The next President will have to deal with a stream of unnatural disasters. So perhaps it would be wise for Harris to more aggressively remind voters of the stakes.
Nader, the spoiler candidate that gave us GW Bush instead of Al Gore, the climate guy? If you’re in FL you should be profoundly embarrassed, and if you’re in a different state just regular embarrassed.
When I think of a “do nothing party”, the Greens are at the top of the list. They quite literally do nothing and have no power, except to spoil tight races in the direction of conservatism/fascism. I guess if that’s you’re goal, you’re happy.
The Cheney cohort supports Harris not because she is a conservative warmonger, they support her because she’ll broadly maintain US legal and political structures, which as they’ve stated, they feel are more important than specific policy. I.e., she will preserve the state of the Republic and not do the fascism thing. They’re endorsement says a lot more about Trump than it does about Harris, which you probably know but are being purposely disingenuous about.
Good luck with your third parties in a system that mathematically will never support a third party though, real big brain stuff. You’re literally playing a different game than everyone else.
To be clear, I’m not trying to convince you of anything, this is for anyone else that may happen upon this thread that might be smart enough to connect the dots about an alternate reality where Gore won the election with respect to climate change.
Just saying, you can’t blame someone for W and Cheney coming to power 24 years ago while your candidate literally campaigns with them and salutes their service. I mean, you CAN, but… Kinda a weird position to take.
Also, even if you think a Gore/Lieberman administration would have even bothered trying to do climate change legislation (neolibs aren’t known for trying to pass non-GOP legislation so they would not) this is passing Denny Hastert’s house how? He literally invented the Hastert Rule.
Not a big fan of posing PII here, but let’s just say I voted that year (for Nader).
Nader, the spoiler candidate that gave us GW Bush instead of Al Gore, the climate guy? If you’re in FL you should be profoundly embarrassed, and if you’re in a different state just regular embarrassed.
George W Bush, the Kamala supporter? Dems can’t complain about W or Cheney anymore, they’re the thought leaders of your warmonger, do nothing party.
When I think of a “do nothing party”, the Greens are at the top of the list. They quite literally do nothing and have no power, except to spoil tight races in the direction of conservatism/fascism. I guess if that’s you’re goal, you’re happy.
The Cheney cohort supports Harris not because she is a conservative warmonger, they support her because she’ll broadly maintain US legal and political structures, which as they’ve stated, they feel are more important than specific policy. I.e., she will preserve the state of the Republic and not do the fascism thing. They’re endorsement says a lot more about Trump than it does about Harris, which you probably know but are being purposely disingenuous about.
Good luck with your third parties in a system that mathematically will never support a third party though, real big brain stuff. You’re literally playing a different game than everyone else.
To be clear, I’m not trying to convince you of anything, this is for anyone else that may happen upon this thread that might be smart enough to connect the dots about an alternate reality where Gore won the election with respect to climate change.
Just saying, you can’t blame someone for W and Cheney coming to power 24 years ago while your candidate literally campaigns with them and salutes their service. I mean, you CAN, but… Kinda a weird position to take.
Also, even if you think a Gore/Lieberman administration would have even bothered trying to do climate change legislation (neolibs aren’t known for trying to pass non-GOP legislation so they would not) this is passing Denny Hastert’s house how? He literally invented the Hastert Rule.