this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2024
147 points (97.4% liked)

News

36043 readers
2958 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Speculater@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (4 children)

How is she a good candidate? She stood against everything progressives stand for as a prosecutor and hasn't apologized or clarified that she supports marijuana legalization, abolition of for-profit prisons, or disproportionately prosecuting minorities.

[–] elbucho@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (3 children)

What the fuck are you talking about? When she was running for president in 2019, she released detailed plans about how she would legalize marijuana, abolish private prisons, and reform the carceral system.

I get that you probably weren't aware of her evolved stance on these things, but a single google search could have shown you that you were incorrect on every single point you made.

[–] Speculater@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

And I'm happy to be wrong about her evolved state. Thanks.

[–] wanderingmagus@lemm.ee 5 points 2 years ago

If I could give you some kind of prize I would. Have a meaningless pixel trophy instead, and an upvote: 🏆

[–] barkingspiders@infosec.pub 4 points 2 years ago

This is the bravest comment I've seen today, you deserve an internet prize 🏆

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

I love this site

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

What the fuck are you talking about? When she was running for president in 2019, she released detailed plans about how she would legalize marijuana, abolish private prisons, and reform the carceral system.

Has she done those things? (I sincerely don't know.)

I've heard that she's revised her stances, but even in 2019 there was some question regarding the sincerity of her evolving viewpoints.

We're likely to get 8 years of her if she wins, so I think it's entirely reasonable to want her to affirm her stances in some of these areas. We won't be able to move any further left than she allows. Sure, she's not Trump, and I'm going to vote for her. It would be nice to have hope she'll do more than just move right more slowly than Trump though.

She says very little, and nothing convincing, about some of the most serious charges against her, like that she fought hard to keep innocents in prison and failed to fight hard against corrupt cops.

If elected president, Harris seems as likely as any of her Democratic rivals, and far more likely than Donald Trump, to pursue a criminal-justice-reform agenda that overlaps with policies I favor as a civil libertarian. And I do not hold it against Harris that as a municipal and state official she enforced many laws that I regard as unjust. All the candidates now running for president will, if elected, preside over the enforcement of some laws that they and I regard as unjust.

But like her rivals, the reforms that Harris would sign into law as president would depend mostly on what Democrats in Congress could get to her desk. Far more important is how she would preside over a federal legal system and bureaucracy that is prone to frequent abuses. And her record casts significant doubts about whether she can be trusted to oversee federal law enforcement, the military, intelligence agencies, the detention of foreign prisoners, and more.

[–] elbucho@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

I mean, she'll have ample opportunity to expound on that. But prison reform and legalizing marijuana were platforms she ran on in 2019. I haven't seen anything from her that would indicate she's reversed her position since then.

[–] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago

Are you new to the democratic party?

[–] samokosik@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Let me ask you a question: Harris Or Trump?

[–] Speculater@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

Harris, 100% I was wrong about the statement. She evolved her stance and has grown.

[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

https://www.politifact.com/article/2019/aug/01/were-tulsi-gabbards-attacks-kamala-harris-record-c/

Harris "put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana."

Notably, the figures dropped dramatically during Harris’ tenure, from 817 marijuana-related admissions in her first year in office to 137 in her last.

She laughed because it was funny and I'm tired of people telling me it's not. 💥 🔫

She's been a prosecutor, senator, and now VP. She has the experience. She can speak in complete sentences. She is a neo-liberal but that was a given. All Democratic candidates since Clinton have been neo-liberals. The idea that Kamala is anti-progressive is false.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago

Yeah it is ridiculous. Essentially "why didn't you legalize marijuana when you were AG?" Because that job isn't about changing the laws it's about prosecuting the law.

Bad enough SCOTUS is changing laws on a whim (instead of interpreting which is their actual job) we shouldn't be expecting everyone on every level just disregard laws they disagree with. I agree that marijuana criminalization is stupid and should be repealed, but push for legislators to change the law rather than push for more people to ignore the law.