I respect that viewpoint. That was the most famous example. But I know people generally thought she was mean, crass, or shrill because she would call Trump names (accurately) during debates.
Being aggressive is cathartic for us who pay attention. But swing voters are inherently easier to push away and are inherently not as “sold” on Trump being a national crisis and don’t like being told what to think.
But I’m just an armchair analyst. So maybe I’m way off.
Yes, 100%. It happened with Hillary. You remember the controversy of her deplorable comment, which was statistically factual?
Moderate Republicans might show up for Trump.
Left leaning centrists might stay home.
Swing voters who are friendly to Trump’s economy might “both sides” their personalities.
Some centrists just give Trump a pass on his personality. But Democrats don’t get the same leeway.
Unfortunately these are the voters that can swing the election.
Unfortunately, I think if she’s too aggressive or mean then it will turn off a lot of swing voters. It’s smart to err on the side of caution.
We got F-bombs in the comments of the Harris-Trump post!
If they ever get to the words “promote the general Welfare”, they’ll ban it in schools for promoting socialism.
There’s a reason they stop reading the Constitution at “We the people…” and celebrate the Confederacy.
The duopoly does represent the people. People suck sometimes. The Democratic Party is the method for people like her to push change. The Democratic Party gives her cause MORE power by consolidating efforts
If there was overwhelming support, even just among liberals, Bernie would have won in 2016 or 2020.
Nobody said to ONLY do the bare minimum. I said you’re doing less than the bare minimum.
I’m thinking you’re being intentionally dense.
If you’re not doing the bare minimum, your opinion literally does not matter.
Also, nobody said bare minimum is enough. It’s the bare minimum, by definition.
Frustration isn’t a reason to give in to a fantasy.
You want a party that will support those initiatives? You have one. It’s the Democratic Party. If they don’t have enough support now to get that shit done, they’re definitely not going to when Republicans take over.
You may not like it, but Dems (specifically liberals and progressives) need more power to enact real change. If you’re working against that, you’re working against your own goals to make yourself feel better.
It’s not a false choice. It’s reality. You can either choose to oppose Trump or you can decide it’s fine.
To be clear, I’m in a red state that has been directly impacted by Trump’s judicial picks and his MAGA extremism. I take personal offense against me and my family when people don’t do the bare minimum to keep Trump out of power.
Well, Republicans are actively opposed to those things. And Democrats need enough support to enact those things.
It’s frustrating for Dems too. And it’s more frustrating when people like Jill Stein make it harder. She should join the party instead of fighting it. But I guess this makes her feel better. She can dislike the system, but things are going to get worse if Republicans win. Just like things got worse in 2016.
That’s a lot of words to say you’re fine with Trump winning and you’re not planning on opposing him.
So you’re fine with Trump. Got it.
What’s the goal for Jill Stein? Climate change initiatives? Liberals are fighting in the trenches to make change while she’s giving lipservice.
Policy making isn’t easy, democracy is slow. Holding the Democratic Party hostage to force them to do something they already want just hurts the cause.
Women don’t count?
That’s called legitimate criticism. And it’s not unfair, she just doesn’t like criticism.
Would it really be in disguise? What policy does the Green party have that isn’t in the scope of the Democratic Party?
This eager dismissal of trans rights
I stopped reading after this because they obviously don’t understand what’s being said.
I support it. They have a job to let viewers know that the radical information is not true, and they should not take it as valid information to get worked up over.
It’s the difference between Trump sounding like a maniac vs exposing a controversy. They don’t need to stop him from sounding like a maniac. They just need to clarify that he is, in fact, a maniac.