One particular issue that Roan would like to be highlighted is “trans rights” adding, “They cannot have cis people making decisions for trans people, period.”
Ok… and you’re telling people to use “critical thinking”? Anybody want to think critically here?
She didn't say anything wrong. There are issues with both sides, and one side can be worse than another. Vote for what you think it is right. I'm just glad she is really supportive toward causes like Gaza and helps, and won't blindly endorse someone actively endorsed by Dick Cheney and courting republicans.
Harris said she wants to earn support, so I don't understand why her base flies into a rage if people are skeptical over her or can't gloss over issues.
As discussion, I'm not her base. But I argue about voting strategy with a Harris conclusion.
I'm deeply unsatisfied with the democratic position on Gaza and beyond. But I'm in the anti trump base. I believe global well being, including in Gaza will be significantly worse if he gets a second term.
I will vote for any competitive, viable candidate that is left of trump, the more left the better. I will not vote for an academic choice that has no chance of winning, and is only a spoiler. Without ejection reform, and something like proportional representation, I believe one should choose based on harm reduction, even if the choice is very unsavory.
I'm quite disappointed in her both-sidesism comments. Maybe that approach is defensible in "normal" times, but not when one candidate/party is fascist, authoritarian, anti-democracy, anti-women's rights, anti-trans, anti-LGBTQ+, anti-people of color.
My feeling is that Chappell is effectively supporting that party by not taking a more vocal stand against them, particularly when she has the ability to influence so many young voters whose lives will be impacted for decades by what the extreme right has done in this country, and will further try to do if they win the White House (and/or Congress) again.
clearly this alludes to vote dilution by "voting small" meaning left vote gets fragmented. The very sad part is - she is right and people SHOULD vote FOR something rather than against, but system is stacked for political duopoly with a slight preference to the right. In other words it not pragmatic to "vote small" under system where small get ignored and society gets polarized to the point of always voting against. What she should be pushing for is a change of a system, otherwise communities she cares for so much are going to remain political hostages of the left because the right found "the other" they can rally against in them. There are only two rational decisions: remain under current system and support whatever big entity is further to the left or stage a revolution/rebellion forcing system change to allow everyone to "vote small". Silence is not working.