This election has issues wherein you might think one candidate is trying to make you take a bite of shit, and then you see the other candidate is going to have people punch you in the mouth and shove shit into it. Either scenario tastes like shit, but when faced with that outcome the how matters.
Also cops. Can't fit everything into even 300. And also Trump is just so much worse on cops somehow. Even on issues where from a distance there doesn't appear to be daylight, there are drastic differences. It's crazy-making when people pretend the differences aren't there or don't matter.
I am critical of the Harris campaign's positions on immigration, guns, and genocide. Stating those criticisms without the context that she's still the correct choice to support because Trump is a threat to all life on Earth would be careless at best. Those omitting context right now aren't great.
This is how more people should speak about morality. Cogent and clear and unapologetic for being truthful.
here's another link to the Coates interview on CBS Mornings, for those adamant about never going on Twitter
Acclaimed author Ta-Nehisi Coates joins "CBS Mornings" to talk about his new book, "The Message," and about the banning of his work in South Carolina.
The sanewashing continues even after their endorsement?! *GASP*
They really and truly are domestic terrorists. And they don't find that label offensive or shameful.
It's buying into the false importance of NYT's endorsements. And also helps to paint themselves as somehow objective/balanced in their coverage. Self-sanewashing along with the rest. Literally no one in 2024 is making their voting choice based on the words printed somewhere within this paper.
This is getting at the right messaging. He is weird and he is weak. Harris could also correct her immigration position, but I guess polls are running the campaign as much as the smart advisers were early on.