I think electing Kamala would increase division because the last time we had a black president the racists lost their fucking shit.
To which I say: Good. Fuck those assholes. Die mad.
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
I think electing Kamala would increase division because the last time we had a black president the racists lost their fucking shit.
To which I say: Good. Fuck those assholes. Die mad.
Are there any Democrats endorsing Trump?
Tulsi Gabbard?
Yes, the 'Democrat' Gabbard.
I'm kind of surprised Joe Manchin isn't. Though I guess he's not quite as far the along the sham Democrat path as Gabbard.
She joined the Republican party, though.
Can't spell "Tulsi Gabbard" without "Buglibastard."
I don't know what a buglibastard is, but it doesn't sound good.
https://news.yahoo.com/news/joe-manchin-found-confusing-reason-202113855.html
Manchin won't endorse Harris because she might get rid of the filibuster
I wish I loved anything as much as Manchin loves the filibuster. Even my own children.
He loves it so much, he even cares about it when he's not running.
I wish I loved anything as much as Manchin loves the filibuster.
Never have I been so creeped out by something I agree with 100%
The Hill - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for The Hill:
Wiki: reliable - The Hill is considered generally reliable for American politics. The publication's opinion pieces should be handled with the appropriate guideline. The publication's contributor pieces, labeled in their bylines, receive minimal editorial oversight and should be treated as equivalent to self-published sources.
MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
Search topics on Ground.News
https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/4961486-arnold-schwarzenegger-endorses-harris-walz-trump-garbage/