Running with a zionist hurts her chances.

That's quite some spin he put on that. There weren't any protestors calling for killing zionists, being violent or being antisemitic.

It just makes Shapiro look even more dishonest. What a piece of human garbage, first he's rabidly pro-genocide and then when there are potential political consequences he pulls a Trump "Ooh, the thing you heard me say is not the thing I said."

Fuck Josh Shapiro, and fuck Harris for picking him.

Jesus, already trying to tidy up his history on Israel. Really disgusting.

He's a self proclaimed zionist who lept at the chance to undermine the student protests.

Turns out Harris' "won't stay silent" speech on Gaza was a bullshit empty gesture. What this pick signals is she's onboard with more genocide.

Looks like it's back to Uncommitted for me in november, what a fucking disappointment. Absolute waste of an opportunity by democrats.

Edit: zionist bots out in full force

Democrats truly are their own worst enemy...

Straight from your source: [...]

Yup, Democrats started to institute firearm regulation as a pillar of the party platform and as a result began accepting progressively less and less NRA donations. The 90s was when it began and the trend continued into the 2000s until today when Democrats overwhelmingly and explicitly pledge not to take NRA money.

It was a decision by the party that public safety was of greater importance than taking NRA money.

Because Citizens United makes that completely and utterly legal.

No. Parties can create their own internal rules, including rules that result in membership being revoked or other consequences (losing endorsements, committee positions etc.). Which would stop them running in democratic primaries. What they cannot do is legally stop people generally from taking campaign donations.

It's rich that you're bemoaning the lack of civic literacy when you yourself don't even understand that parties create their own internal codes of conduct and ethical guidelines (or are intentionally misleading people), which they 100% can use to maintain party ethics.

See how I never even implied that?

You quite literally did.

Your kneejerk response to someone making a simple observation that Democrats allow the meddling of zionist PACs in our democracy (by allowing members of the party to accept AIPAC money) was to deflect responsibility away from those willfully accepting the money to the decision that allowed them to accept the money.

You're being deeply dishonest about your intentions here, attempting to obfuscate it with condescension and trying to project an unearned sense of authority.

Civic literacy in this country is fucking awful.

Its not that people opposed to zionism are civically illiterate, it's that you've mistaken your latent right-wing views and intellectual dishonesty with civic literacy.

You’re flipping causality.

No, I'm not. The NRA historically spent over a thirdof its lobbying money on Democratic races. They stopped because Democrats stopped accepting the money or were just donating it to charity as in the case of Tim Walz, not because the NRA doesn't want influence over Democrats.

You know who the largest source of Republican money into Democratic races is right now? AIPAC.

Now why would Republicans donate to AIPAC knowing that AIPAC is going to be spending millions in these Dem primaries? Hmm 🤔

Almost like AIPAC is a means of introducing far-right influence into the Dem party and attempting to displace criticis of the rightwing extremist Israeli regime. Like how AIPAC spent record amounts to help replace Jamaal Bowman with a racist like George Latimer.

The Democrats absolutely can create rules about where members can recieve money from, and they absolutely should. It is a choice the party makes for themselves, it's not foisted upon them. It's naive (or dishonest) to pretend that money isn't leveraged to direct party politics and that it's not weaponized across party lines.

Citizens United is the cause of our lobby issues generally, yes, but the Democrats are still responsible for allowing their members to take AIPAC money.

They stopped members taking NRA money when the NRA was trying to play bothsides, they can do it with Israeli money too. Swearing off money from AIPAC and other Israeli groups should be a requirement to run in the party.

So tired of Democrats letting zionists meddle in our democracy.

All the way to the election I'd imagine, unless she shoots herself in the foot picking Shapiro as a VP or something like that.

In regards to Musk's businesses it might be considered a mercy for his kids to not inherit them...

The thin silverlining to that scenario is he's not president/commander in chief and can't have his goons lower security so his rioters can get in.

The moon is hollow and the Nazis are on the inside, duh.

Bipartisan is a really bad sign. My money says this is not going to be aimed at actually addressing the underlying profit motive that drives big tech to purposefully promote misery through their algorithm designs, instead it will be further restriction on users freedoms and privacy.

Israeli fascism is not a result of democracy...it's a colonial project born from the pre-war mentality of Europe and the preceding centuries of monarchy and despotism. It is, fundementally, anti-democratic.

Israel and the US are indeed different. The US, regardless of its problems with its right-wing and the right's support of Israel, is not an apartheid state and there is meaningful internal opposition to the far-right in the US (unlike Israel, or Russia, or China).

You're trying to conflate democracy and capitalism, which really makes me question your motives.

What little life he has left. I'll never understand how people get to that age and are still behaving like they're going to live forever. If someone has a forward-looking sense of duty that motivates them to make a better future for others I understand that, but Trump is clearly just in it for himself so I don't really understand the motivation if it's not just straight up denial of his own mortality.

The end is right around the corner for old Dumpy, you'd think he'd want to spend it sitting on a beach drinking pina coladas that he got other people to pay for.

I wonder if they would ensure food was halal or kosher for patients who adhere to those specific religions.

Potentially, yeah, I'm not exactly pinning all my hopes on it or anything, but I feel like even with the people who are fully in the cult, a lot of them are mostly just kind of dim and easily manipulated. They're ordinary people laboring under a lie, not necessarily the people who actually fabricate the lies themselves intentionally (though some of them certainly might be that type, as you say).

It creates a short circuit in the system when those ordinary people have the direct access to the truth without Fox or Trump or whoever else being able to act as a middleman and spin it. It's harder to lie to yourself when you're the one faced with the decision to tear up the ballots or whatever they would have to do to make things fit their world view.

I don't think people are all good, most are a mixed bag at best, but I do have faith in average people to admit the truth to themselves when it's presented to them in a way that they can accept it. With some those conditions under which they'll accept it are just especially extreme.