136
is this harris once again demonstrating her keen political instincts by spiting her only allies? or is this her simply recognizing that she's already been thrown under the bus by them so turnabout is fair play?
i think its her realising her career is over and doing a last cashgrab.
I think she is aware that there is a small but loud social media contingent that endlessly repeats, "could've had Kamala but you had to X" and she wants to ride that train wherever it can get her. Which includes the cashgrab but I think she will take whatever she can get, including political positions.
It’s what feeds Hillary
Thats probably more accurate.
My gut feeling is that giving her that much self-awareness is an optimistic reading.
Democrats and admitting to fucking up when it's too late to do anything
TOGETHER AT LAST!
When people were criticizing Dems for pushing Biden as his brain was clearly mush, these were the people doing "epic" clapbacks and telling you that if you don't support Genocide Joe you support Trump.
no you don't understand this is a good thing, they're going to take it to a committee and public to make it better now unlike before - libs who think new head of dnc is going to change the party
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
It's too bad there wasn't anyone with the strength of this Kamala person involved in that process that could have done something about it.
The irony of course is that if the dems had a proper primary, there's no way she would have been the ticket, and Joe knew that.
Newsome and booty-head ticket in 2028
Since her only problem was her association with Biden and not all of her public policy stances, surely this will be her ticket to the white house
(In the voice of David Attenborough)
The time between elections is a contentious one for the residents of the Democratic savanna. While, on the surface, things may appear calm, behind office facades and in high end restaurants, a vicious power struggle is taking place. Staffers and consultants are busily establishing a pecking order that will determine who will participate in the next election season, and who will be left out. Evidence of this struggle occasionally breaks the placid surface. Here, we see a book release: a strong signal from the candidate and her coterie that she intends to stake her claim to another nomination. A move this aggressive demands a response: soon we shall see thinkpieces and retrospective articles from other factions. This struggle for dominance will play out over the next news cycle, and the contest may not produce a clear winner. Combatants will return to their offices to lick their wounds until another candidate makes a bid.
I can hear Attenborough saying this so clearly in my head.
How many books has she written in the past few months
You mean her ghost writer?
Why isn't ghostwriting considered a form of false advertising, anyway? (Assuming the answer is more involved than "We live in a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie")
Generally ghostwriters were to be collators and redactors of notes and diaries that aren't up to literary standards. But now they mostly write to outline.
Honestly I prefer Castro's approach of a journalist interview (though Castro could definitely write)
How many prominent American politicians have even written their own work?
Obama's were ghost written
This is all from the same book, "107 Days"
Hey guys, my reading comprehension is pretty poor. I think what it is is that I really don't understand the what the word "let" means. The way I'm used to using it, there would be some other individual or entity here with enough control to "let" this thing happen. Can someone clear up exactly who it was that recklessly let Biden make the reelection decision on his own?
Having read nothing, given they only got him to give up reelection because they threatened to force him out through amendment 25 to the constitution which requires a letter from the vice president and 8 cabinet members to remove the president - it's presumably threatening this earlier
wdym made the decision on this own is this genuinely not democratically decided? What's the process here you vote someone chief dawg and he just rules with an iron fist until they croak?
She's saying it was reckless for him to seek re-election in the primaries as he was not physically/mentally fit to run or govern. He made the decision to run again despite his condition.
They are just telling on themselves that they were supposed to invoke the 25th amendment and didn't, leaving a mentally incapacitated person in charge of nukes (and creating a genocise, don't forget that).
Exactly
He was probably grounded from the suitcase.
The Democratic National Committee makes the rules for primaries and can unilaterally decide to pick a presidential candidate via a change to the rules
There was a supreme court decision that affirmed they can do what they want
World arbiter of democracy 🫡
yueAH KAMALA KILL HIM KILL JOE BIDEN
Maybe we shouldn't have played existential chicken with the electorate by propping up Trump and Rubio in the Pied Piper Strategy....NO! It's the voters who are wrong!
😠
Funny how she doesn't mention that they almost definitely already knew this 80 year old man had cancer.
Have some respect for the dead. Biden died not that long ago and now she comes out with this?
Reddit Liberal 9/11
I mean no shit. It was a terrible call by everyone involved, her included
Does she say this or anything like this? No then fuck her and her shitty campaign that got us here
I should not have said I would do exactly what he was doing
And it wasn't reckless letting her run for prez?
He is the president and you agreed to be his VP. Did you think that you were in charge?
this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2025
136 points (99.3% liked)
news
24305 readers
683 users here now
Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.
Rules:
-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --
-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --
-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --
-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today/ . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --
-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--
-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--
-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --
-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS