Welcome To aBlackWeb

So Black Men are going to get the blame if Kamala Harris loses to Donald Trump in November

Bruh, you can't make erroneous comments and then tell people to stop arguing when they correct you.

And voting isn't just "Pick one of the two candidates." Again, that's why black people make no progress. We constantly give our vote without demanding anything back. Kamala is a far better candidate, but we shouldn't just make her feel like our votes are guaranteed for her without her having consider our demands or desires as part of her agenda. Black people still getting murdered by cops with impunity. If she's tired of the criticism she receives for her actions as a D.A., how about she prioritize pushing the criminal justice reform that Biden let flounder and disappear?

There's more than two candidates to choose from. I really wish y'all would break away from that mentality.
 
If she's tired of the criticism she receives for her actions as a D.A., how about she prioritize pushing the criminal justice reform that Biden let flounder and disappear?

Where do you think criminal justice reform died at? You think it stopped at Joe Biden's desk? Where do you think it was halted?
 
So what demands or desires can and should she meet and fulfil within the next 4 months that would secure your vote and in your opinion the votes of other Black Americans?

Let's talk solutions or paths to solutions.

The taking our ball and going home approach with no path to resolution is nonsensical.

I'd like to hear a demand that doesn't already exist or has not already been put into action
 
So what demands or desires can and should she meet and fulfil within the next 4 months that would secure your vote and in your opinion the votes of other Black Americans?

Let's talk solutions or paths to solutions.

The taking our ball and going home approach with no path to resolution is nonsensical.

I think we're talking past each other. I don't disagree with what you just said. I disagree with the idea that we all should just accept Kamala as the candidate. Unless I'm mistaken, the DNC can perform emergency actions that would allow voters to choose the candidate. I think that's a better option than just demanding everyone get behind a candidate that a lot of people don't like.
 
Where do you think criminal justice reform died at? You think it stopped at Joe Biden's desk? Where do you think it was halted?

It died in Congress and Biden didn't care. I get that you're trying to get everyone to see that there are divisions in the government, but in your effort to correct misconceptions about how the government works, you're also being a little obtuse. There is constant wheeling and dealing between the various factions in the government. Presidents prioritize what they think is important. Biden could have forced the issue on that topic like he did on others, but he chose not to. If Kamala gets in office will she even try to resurrect that effort and get something passed or will she leave in the grave?
 
There's more than two candidates to choose from. I really wish y'all would break away from that mentality.

There are only two viable candidates right now. I get what you're saying and I agree, but for this particular election, only two of the candidates are viable.

Honestly, this would have been the election cycle for a good third party to step up since both of the primary canddidates were unliked, but none of the other options were able to make a big run. In fairness, that is in large part dude to the system actively working against them.
 
I think we're talking past each other. I don't disagree with what you just said. I disagree with the idea that we all should just accept Kamala as the candidate. Unless I'm mistaken, the DNC can perform emergency actions that would allow voters to choose the candidate. I think that's a better option than just demanding everyone get behind a candidate that a lot of people don't like.

The majority of voters would still pick Kamala. You think there's some dark horse candidate that the people are being withheld from?
 
Come on man. Here's an example of someone defending Kamala's stance in that matter.




The person went on to justify the move by saying this:



So where is the inaccuracy in what I said? Kamala didn't invent the concept of punishing parents for the truancy of their children, but she's the one that pushed for a harsher punishment that included jail time.

Funny enough the statement right after the part you pointed out provides far more context. She wasn't going after or targeting Black mothers nor was the policy something she created as you have said. So painting the picture and/or hinting at her creating a policy that did just that is inaccurate. That's what alot seem to believe. And it doesn't even correctly describe the policy which, according the quote you provided, was not having lines of single mothers locked up for their kids missing school.
 
It died in Congress and Biden didn't care. I get that you're trying to get everyone to see that there are divisions in the government, but in your effort to correct misconceptions about how the government works, you're also being a little obtuse. There is constant wheeling and dealing between the various factions in the government. Presidents prioritize what they think is important. Biden could have forced the issue on that topic like he did on others, but he chose not to. If Kamala gets in office will she even try to resurrect that effort and get something passed or will she leave in the grave?

The George Floyd Act passed the House when Democrats had the majority. It failed in The Senate because Republicans fillibustered it. How can you say Biden didn't care when he is the one that sent it to Congress?

If Kamala is POTUS the bill will pass if Dems control the House and The Senate. If Republicans have either then it will fail.

Then, let's just say Dems with the House and Senate and Kamala is POTUS, as soon as the newly passed George Floyd Act is put into an actual court case like the one in Chicago with Sonya Massey, Republicans will 100% challenge it in the courts and one of the many extreme right wing judges that Trump appointed will strike it down. Then Democrats will appeal it. Then it will go to the SCOTUS where it will be shelved...............

None of that is because Joe Biden didn't care.
 
There's more than two candidates to choose from. I really wish y'all would break away from that mentality.

So what other candidates have an actual chance at winning? Whenever people say this they always throw out some name that they know has no chance of winning. Especially this late in the game.
 

  • Vice President Kamala Harris (45%) trails Trump (47%) by two points in a CNN/SRRS poll—a smaller deficit compared to Biden’s six-point shortfall behind Trump in the same poll.
  • Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (42%), who has starkly pushed against the idea of replacing Biden, according to Politico, is five points behind Trump (47%) in the poll.
  • California Gov. Gavin Newsom (43%), who has commonly been floated as a Biden replacement despite turning down rumors of a “shadow campaign” for the White House, polls five points behind Trump (48%), according to the poll.
  • Secretary of Transportation and former 2020 presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg (43%) trails Trump (47%) by four points in the CNN/SRRS poll.
  • At 44%, Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., a former presidential candidate who ran against Biden in 2019, also sits two points behind Trump (46%), albeit in a poll from progressive think tank Data for Progress.
  • Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker (43%) expressed support for Biden after his debate performance and is behind Trump (46%) by three percentage points in a Data for Progress poll.
  • Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., another familiar face to voters, polls three points behind Trump in the Data for Progress poll, with Klobuchar capturing 43% support compared to Trump’s 46%.

Kamala isn't as popular or as powerful a candidates as some of ya'll are trying to make it seem. She might be and the favorite and best candidate, but not so much so, that she would definitely be selected if a quick primary action took place. Even if she does end up winning, a quick primary would give her an opportunity to present herself a candidate in her own right as opposed to just being Biden's replacement.
 
The George Floyd Act passed the House when Democrats had the majority. It failed in The Senate because Republicans fillibustered it. How can you say Biden didn't care when he is the one that sent it to Congress?

If Kamala is POTUS the bill will pass if Dems control the House and The Senate. If Republicans have either then it will fail.

Then, let's just say Dems with the House and Senate and Kamala is POTUS, as soon as the newly passed George Floyd Act is put into an actual court case like the one in Chicago with Sonya Massey, Republicans will 100% challenge it in the courts and one of the many extreme right wing judges that Trump appointed will strike it down. Then Democrats will appeal it. Then it will go to the SCOTUS where it will be shelved...............

None of that is because Joe Biden didn't care.

I said he didn't care to fight for it. Again, the loan forgiveness act failed too, but Biden has continued to fight for that. Criminal justice reform had its one hurrah and was forgotten. Will Kamala try to get it done in the future particularly if the Dems gain a majority in the House and Senate at some point? She should at least have to answer that question, don't you think?

Yes, the Reps will oppose, but opposition usually ends with watered down versions of what was pushed. That sucks, but the watered down shit is still better than nothing, which is what we get when the politicians in power choose not to fight.

Based on your logic, Dems shouldn't try to push or fight for anything because it's all doomed to failure.
 
Didn't Kamala locked up alot of black women too? I remembered some controversy when she was attorney general where whenever a kid skipped school they would arrest the parents (typically a single mother). And Kamala was behind all that.
 
Funny enough the statement right after the part you pointed out provides far more context. She wasn't going after or targeting Black mothers nor was the policy something she created as you have said. So painting the picture and/or hinting at her creating a policy that did just that is inaccurate. That's what alot seem to believe. And it doesn't even correctly describe the policy which, according the quote you provided, was not having lines of single mothers locked up for their kids missing school.

I don't quite understand what you're trying to say. The reason people say these policies are "targeting" black mothers or black people is because the people who enact them know full well that black people will be impacted disproportionately. So, sure, Kamala might not have fought for the law specifically because she wanted to hurt black mothers, but she knew that black mothers would likely be hurt more than anyone else.

The policy factually increased the penalties parents could suffer for truant kids. Yes, Kamala's administration claims it was done to bring attention to the issue, but that doesn't change the fact that passing such a policy opens the door to harsh punishments against people who are already in poor situations. That's basically the story of black people in America following the Civil Rights era.
 
Didn't Kamala locked up alot of black women too? I remembered some controversy when she was attorney general where whenever a kid skipped school they would arrest the parents (typically a single mother). And Kamala was behind all that.

That was just discussed and no that's not what happened.
 
I think we're talking past each other. I don't disagree with what you just said. I disagree with the idea that we all should just accept Kamala as the candidate. Unless I'm mistaken, the DNC can perform emergency actions that would allow voters to choose the candidate. I think that's a better option than just demanding everyone get behind a candidate that a lot of people don't like.

No disrespect but this seems like more meandering and arguments for the sake of arguments.

What are the other candidates going to do for black people or offer that kamala can't or won't? 🤔

Theres no path to a solution that doesn't include taking Ls. But if people aren't heading to the polls consistently and putting politicians in position to serve their interests I don't understand who exactly yall are expecting to incentivize your votes. You have to put them in position first which is why voting is important.
 
I don't quite understand what you're trying to say. The reason people say these policies are "targeting" black mothers or black people is because the people who enact them know full well that black people will be impacted disproportionately. So, sure, Kamala might not have fought for the law specifically because she wanted to hurt black mothers, but she knew that black mothers would likely be hurt more than anyone else.

The policy factually increased the penalties parents could suffer for truant kids. Yes, Kamala's administration claims it was done to bring attention to the issue, but that doesn't change the fact that passing such a policy opens the door to harsh punishments against people who are already in poor situations. That's basically the story of black people in America following the Civil Rights era.

When you say something was targeting or going after people that is insinuating that was it's sole or main intent which you admit it wasn't. Was it a side effect? Yes. Was it it's intended point? That's not something you can say for certain. Especially if you look at, again in the information you posted, what actually happened with how that law was enforced. The quote you provided says specially "very few parents were arrested". So this idea that lines of single Black mothers were being hauled off to jail over their kid's truancy is not accurate at all.
 
Back
Top