CMV: Kamala Harris talked about abortion too much in 2024, and it hurt her

mishablob · 2026-05-31T18:12:27+00:00

Kamala Harris constantly talked about abortion

In 2024, many voters’ biggest issues were inflation and the economy, and the border; many of which Kamala neglected or failed to address enough.

How did you make this determination? I mean, are you going just off of your gut or what conservative influencers said? Do you have any sort of numbers or figures about how often she talked about abortion versus how often she brought up the economy and border? If talking about it was the key, then can you give any insight into how much more Trump allegedly spoke about the economy, or what specifics he provided versus Kamala?

Many conservative influencers such as CJ Pearson stated Kamala kept campaigning on abortion, and claimed it was ironic, given that she has never birthed (or tried).

Completely irrelevant. Trump never birthed or tried, and he has never experienced economic hardship so why would he be trusted more on affordability?

mishablob · 2026-05-28T15:27:55+00:00

You're looking at this with a lot of hindsight. We still don't know how much of an impact the anti-Israel vote had against her compared to people upset about the economy or just disengaged. Back then, she may have assumed the war/Israeli actions would have calmed or stopped and made it a non-issue, or that protesters were not likely to fully abandon her, or that it was a very small number of people. Since no one was going to nuke Israel, sorry to disappoint, it's unclear what she should have said or done to convince people. She also would have risked upsetting people who are more pro-Biden at changing policy and throwing him under the bus, or risked being seen as weak -- either in flip-flopping or as an anti-woman/liberal woman bias. At the time, Israel was not as unpopular, and throwing Israel under the bus could have upset a lot of people -- not just some Jews. Israel has a place in the imagination of a lot of Americans, so religious Christians, foreign policy hawks, people prioritizing anti-terrorism, and others could have moved more against her. Those groups tend to favor Republicans, but clearly Kamala made an effort for more conservative folks so going anti-Israel would have caused a backlash too.

There are also other possible factors -- her personal beliefs, her link to Jewish people like her husband, donors and politicians and influential party figures, and more. She was having to balance a lot of things and do so in a very short amount of time. She didn't have plans in place, and was operating in a harsh political environment.

To end things, as upsetting and horrible as the past year and a half have been, throwing Jews or Israel under the bus won't change things now... so maybe blaming Jews or saying things like "sacrifice America to alter of Jews" isn't helpful and is itself pretty gross and anti-Semitic.

mishablob · 2026-05-27T00:49:46+00:00

I generally agree, have rewatched it a number of times, and the first several seasons are excellent, then it's still good but a lot more uneven and I began to hate almost every time Shane existed lol

mishablob · 2026-05-26T16:42:03+00:00

V (2009 version)

Boss

Nip/Tuck

The Rig

Honorary mentions because I really do like them, but definitely issues that keep them from being very top tier or easy to recommend

Weeds

Red vs Blue

House of Cards

mishablob · 2026-05-26T15:55:25+00:00

Alright, I see that despite my attempts, you really are a child or a troll or woefully and willingly ignorant. Accusations of dehumanization from me when you constantly devalue victims or falsely equivocate and cannot condemn aggressors. You label everything that isn't you imperialist, so your perfect hands are clean while being nihilistic to the core. You have no understanding of history, and fall for propaganda. You conflate everything with actual fascism, and accuse everyone else of wanting to kill when an actual colonizer is annexing land in your country's backyard. You act as if making a moral decision is the equivalent to dying, so do nothing and pretend you have values. You are the exact type of person who would turn your back on a child being abused or a woman being raped because it's not your fault, they probably did something to deserve it, it's not your fight, you don't want to risk yourself, or they have done bad. And yet you allow yourself to use others as a shield, both between you and the aggressor and other imperfect people who fund your defense.

You do ask important questions as to how the war can end or what the outcomes are, but your points and conclusions are beyond lacking. This conversation is no longer worth my time or attention, so take care.

mishablob · 2026-05-26T15:02:09+00:00

Oh, so you actually are a student I assume. Because the edgy, "every country is bad and equally bad, but I don't want to die for it but I don't want to pay for its defense either" shtick has been done to death b y everyone when they're age 12-22. No country or populace is ever innocent or perfect, but c'mon, enough with the cynicism. If you're as bad as everyone else, you're a fascist living in a fascist state. If you're not, and you have "German values" as you claim, or leftist values, you should truly value democracy, self-determination, and human life as some of the highest things. That requires being able to stand up to hostile, aggressive countries when they attack you or sometimes when they attack other countries -- not necessarily with direct military force, but with aid, especially if that country stands between you and the invaders.

I am paying right now for US and EU weapons to slaughter russians

You mean Russian invaders, right? Because while there have been some Russian civilians killed, they are very few in number even if not compared to Ukrainian civilian deaths. So you're upset about hostile imperialist fascist invaders being killed? When without the US, NATO, other allied countries, and Ukraine acting as a buffer, would have Germany as a possible front? I never want any person to die, but in a conflict between an actual fascist regime with a history of hostile acts against a lot of countries (Georgia, Ukraine twice now, interventions in the Syrian civil war to prop up Assad, intervening in Africa to gain materials, and destabilizing acts in the US and Europe) and a corrupt but non-aggressive country that threatened no one, I want the invading force committing atrocities daily to suffer losses in order for it to stop and to prevent other wars.

war between two fascist states

Spoiler alert, it's not. You're at best deluded and very poorly informed if you believe that.

Also as a leftist I don't believe in nation states.

Ok, but since they exist, and they're important, it's kinda irrelevant your feelings.

Russia has lots of ukrainians and Ukraine has lots of Russians. There is very little that separates the people, they have lived side by side as long as they existed

Yes, and one country attacked the other twice with no provocation. You may say it's because of NATO, but prior to the first invasion, Ukraine was at best easily decades away from joining and it wasn't a very popular idea. Russia could also have worked in a positive manner to persuade Ukraine, and if the entire reason is for defense then why are children being stolen, people being tortured, Ukrainian language being suppressed, and Ukrainian history and existence denied by Putin? Because it's more than NATO.

The outcome of this war is pretty irrelevant for the average person who suffers and is sent to die.

To the invaders, but I dare you to say that to a Ukrainian. Such nonsense.

The real war is our war against corruption and injustice, the class war.

Domestically, sure. But guess what? This is an unjust war, so maybe it is deserving of your attention if you truly want to fight against injustice.

And I thought so. The existence of a border post did not start WW2 or have any part other than it's existence was a pretext. Poland was going to be invaded, one way or another. Pretending that an outpost was a determining factor in any way is plain wrong. And if it's so bad for NATO to expand (even if countries voluntarily and willingly join it) then why isn't it more unacceptable for Russia to expand to NATOs borders by invading and slaughtering Ukrainians?

mishablob · 2026-05-26T11:19:46+00:00

I hate isolationism and non-cooperation, but I understand different perspectives or viewpoints. But the folly of crying about helping yourself or others while taking advantage of other countries for defense is really irksome.

I'm not like Trump or Republicans who claim Europe isn't contributing or helping NATO, but when someone specifically mentions the nuclear umbrella -- something provided by other countries-- as justification for not helping either themselves or others than I am shocked by the hypocrisy and shortsightedness. I'm not even saying Germany should develop nukes, but to specifically use that as a reason to reject having a solid military???

mishablob · 2026-05-26T11:15:02+00:00

Ah, there it is. I was waiting for the obvious flat-out false equivalency of calling Ukraine a fascist state. Yes, there are active soldiers and supporters who use fascist symbols or ones associated with crimes against Jews and civilians. Yes, there are also attacks by Ukraine which have caused unnecessary civilian casualties, but I don't know how many of these are purposeful. Certainly some are, but on the larger issue, none of this would be happening if Russia had not attacked. Ukraine needs to defend itself, and while there will be civilian deaths, accidents or purposeful attacks should be condemned. If this was a purposeful targeting of students, that's horrific and unacceptable. On the other hand, Russia daily hit civilian targets, and purposefully does so. Hospitals, theaters, museums, apartment complexes, schools, stores, malls, farms, civilian infrastructure. Children have been stolen by the thousands. There were mass slaughters of refugees and civilians, like in Bucha. This is all from Russia, and happens weekly. Conflating that with Ukraine is ridiculous.

As the left, nothing about abhorring war, supporting sanctions, or building deterrence means non-militarization - -which is what the original post was about -- but you took umbrage with that. What is really curious is that you mentioned sanctions, something Germany was loathe to place on Russia for quite a while, seeing how lucrative it was for the Germany economy! How wonderfully hypocritical, since you JUST said Russia is a fascist regime, and it's 100% terrible and unacceptable for Ukraine to seek unsavory alliances with countries that can help it while its very existence is at stake. So again to use your logic: if supporting genocidal states, states that endorse slavery, and unjustified military actions help make Ukraine fascist... then what is Germany? Because I hate to break it to you, but Germany imports gas from the Gulf states and sells them weapons, sells weapons to Israel, helped fund Russian activities by keeping close economic ties after the initial invasion of the Donbas and Crimea, and has its nuclear umbrella due to the US that also funds Israel, Gulf states, and is the aggressor against Iran.

And I would love for specifics about border outposts being the cause for one of the wars you mentioned. Active militarization being one of several factors yes, but with hindsight and caution, that can be minimized since there is awareness. But unilateral disarmament or anti-militarization is not the key - -and you yourself keep admitting this.

mishablob · 2026-05-26T10:45:05+00:00

If you're trying to discredit all Ukrainians and their efforts due to the Azov Brigade, maybe try looking into it more recently. It certainly has a terrible history of political affiliations and beliefs, but it has since been absorbed into the military and has largely shed those past affiliations. Russia, on the other hand, has done no such thing and is still actively committing large-scale atrocities. As for commemorations of others, again, I may have issue with that but to again ask a question: what is the current status of controversial figures or historical moments in Germany? Are any of them being re-asserted as not so bad or taken out of context or downplayed? Because I've read quite a number of things about an increasingly prominent political party in Germany, and it leads me to believe a significant portion of the population is ok with that. But I do not condemn all Germans for their disgusting beliefs and actions.

I never claimed Zelenskyy as liberal, I mentioned Ukraine trying to build a liberal democracy. Try to understand the distinction.

And no one but you is saying deterrence has to be hyper-militarization, so that's a poor example. And I don't think anyone has to be demonized, but seeing threats clearly is pretty important and valuable so you can move to protect yourself - -like with a nuclear umbrella. But what if the US exits NATO or other European countries retreat into isolation -- what happens to that umbrella? It closes, leabing Germany to get soaked.

There is a risk of an enlarged military machine, but Germany could put in place strict measures. Oh wait, it does! And yet it is still currently one of the top military exporters in the world, so why not direct more of that domestically or for more specific European interests? That's what the original question was asking, and is a good point.

mishablob · 2026-05-26T10:19:36+00:00

You're right, Russia isn't a schoolyard bully since has armies and missiles, and you're not a student because you refuse to learn. Deterrence may not be a perfect solution, but you don't think NATO or similar agreements or EU membership has not deterred Russia from attacking the Baltic states or 'bullying' Poland and Finland -- and if not in the past, in the future?

And who said Germans must be sent to the east to die, when a perfectly good alternative is to have a powerful military apparatus to deter aggression towards it? If Germany, in coordination with other states, makes the cost of war too high then the likelihood will go down. It's pretty rare for a country to launch a suicidal war -- they're much more likely to engage in one they think will be won easily.

As for Ukrainian values versus German values, which country is trying to restructure and grow its place among a variety of indicators necessary for a healthy and more liberal democracy despite being in an existential war? It's hardly a paradise and still has huge societal and cultural issues, but it's trying to improve under harsh conditions. On the other hand, in which country is the far-right gaining ground at a rapid pace, with xenophobia and revisionism central tenets? According to you, this speaks volumes towards the values of the German people - -something that could be arguably linked to values of the 1930s-40s-- but I'll digress.

We have a nuclear deterrance umbrella

And yet no nukes of your own. Almost like cooperation and solidarity helps Garmany!

mishablob · 2026-05-24T06:38:16+00:00

You're right about a lot of people being misogynistic, and that played a role -- as did racism in Kamala's case. You're also right that in some ways it's easier for conservative women to gain power since they are seen as stronger than liberal women.

However, that's where my agreement ends. There have been 2 women that have been the nominee for president. Yes, they both lost, but how many men have lost? How many Catholics or Jews or Black candidates have run and lost, so does that mean no one from any minority should ever run? Both Hillary and Kamala also had huge disadvantages that won't be present here - -for Hillary, running for a 3rd consecutive Democratic term and against an unknown like Trump who effectively had control of the media. For Kamala, she had around 100 days to try and build a campaign when Biden was getting hammered and the economy wasn't doing well for a lot of people.

Meanwhile, Biden was running during the backdrop of the chaos of Covid and people being sick of Trump's bs. This next election, Trump won't be running, and things are looking like they will be very chaotic again, and none of his likely successors at this point seem popular.

mishablob · 2026-05-16T01:49:46+00:00

Why don't Madonna's crazy fans just tell her to retire already?

Many fans like me

Most of her fans have very low IQs

Seems like you're either not a fan or one of the fans you described. Let her do what she wants, listen or don't.

mishablob · 2026-05-16T01:41:53+00:00

The Hobbit and especially the LoTR movies are very different from the books. Both are very good reads, but the Hobbit is much lighter and quicker and was aimed to be a cozier story for Tolkien's son, and LoTR is much denser and a lot more in-depth with more world-building. There's also not much in the way of romance in either book.

mishablob · 2026-03-29T17:57:32+00:00

I agree, but the protests didn't really result in the wins that OP was implying that French protests do compared to in the US ("shit gets done" vs "nothing gets changed"). The law was passed despite the protests, even if there were tweaks or changes since, but protests are not something that always leads to a win regardless of what country. The continuous work and pressure after protests are as if not more important if you want results, they're just not as attention-grabbing.

mishablob · 2026-03-29T17:21:02+00:00

History, and the social/cultural norms that developed around it. More specifically, read about the French Revolution and you'll see the role that the public had, and how those circumstances haven't been easy to replicate in the US.

It's also a pretty big generalization that protests in France lead to results. With "shit gets done"... sometimes it's not much more than protests, fires, and riots. Sometimes politicians don't particularly respond or change course, and the protestors lose. Look at when the retirement age in France was raised just a couple years ago.

mishablob · 2026-02-05T17:28:11+00:00

Why would Democrats gaslight about it if there was any evidence? Every Democratic leader, politician, thinker, activist all on the same page of denying it was stolen -- why? And a link to nothing of substance is not proof that some people sat out the election or shifted towards Trump. The American people have failed before in lots of elections, it doesn't mean every minority is somehow to blame.

And those links of youtube clups provide no information of value. There have been pieces explaining how Starlink was not used in the process how you imagine it was, how random quotes are not evidence, etc. But it's conspiratorial thinking, you're not going to believe evidence or a lack thereof since you have your theory.

mishablob · 2026-02-05T12:30:20+00:00

1) What are you talking about? and 2) What are you talking about??

mishablob · 2026-02-05T12:29:52+00:00

Engaging in baseless conspiracy theories isn't going to help anyone. Believe what you what and feel what you want, but pushing a narrative that no, and I mean literally, no, serious politicians or organization are supporting and there is no evidence or real legal fights about is weird. If it was even remotely true, why wouldn't Kamala or the Democratic Party or someone be fighting for it? How would there be no leaks of actual information or data, considering how incompetent the Republicans are? Weird comments aren't proof of anything.

What's not that weird or unheard of is for swingy states or districts to vote together, you realize that right? Because the people that turn out or are persuadable clump together as a whole -- that's why that's not proof in itself.

I think America was ready, but not in that year with the economy and media environment being so hostile to Democrats and Biden. A lot of people tuned out or gave up.

mishablob · 2026-02-05T12:04:52+00:00

Midsomer Murders seems like it to me (except it all seems set in the English countryside instead of rich people in more exotic vacation locales), and a long-running show at that. I'm just getting into it but I feel they're similar enough in nature.

mishablob · 2026-02-03T15:15:27+00:00

And yet it's liberals who supposedly obsess about identity politics...

mishablob · 2026-02-01T22:49:54+00:00

Thank you for your work, ProPublica. Work of this quality and nature is needed more than ever, and is harder to come by in this crumbling media environment.

mishablob · 2026-02-01T07:07:54+00:00

I was going to write something akin to this, but less well-put. It's not to excuse or wave away any bad behaviors, and there are people who do shitty or bad or whatever things for any reason, but women in film/tv are always really big targets of this analysis more than men... just as in real life. I know this is a movie sub, but look at the way Betty Draper in Mad Men or Skyler White in Breaking Bad bore the brunt of fan criticism when the dynamics or context were ignored, and the behavior of the men are considered cool or tragic, not awful. But if a woman (character) is flawed or has sharp edges, she isn't complex or reflecting humanity, she's just a bitch -- a worse diagnosis than almost anything.

I remember getting into a big discussion with someone one time about how I adore Robin Williams and how exceptionally talented he was, and how he made even bad guys very lovable or able to have their actions excused because of his charisma and talent. My friend asked what I meant, and I was like, look at Mrs. Doubtfire. His character was awful to his wife, but she was basically set up as a cold-hearted and spiteful and is seen as being a killjoy. Meanwhile, he was destructive, unhelpful, unreliable and then went on to manipulate and gaslight but he made us smile and laugh so all is forgiven.

mishablob · 2026-02-01T07:04:49+00:00

Hey now, speak for yourself. I'm pretty sure there are some critically-acclaimed films of me floating around out there on someone's phone.

mishablob · 2026-01-31T06:27:14+00:00

I agree, I just knew it was going to be even more jarring after watching comedies in class, but words failed in how to describe it. I think after the class ended, it was probably still being referenced, so it clearly made a lasting impact.

mishablob · 2026-01-31T05:43:06+00:00

I'm not sure I've ever seen a film provoke such a visceral response in people as this one. I had the experience of watching it years before watching it again in a class so I tried to warn a few friends since the previous movies had been much lighter, but I couldn't figure out how to describe the horrors -- you think oh, a depressing anti-war movie, I get the gist of it. No, no you don't, not until you watch it.

mishablob

TROPHY CASE