Summary
In an emotional monologue, John Oliver urged undecided and reluctant voters to support Kamala Harris, emphasizing her policies on Medicare, reproductive rights, and poverty reduction.
Addressing frustrations over the Biden administration’s Gaza policy, he acknowledged the struggle for many voters yet cited voices like Georgia State Rep. Ruwa Romman, who supports Harris despite reservations.
Oliver warned of the lasting consequences of a second Trump term, including potential Supreme Court shifts.
Oliver said voting for Harris would mean the world could laugh at this past week’s photo of an orange, gaping-mouthed Trump in a fluorescent vest and allow Americans to carry on with life without worrying about what he might do next.
I hear this a lot but:
I’d argue that driving up the support for Harris in the popular vote is critical. If Trump wins Electorally, it’s still rhetorically important to stifle the notion of a mandate by not letting him get 50%.
Blue states have fallen in the past or can shift purple if the line isn’t held.
That said, I’m glad you’re not in a swing state at least.
Reminder that it was Biden who just recently issued a forceful formal apology to the indigenous people of America. GOP didn’t it. Trump mocked it by having a rally on their sacred grounds no less.
it was another public display of the same “shallow understanding” from moderates that MLK jr wrote about; but i think he can be forgiven for it since the native americans in canada and united states seem to have similar understanding.
and the blue states conversion is going to happen at the same rate as democrat’s conversion into diet republicans.
Yet for all of MLK’s grievances, who ultimately provided the pathway to lawful change in Congress in 1964?
waiting for election to end before taking action to stop a genocide sounds too much like the definition of that timetable MLK jr was referring to and voting for an genocider enabler to help maintain negative peace is something he actively warned against.
moderates have a “shallow understanding” of MLK jr’s efforts because americans are indoctrinated against all it of it except for his nonviolence and it’s relevance along with my experience is saddening since i’m literally watching history repeat before my eyes as it’s enabled by the overwhelming majority who never bothered to reach out past that indoctrination.
All due respect, you didn’t answer the question.
Pyrrhic victories are meaningless. In the end, who actually followed through with change?
Obama himself, the first black President, sympathized with you that change never seems to come quickly enough. Partly because people like Trump are so damaging and disruptive to progress. In their absence, we’d be far more free to advance more quickly. Alas, that’s just dreaming.
So in the end, it was those liberals in Congress who passed the monumental change. And without question, MLK had more allies among them than he did the Confederate successors in the KKK, obviously.
In the end, some change is better than no change is better than regression through entropy.
there is no objective answer to your question; only responses that align with our world view and in my world view neither biden nor harris represent progress based on my experiences.
MLK jr was successful because of the portrayals of racially motivated violence in the media galvanized the voting public into passing the civil rights acts and our leaders have since taken efforts; spent money; and have repealed several civil rights related acts to ensure that it doesn’t happen again; this isn’t progress.
.
that’s the last time we made progress and those too come from the same generation of civil rights pushes.
similarly to MLK jr, our leaders have also taken efforts, spend money and legislated away rights to ensure that they never happen again; yes we did progress at those times, but haven’t since then.
.
So legalizing homosexuality (2003) and legalizing same-gender marriage (2015) are not progress? What an odd thing to suggest. I’m guessing a lot of married queer people who aren’t imprisoned would disagree.