Medhi Hasan's brief rebuttal to those blaming progressives and the left.
Nailed it!
Nailed it!
Blame the Left? Who Are You Trying to Kid?
- Thread starter What Would Jesus Do?
- Start date
One of the most delusional mofos on the planet. 🥜
Pretty simple how Trump won. He lied. About everything. And America was stupid enough to buy into it.
Sure. But how do you feel about the gaslighting Hasan says the Dems and Dem-leaning media are engaging in?
Point out what he said that isn't correct. Anything.
We have enough name-calling substituting for actual thinking. How about being part of the solution?
"There was nothing left wing about Harris."
Do you prefer to call that a blatant lie, or just gaslighting?
Nothing left wing about her?
Nothing?
I stand by my comment. That man knows his audience and delusion is the delicacy of the hour for the true believer.
Far easier to make sense of it all if one simply denies all reality and facts.
That’s what children do when they play make believe. Most of us have grown out of that phase of life.
Harris was ultra extreme alt-left left. All 50 States in the Union moving right support that statement.
She and her politics were REJECTED.
So your "evidence" is that you are incredulous? The argument from incredulity?
Point out her current left wing positions. She was on the left for a few things in the past, but what about lately?
Pardon my incredulity at your ignorant take. Honestly, at this point I only have myself to blame to continually underestimating your vacuity.
The Voteview project (now based at UCLA) has, since the 1980s, employed the roll-call votes cast in Congress to locate all senators and representatives on a liberal-conservative ideological map. These data and methods have been utilized by academics in thousands of peer-reviewed books, book chapters and journal articles. Although no method is perfect, there is a general consensus within the academic community that the NOMINATE methodology employed by the Voteview project and its close cousins represent the gold standard.
The Voteview data can be used to study the Senate in two principal ways. The first method analyzes each two-year congressional period separately and provides a unique ideological location for every senator for each biennium, allowing for the comparison of senators who served during that Congress, but not for the comparison of senators across Congresses. The second method analyzes the congressional periods together and provides a single ideological location for a senator based on the entirety of their voting record while in that office, thereby allowing for the comparison of senators across Congresses.
Harris served in the Senate representing California during two Congresses (the 115th and 116th) before resigning to assume office as vice president in 2021.
In the 115th Congress (2017-2019), 48 Democrats served in the Senate and cast a sufficient number of votes for reliable analysis. Of those 48, Harris had the third-most liberal voting record, after Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.).
In the 116th Congress (2019-2020), 45 Democrats served in the Senate and cast a sufficient number of votes for reliable analysis. Of those 45, Harris had the second-most liberal voting record after Warren.
Since the turn of the century, there have been 11 complete Congresses (107th through 117th), with only five months remaining in the 118th. During this period, there were 109 different Democrats who served in the Senate and cast a sufficient number of roll call votes for a reliable analysis of their ideological position.
Of these 109 Democrats, Harris has the second-most liberal voting record. This makes her slightly less liberal than Warren, but more liberal than all of the remaining 107 Democrats, and significantly more liberal than all but a handful.
Included among these 109 Democrats are President Biden, former President Barack Obama and 2016 presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. The record indicates Clinton is more liberal than 74, Obama more liberal than 62 and Biden’s more liberal than 52.
I'd offer a graph to show how extreme that is, but I'm too tired to have to explain the graph to you.
The only question is whether you're a gaslighter yourself, and only pretending to be this ignorant, or really this ignorant.
“Hi 911, i would like to report a murder.”
This has nothing to do with her campaign. Her platform was closer to Bush then Bernie
And people knew she was being disingenuous.
I’m to believe because she cozied up the neocons who believe in big govt abroad the way that liberals believe in big govt at home she’s suddenly turned on a dime and no longer holds any of the views she actually never repudiated, even when given the chance?
Please, please, PLEASE keep believing the country didn’t reject what she has always stood for, and run on that platform for the rest of my life.
She was essentially lying, i.e., supposedly changing her positions on a lot of topics. However, if she would have won the election she would have flipped back to her real positions and Americans saw through her fake front.
Interesting conversation.
From my perspective, I never left the Republican Party. They left me by moving to the extreme right, thus forcing me to become an independent.
My political views have not changed, but the nation has shifted to the radical right.
Rule of law, separation of church and state. Those used to be values of the Republican Party. Staying out of people’s business.
If someone had told me 30 years ago that I would no longer be a Republican, I would have laughed at them.
From my perspective, I never left the Republican Party. They left me by moving to the extreme right, thus forcing me to become an independent.
My political views have not changed, but the nation has shifted to the radical right.
Rule of law, separation of church and state. Those used to be values of the Republican Party. Staying out of people’s business.
If someone had told me 30 years ago that I would no longer be a Republican, I would have laughed at them.
The votes during the years that are always cherry picked here account for years in which nothing could be accomplished by her votes other than politically stacking progressive clout. In no timeline in existence did actual progressives look to Harris is a beacon of leftist purity or even close. She's a neoliberal, and her campaign showed it. She even tried to step a bit to the right during her campaign, and to no avail.
You have really turned out to be quite the weasel, not that I couldn't tell before.
Three Areas Where Hillary Clinton Is Running Against Her Husband's Legacy
The politics of immigration, marriage, and crime have changed a lot since the 1990s.link
Bill Clinton would crush it running on his 90s platform. Now people want to pretend that is extreme right wing positions, and that the Democrats haven't moved their positions away from him and his success.
They don't care about the policies or the lies, they care about owning Democrats
Liar.
The Voteview project (now based at UCLA) has, since the 1980s, employed the roll-call votes cast in Congress to locate all senators and representatives on a liberal-conservative ideological map. These data and methods have been utilized by academics in thousands of peer-reviewed books, book chapters and journal articles. Although no method is perfect, there is a general consensus within the academic community that the NOMINATE methodology employed by the Voteview project and its close cousins represent the gold standard.
Lol, weasel. Go find meore italicized Google searches, a wall of them, to bore people away from your arguments, which will surely feel like a victory for you. I'm sure you can use data from voting records in peer reviewed books, but what you did was cherry pick the same years everyone else like you picks and build your assumptions from there. I think anyone not being disingenuous to win the internet can tell you there is a huge difference between Harris and say Sanders, AOC, other squad members, etc.
That kamala actually wanted to close the border. Or that she wasn't far left.
In fact, she was so far left that she didn't even want to publicly stand by things she previously said like her desire to ban fracking.
It’s not me, it’s UCLA in peer reviewed research.
Where’s your peer reviewed research demonstrating that UCLA is ‘cherry picking’?
Don’t have any? None? Just gaslighting without evidence again?
You brought up fracking. There are plenty of green Republicans that are against fracking. It is not a left wing view.
Being green doesn’t make someone left wing.
We won, you stupid bitch! We'll fix it our way!!
@Moral where'd you go?
Did you finally realized that I 'cherry picked' the years that Harris was serving in the Senate?
Question remains, are you a gaslighter, or hopelessly ignorant?
He doesn’t seem to understand that all the progressive ideals and memes he says Harris never committed to in campaign were essentially co-signed by the party writ large. The American public, right or wrong, associates these things with the entire party.
I moved on. I have to show ignored content to interact with you, and it has been that way for a good while so I don't get notifications when you respond. It's probably for the best because of someone wants to interact with you, you will always be there interacting. I didn't read anything between this comment and the previous ones, just to show how not invested I am with you. See you again in a few months brotaterchip.
You couldn't find anything to refute what I said, so you 'moved on'.
Classic. Back to safe space from the Bad Man who brings facts into the discussion.
What you've actually 'invested in' is a world view that can't survive the facts.
Sometimes you are unbearable. Someone either sees it your way, or they are a deplorable. I have never voted Trump. I think the man is an imbecile. I qui the GOP during W’s first term as it became clear the R’s had no interest in fiscal discipline. But if you were watching objectively, it was clear Kamala had very few core principles and more or less used poll tested answers to almost everything.
So . . . you can't actually point out where he was wrong.
You just moved the goal posts. Was that deliberate? I'm guessing so or you wouldn't have started off with name-calling. But I'll address your spin anyway.
1. No one is saying she doesn't count as a mainstream liberal Democrat.
The smear that Hasan is responding to is that she was extreme left, far left, radical, too progressive, etc., etc. Not that she is counted among America's milquetoast liberals.
2. The question your responded to was whether she is far left NOW, not whether she took some good lefty positions in the past. That has already been acknowledged. So with all you bloviating, all you've really shown is that she used to be a liberal more than 5 years ago.
3. Even back when you could rate her as a liberal in the Senate, most of the legislation she voted for was pretty centrist - only rating as liberal in the context of the increasing rightward drift of US politics. By contrast, in 2024 she was praising the failed bipartisan immigration bill - which by lefty standards was not a good bill.
Of these 109 Democrats, Harris has the second-most liberal voting record. This makes her slightly less liberal than Warren, but more liberal than all of the remaining 107 Democrats, and significantly more liberal than all but a handful.
Of these 109 Democrats, Harris has the second-most liberal voting record. This makes her slightly less liberal than Warren, but more liberal than all of the remaining 107 Democrats, and significantly more liberal than all but a handful.
Which of those positions did she repudiate?
Are we going to pretend, without evidence, that she has completely and utterly changed her viewpoints?
Of these 109 Democrats, Harris has the second-most liberal voting record. This makes her slightly less liberal than Warren, but more liberal than all of the remaining 107 Democrats, and significantly more liberal than all but a handful.
What if I put it this way, her record (not her rhetoric) places her in the top 99th percentile of Democrats, not just Senators, but of Democrats. That's not 'mainstream' Democrat.
Your blindness on this is simply staggering.
You are who the gaslighters are seeking to 'inform'.
Last edited:
