She didn’t say anything wrong. There are issues with both sides, and one side can be worse than another. Vote for what you think it is right. I’m just glad she is really supportive toward causes like Gaza and helps, and won’t blindly endorse someone actively endorsed by Dick Cheney and courting republicans.
Harris said she wants to earn support, so I don’t understand why her base flies into a rage if people are skeptical over her or can’t gloss over issues.
As discussion, I’m not her base. But I argue about voting strategy with a Harris conclusion.
I’m deeply unsatisfied with the democratic position on Gaza and beyond. But I’m in the anti trump base. I believe global well being, including in Gaza will be significantly worse if he gets a second term.
I will vote for any competitive, viable candidate that is left of trump, the more left the better. I will not vote for an academic choice that has no chance of winning, and is only a spoiler. Without ejection reform, and something like proportional representation, I believe one should choose based on harm reduction, even if the choice is very unsavory.
I fucking love her!
Edit: Chappell Roan is donating proceeds to Palestine and told the Whitehouse to fuck off when they tried to pink-wash her.
She’s extremely political and this quote is cherry picked out of context.
She’s criticizing the engine of celebrity endorsement and asking us to engage directly.
Which quote is cherry picked? Honestly curious
I’m quite disappointed in her both-sidesism comments. Maybe that approach is defensible in “normal” times, but not when one candidate/party is fascist, authoritarian, anti-democracy, anti-women’s rights, anti-trans, anti-LGBTQ+, anti-people of color.
My feeling is that Chappell is effectively supporting that party by not taking a more vocal stand against them, particularly when she has the ability to influence so many young voters whose lives will be impacted for decades by what the extreme right has done in this country, and will further try to do if they win the White House (and/or Congress) again.
“there’s problems with both sides”
Also, this is great…
Have you seen what Blue MAGA has said about her? It’s insane:
I don’t see how the full quote really changes anything.
I fully agree with her position that folks she be informed and engaged in their local politics.
Fully agree with her that people should use critical thinking skills.
But saying both sides have the same amount of problems is a ridiculous false equivalency, and directly threatens the very people she supports. One side is going to make life a living hell (if not outright cause deaths - see: abortion rights for an example) for LGTBQ+ people, for women, and for people of color. There’s no “both sides” argument here.
She’s within her right to call out the Left for specific issues she disagrees on, but she loses credibility for effectively saying one side is not better than the other in all the areas I’ve described
clearly this alludes to vote dilution by “voting small” meaning left vote gets fragmented. The very sad part is - she is right and people SHOULD vote FOR something rather than against, but system is stacked for political duopoly with a slight preference to the right. In other words it not pragmatic to “vote small” under system where small get ignored and society gets polarized to the point of always voting against. What she should be pushing for is a change of a system, otherwise communities she cares for so much are going to remain political hostages of the left because the right found “the other” they can rally against in them. There are only two rational decisions: remain under current system and support whatever big entity is further to the left or stage a revolution/rebellion forcing system change to allow everyone to “vote small”. Silence is not working.
More like Dave Chappelle Roan, amirite? 😅
I love getting old. I don’t know who this person is so I get to not care about their opinion.
Ahh good that she wants to vote. But it is myopic.
