Harris says she would appoint a Republican to her Cabinet if elected
www.nbcnews.com
In a clip of a CNN interview scheduled to air in full Thursday night, Harris said she was committed to welcoming diverse points of view.

“I have spent my career inviting diversity of opinion. I think it’s important to have people at the table when some of the most important decisions are being made that have different views, different experiences,” Harris said. “And I think it would be to the benefit of the American public to have a member of my Cabinet who was a Republican.”

  • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
    0·
    20 days ago

    Why are all the top comments ITT freaking out about this?

    It’s a cabinet position, a common tactical gesture to steal another cohort of moderate Republican voters that are looking for safe alternatives to voting Trump-Vance.

    These are historically proven tactics and it’s clearly working here, which is good because winning by a big margin will help mitigate the predicted GOP election interference.

    So anyway, would it better to lose than for a token Republican to be given a mostly symbolic position in the cabinet?

    Of course not. So why all the kvetching?

    • shastaxc@lemm.ee
      0·
      20 days ago

      I never liked that saying; it doesn’t make sense. It makes it sound like cutting off your nose is dumb but spiting your own face isn’t… Why would you spite your own face?

    • octopus_ink@lemmy.mlOPEnglish
      0·
      20 days ago

      So anyway, would it better to lose than for a token Republican to be given a mostly symbolic position in the cabinet?

      Of course not. So why all the kvetching?

      Because I reject the false dichotomy that those are the only two choices. Because nearly all Republicans either stood by while Trump raged like a bull in a china shop when he was in power, and waited until it was very, very clear that it was a sinking ship to oppose him. Because the 3(?) who opposed him earlier on were still people we’d have not wanted in any position of influence as Democrat voters or progressives before the recent several years long clownshow made them look like decent people in comparison.

      • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
        0·
        20 days ago

        OK I hear you but

        Because [not fair, tit for tat]

        Sounds like an insufficient reason to pass up a tactical advantage. That would be “cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face,” wouldn’t it?

        • Zaktor@sopuli.xyzEnglish
          0·
          20 days ago

          This assumes that announcing you’ll give Republicans power is a tactical advantage. That’s the whole core of the false dichotomy.

        • octopus_ink@lemmy.mlOPEnglish
          0·
          20 days ago

          Hey it’s politics - tactical advantage wins over integrity every time, I get it. I can still be pissed off though, right? She’s getting my vote, do I AT LEAST get to be angry about it without being told to shush?

          (Not by you specifically.)

          • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
            0·
            20 days ago

            For sure, it doesn’t feel just to offer olive branches to folks who haven’t earned it. I don’t know if I’d be emotionally mature enough to do it, but I’m glad to have a candidate who can keep a cool head and do what it takes to win.

      • Zaktor@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        0·
        20 days ago

        Also, there’s a lot more wrong with Republicans than just whether they allowed Trump to happen. Like we have a whole ideology about what the right way to run society is that even the nice Republicans reject.