- cross-posted to:
- usa@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- usa@lemmy.ml
“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.”
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.
OK I hear you but
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?
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.)
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.
This assumes that announcing you’ll give Republicans power is a tactical advantage. That’s the whole core of the false dichotomy.
What power?
What? A cabinet seat.
Cabinet appointments are Monopoly money.
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.