I think the debate over it is somewhat interesting. I can think it’s valid or misguided. But Chappell, specifically, requires no defense. Even if you disagree with her non-endorsement, that’s like the most minor complaint you could have. She’s still solidly voting for Harris and stated as much, which is just as good.

74 million people voted for Trump in 2020 after one of the worst presidential terms in U.S. history, stripping federal protections and pushing radical anti-LGBTQ+ judges into every level of government. And the two candidates are still tied in the polls, despite only adding an insurrection and convictions to his resume. That’s the problem.

I don’t give a fuck what she has to say to voters to get her elected. If you don’t think liberal judges over the next four years are a net positive over conservative judges, you need to pay more attention to politics more holistically.

For the record, this is also why I’m forever grateful to Joe Manchin for giving Dems a majority despite him not agreeing with Dems on many subjects. The alternative was far, far worse.

I live in a red state. Federal protections are the single most effective way way to support LGBTQ+. So yeah, don’t say you’re doing “everything” if you won’t even endorse.

Love what she does, I love the activism. She has no obligation to endorse. I totally get Gaza if that’s the holdup. But saying you’ll do “everything” in the same breath as saying you won’t endorse Harris is a lie and is offensive to me as someone who lives in an impacted state who desperately does not want another Trump presidency.

I watch enough cable news to know that they don’t take the extremism on the right seriously enough. And they’re too chicken shit to call it out 90% of the time because then they’ll look biased. They try to attack the left over literally anything to appear impartial.

I pay attention to politics. And I notice the shit that happens that gets ignored.

You’re just up and down this thread attacking things nobody said. I can’t tell if it’s intentional or not.

I think you missed the conversation entirely.

It’s literally THE cause that SHE mentioned. That’s the entire point of my comments.

I fully support questioning both sides. I support making up your own mind. Although I think the news goes out of its way to sanitize the dangers of right’s extremism, which makes it harder for low-information voters to make informed opinions. But that’s a separate conversation.

None of that changes the fact that she has a platform and she isn’t using it for her cause as she claims she does. But I’m glad that she’s definitively voting for her causes along with tens of millions of other people.

I don’t know what’s crazier, only having three winless teams 3 weeks into the season, or that one of them is the Bengals and Joe Burrow isn’t even injured.

I completely respect Gaza making people reluctant voters. But don’t tell me you’re doing everything in your power for LGBTQ+ if you’re not going to support the only candidate who supports those rights. Just don’t even mention it if you’re going to contradict it.

Now, I only discovered who this person is this week (I heard one of her songs before all this stuff blew up). I don’t hate this person. My issues with her stance is about as minor as it can possibly be.

I’m just a passive observer who is watching half the country vote for a megalomaniac, a sliver of ill informed cynics vote for a Russian stooge, and a bunch of otherwise rational Americans pretend they don’t STRONGLY side with one party of another on 95% of issues.

Endorsing is not the same as undying loyalty. Seems obvious. But I guess it has to be stated clearly.

I think it’s perfectly fine to criticize anybody who says they’ll do everything in their power to support LGBTQ+, and then refuse to endorse Harris (even though she basically has).

Bonus rankings! This one is more straightforward. Teams get points for wins. They get more points for beating good teams and fewer points for beating bad teams. (+32 for beating the best team, +1 for beating the worst). Teams lose points for losses. They lose more points for losing to bad teams and fewer points for losing to good teams. (-32 for losing to the worst team, -1 for losing to the best). The points total was reset with the first game of the season.

If we’re talking about objective impact, then I guess the shit list is Trump voters at the top, then Jill Stein voters and non-voters.

Around half of voters are going to vote for Trump. A decent portion of people voting for Harris are swing voters, meaning they at least consider voting for Trump. A significant portion of people are going to vote for Jill Stein, despite the fact that Trump winning is BAD for just about everything she cares about, and host of human rights she doesn’t seem to care about.

Irrationally hopeful voters are at the bottom of my shit list.

I wonder if it has to do with General Ross, who the team is named after.

She’s probably my least favorite of the bunch. But I’m glad that she’s there since people like her.

MAGA pollsters try to scare MAGA voters into voting.

Bonus rankings! This one is more straightforward. Teams get points for wins. They get more points for beating good teams and fewer points for beating bad teams. (+32 for beating the best team, +1 for beating the worst). Teams lose points for losses. They lose more points for losing to bad teams and fewer points for losing to good teams. (-32 for losing to the worst team, -1 for losing to the best). The points total was reset with the first game of the season.

If the DNC is too conservative, then she is inversely too liberal for the DNC. And she isnt, it’s not a monolith. She would be more than welcome in the more liberal half of the government.

If she wants to change it, she should join and do so. She might not succeed. That’s how Democracy works. She’d be more likely to succeed though.

I’ve never heard a single position of hers that is too liberal. Even Andrew Yang was given his time to make his case. Voters said no.

The problem is that she’s not actually popular enough with voters to get elected, let alone popular enough in the liberal half of the country to get nominated. She’s saying the game is rigged because she doesn’t actually have a chance.

The game actually favors her. RCV would help a moderate like Manchin get elected.