'Of course!' Harris tells '60 Minutes' interviewer she's shot her Glock (www.rawstory.com)

submitted 1 day ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

29 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Clip directly from Kamala: https://x.com/KamalaHarris/status/1843450339774574637

top 29 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Thrillhouse@lemmy.world 35 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I felt that this 60 minutes interview wasn’t fair AT ALL and heavily slanted toward calling the Harris/Walz campaign on the most trivial shit.

For example, calling out Walz on the few times he’s misspoke and then asking how the voters can trust him.

Fuck allllll the way off with that bush league line of goddamn questioning. It’s not comparing apples to apples to pretend Walz is some huge liar when Trump and Vance lie literally every time they open their mouths with egregious, dangerous and racist lies. It’s disingenuous and ridiculous “reporting”.

Same with saying Harris’ plan would hurt the economy. Trump had Obama’s economy served up to him on a silver platter, tanked it (partial credit to Covid and the war in Ukraine as aggravating factors), and is pretending it’s all the Biden-Harris administration’s fault. Macroeconomically America is recovering from its recent economic downturn, similarly to Canada. Maybe, just maybe, the middle class is not feeling this because of wage suppression, corporate greed, price gouging and purposeful, weaponized incompetence by the Republicans in Congress.

[-] ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com 11 points 1 day ago

Yeah...I thought ABC did great on the fact checking during the Harris debate. But in general, professional journalism is in a sad state.

Feeding into the false equivalence by being "equally" challenging is a part of the sanewashing. Someone needs to tell these journalists that treating bad faith actors differently than good faith actors is desirable and doesn't make you biased.

[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 64 points 1 day ago

Well duh. The first rule of owning a firearm is making sure that it isn't the first time you use it in the moment you need to use it

[-] metaStatic@kbin.earth 21 points 1 day ago

every gun is loaded, especially when it's not

[-] m0darn@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago

Seems pretty sexist to even ask.

When was the last time trump shot a gun?

[-] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 8 points 1 day ago

The fact that a candidate has to answer questions about their shooting experience in order to be qualified for the presidency says it all. This country is extremely messed up.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago

Of course former law enforcement is going to own a Glock and have time on it. That's pretty much a given. They even have an officer purchase program.

https://us.glock.com/en/buy/blue-label-program

[-] JohnOliver@feddit.dk 8 points 1 day ago

Irrelevant and foreseeable 'news'

[-] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world -5 points 1 day ago

Raw Story - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

Information for Raw Story:

MBFC: Left - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.News

https://www.rawstory.com/kamala-harris-2669347102/

Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2024

81 points (88.6% liked)

politics

19011 readers

3352 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News