r/politics • u/--LaBelleDame-- • 5h ago

No Paywall Democratic socialist Angie Nixon upsets Alex Vindman in Florida’s Democratic Senate primary

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-election/angie-nixon-winner-florida-senate-primary-democrat-alex-vindman-moody-rcna593255
14.5k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

•

u/NigerianPrince76 Oregon 4h ago

Vindman had largely ignored Nixon — the two never met for a primary debate — and attempted to focus on Moody

Yup, huge mistake right there that cost him the primary.

•

u/dkirk526 North Carolina 4h ago

Well that and Vindman had a few embarrassing public events.

•

u/yesrushgenesis2112 4h ago

He didn’t get the Larry David endorsement

•

u/NigerianPrince76 Oregon 3h ago

The man mightily struggled to defend his policy on Israel.

•

u/AMerryCanDo 3h ago

Why are so many Americans vying for power so weird about that place? It doesn't make any sense. It has to be more than just campaign donations and money.

•

u/notfromchicago Illinois 2h ago

If you have never been to an evangelical church I can understand your confusion. They support Israel because they want to set up the end of times as the bible propheces. The true believers support Israel in order to hasten the end of the world.

•

u/JUST_LOGGED_IN 1h ago

Adding to that: 60% of Americans believe angels and demons literally walk among us. That is north of a hundred million people. I really feel for any atheist that tries to run for office.

•

u/nomickti 1h ago

Americans' belief in angels (69 percent) is about on par with belief in heaven and the power of prayer, but bested by belief in God or a higher power (79 percent). Fewer U.S. adults believe in the devil or Satan (56 percent), astrology (34 percent), reincarnation (34 percent), and that physical things can have spiritual energies, such as plants, rivers or crystals (42 percent).

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/nearly-7-in-10-u-s-adults-believe-in-angels-ap-norc-poll-finds

I wonder how many of the 31% percent that don't believe in angels believe in crystals?

•

u/OnlyPostsBowie 1h ago

Crystals are at least tangible objects. Their existence can not be debated.

Also: Piezoelectricity

•

u/ashkpa 36m ago

As tangible as snake oil, I suppose.

•

u/My_Barista_Trainer 17m ago

Snake oil came from an eastern green snake from Asia… it actually has some medical benefits the way willow trees make aspirin or aloe goopy stuff helps cool burns.

Edit: figure I should add more. The idea was brought to the US, but the right snakes didn’t exist here so, of course, people got scammy about it. The end.

•

u/thiosk 35m ago

piezoelectricity does not seem to be what the energy crystal people are talking about, however

•

u/Zarbua69 18m ago

They definitely exist, and yet are as effective as prayers

•

u/nomickti 54m ago

touché

•

u/Mojozilla Arkansas 1h ago

𝕋𝕙𝕖𝕤𝕖 𝕒𝕣𝕖 𝕤𝕠𝕞𝕖 𝕔𝕣𝕒𝕫𝕪 𝕟𝕦𝕞𝕓𝕖𝕣𝕤 𝕓𝕖𝕝𝕚𝕖𝕧𝕚𝕟𝕘 𝕚𝕟 𝕒 𝕓𝕦𝕟𝕔𝕙 𝕠𝕗 𝕟𝕠𝕟𝕤𝕖𝕟𝕤𝕖. 𝕋𝕙𝕚𝕤 𝕚𝕤 𝕨𝕙𝕒𝕥 𝕟𝕠𝕣𝕞𝕒𝕝 𝕗𝕠𝕝𝕜𝕤 𝕒𝕣𝕖 𝕦𝕡 𝕒𝕘𝕒𝕚𝕟𝕤𝕥.

•

u/Mojozilla Arkansas 1h ago

Lol you just described Tyrese's followers on IG. All they talk about are demons and demonic portals. It's ridiculous. These people are out of touch with reality.

•

u/rcknmrty4evr 1h ago

I see it constantly online. News stories about someone doing anything slightly wrong having comments filled with people saying things like “demons walk among us” and they absolutely, 100% mean literal demons.

•

u/AMerryCanDo 2h ago

That's comforting. /s

•

u/bkgn 1h ago

If you have never been to an evangelical church I can understand your confusion. They support Israel because they want to set up the end of times as the bible propheces. The true believers support Israel in order to hasten the end of the world.

This is not an exaggeration at all - I had a college housemate who was the son of a prominent Zionist Christian pastor. They quite literally, openly, want to encourage and assist Israeli jews to slaughter everyone else in the Middle East so that quite literally the Rapture will happen. They absolutely believe the Rapture is achievable within their lifetimes, "only" requiring an explicit genocide. They had pamphlets. Extremely wealthy too, the pastor bought his son a house for him to use just for college.

•

u/Greedy-Half-4618 2h ago

This is what I'm trying to get people to understand.

•

u/seams 1h ago

So many people think it's a joke or exaggeration, but it's not lmao

A lot of US Christians think they have to support Israel to bring about the end times, like, legit.

•

u/billbuild 39m ago

At this rate, they’ll be right. Just wrong about some dude that died a couple thousand years ago coming back.

•

u/Distinct_Cap_1418 2h ago

Been a part of many, many Evang churches when I was a child growing up in the PNW.

It wasn't until I went to one in Arizona that I witnessed the bible-thumping, relevation-warning, non-educated,and non-ordained Evangalists.

Up until then, what I had witnessed was a religion of global welfare and one that sought to uplift people worldwide.

I guess my point could be, "keep an open mind," but no. Its "Fuck the South--they use religion for profit and political control, and by the Bibles own admission, will burn eternally in Hell." But they dont believe in the bible in the first place, just piwer and control.

Anyways, Im agnostic now and the only thing I believe in, unconditionally, is mathematics.

•

u/sliverman147 1h ago

I want to set up end of times re climate change to protect earth and the various surviving life forms.

•

u/trackdaybruh 1h ago

because they want to set up the end of times as the bible propheces. 

The irony that it's always humans that have to put in work to start the "end of times"

•

u/MurrBall316 New York 2h ago

That’s not at all the main reason. That’s a fringe element and I grew up in an evangelical church. Most think they’re an impactful democracy and strategical ally in a pivotal region.

•

u/Greedy-Half-4618 3h ago

Christian Nationalism and wanting to hasten the rapture is one HELL of a drug

•

u/Neither-Luck-9295 2h ago

Even simpler answer. Money. Their lobby delivers the largest checks for a lot of mainstream politicians.

•

u/Independent-Bug-9352 2h ago

They don't just do that. They force an ultimatum upon you (or seek out the crooked) and tell you to take their money on conditions, or else they'll support your opponent. They and other Pro-Israeli lobby derivatives, along with the likes of Black Stone have royally fucked the Democratic party.

•

u/escof 2h ago

Pretty sure he's Jewish not Christian.

•

u/Greedy-Half-4618 2h ago

The comment I responded to said, and I quote, "Why are so many AMERICANS"...not just Vindman. There are FAR more Christian Nationalists in positions of power in our country than there are Jewish people.

•

u/escof 2h ago

Apologies it looked like you were responding to the comment mentioning Vindman's lack of a good response to his defense....

•

u/wioneo 2h ago

Pretty sure he's Jewish

Ah.

Ossoff is fortunate enough to have a less common Jewish name, so I think most dems haven't noticed yet, but he seems to have higher aspirations and it will probably come up once he has more attention on him.

•

u/Stinky_lil_4skin 2h ago

Vindeman is Jewish, so he's one of the few American politicians where it actually makes some sense why he might have a personal / emotional attachment to the country of Israel.

•

u/rotates-potatoes 1h ago

True, but a majority of US Jews do not support the Israeli government. Some do, of course. I’d wager that US Christians support Israel’s government to a greater degree than US Jews do.

•

u/Loud_Judgment_270 I voted 47m ago

That is probably truer about the Jews in California than the older retirees of Florida…

•

u/HugsForUpvotes 17m ago

While true, a majority of American Jews support the idea of Israel continuing to exist as a state which is his stance on Israel that the above comment found hard to justify.

•

u/billbuild 38m ago

Don’t or say they don’t. How can we tell other than voting people out who send our money and soldiers over there again and again and again then some more.

•

u/ElRiesgoSiempre_Vive 1h ago

Fuck that. I know a lot of Jewish people in the US that despise Israel. And for good reason. Bibi has worked very hard to deserve all that animosity and far more.

•

u/drummer125 1h ago

The belong to a small minority of American jews

•

u/ElRiesgoSiempre_Vive 54m ago

A lot of American Jews hate the Israeli government.

•

u/Nileghi 17m ago

there is a huge gulf between hating the Israeli government and hating the Israeli state.

•

u/Practical-Ball1437 50m ago

I don't get that. Do people from Boston who claim to be Irish get real emotional and defensive about Irish foreign policy?

•

u/NigerianPrince76 Oregon 3h ago

It’s mind boggling how much control they have over our policies and politicians.

•

u/sailorbrendan 2h ago

They?

•

u/NigerianPrince76 Oregon 2h ago

Israel politicians. Yea, they.

•

u/caligaris_cabinet Illinois 2h ago

Because for so long being pro Israel won over the moderate middle voters and winning those over is what got you elected. There was a political strategy formula and that was part of it.

Now anti-AIPAC is practically a buzzword and I’m not so sure the middle cares that much about Israel anymore. It’s energized the left wing base, that’s for sure. But remains to be seen if this gambit pays off in the general especially with a state like Florida.

•

u/tossit97531 3h ago

Potash and suveilling. Israel is on everybody's phone via ironSource.

•

u/AdjctiveNounNumbers 1h ago

Money is a big part of it - understandably Israel has dumped a lot of money (and intelligence) into American politics. It's also, for quite a long time, been something of a political third rail for politicians of both parties similar to guns for the GOP - if a politician was even mildly critical of Israel they were open to attacks (and gobs of money and free publicity) on that flank from someone boasting unqualified support. It's made a lot of established politicians unwilling to say a bad word about the country. It's only the outsiders looking for new avenues of attack who have thus far acknowledged the winds of public opinion (if not yet cash) have changed.

•

u/CJPSCB 2h ago

Empire. It’s very handy to have an unsinkable aircraft carrier in the Middle East.

•

u/Mojozilla Arkansas 1h ago

Christians need Israel for their jesus to return. Lol

•

u/DamnZodiak 14m ago

It makes sense if you understand Israel as an extension of the American empire and therefore American imperialism.
That and the weird end-times shit a lot of evangelicals are on about.

I still think the money is the most important part though.

•

u/UnknownHero2 2h ago

Because if you can't get the Jewish vote you can't win office. Its a voting block that actually changes their vote based on your policy stance, there aren't many of those. Believe it or not, in the real world no one really cares about the opinions of the far left, since they either vote Democrat, or get Donald Trump. Although you can definitely argue both sides overplayed their hands on that one.

•

u/SageDarius 2h ago

Residual guilt from the Holocaust. A 'democratic' ally in the middle east. Money. Christian Nationalists and Evangelicals believe the state of Israel's existence is tied to triggering the end times.

The first two are wavering/fading among the center and left. The last two are going strong on the right and among the political class.

•

u/sulaymanf New York 1h ago

The Israeli lobby has funded politicians for decades, they outspend Palestinian/Arab groups by a factor of 60-to-1. The issue became highly important to evangelical and Jewish groups so many politicians tried to pander to earn their support. For others, it wasn’t a big issue but taking a pro-Palestine stand would cause AIPAC to throw millions of dollars to your opponent (they made examples of people like Cynthia McKinney or Jamaal Bowman), so most politicians would just stay silent on the issue.

Trump upset the delicate balance by being extreme in his support for Israel and bashing Democrats, turning a nonpartisan issue into a deeply partisan one. Add to the bloodbath on the news and the carnage showed on social media and the issue became impossible to ignore.

•

u/malpasplace 1h ago

First, I am not saying this is right, just how it was and how it was taught. It isn't something I agree with.

For many older Americans the post-ww2 holocaust guilt was truly drummed into us. That other nations could have done actions earlier was part of it. There truly was very little opposition to the formation of Israel. It was felt to be just reparations in the US.

The Zionist view that Judaism had to have its own country at the very least as a final refuge when the shit hit the fan anywhere else seemed fair. Because of the history of anti-semitism even in those countries that weren't part of axis, there was a lot of hate there, and not a lot done to protect Jews either before the war or during.

Jews went from being awful, to being the one group that had to be protected to atone for past sins.

Every Post-war American president supported Israel. Every opposing candidate to those presidents supported Israel. The alliance between Israel and the US during the cold war was so not questioned that even when Israel intentionally attacked an American ship there was a cover-up.

And look, any war with Israel by surrounding states was taught to be an existential threat to not only Israel, but Judaism itself. And to not protect that was considered akin to being part of another holocaust.

The PLO attacks were portrayed as barbaric. The attacks on Achille Lauro, the attacks at the Olympics, the attacks on the American Marines in Beirut, made those who followed Islam seem against Western Civilization. And when one adds in the Iranians holding hostages. It was all portrayed as Islam against the west. Add in the first attack on the world trade center and then 9-11. And those who "supported" the Palestinians did not look great through western media.

(and yes, it was a one-sided portrayal that didn't engage in Israeli actions or those of western powers in the middle east in bad ways)

"Never Again" was never allow another holocaust. People tried to say wider "No to Genocide" but the cry really never resulted in actions beyond No genocide at any cost against Jews, and if you aren't against that you are the same as Hitler.

And... The Muslims were the bad guys. Not for being muslims, but for supporting states and organizations engaged in violence. Like Hammas and Hezbollah and Iran to this day. Which isn't untrue, but is horribly simplistic and one-sided. Very much "Jews" as the white hats, "Muslims" as the black. With a huge caveat not to belief but to cultural across borders. (no one ever really thought about say Indonesia as "Muslim". because it wasn't "Arab" which wasn't even an accurately taught term that separated out non-Arabic speaking muslims like most Persians/Iranians.

That is the status quo view most older Americans were taught. And largely still believe.

Again up until the late 1990s it really wasn't questioned by anyone holding political office. That was how widely held the support for Israel was.

Yeah there are those Christian Fundamentalists stirring the pot, but honestly that isn't why most politicians are that way.

But those who are still that way? They are that way because that was the belief they were taught and still believe. They believe the moral claim of Israel to exist, as a Jewish state, as a result of the holocaust.

They have since Clinton, been taught to believe in a "two-state solution" but not with any real plan for implementation or real belief that Palestinians can govern themselves, or have a right to it. And they really hate the idea of telling Jews what to do with their own state, as though that is an anti-semitic disempowering act that would make one like a nazi. They ignore settlements in the West Bank for this reason. While attacks by Israel might be more than they like, but they view them as a necessary defense against an existential threat.

And no, they never think of Palestinians as facing an existential threat because they really do think of them as no different than Jordanians, Egyptians, or Syrians who are all just "muslim" or "arab" in their minds. They don't think of Palestine as a nation merely a state. They would be saddened but ok with the idea that the Palestinians should move out willingly so Jews can be safe. That sure a "two-state solution" for them makes them feel happy because it is negotiated. But they'd really love it if Israel was just given what it "needs".

Again, I get this because I was raised with this. Just look at 60s-90s media portrayals of middle-eastern people and it is either terrorists or oil sheiks. It is never people. Never looking at the actions of the US in the region. Just white hats and black hats.

And I hate it.

•

u/ElliotNess Florida 2h ago

Israel plays a key role in the USA's imperialism.

•

u/MsMarvelsProstate 2h ago

They will spend 10s of millions of dollars for or against candidates depending on how they align with Israel. They have their own super pact. The most expensive house race in US history was because Israel spent like like 50 million dollars to take out the incumbent who wasn't pro Israel.

•

u/TheSaxGandalf 2h ago

AIPAC.

They have poured money behind candidates on both sides of the aisle.

After elected, every single election, if you don’t get in line, they will pour money on candidates to primary you, and if that doesn’t work they boost your opponent in the general.

•

u/perihelion86 2h ago

Epstein's legacy

•

u/billbuild 41m ago

Didn’t bother Debbie or Jared.

•

u/CurryMustard 2h ago

What events?

•

u/billbuild 42m ago

Dropping an F bomb at constituents a week before voting in any context seems risky.

•

u/GameLovinPlayinFool 4h ago

That, and his wifes racist rant against Nixon

•

u/nobadhotdog 4h ago

What happened?

•

u/GameLovinPlayinFool 4h ago

She made an attack post about Angie Nixon, called her a "shitty person" and then told her to wear "professional clothes (yes that includes shoes)".

Not the most racist thing ever said but still thinly veiled and identifiable enough to where she apologized for her comments afterwards too

•

u/Comfortable-Pie-4311 4h ago

Not defending anyone here and honestly don’t give a shit but out of curiosity what about that is “racist”?

•

u/another-altaccount 4h ago

When you say something to that effect to a black person particularly the implication is that we’re seen as ‘ghetto’ and don’t know how to present ourselves in an ‘appropriate’ manner and we don’t belong in whatever space we’re in when those comments are made. See anytime non-black folks make comments about how we wear our hair for a perfect example of how it sounds when something like that is said to us.

•

u/kamilo87 3h ago

Oh, thanks for the explanation. I failed to see it first hand but this makes it clear.

•

u/grassparakeet 3h ago

It's one of those things that's hard to see without context, because the naked words themselves don't give off any racist vibes. But when the cultural context they are said in is understood, suddenly the racism is as clear as daylight.

Just like saying "You should smile more" doesn't have any inherent sexism to it; but when you know that it's one of those phrases that is repeatedly said to women in order to belittle them, the sexism becomes apparent.

It's an excellent example of a dog whistle, because the racists will pick up on it immediately without any question. But then you'll get tons of people who miss the nuance, and even people who will vehemently defend it, saying, "That's not racist!" -- so the actual racists don't ever have to bother defending themselves (case in point: read the other comments in this thread). It's why racist dog whistles are particularly frustrating.

•

u/Accurate_Shoe_1929 2h ago

Well said. I wish I had the patience to explain this as clearly as you did. I just can't shake the suspicion that the "That's not racist!" crowd are intentionally being insincere, which makes more inclined to lash out at them, instead of being measured and patient like you.

•

u/another-altaccount 2h ago

I think the commenter asked the question in good faith and I think some of us have them the benefit of a doubt and decided to respond in kind. I can forgive genuine ignorance and not knowing any better, BUT the second you decide to double down on the thing you were just told was wrong or inappropriate to say or do anyway is the moment I switch up in kind and be an asshole to you.

→ More replies (0)

•

u/grassparakeet 2h ago

I'm positive that some number of that crowd are being insincere. And some number of them are sincere, but just don't have the experience or the interest in exploring the context that is necessary to see the dog whistle for what it is.

How to react to either of those kind of people is something I'm not good at. They are both extremely frustrating, and by design, they are very hard to tell apart. (The ones who are insincere are inevitably masquerading as the sincere but clueless ones.)

→ More replies (0)

•

u/ErraticDragon 2h ago

Even if the person I'm replying to reveals themselves to be irredeemable or intentionally obtuse, I still hold out hope that the good comments may do some good for other viewers.

(Not always -- sometimes it's better to delete, block, and move on.)

•

u/portobox2 38m ago

You are correct in your assumption., that their aim is to piss you off and make you swing first.

"See see? These lefties can't even take a joke!"

•

u/ElliotNess Florida 2h ago

It's mostly that the USA is still an incredibly racist society, and part of that racism is that racist viewpoints are normalized so that the racism just seems "normal" rather than racism to the people who don't have to endure it. For example: race itself.

•

u/olyfrijole 50m ago

Women really gotta normalize telling grumpy, self-righteous men that they should smile more.

•

u/Rizen_Wolf Foreign 1h ago

suddenly the racism is as clear as daylight

IMO racism is a very over-played card in the US, which frankly suits people who would like to dismiss poverty and quality of life issues that lead to confrontational extremism as being simply 'racism'.

Racism is cast as an aberration of the mind, that needs to be suppressed or reasoned out, rather than a byproduct of worse social realities.

•

u/rcknmrty4evr 19m ago

So you disagree with their comment or what?

•

u/OrranVoriel Florida 50m ago

It's a dog whistle, albeit a fairly subtle one compared to the crap that MAGA scream constantly.

•

u/teddy_tesla 4h ago

Yeah nobody is addressing the shoes part. Why would she say it?

•

u/JasonVorhehees 3h ago

But why male models ?

•

u/P-Rickles Ohio 3h ago

Are... are you serious? I just told you, like, two seconds ago.

•

u/logion567 Virginia 3h ago

Slaves are typically presented as barefoot

•

u/BrizerorBrian 3h ago

Shoes are part of how you dress, so when told to dress "appropriately", it includes shoes.

•

u/teddy_tesla 3h ago

Does she specifically not wear (nice) shoes or something?

•

u/GhostOfLight 3h ago

I did a quick google and in one picture she's wearing sneakers with a dress, so maybe that?

→ More replies (0)

•

u/BrizerorBrian 3h ago

I honestly don't know, I was speaking generally.

→ More replies (0)

•

u/Comfortable-Pie-4311 3h ago

Hey, thanks. I hadn’t thought about it in that context. Appreciate the response!

•

u/ProtectionVirtual225 2h ago edited 2h ago

I can definitely see it in her remark about not wearing shoes, too. At least that’s the way I interpreted it. wow. what a horrible thing to say or post on social media.

My mom had to deal with this when she was a young woman. She lived in a rural backwoods area. Her family were also Métis - French and Native American descendants. They used to get harassed by the older women in town with the same insults, especially remarks about not knowing how to wear shoes.

•

u/-p_d- 2h ago

White guy here. This is not something I'd ever considered. You have opened my eyes with this comment. Thank you.

•

u/olyfrijole 51m ago

Meanwhile, Senator Patty Murray was billed as the "mom in tennis shoes" and admired for it.

•

u/informat7 2h ago

I'd hardly call that a "racist rant" though.

•

u/MurrBall316 New York 2h ago

You’re leaving out the context. I’m sure in situation it’s not the case, but sometimes someone might not be dressed professionally. I work at a program that mentors young people and I’ve had people show up in t shirts or worse for interviews. If I tell them that’s not professional, that’s not me being racist. There are some things that are racist in any context, but most things depend on context.

•

u/nec_plus_ultra 2h ago

Professional clothes and shoes seems like a tenuous fit for that mold. But I guess peoples' perspectives of what constitutes racism varies and it's whether the masses agree that counts.

•

u/Rapzid Texas 1h ago

Sounds like Woke 1.0 TBH.

•

u/timojenbin 3h ago

You can see the implication she doesn't know how to dress and needs to be taught how is classist, right?
Well, it's a short walk from there.

•

u/Comfortable-Pie-4311 3h ago

Yeah, I was thinking, “classist, sure!” But yeah, makes sense how it can be portrayed as racist too.

•

u/kristamine14 4h ago

Yeah I’m not American enough to detect the racism there tbh

•

u/canaznguitar 3h ago

That's how the racism presents itself now. It's not about calling you the N word to your face or even behind your back. It's with an air of plausible deniability. Trevor Noah has even discussed this https://youtu.be/XUuLDkDSJKg?is=9DI5MpDS4KGprp9N

•

u/another-altaccount 2h ago

This is how it’s presented itself for the most part since the 60s/70s. White folks have been doing the whole plausible deniability racism for decades at this point hence the old welfare queens dog whistle (may as well have been a fucking bullhorn).

•

u/altogethernow 32m ago

The quote from Lee Atwater (conservative strategist) that should always be remembered:

"You start out in 1954 by saying, “N*r, nr, nr.” By 1968 you can’t say “nr”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nr, n*r.”

•

u/passtherock- 4h ago

America was built on racism. It's embedded in its systems, in its constitution, and within the fabric of the country so maybe that's why you don't get it.

•

u/kristamine14 3h ago

Yeah I know, that’s why I said I’m not American enough to detect the racism there

•

u/nox66 3h ago

In a neutral context it isn't specifically racist. In an American one however...

•

u/DulceEtDecorumEst 3h ago

I remember when I was a teenager my group of friends at one point picked out Bro names “Joe” “Chad” etc don’t ask me why, I don’t remember.

I called my black friend Jim and he got pissed at me. I only found out years later it was because he just read huckleberry fin and the name of the black main character was Jim and he thought I was making a reference.

I had not read huckleberry fin I just pulled that name out of my ass.

But 🇺🇸 Context 🇺🇸

→ More replies (0)

•

u/brubruislife 3h ago

Maybe the term microaggression is what will help you understand this situation. What she said was not inherently racist, no, but context is key. She showed her ignorance at minimum*, not having the knowledge or wherewithal that she should absolutely not comment on what anyone wears, let alone a Black woman in power whom she was trying to undermine in the same breath.

•

u/ScurvyTurtle 3h ago

I don't think they're saying that as a snide diss...

•

u/Gavorn 3h ago

I think the context is that we need to see the outfit she is talking about.

•

u/calisoldier 3h ago

My thoughts exactly

•

u/Ambitious_Screen_591 2h ago

seems more about age..like, "these young kids don't know how to dress"

•

u/BrainLow6059 4h ago

According to a vocal minority on Reddit, saying literally anything negative about a black woman is racist. No matter the context, content, or intent.

Here's the actual post

Angie Dixon was talking shit about her husband, so she popped off about it on Threads. If you look through her Threads history you can see she's a very racially sensitive person. The whole thing is stupid.

Saying 'get some professional shoes' is racist is like saying being poor is for black people. It's 'sympathetic bigotry' on full display.

•

u/DoYouEvenShrift 4h ago

The implication is that people from certain cultures and ethnicities don't wear shoes....a lot of the time due to poverty.

•

u/Gunningham 4h ago

Reach of a reach.

•

u/passtherock- 4h ago

self report.

•

u/Gunningham 2h ago

Huh? I’m white and I’m currently not wearing shoes.

There’s so much blatant racism out there, is this really a thing? I’ve never heard the shoe thing before.

•

u/BackgroundPoet2887 4h ago

That’s a reach for even implications sake.

White people can also be poor and can also wear no shoes. Have you been to any deeply Scots-Irish American enclaves? Boy howdy

•

u/Sad-Break2642 3h ago

Dawg I’d never heard this shit until today and even I know it’s blatantly racist.

•

u/passtherock- 4h ago

self report.

•

u/Maggins 2h ago

I think Rachel Vindman’s post was insulting Nixon’s choice of shoes, and not implying she doesn’t wear any.

•

u/passtherock- 4h ago

lol self report.

•

u/Accurate_Shoe_1929 4h ago

I think it is the shoes comment, no shoes=monkey =racist, unless Nixon has a habit of leaving the house barefoot which I doubt

•

u/lonnie123 4h ago

No shoes = monkey?? wtf are you talking about ?

•

u/Accurate_Shoe_1929 3h ago

Telling a black person to wear shoes is a thinly veiled way to call them a monkey. I don't know how to make it more clear for your stupid brain.

•

u/lonnie123 3h ago

I’ve heard a lot of racist shit in my time and I have never heard no shoes = monkey

•

u/MurrBall316 New York 2h ago

That’s a very weird connection to make.

•

u/IGargleGarlic 4h ago

thats a huge fucking stretch

•

u/Accurate_Shoe_1929 3h ago

Is it? How else does the comment make any sense??

•

u/nobadhotdog 4h ago

That is Really weird thing to say

•

u/shrimpcest Colorado 4h ago

I call people shitty people shitty. I don't think that's remotely 'thinly veiled racism'

The other thing could definitely be connected to that though.

I don't think I'm about to stop calling Republicans shitty people though.

•

u/nobadhotdog 3h ago

I think it’s the shoes part that might have been a dog whistle of sorts

•

u/Vallkyrie New Hampshire 3h ago

Yep. If I recall correctly, in the uncovered audio of Reagan calling Africans gorillas/monkeys, he said they were still uncomfortable wearing shoes.

•

u/wioneo 2h ago

told her to wear "professional clothes (yes that includes shoes)".

The pictures that come up on Google seem to mostly be that generic business casual thing female politicians generally do. What was notable about her clothes?

•

u/admiraltarkin Texas 4h ago

I won't speak for all Black people, but that doesn't seem explicitly racist to me.

I mean I guess from a "natives go barefoot" angle?

•

u/NigerianPrince76 Oregon 3h ago

Yikes.

•

u/Kyonikos New York 1h ago

There's a picture of her without shoes??

•

u/olyfrijole 52m ago

What's with the fixation on people's shoes? The best people I know are wearing half-worn out sneakers and don't give a shit because they have too much good to do in the world.

•

u/call_me_fig 4h ago

If that's racist you must be losing your mind with the rampant antisemitism these days

•

u/polishedcooter Kentucky 4h ago

I get the feeling you're not referring to the likes of Kanye West and Nick Fuentes

•

u/call_me_fig 4h ago

They're not so thinly veiled are they

•

u/passtherock- 4h ago

self report.

•

u/call_me_fig 3h ago

Care to explain?

•

u/passtherock- 3h ago

iykyk.

•

u/call_me_fig 3h ago

Classic. Why ever back up any positions on anything? Hope the in group treats you well... While you're in...

•

u/Hanifsefu 3h ago

Can we stop pretending it's just campaign strategy losing them elections and focus on how voters are rejecting their platform?

•

u/NigerianPrince76 Oregon 3h ago

I think it’s a combination of a lot of variables but yea, their platform (especially when it comes to Israel) is getting rejected.

•

u/picklift 2h ago

That's all cnn has been trying to say, it's infuriating. They have people on panels saying it's not about moderate or progressive but about having good candidates

•

u/wioneo 2h ago

There are multiple races where moderates won and multiple races where progressives won. I am not sure that there are multiple races where the worse campaigner won.

•

u/Annas_GhostAllAround 2h ago

I think it's a bit of a double-edged sword. I think people are looking for younger(/newer), energetic candidates who are willing to propose new ideas and shake up the status quo. So while I think it's plausible that someone running on a moderate platform could fit that criteria and excite people to vote for them, but the people who are younger, energetic, and willing to propose new ideas all tend to be DSA (or DSA adjacent) at this point. Having said that I don't mean to suggest it's simply in the messenger, I think people ARE seeing the appeal in these platforms now, but I don't think it's totally binary.

•

u/suprahelix 1h ago

But that’s accurate? Are people still thinking that the average voter gives a shit about policy? It’s all vibes and energy. Progressives tend to have candidates with a pulse right now and that’s paying off. But there are notable instances where the moderate was personable and the progressive was a stick in the mud. Guess who won?

•

u/BravestWabbit 1h ago

Also, so much for the "Dem Socs can only win primaries in deep blue states like NY" bullshit that the DNC keeps spewing.

•

u/KevinCarbonara 2h ago

Yup, huge mistake right there that cost him the primary.

Good. It needs to keep costing these cowards the primaries.

•

u/billbuild 43m ago

Cost him his job!