Monday Morning Meme Madness
Dem Advisor James Carville Predicts ‘Massive Collapse’ Will Hit the Trump Administration i...
Capitol Cleanse: President Trump Fires 2,000 USAID Employees in Washington Weekend Purge
A Come To Jesus Monument? AI-Generated 200-Foot White House Christ Statue Fools the...
Susan Rice Seeks Out Obama WH Bud Jen Psaki to Lament the ‘Dismantling...
Millionaire Bernie Sanders Begs for $27 Donations to Fight Oligarchy and Get a...
Leftist Limbo: The Democrat Party’s 21% Approval Rating Has Some Wondering How Much...
Trump Announces Kash Patel's Deputy FBI Director and THIS Will DEFINITELY Ruin the...
Actress Natasha Lyonne Says the (Very Disturbing) Quiet Part Out Loud
Megyn Kelly Sheds Happy ‘White Women Tears’ Over MSNBC Jettisoning Joy Reid and...
Adam Kinzinger: Musk’s ‘Chainsaw for Bureaucracy’ Backlash Will Cut GOP in Pro-Dem Campaig...
Drastic Action: Trump White House Moving Faster than ‘News’ and Being Transparent While...
Drowning Dems: Hakeem Jeffries Sticks to Losing Script Against Trump as Party Sinks...
Spongebob Crypants: Trump and Musk Hilariously Troll Leftists Whining About Progress Repor...
Lefty Gets WRECKED for (Probably Fake) Story About Trump-Supporting Neighbor Getting Fired...

Scientific American Endorses Kamala Harris for all the Science She'd Bring

ImgFlip

We've written before how once-respected magazines and journals like Nature, Popular Mechanics, and Scientific American have all thrown away their credibility in the name of politics. Nature, for example, reported that establishing a legal definition of whether someone is male or female based on the genitals they are born with "has no foundation in science." Popular Mechanics asked scientists for "the best, safest ways" to bring to the ground "a statue that you decide you no longer like."

Advertisement

Scientific American essentially endorsed Kamala Harris back in July by saying that because her mother was a biomedical scientist, Harris would bring science to the forefront of her administration. Her father was also a Marxist and she brought that to her administration, so maybe it makes sense.

The editors write:

In the November election, the U.S. faces two futures. In one, the new president offers the country better prospects, relying on science, solid evidence and the willingness to learn from experience. She pushes policies that boost good jobs nationwide by embracing technology and clean energy. She supports education, public health and reproductive rights. She treats the climate crisis as the emergency it is and seeks to mitigate its catastrophic storms, fires and droughts.

Only one of these futures will improve the fate of this country and the world. That is why, for only the second time in our magazine’s 179-year history, the editors of Scientific American are endorsing a candidate for president. That person is Kamala Harris.

Guess when the first time was?

Advertisement

But look at the science! Look at Harris' record on climate change and reproductive rights!

Look at Joe Biden's scientific approach to allowing boys to play on girls' sports teams. Or the fact that he ended cancer as we know it.

That or the Q&A session she had with child actors about Space Force and NASA. Plus, Joe Biden put her in charge of overseeing artificial intelligence and set her to meet with the leading innovators.

Advertisement

It looks like this is going to be a thing now every four years at Scientific American.

Remember when TIME Magazine named Ahmed “Clock Kid” Mohamed to its Most Influential Teens of 2015 list for what Barack Obama called his "cool clock" with the numbers on the inside of the case? He even got invited to Science Night at the White House where he got to mingle with other renowned scientists like Bill Nye, the Science Guy.

And they wonder why we don't trust scientists anymore.

***

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement