U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris has repeatedly claimed that she worked at McDonald’s while getting her undergraduate degree in the 1980s. This claim has been reported by multiple reputable news outlets, but aside from Harris’ own testimony, there is no independent evidence such as a photo, employment record, or confirmation from a friend or family member to verify the story. Harris has invoked the alleged McDonald’s work experience throughout her political career, including in a 2024 presidential campaign ad and during a 2024 appearance on “The Drew Barrymore Show.” Other prominent Democrats, such as former President Bill Clinton, have also repeated the anecdote. However, some internet users have challenged the claim, with unverified reports that “McDonald’s Corporate sources” have no record of Harris working at their locations. Snopes reached out to Harris’ campaign and McDonald’s headquarters seeking evidence to corroborate the claim, but as of the report’s publication, no such proof has been uncovered. Without tangible evidence to independently confirm or debunk the story, Snopes has rated the claim “Research In Progress” as they continue to investigate.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
6 points

Social security records.

90s is nothing, a normal person could get it in a month, one of her aids could probably get it in an hour.

Does it matter tho?

Eh, it would be fucked up if she just flat out lied, but it’s hard to imagine she would lie about that.

If she proves it tho, they’ll make a new stupid claim and if she doesn’t prove it they’ll use this as evidence that she would prove it if it wasn’t true.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Social security records. 90s is nothing, a normal person could get it in a month

I tried this and it takes ages. I applied back on July 1st and haven’t heard a peep yet - apparently this can take many months or sometimes even years.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Man, you know what?

I was wrong.

I’m used to having to get other people’s records, to look up my own back to my first highschool job, took literally less than five minutes.

Coincidentally, it was also a McDonald’s.

Try it yourself. Ssa.gov

I applied

Well, that’s not what anyone was talking about about…

permalink
report
parent
reply

I applied
Well, that’s not what anyone was talking about about…

As clarification, I applied for the SSA-7050-F4 ( that is https://www.ssa.gov/forms/ssa-7050.html ) in order to get my detailed earnings and employment history, and following this video as a guide: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SH8H9U-SIs8

Considering what the thread was about - what did you think I said I had applied for? I’m genuinely curious now - as per https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/flyers/EBE_Flyer_Apply_for_your_Social_Security_Number_While_Applying_for_Your.pdf it takes just two weeks after applying for the SSN / SSN card itself to get it, while actually applying for benefits takes 3-5 months as per https://finance.yahoo.com/news/social-security-benefits-long-does-180014897.html (which is ridiculously long but still not as bad as a year long wait).

to look up my own back to my first highschool job, took literally less than five minutes.
Coincidentally, it was also a McDonald’s.

Dang where were you two months ago lol - can you talk me through this? If I can pull down a record of who I worked for from their online website then this would be a really big help for me for personal reasons.

Try it yourself. Ssa.gov

I did but couldn’t find it - only saw my yearly and monthly earnings totals.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

How to know when OP is unhinged and divisive:

People are agreeing with givesomefucks, who often gets down voted for unpopular views.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

It’s like when people think that them walking by causing street lights to go out.

We’re pattern recognition machines, and we have certain biases. People don’t notice all the streetlights that are working, just the ones that flicker. Either it happens right next to you, or you don’t notice.

Chances are you’re only looking at usernames when it’s really down voted. With the rare exception this time.

I bet if your scrolled thru my post history, you’ve up voted me more than youve down voted me.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Damn, you aren’t wrong!

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Truly, today is some interesting times.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

Seems pretty ridiculous to judge the validity of an argument based on whether people agree with a particular commenter or not.

Ideas should be evaluated on their own merit, not dismissed because of who supports or opposes them.

This kind of thinking only stifles discussion and perpetuates division, which is exactly what we should be avoiding if we’re serious about finding solutions. Let’s focus on the content of the conversation, not the personalities involved.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 13K

    Posts

  • 388K

    Comments