The Swamp

"One Kamala is dead and the other just killed her political career. Rough week." would be a good tweet but not racist.

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Tue Aug 11, 2020 3:57 pm That’s why I’ve been anti-Warren as VP. She’ll be 75 in 2024.

She's also really great to have in the Senate. She's in office until 2025 can't risk losing a Senate seat even to a moderate R (for the 9 months or whatever from when she'd take over VP to getting the seat filled in November) MA is a weird state...democratic, but they like R governors.

"Phony" Kamala seems to be the starting point.

Lol.

She'll probably end up getting crushed more by the far Left bitching about her time as a prosecutor than anything the Right can dig up on her (hopefully).

Wonder if Trump will vote for Biden?

GoodKarma wrote: ↑Tue Aug 11, 2020 5:15 pm She'll probably end up getting crushed more by the far Left bitching about her time as a prosecutor than anything the Right can dig up on her (hopefully).

And they are already coming out with the "Kamala is further Commie than Bernie Sanders and Karl Marx."

None of it matters at this point. If you are "far left," you already had your shot and your voice heard on her.

If you don't understand the bigger picture, at this point... kindly go fuck yourself. It's maddening.

GoodKarma wrote: ↑Tue Aug 11, 2020 5:15 pm She'll probably end up getting crushed more by the far Left bitching about her time as a prosecutor than anything the Right can dig up on her (hopefully).

I've already seen 2 of my Bernie Bro friends (both strangely gigantic potheads...weird right?) post things akin to "Kamala is still a fucking cop".

Great.

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 8:11 am None of it matters at this point. If you are "far left," you already had your shot and your voice heard on her.

If you don't understand the bigger picture, at this point... kindly go fuck yourself. It's maddening.

Seriously.

There's enough to bitch about without having to rip apart the only sane choice because it's not perfect.

The only sane choice? Who does Harris pull in that wasn't already counted as either enthusiastically Biden or reluctantly Biden?

mister d wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 9:47 am The only sane choice? Who does Harris pull in that wasn't already counted as either enthusiastically Biden or reluctantly Biden?

If you got to add a demographic at the expense of women and bipoc, who exactly would that be?

mister d wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 9:47 am The only sane choice? Who does Harris pull in that wasn't already counted as either enthusiastically Biden or reluctantly Biden?

Not gonna speak for Pruitt, but I think the idea is it was always the only sane choice and adding Harris doesn't make it less so.

P.D.X. wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 9:54 amIf you got to add a demographic at the expense of women and bipoc, who exactly would that be?

What if you still chose a non-white woman, but one who didn't have a long history of being on the other side of who the left is currently (literally) fighting against?

mister d wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 9:47 am The only sane choice? Who does Harris pull in that wasn't already counted as either enthusiastically Biden or reluctantly Biden?

"Sane choice" referred to voting against Trump.

Harris won't attract any new voters, but my feeling is that 95% of the voters have already made up their minds in terms of who they'll vote for for President. (One of the many things that makes the lengthy election process so idiotic).

It'd be great if Biden went away from the traditional centre to pick a running mate, but that would have risked alienating enough old school Dems to potentially cost votes.

Pruitt wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 10:16 am... but that would have risked alienating enough old school Dems to potentially cost votes.

Its shit like this that makes me still wonder if the Dems will out-implode the Republicans in the next decade or so. Better to alienate 100 progressive leftists than risk losing one college educated white centrist.

Not a big Kamala Harris fan, but probably the smartest pick. I don't think she brings any votes, but she also doesn't lose many votes. Yeah, some Progressives who don't like Biden might be put off, but I think Biden loses fewer of them than anti-Trump Republicans he'd lose by choosing a true Progressive. I think sensible Conservatives can stomach voting for Biden with Harris on board. She is a tough, no-nonsense prosecutor. Any Republican willing to consider voting for Biden isn't going to be put off by race. I'm curious to see the reaction from the black leaders who were calling on Biden to select a black running mate. Are they happy with the pick, or are they more upset with her history as a prosecutor?

I think the Democrats shoot themselves in the foot playing demographics. They shouldn't have announced 5 months ago that it was going to be a woman and basically announce 2 months ago that it would be a woman of color. I mean the choice of Harris is fine, it's just the path of how they got there.

I find that playing demographics is always a failed strategy. I mean, did the selection of Palin convert anybody? Did female democrat and independent voters suddenly turn to try and get a woman VP?

VPs very rarely affect the race.

If the "Biden does one term and steps aside" plan comes to fruition, how do people feel about Harris stepping up to be the candidate in 2024? If you want to expand, I'm interested in answers depending on theoretical opponent profile ranging from "slightly more centrist/moderate Republican" to "politically savvy/competent fascist"

mister d wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 10:04 am

P.D.X. wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 9:54 amIf you got to add a demographic at the expense of women and bipoc, who exactly would that be?

What if you still chose a non-white woman, but one who didn't have a long history of being on the other side of who the left is currently (literally) fighting against?

I'm not completely educated on her background, but was she involved in or did she enable white supremacy, corruption, cronyism, nepotism, racism, xenophobia, anti-intellectualism, authoritarianism, fascism, fraud, etc?

Probably not even half that list so now I'm sold.

Isn't it funny that the liberals are ripping the choice of Harris because she's not liberal enough and a former prosecutor, while the republicans are busy painting her as a hybrid of Marx, Lenin, and Pelosi.

The Republicans call everyone that. If Trump was the candidate for the Democrats they'd call him that. They lump all Democrats as one while Democrats are divided.

mister d wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:00 pm

Also

We'll have our own convention. With blackjack. And Hookers.

You know what forget the convention.

And the blackjack!

Are there any young up and comers on either side of the aisle? All the Dems of note are either 70+ or first term house members. All the young GOPers are wacky as fuck Trumpers or QAnon idiots.


I do like Jared Polis here in Colorado, but I don't know if he can go house, gov, pres (or if he wants to.)

It just feels like the DNC secretly wouldn't be upset with Republicans in charge. I always get the "submissive" vibe from them.

The responses are great.

Johnnie wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 5:30 pm It just feels like the DNC secretly wouldn't be upset with Republicans in charge. I always get the "submissive" vibe from them.

"We should have lost to Romney. None of this would have happened."

Sure those quotes are played without context, but the music is really ominous so I'm sold!

Kind of ironic seeing Republicans attacking someone with a clip from 1973 for using the term "Negro." That was still an acceptable term in 1973, right? It drives me nuts when the super-progressive Woke crowd attacks what people said or did by using today's standards.

I've seen this shared by a number of people on Twitter and it only gets more effective each time I see it...

They mispronounce her name on purpose at this point, right? She should start calling them Doan-ald and Mee-kay.

We have dietary guidelines?

The food pyramid? I think "can eat" is the bigger issue there.

I remember the old days of the Obama administration where they rationed meat to 1 serving a week. Those were tough times. Thank g-d for Trump and the meat industry taking us back to the glory days.

BSF21 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 14, 2020 9:26 am I remember the old days of the Obama administration where they rationed meat to 1 serving a week. Those were tough times. Thank g-d for Trump and the meat industry taking us back to the glory days.

Remember when they lost their shit because Michelle Obama grew a garden and put a honey bee hive at the White House? Then she had the audacity to suggest kids should eat healthier and lose weight. These assholes can turn anything into an attack on their freedoms, yet they are OK with jackbooted paramilitary dudes with no identification grabbing peaceful citizens off the streets and kidnapping them in unmarked rental vans.

Jesus. Fucking. Christ.