Official Kamala Harris VP Thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris cannot win.
Her at the top of the ticket is huge huge mistake.
Like opening nobu in canton Ohio then wondering why it’s not doing well.
So over the dems and their dumb dumb choices at all times

I’m over it too, but this is where we find ourselves. We have zero control what party leadership decides. I am upset at endorsing Kamala because she somehow “deserves” it. No. That’s not the way to win an election people.

He's endorsing her because she can access the funds he's already raised and so the party has a candidate right away. She's the VP and if he doesn't endorse her then that alone ends up being a liability.

Can she win? I don't know, but what I do know is that appealing to women about their rights will likely be very effective. 81 year old Joe Biden wasn't exactly an asset there.

? Joe Biden is pro women rights and for protecting abortion and contraception for women. Harris is not more pro women bc she is a woman. They are exactly the same on that issue…

Harris has been prosecuting the case for reproductive freedom incredibly well for two years. I love Biden but he completely fumbled a softball question about Roe at the debate.

If a dem were to hypothetically get in, I'm not sure what you would expect a president to do vis-a-vis abortion.

SCOTUS already told you it does not exist in the Constitution and it's a tenth amendment issue left up to each state.

Weird, you forget about 50 years of precedent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris cannot win.
Her at the top of the ticket is huge huge mistake.
Like opening nobu in canton Ohio then wondering why it’s not doing well.
So over the dems and their dumb dumb choices at all times

I’m over it too, but this is where we find ourselves. We have zero control what party leadership decides. I am upset at endorsing Kamala because she somehow “deserves” it. No. That’s not the way to win an election people.

He's endorsing her because she can access the funds he's already raised and so the party has a candidate right away. She's the VP and if he doesn't endorse her then that alone ends up being a liability.

Can she win? I don't know, but what I do know is that appealing to women about their rights will likely be very effective. 81 year old Joe Biden wasn't exactly an asset there.

His endorsement is irrelevant to accessing the funds. She is the remaining candidate on the original ticket and her campaign could access funds donated to that campaign, regardless.

If neither remains on the ticket, the funds revert to the party. It’s not quite the death knell that Harris supporters make it out to be.

She cannot win and, as a Dem voter, I hope she is not nominated.

In addition, there will very much be, in the fullness of time, a “what’s wrong with Joe?” line of questioning that will certainly include, “what did the Vice President know and when did she know it,” and “who was really running the country.” The president’s remaining months in office will be dogged by these questions.

The full effort of this will wait until after (if) she is nominated. If she wins the presidency, expect there to be an impeachment or other inquiry.

But Obama and Michelle are not endorsong her. They want an open primary where they hope a superb nominer will emerge. Kamala's toast

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris cannot win.
Her at the top of the ticket is huge huge mistake.
Like opening nobu in canton Ohio then wondering why it’s not doing well.
So over the dems and their dumb dumb choices at all times

I’m over it too, but this is where we find ourselves. We have zero control what party leadership decides. I am upset at endorsing Kamala because she somehow “deserves” it. No. That’s not the way to win an election people.

He's endorsing her because she can access the funds he's already raised and so the party has a candidate right away. She's the VP and if he doesn't endorse her then that alone ends up being a liability.

Can she win? I don't know, but what I do know is that appealing to women about their rights will likely be very effective. 81 year old Joe Biden wasn't exactly an asset there.

? Joe Biden is pro women rights and for protecting abortion and contraception for women. Harris is not more pro women bc she is a woman. They are exactly the same on that issue…

Harris has been prosecuting the case for reproductive freedom incredibly well for two years. I love Biden but he completely fumbled a softball question about Roe at the debate.

If a dem were to hypothetically get in, I'm not sure what you would expect a president to do vis-a-vis abortion.

SCOTUS already told you it does not exist in the Constitution and it's a tenth amendment issue left up to each state.

The Supreme Court has revisited issues in the past and they will do it again in the future. If the realize their mistake and rediscover the right to privacy, then they might do it sooner rather than later.

There has been no mistake. The word abortion does not appear in the Constitution. You do not have a right to murder.

Omg ridiculous. You have to murder an actual living human, not a clump of cells.

[Anonymous]

Old white men posting on this thread just can’t handle abortion rights. Let me tell you, women are gonna be all over the right to make this decision themselves.
Don’t pee yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris cannot win.
Her at the top of the ticket is huge huge mistake.
Like opening nobu in canton Ohio then wondering why it’s not doing well.
So over the dems and their dumb dumb choices at all times

I’m over it too, but this is where we find ourselves. We have zero control what party leadership decides. I am upset at endorsing Kamala because she somehow “deserves” it. No. That’s not the way to win an election people.

He's endorsing her because she can access the funds he's already raised and so the party has a candidate right away. She's the VP and if he doesn't endorse her then that alone ends up being a liability.

Can she win? I don't know, but what I do know is that appealing to women about their rights will likely be very effective. 81 year old Joe Biden wasn't exactly an asset there.

His endorsement is irrelevant to accessing the funds. She is the remaining candidate on the original ticket and her campaign could access funds donated to that campaign, regardless.

If neither remains on the ticket, the funds revert to the party. It’s not quite the death knell that Harris supporters make it out to be.

She cannot win and, as a Dem voter, I hope she is not nominated.

In addition, there will very much be, in the fullness of time, a “what’s wrong with Joe?” line of questioning that will certainly include, “what did the Vice President know and when did she know it,” and “who was really running the country.” The president’s remaining months in office will be dogged by these questions.

The full effort of this will wait until after (if) she is nominated. If she wins the presidency, expect there to be an impeachment or other inquiry.

But Obama and Michelle are not endorsong her. They want an open primary where they hope a superb nominer will emerge. Kamala's toast

Obama is washed up and irrelevant. Nobody cares what he thinks. Maybe he should go parent his kids instead of trying to be a shadow president.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris cannot win.
Her at the top of the ticket is huge huge mistake.
Like opening nobu in canton Ohio then wondering why it’s not doing well.
So over the dems and their dumb dumb choices at all times

I’m over it too, but this is where we find ourselves. We have zero control what party leadership decides. I am upset at endorsing Kamala because she somehow “deserves” it. No. That’s not the way to win an election people.

He's endorsing her because she can access the funds he's already raised and so the party has a candidate right away. She's the VP and if he doesn't endorse her then that alone ends up being a liability.

Can she win? I don't know, but what I do know is that appealing to women about their rights will likely be very effective. 81 year old Joe Biden wasn't exactly an asset there.

His endorsement is irrelevant to accessing the funds. She is the remaining candidate on the original ticket and her campaign could access funds donated to that campaign, regardless.

If neither remains on the ticket, the funds revert to the party. It’s not quite the death knell that Harris supporters make it out to be.

She cannot win and, as a Dem voter, I hope she is not nominated.

In addition, there will very much be, in the fullness of time, a “what’s wrong with Joe?” line of questioning that will certainly include, “what did the Vice President know and when did she know it,” and “who was really running the country.” The president’s remaining months in office will be dogged by these questions.

The full effort of this will wait until after (if) she is nominated. If she wins the presidency, expect there to be an impeachment or other inquiry.

But Obama and Michelle are not endorsong her. They want an open primary where they hope a superb nominer will emerge. Kamala's toast

The Dems need to stop listening to Obama and Michelle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris cannot win.
Her at the top of the ticket is huge huge mistake.
Like opening nobu in canton Ohio then wondering why it’s not doing well.
So over the dems and their dumb dumb choices at all times

I’m over it too, but this is where we find ourselves. We have zero control what party leadership decides. I am upset at endorsing Kamala because she somehow “deserves” it. No. That’s not the way to win an election people.

He's endorsing her because she can access the funds he's already raised and so the party has a candidate right away. She's the VP and if he doesn't endorse her then that alone ends up being a liability.

Can she win? I don't know, but what I do know is that appealing to women about their rights will likely be very effective. 81 year old Joe Biden wasn't exactly an asset there.

? Joe Biden is pro women rights and for protecting abortion and contraception for women. Harris is not more pro women bc she is a woman. They are exactly the same on that issue…

Harris has been prosecuting the case for reproductive freedom incredibly well for two years. I love Biden but he completely fumbled a softball question about Roe at the debate.

If a dem were to hypothetically get in, I'm not sure what you would expect a president to do vis-a-vis abortion.

SCOTUS already told you it does not exist in the Constitution and it's a tenth amendment issue left up to each state.

Weird, you forget about 50 years of precedent.

DP. Do you mean the 50 years of precedent in which it was never codified into federal law by the legislative branch, even during years in which Dems had control? The 50 years of precedent encompassing RBG’s refusal to retire during a time in which an abortion-rights-protecting justice could have been confirmed as her replacement?

[Anonymous]

Larry Hogan

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris cannot win.
Her at the top of the ticket is huge huge mistake.
Like opening nobu in canton Ohio then wondering why it’s not doing well.
So over the dems and their dumb dumb choices at all times

I’m over it too, but this is where we find ourselves. We have zero control what party leadership decides. I am upset at endorsing Kamala because she somehow “deserves” it. No. That’s not the way to win an election people.

He's endorsing her because she can access the funds he's already raised and so the party has a candidate right away. She's the VP and if he doesn't endorse her then that alone ends up being a liability.

Can she win? I don't know, but what I do know is that appealing to women about their rights will likely be very effective. 81 year old Joe Biden wasn't exactly an asset there.

Appealing to women who want women to be able to have abortions is not enough of a platform to win a presidential election.

Yes it is.

+1
Yes. I would vote solely on this. It’s that important to me that me and my daughter be able to make those decisions about our own bodies.

Why do posters like you only mention your own bodies and not the growing baby inside a mother?

Because we don’t consider it a growing baby but a mass of cells. And because the pregnant woman should be able to make this decision.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris cannot win.
Her at the top of the ticket is huge huge mistake.
Like opening nobu in canton Ohio then wondering why it’s not doing well.
So over the dems and their dumb dumb choices at all times

I’m over it too, but this is where we find ourselves. We have zero control what party leadership decides. I am upset at endorsing Kamala because she somehow “deserves” it. No. That’s not the way to win an election people.

He's endorsing her because she can access the funds he's already raised and so the party has a candidate right away. She's the VP and if he doesn't endorse her then that alone ends up being a liability.

Can she win? I don't know, but what I do know is that appealing to women about their rights will likely be very effective. 81 year old Joe Biden wasn't exactly an asset there.

Appealing to women who want women to be able to have abortions is not enough of a platform to win a presidential election.

Yes it is.

+1
Yes. I would vote solely on this. It’s that important to me that me and my daughter be able to make those decisions about our own bodies.

Why do posters like you only mention your own bodies and not the growing baby inside a mother?

Because we don’t consider it a growing baby but a mass of cells. And because the pregnant woman should be able to make this decision.

You can view it as a mass of cells, but it is in fact also a growing baby.

NP. That "growing baby" which in my case was the very much wanted product of IVF, would have killed me if I was not able to abort my ectopic pregnancy at 7 weeks. And, fortunately, I was able to use methotrexate (a medication targeted by the "pro life" community), thereby eliminating the need for surgery or waiting until I began to hemorrhage.
In the case of a good friend of mine, that "growing baby" suddenly began to put her life at risk around 18 weeks. Doctors told her that, if by some chance she made to 24 or 25 weeks to attempt delivery, the fetus would likely die an agonizing, suffocating death within a few hours at most, and she risked her future fertility and potential irreparable harm to her own body every day she continued the pregnancy.
Or, how about the case of Savita Halapannavar in Ireland (and similar situations now, here in the US) where that "growing baby" is in fetal demise but still has a heartbeat and yet is causing the mother to go septic?

My health and my desire not to leave my existing DD motherless should be the priority. And it shouldn't be left to politicians to make those decisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris cannot win.
Her at the top of the ticket is huge huge mistake.
Like opening nobu in canton Ohio then wondering why it’s not doing well.
So over the dems and their dumb dumb choices at all times

I’m over it too, but this is where we find ourselves. We have zero control what party leadership decides. I am upset at endorsing Kamala because she somehow “deserves” it. No. That’s not the way to win an election people.

He's endorsing her because she can access the funds he's already raised and so the party has a candidate right away. She's the VP and if he doesn't endorse her then that alone ends up being a liability.

Can she win? I don't know, but what I do know is that appealing to women about their rights will likely be very effective. 81 year old Joe Biden wasn't exactly an asset there.

Appealing to women who want women to be able to have abortions is not enough of a platform to win a presidential election.

Yes it is.

+1
Yes. I would vote solely on this. It’s that important to me that me and my daughter be able to make those decisions about our own bodies.

Why do posters like you only mention your own bodies and not the growing baby inside a mother?

Because we don’t consider it a growing baby but a mass of cells. And because the pregnant woman should be able to make this decision.

You can view it as a mass of cells, but it is in fact also a growing baby.

And ppl will vote based on how they see this and how they consider the woman’s right to make that decision.

[Anonymous]

South Bend < Flavortown, if you catch my drift. #HarrisFieri24

[Anonymous]

Mark Kelly for the death blow to the GOP

[Anonymous]

Has Hakeem Jeffries been mentioned here yet for President? I like him and Josh Shapiro.

[Anonymous]

I really want Pete. But the Dems aren’t going to do it.

So make it Mark Kelly.

We need someone who is more moderate and super sharp. Kelly brings Arizona.

Jeffries needs to stay in the house a bit longer and too much of a risk on this ticket. Shapiro is okay, but won’t bring out the moderates