Official Kamala Harris VP Thread

[Anonymous]

Say it with me: MADAM PRESIDENT

[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.

I believe it's a growing baby. And that the woman carrying that growing baby can make the decision to terminate her pregnancy if she wants to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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

Unlikely a VP can move the needle that much - Trump leading by 5-10 in Arizona…

[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

Dang. I saw that too and agree. Pelosi didn’t either. There’s no way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I believe it's a growing baby. And that the woman carrying that growing baby can make the decision to terminate her pregnancy if she wants to.

Same logic. Woman who gives birth to that growing baby can “terminate” it. Where do you draw the line? And what science are you basing your decision on?

I'm not basing my decision on science. I'm basing it on human rights, which are not always black and white.
What if men could get pregnant? Do you truly believe that they wouldn't feel that their rights trump the rights of babies growing inside their bodies?

[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.

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

Dang. I saw that too and agree. Pelosi didn’t either. There’s no way.

+1. They know she's incompetent

[Anonymous]

If Harris isn’t the nominee, the $ just reverts to the party? Is this correct?

[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 with the blessing of the law unless some conditions are fulfilled (how far along, exceptions for rape, etc.)..

[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.

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

Dang. I saw that too and agree. Pelosi didn’t either. There’s no way.

+1. They know she's incompetent

Jeffries won't endorse Harris, too.

[Anonymous]

I think Kamala Harris will choose someone she personally knows from her time in the Senate—and is already comfortable with. I don’t think she will pick a governor she has shaken hands with once. It will be a white man with experience, but not so much experience that it makes her look bad. Someone probably from the East Coast who is well-known, vetted, and accepted by the East Coast media. And it will be a “team player” who never publicly called for Biden to step down.

[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.

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

Dang. I saw that too and agree. Pelosi didn’t either. There’s no way.

The argument I've seen is that they want to wait until she's the official nominee. I'm very skeptical though. I think this is all a setup. If polls change and she's not doing well against Trump, especially in swing states then they have an argument to replace her.

I will be extremely surprised if she's on the ticket at all in November.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think Kamala Harris will choose someone she personally knows from her time in the Senate—and is already comfortable with. I don’t think she will pick a governor she has shaken hands with once. It will be a white man with experience, but not so much experience that it makes her look bad. Someone probably from the East Coast who is well-known, vetted, and accepted by the East Coast media. And it will be a “team player” who never publicly called for Biden to step down.

She's not picking anyone. If.she remains on the ticket, she will go with who the party tells her too. The best choices are Kelly or Beshear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Kamala Harris will choose someone she personally knows from her time in the Senate—and is already comfortable with. I don’t think she will pick a governor she has shaken hands with once. It will be a white man with experience, but not so much experience that it makes her look bad. Someone probably from the East Coast who is well-known, vetted, and accepted by the East Coast media. And it will be a “team player” who never publicly called for Biden to step down.

She's not picking anyone. If.she remains on the ticket, she will go with who the party tells her too. The best choices are Kelly or Beshear.

Harris will be the nominee by August 5th. The Democratic National Convention starts on August 19th. She will make the choice but the process of selection will be condensed to about 1-2 weeks. Mark Kelly is solid but I believe Arizona would have a special election for his replacement and that would be a roll of the dice. I don’t think they would want to risk it. His vote is needed in the Senate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Kamala Harris will choose someone she personally knows from her time in the Senate—and is already comfortable with. I don’t think she will pick a governor she has shaken hands with once. It will be a white man with experience, but not so much experience that it makes her look bad. Someone probably from the East Coast who is well-known, vetted, and accepted by the East Coast media. And it will be a “team player” who never publicly called for Biden to step down.

She's not picking anyone. If.she remains on the ticket, she will go with who the party tells her too. The best choices are Kelly or Beshear.

Harris will be the nominee by August 5th. The Democratic National Convention starts on August 19th. She will make the choice but the process of selection will be condensed to about 1-2 weeks. Mark Kelly is solid but I believe Arizona would have a special election for his replacement and that would be a roll of the dice. I don’t think they would want to risk it. His vote is needed in the Senate.

Yeah that is the issue with Kelly.


And we will see if Harriss is the nominee.

[Anonymous]

Hilary and Bill were pretty quick to endorse Kamala.
But I’m pretty sure Hilary would endorse ANYONE (even Kamala Harris) if it means she can prevent Michelle Obama from taking the title of first female President that Hilary feels the Obamas stole from her. After Barack stepped in front of her and “robbed” her of what she felt was rightfully her nomination in 2008, and after playing nice with the Obamas for eight years of his presidency to get the party’s nomination in 2016 only to lose in a spectacularly crash-and-burn shocker of an election to Donald Trump of all people…..the last thing she wants is for the party to decode that the only way they can win the presidency is to put up Michelle Obama.
So she and Bill immediately release an endorsement of Kamala.
They know she’s not likely to win, but they also know that the only way the DNC will replace Kamala Harris as the nominee is if they can identify a different black woman candidate who has the polling numbers to WIN! And Hilary knows that’s MO. We all know it. But there is no way Hilary is having that.