2024 Democratic National Convention

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The conventions are always a bit long for me. But I've enjoyed the differences in the two this year. The differences are quite stark, in fact.

From last night, I thought Clinton . .. it wasn't his best. And went long. But he won't be doing many more of these so it was good to see.

I liked Jeffries a lot. The Boyfriend reference was hysterical. He's smart as a whip, charismatic, and a good speaker.

I also LOOOOOVED Pete. He was my candidate in 2020 and watching him you can see why.

+1

I love Pete also.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:JD Vance is just terrible. Jake Tapper just asked him to respond to Buttigieg's response to his childless people do not have a commitment to the future of this country. (Buttigieg said tonight that when he served in Afghanistan, he didn't have kids and neither did most of his fellow troops, but you better believe their commitment to their country was pretty d--- physical).

Vance botched the supply. He couldn't defend himself other than saying his remark was sarcastic and Buttigieg should be more offended by the job he has done as Transportation Secretary. Like what? Why can't Vance just be a human? Why does he have to keep that smug expression on while he refuses to apologize. Just say "I'm sorry. That comment was tongue in cheek and I hate that I offended so many people."

But he opens his mouth, puts on a smarmy expression and just makes everything worse.

He is a dolt. There is no there there. A ghostwritten book and being backdoored into Yale doesn’t make you smart. He’s a midwit political prostitute.

He seems to have no charisma and little if any emotional intelligence. I find Vance even less relatable then Trump — even though we probably have only 2 or 3 degrees of separation. He carried himself as though he thinks he’s the smartest person in the room — when it’s apparent to most that he’s not. He’s arrogant, mean spirited and offensive. I know several people who are considering getting cats thanks to his comments, so there’s that.

Most memoirs are ghost written. About 80K to the writer. Half up front. Also if you don’t “kill the dog” no one buys the book. Many of the deets are inflated and dramatized. D’uh.

I don't think his was ghostwritten. He was a nobody when he wrote that book - he only became a somebody because of the book. People who have existing platforms get ghost writers - but other people write their book to build their platform. I think he's the latter. I'm sure if he writes another book he'll have help - that first one, though? I'd be surprised.

I read the book when it came out. At the time, I thought that the second half of the book read like a political screed, almost as if it had been written by a different author— so maybe it was. Or maybe it was a poorly edited cut and paste.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Troll skills are pretty good

That letter is really weird—the handwriting for the post script at the bottom is totally different. I DNGAF if she did write it—it’s 24 years ago and a lot has changed since then — but it really looks like different handwriting.

I just can't read a word she said

Jan 11 '00

Donald--I received the book
excerpt
I have to tell you
your comments made
me a little weepy
It's one thing to say
and live a life of
integrity--still another
to have people like yourself
notice.
-Thank you
Oprah
Too bad we're not running for office,
What a TEAM!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The conventions are always a bit long for me. But I've enjoyed the differences in the two this year. The differences are quite stark, in fact.

From last night, I thought Clinton . .. it wasn't his best. And went long. But he won't be doing many more of these so it was good to see.

I liked Jeffries a lot. The Boyfriend reference was hysterical. He's smart as a whip, charismatic, and a good speaker.

I also LOOOOOVED Pete. He was my candidate in 2020 and watching him you can see why.

+1

I love Pete also.

Jeffries gave a terrible speech. What are you talking about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since this is a discussion, and I’ve been clapping all along, yesterday hit different.
•I now feel it might be going on too long. The momentum we felt was unexpected and we were surprised and elated, better to end on a high note and have us wanting more.
•I was a little let down by Walz’s speech - I have heard it before and hoped it would be different
•While it is joyful, they are overusing the word joy

The main problem last night was Clinton went off script and for about 30 minutes too long. On the other hand, that was probably his last major public speech, so he milked it.

I thought Pete and Walz were fine/good.

With Biden, the Clintons and Pelosi, we are seeing a true transition to Harris, Pete, Jeffries etc. I agree that last night didn't have the same juju as the first two nights, but I expect tonight to end strong.

I hadn’t planned to watch any of this in real time, and I’m glad that I did. There was a point during Clinton’s speech when I was struck by the thought that, as you’ve said, this might be Clinton’s last speech on this scale. I’m not a fan of Bill, so I was startled at how poignant watching him speak actually felt. Pelosi seemed very much on-the-way-out, and felt kind of irrelevant. I guess what struck me is that, as you’ve said, it was a “true transition “ — but where I’ve been viewing it as a transition of policies and priorities, it really is a generational shift as well, with multiple dimensions involved in such a shift.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:JD Vance is just terrible. Jake Tapper just asked him to respond to Buttigieg's response to his childless people do not have a commitment to the future of this country. (Buttigieg said tonight that when he served in Afghanistan, he didn't have kids and neither did most of his fellow troops, but you better believe their commitment to their country was pretty d--- physical).

Vance botched the supply. He couldn't defend himself other than saying his remark was sarcastic and Buttigieg should be more offended by the job he has done as Transportation Secretary. Like what? Why can't Vance just be a human? Why does he have to keep that smug expression on while he refuses to apologize. Just say "I'm sorry. That comment was tongue in cheek and I hate that I offended so many people."

But he opens his mouth, puts on a smarmy expression and just makes everything worse.

He is a dolt. There is no there there. A ghostwritten book and being backdoored into Yale doesn’t make you smart. He’s a midwit political prostitute.

He seems to have no charisma and little if any emotional intelligence. I find Vance even less relatable then Trump — even though we probably have only 2 or 3 degrees of separation. He carried himself as though he thinks he’s the smartest person in the room — when it’s apparent to most that he’s not. He’s arrogant, mean spirited and offensive. I know several people who are considering getting cats thanks to his comments, so there’s that.

Really poor decision making by Trump to pick Vance as his VP. Given that Trump's 80 and appearing incoherent and rambling in his rallies, speeches and interviews and is a wild card, he needed a very experienced VP candidate with governing experience as his successor. Vance is not only smug and unlikeable, he's highly inexperienced. He's been in the Senate for 2 years but is mainly known for writing a memoir (which is also smug and trashes the poor, rural community he comes from). Meanwhile Tim Walz has experience as been elected twice as Governor and 5 times as congressman so has a lot more experience than Vance. Pence was not great, but was a much better choice to balance out the ticket.

[Anonymous]

I love Pete. I can't wait to see what the future hold for him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I like the visuals of the signs but so much wasted paper! I thought dems are supposed to be environmentalists

Recycle baby!

[Anonymous]

I think my big takeaways last night are that:

- Tim Walz as a VP pick was meant to do more than bring swing states (like Shapiro) but it helps to materialize a vision of what they wanted to run on: decency, inclusion, excitement. His dichotomies are perfect for the political moment: small-town public school teacher + veteran, a football coach + LGBT club faculty advisor, gun owner + gun safety advocate. It's great and provides a healthy counterpoint to the republican talking point that a Harris presidency will be radically liberal.

- Pete is just excellent. I really hope he has a political future because I have never seen a politician be so eloquent and effective.

- The democratic strategy of "Joy" and recasting the narrative around patriotism and freedom is so wonderful to see. I am a first generation American/immigrant and I deeply love this country. I love to see democrats breaking the crazy monopoly the republican party has on freedom and love of country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Since this is a discussion, and I’ve been clapping all along, yesterday hit different.
•I now feel it might be going on too long. The momentum we felt was unexpected and we were surprised and elated, better to end on a high note and have us wanting more.
•I was a little let down by Walz’s speech - I have heard it before and hoped it would be different
•While it is joyful, they are overusing the word joy

Very interesting. I thought Clinton was boring/went on too long but I loved several of the speeches last night -- Oprah's was good, and I thought both Wes Moore and Pete did a phenomenal job. I also thought that Walz hit it out of the park. There are some people watching the DNC who haven't heard him speak before so it's new to them. I absolutely loved the moment with his family and thought it was incredibly heartwarming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

How the GOP has gotten away with the claim they are better for the economy is beyond me.

I knew it was correct. Voting Democrat has always been good for my pocket book as well as my conscience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since this is a discussion, and I’ve been clapping all along, yesterday hit different.
•I now feel it might be going on too long. The momentum we felt was unexpected and we were surprised and elated, better to end on a high note and have us wanting more.
•I was a little let down by Walz’s speech - I have heard it before and hoped it would be different
•While it is joyful, they are overusing the word joy

Wednesday hit me a bit like Monday - too many speakers and those who spoke went on too long. I agree they didn’t differentiate Walz’s convention speech from his stump speech so I had heard it before, and had heard some of Shapiro’s and Buttigieg’s best lines watching them during the veepstakes. The last few lines for Walz last night were new to me though and packed a punch (I’m a football fan though, they might be lost on someone who’s not) regarding the one more phone call/door knock/donation. Making plans to send postcards to Georgia this morning.

Me again, forgot to say that part of the length problem was that Oprah was somewhat of a late addition and she had a pretty long speech. I get that lots of people love her and I think I’m supposed to as a 50-year-old woman - I recognize that she’s done a lot of good on a lot of issues (victims of intrafamily child sexual abuse first and foremost) but she also platformed a LOT of BS and is responsible for cretins like Dr. Phil and Dr. Oz so…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:why is the kid crying?

I think his son is non verbal and this was too emotional for him to handle and express.

He’s not non verbal. He has a non verbal learning disability (‘waning it’s a LD that is not focused on language, eg not dyslexia). People keep getting this wrong. He cried because he’s an emotional kid and it was an emotional moment — he’s overcome with love for his dad.

Yes, he has NVLD but many people don't know what that it is and only focus on the "non-verbal" part of the title. He also has anxiety disorder and ADHD. As a parent of two teens who have ADHD, and social anxiety it is very affirming for my kids to see their family represented. I also love the apparent love and warmth that whole Walz family beams out.

Walz and his family have generated so much love and relatability no matter what Vance, Trump and GOP trolls throw at him. There's an entire subreddit (r/walzposting) dedicated to those who celebrate Walz.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Troll skills are pretty good

It’s not a flex at all to display that you’re so sh|tty now that someone who privately thought you were great decades ago came out publicly decades later to endorse the person running against you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Troll skills are pretty good

That letter is really weird—the handwriting for the post script at the bottom is totally different. I DNGAF if she did write it—it’s 24 years ago and a lot has changed since then — but it really looks like different handwriting.

I just can't read a word she said

Jan 11 '00

Donald--I received the book
excerpt
I have to tell you
your comments made
me a little weepy
It's one thing to say
and live a life of
integrity--still another
to have people like yourself
notice.
-Thank you
Oprah
Too bad we're not running for office,
What a TEAM!

As usual, Trump is clinging to the past. In this case a letter written 24 years ago.

The letter is from 2000 Donald. When you were a democrat and has liberal social views and hadn't embraced MAGA. She heartily endorsed Obama in 2008 and was disgusted by Trump's racist birther comments. When Trump finally did run in 2016, Oprah didn't endorse the current version of Trump. She endorsed his opponent Hillary. And now in 2024, she has endorsed his opponent again, Kamala.