Harris for President: new poll shows she's got the most chance at beating Trump

[Anonymous]

The more posts there are insulting Harris the more we know she's a threat to Trump!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How in the hell did this country overwhelmingly reelect Barack Obama less than EIGHT YEARS AGO? What has happened to us?

Funny the tricks the memory plays.

In 2012 the election results were 51.1% versus 47.2%. That was not "overwhelmingly" if we use, for example, Reagan's 59% landslide in 1984 as overwhelming.

It is perfectly feasible to be opposed to Obama without being "racist" however you define the term. He wasn't that impressive as a president, was aloof, and his administration was not particularly progressive on the financial front, firmly siding with the establishment classes and screwing over the working classes with massive bailouts of the rich following 2008.

DP. It is feasible, yes, and I can believe that of you. But for everyone else, when McConnell remade the R party into the Party of No, the last minute turnabout in the vote on Obamacare after so much (apparently bad-faith) negotiation, etc. That wasn't because he was a D. It was for a lower reason.

Were there people upset by a black man in the WH? Absolutely. But nowhere in the numbers some of you might be dreaming of. MAGA had no problems voting for Tim Scott or Herschel Walker. Obama was a deeply flawed president who was not the genius his loyalists believed him to be, he shied away from the dealmaking that goes with politics and Obamacare allowed health costs to explode. Ideologically, conservatives would be opposed to many of Obama's platforms, so they have reasons to say no to him and to vote against his appointees. And many of his appointees weren't great. Sotomayor is a good example. She's not a first rate jurist and even Laurence Tribe of Harvard Law, probably the most famous and important legal scholar in America (and no right winger, har har) wrote a letter to Obama saying Sotomayor was a bad choice and not very particularly bright. The big shift towards identity politics happened under Obama and he encouraged its growth throughout American institutions, which is a major factor behind the current polarization of the country today. And let's not forget Obama beget Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The more posts there are insulting Harris the more we know she's a threat to Trump!

This.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The more posts there are insulting Harris the more we know she's a threat to Trump!

And what does that mean regarding all the insulting posts about Trump?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The more posts there are insulting Harris the more we know she's a threat to Trump!

This.

They're trying to goad you and half the comments are from never-Trumpers and Democrats trying to explain why it's a bad idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How in the hell did this country overwhelmingly reelect Barack Obama less than EIGHT YEARS AGO? What has happened to us?

Hillary happened

https://youtu.be/AOW0cUaGWZU

Biden

https://youtu.be/ajtOekO3PvA


Hillary wanted to expand H1XB program and replace US workers with hundreds of thousands of guest workers.

https://youtu.be/AOW0cUaGWZU

Trump was the ONLY candidate to advocate for less immigration.   Both parties push for more immigration to replace US workers.  But Democrats used to be the party of labor.

3 Supreme Court picks lost because Hillary lost to an idiot like Trump

If Democrats reduced the overwhelming immigration and focused on America first, they would never lose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How in the hell did this country overwhelmingly reelect Barack Obama less than EIGHT YEARS AGO? What has happened to us?

Maybe when we forgot how to do basic math…

Hint: 2012 was how many years ago?

[Anonymous]

Megan Markle. This is her moment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the goal was Harris, Dems would be talking 25th amendment. The fact that they are not indicates they don't want that outcome.

You don't get it. Biden needs to be convinced, not forced. He's known to be stubborn, so it's going to take a lot of convincing. The 25th amendment would cause lasting resentment and damage. That's a MAGA dream, but not in Democrats' interest.

And Democrats are very fractured right now. Stop talking about "what Democrats want". A lot of them don't even know what they want, because they see grave risk whichever option they pick, which means that inertia and Biden might win the day. Thank goodness some people have had the courage to say publicly what many think privately - that Biden should step aside. I hope the dam has breached and Biden will be convinced to make a graceful exit. I'd say the chances are still in favor of a Trump/Biden election right now. Which would mean Trump as President given his debate momentum, the news from the judiciary and the polls. This time in 2020, Biden was statistically ahead.

Biden is not in the driver's seat. He was set up with the early debate and was too far gone mentally to see the trap. The Dems driving the move to replace him know what they want; a nominee that is not Biden, not Harris.

Don’t buy it. Is it really that hard to believe he’s that narcissistic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The more posts there are insulting Harris the more we know she's a threat to Trump!

And what does that mean regarding all the insulting posts about Trump?

That he's a grave threat, obviously. If the election were to be held today, he'd win. If the election is held with Trump and Biden, Trump will win. The only way the democrats stand a sliver of a chance is if they pick a different candidate. And the CNN poll just released shows what some of us have suspected for a long time now - that Harris is the best alternate.

Those numbers can be boosted even more by a wise VP choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How in the hell did this country overwhelmingly reelect Barack Obama less than EIGHT YEARS AGO? What has happened to us?

Funny the tricks the memory plays.

In 2012 the election results were 51.1% versus 47.2%. That was not "overwhelmingly" if we use, for example, Reagan's 59% landslide in 1984 as overwhelming.

It is perfectly feasible to be opposed to Obama without being "racist" however you define the term. He wasn't that impressive as a president, was aloof, and his administration was not particularly progressive on the financial front, firmly siding with the establishment classes and screwing over the working classes with massive bailouts of the rich following 2008.

DP. It is feasible, yes, and I can believe that of you. But for everyone else, when McConnell remade the R party into the Party of No, the last minute turnabout in the vote on Obamacare after so much (apparently bad-faith) negotiation, etc. That wasn't because he was a D. It was for a lower reason.

Were there people upset by a black man in the WH? Absolutely. But nowhere in the numbers some of you might be dreaming of. MAGA had no problems voting for Tim Scott or Herschel Walker. Obama was a deeply flawed president who was not the genius his loyalists believed him to be, he shied away from the dealmaking that goes with politics and Obamacare allowed health costs to explode. Ideologically, conservatives would be opposed to many of Obama's platforms, so they have reasons to say no to him and to vote against his appointees. And many of his appointees weren't great. Sotomayor is a good example. She's not a first rate jurist and even Laurence Tribe of Harvard Law, probably the most famous and important legal scholar in America (and no right winger, har har) wrote a letter to Obama saying Sotomayor was a bad choice and not very particularly bright. The big shift towards identity politics happened under Obama and he encouraged its growth throughout American institutions, which is a major factor behind the current polarization of the country today. And let's not forget Obama beget Trump.

This is what's known as post hac rationalization. You can give all these reasons now why Obama was disliked. But the reason then was much more straightforward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How in the hell did this country overwhelmingly reelect Barack Obama less than EIGHT YEARS AGO? What has happened to us?

Funny the tricks the memory plays.

In 2012 the election results were 51.1% versus 47.2%. That was not "overwhelmingly" if we use, for example, Reagan's 59% landslide in 1984 as overwhelming.

It is perfectly feasible to be opposed to Obama without being "racist" however you define the term. He wasn't that impressive as a president, was aloof, and his administration was not particularly progressive on the financial front, firmly siding with the establishment classes and screwing over the working classes with massive bailouts of the rich following 2008.

DP. It is feasible, yes, and I can believe that of you. But for everyone else, when McConnell remade the R party into the Party of No, the last minute turnabout in the vote on Obamacare after so much (apparently bad-faith) negotiation, etc. That wasn't because he was a D. It was for a lower reason.

Were there people upset by a black man in the WH? Absolutely. But nowhere in the numbers some of you might be dreaming of. MAGA had no problems voting for Tim Scott or Herschel Walker. Obama was a deeply flawed president who was not the genius his loyalists believed him to be, he shied away from the dealmaking that goes with politics and Obamacare allowed health costs to explode. Ideologically, conservatives would be opposed to many of Obama's platforms, so they have reasons to say no to him and to vote against his appointees. And many of his appointees weren't great. Sotomayor is a good example. She's not a first rate jurist and even Laurence Tribe of Harvard Law, probably the most famous and important legal scholar in America (and no right winger, har har) wrote a letter to Obama saying Sotomayor was a bad choice and not very particularly bright. The big shift towards identity politics happened under Obama and he encouraged its growth throughout American institutions, which is a major factor behind the current polarization of the country today. And let's not forget Obama beget Trump.

The previous health insurance regiment in the US was completely unsustainable, so while costs may have risen for some people, for others, it was a godsend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The more posts there are insulting Harris the more we know she's a threat to Trump!

Exactly! She’s actually a brilliant politician & stateswoman who has just been PRETENDING to be a cackling idiot!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The more posts there are insulting Harris the more we know she's a threat to Trump!

And what does that mean regarding all the insulting posts about Trump?

That he's a grave threat, obviously. If the election were to be held today, he'd win. If the election is held with Trump and Biden, Trump will win. The only way the democrats stand a sliver of a chance is if they pick a different candidate. And the CNN poll just released shows what some of us have suspected for a long time now - that Harris is the best alternate.

Those numbers can be boosted even more by a wise VP choice.

People won't vote for Harris for one of a number of reasons. She is a mixed-race woman of Caribbean and South Asian descent, first generation American, married to a White Jew, and often comes across as awkward and incompetent. She won't pick up any Trump voters and some of the Democrats who believe themselves to be open-minded may decide to not vote at all, vote 3rd party, or vote Trump. The bigots will show their faces in surprising ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Megan Markle. This is her moment.

Haha. Love you.