Kamala Harris’ office rife with dissent

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris is terrible. There's NO WAY the Dems can run her in 2024.

Amtrak Joe is running in '24.

In your dreams. He'd be way too old.

Magoo is barely hanging on by a thread as it is.

The Dems have a big problem. And if Trump comes back it's all over.

[Anonymous]

The second she snubbed Joe on the boarder issue, it was over. A VP takes what is assigned to him or her and runs with it. Good bad or indifferent. Look at Pence. Do you think he wanted the COVID issue when Trump just threw it over to him and made him the face of the COVID fight? Hell no. But a true leader would take it and do the best G damn job they possibly can do and be an excellent communicator of the plan. Kamala, bless her, does not have the band width for that position. Does not make her a bad person but not the person for that Job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris is terrible. There's NO WAY the Dems can run her in 2024.

Amtrak Joe is running in '24.

In your dreams. He'd be way too old.

Magoo is barely hanging on by a thread as it is.

The Dems have a big problem. And if Trump comes back it's all over.

Not really. Trump is just as old and senile but is virulently hated by most of the population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She got pretty humiliated at the signing ceremony today. She can’t catch a break.

How so?

The WH had not intended her to have a speaking role. But after last night’s mean girls meltdown they shoe horned here into the agenda. But no one updated the copy given to the announcer and he blew right by her.

What is the mean girl meltdown? I need to see this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There you are! You're so right. We are free to criticize male politicians, but never women! *Especially* not Democratic women. Verboten! Give us all a break. She's an insipid, lightweight politician - regardless of her gender.

When it’s part of a coordinated hit…

There’s only one person that could have issued that hit job……..

I'm listening to Ben Shapiro's podcast right now. He did a deep dive on this and basically theorizes that CNN would only put out this hit piece if it were sanctioned by the WH.

I wonder if mayor Pete could have the juice to preemptively crush his 2024 opponent.

Only if he is not on paternity leave

It was reported that one of his babies recently got out of the hospital. Have some empathy.

Party of family values indeed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There you are! You're so right. We are free to criticize male politicians, but never women! *Especially* not Democratic women. Verboten! Give us all a break. She's an insipid, lightweight politician - regardless of her gender.

When it’s part of a coordinated hit…

There’s only one person that could have issued that hit job……..

I'm listening to Ben Shapiro's podcast right now. He did a deep dive on this and basically theorizes that CNN would only put out this hit piece if it were sanctioned by the WH.

I wonder if mayor Pete could have the juice to preemptively crush his 2024 opponent.

Only if he is not on paternity leave

It was reported that one of his babies recently got out of the hospital. Have some empathy.

Party of family values indeed.

Respectfully, he has already taken more paternity leave than I took maternity leave for both of my kids combined. The government only recently started offering paid parental leave to its employee, and only because Trump made it so. I don't begrudge him time off but when the economy is in chaos over issues that he is in charge of, and the average woman doesn't have any paid leave to cover THEMSELVES getting out of the hospital, it's hard to relate to Pete.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There you are! You're so right. We are free to criticize male politicians, but never women! *Especially* not Democratic women. Verboten! Give us all a break. She's an insipid, lightweight politician - regardless of her gender.

When it’s part of a coordinated hit…

There’s only one person that could have issued that hit job……..

I'm listening to Ben Shapiro's podcast right now. He did a deep dive on this and basically theorizes that CNN would only put out this hit piece if it were sanctioned by the WH.

I wonder if mayor Pete could have the juice to preemptively crush his 2024 opponent.

Only if he is not on paternity leave

It was reported that one of his babies recently got out of the hospital. Have some empathy.

Party of family values indeed.

Respectfully, he has already taken more paternity leave than I took maternity leave for both of my kids combined. The government only recently started offering paid parental leave to its employee, and only because Trump made it so. I don't begrudge him time off but when the economy is in chaos over issues that he is in charge of, and the average woman doesn't have any paid leave to cover THEMSELVES getting out of the hospital, it's hard to relate to Pete.

I agree that parents should get more leave, preferably paid, but at minimum their job should guaranteed to be there when they get back if they decide unpaid leave will work for them. The answer is not to begrudge Pete his time off but make that a possibility to all parents. Running his department isnt a one man show, nor should it be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris is terrible. There's NO WAY the Dems can run her in 2024.

Amtrak Joe is running in '24.

In your dreams. He'd be way too old.

Magoo is barely hanging on by a thread as it is.

The Dems have a big problem. And if Trump comes back it's all over.

Not really. Trump is just as old and senile but is virulently hated by most of the population.

Correction: Trump is virulently hated by the Democrats, beloved by the Republican voters, and the independents/moderates are very ambivalent about him with a wide range of views and it comes down to who is the lesser of two evils.

There have been a couple of recent polls showing Trump defeating Biden in a hypothetical match up if held today. Much of it has to do with Biden losing his independent vote substantially. And Trump improving on his margins in friendly states. For example, the Des Moines Register poll two days ago showed Trump increasing his lead in Iowa from a healthy win to close to a blowout.

On a personal level I don't want to see Trump running for reelection in 2024 but I'm not so blinded that I can't acknowledge it is a distinct possibility and that he has substantial support. The continuing weaknesses of the Biden Administration and their increasing failure to claim the mandate of competence only makes it easier for the independents to overlook Trump's many flaws and reluctantly vote for him. The good news is that three years is a long way off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris is terrible. There's NO WAY the Dems can run her in 2024.

Amtrak Joe is running in '24.

In your dreams. He'd be way too old.

Magoo is barely hanging on by a thread as it is.

The Dems have a big problem. And if Trump comes back it's all over.

Not really. Trump is just as old and senile but is virulently hated by most of the population.

Correction: Trump is virulently hated by the Democrats, beloved by the Republican voters, and the independents/moderates are very ambivalent about him with a wide range of views and it comes down to who is the lesser of two evils.

There have been a couple of recent polls showing Trump defeating Biden in a hypothetical match up if held today. Much of it has to do with Biden losing his independent vote substantially. And Trump improving on his margins in friendly states. For example, the Des Moines Register poll two days ago showed Trump increasing his lead in Iowa from a healthy win to close to a blowout.

On a personal level I don't want to see Trump running for reelection in 2024 but I'm not so blinded that I can't acknowledge it is a distinct possibility and that he has substantial support. The continuing weaknesses of the Biden Administration and their increasing failure to claim the mandate of competence only makes it easier for the independents to overlook Trump's many flaws and reluctantly vote for him. The good news is that three years is a long way off.

No, he's virulently hated by independents and moderates as well. That's why Youngkin tried to ignore him. He is however loved by Republicans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There you are! You're so right. We are free to criticize male politicians, but never women! *Especially* not Democratic women. Verboten! Give us all a break. She's an insipid, lightweight politician - regardless of her gender.

When it’s part of a coordinated hit…

There’s only one person that could have issued that hit job……..

I'm listening to Ben Shapiro's podcast right now. He did a deep dive on this and basically theorizes that CNN would only put out this hit piece if it were sanctioned by the WH.

I wonder if mayor Pete could have the juice to preemptively crush his 2024 opponent.

Only if he is not on paternity leave

It was reported that one of his babies recently got out of the hospital. Have some empathy.

Party of family values indeed.

Respectfully, he has already taken more paternity leave than I took maternity leave for both of my kids combined. The government only recently started offering paid parental leave to its employee, and only because Trump made it so. I don't begrudge him time off but when the economy is in chaos over issues that he is in charge of, and the average woman doesn't have any paid leave to cover THEMSELVES getting out of the hospital, it's hard to relate to Pete.

I agree that parents should get more leave, preferably paid, but at minimum their job should guaranteed to be there when they get back if they decide unpaid leave will work for them. The answer is not to begrudge Pete his time off but make that a possibility to all parents. Running his department isnt a one man show, nor should it be.

The issue is that Pete using that much leave when his spouse is a stay at home dad, in the midst of a crisis, makes him unrelatable AND unreliable. Most people would not be able to do what he's doing, and the fact that it is seen as impacting the entire economy is very problematic. Would President Pete be able to bow out of chaperoning a field trip if we had a national security crisis? What's his line? The collapse of the supply chain isn't enough for him to come back to work, so he's not reliable. Women are not cut that slack, even at normal jobs.

[Anonymous]

Why do you think Harris got her butt kicked in the primaries? She's awful. Yet Biden went out and hired her anyway, which is now brutally obvious that it was done as a diversity hire. Harris looked completely like a deer in headlights when she attempted geopolitics, which was well above her head. I think the Dems and admin saw how terrible she was and has put a muzzle on her ever since. Dems are going to have to start from scratch in 2024. Maybe they'll finally learn diversity alone doesn't make one a good hire or candidate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do you think Harris got her butt kicked in the primaries? She's awful. Yet Biden went out and hired her anyway, which is now brutally obvious that it was done as a diversity hire. Harris looked completely like a deer in headlights when she attempted geopolitics, which was well above her head. I think the Dems and admin saw how terrible she was and has put a muzzle on her ever since. Dems are going to have to start from scratch in 2024. Maybe they'll finally learn diversity alone doesn't make one a good hire or candidate.

What exactly are you referring to here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you think Harris got her butt kicked in the primaries? She's awful. Yet Biden went out and hired her anyway, which is now brutally obvious that it was done as a diversity hire. Harris looked completely like a deer in headlights when she attempted geopolitics, which was well above her head. I think the Dems and admin saw how terrible she was and has put a muzzle on her ever since. Dems are going to have to start from scratch in 2024. Maybe they'll finally learn diversity alone doesn't make one a good hire or candidate.

What exactly are you referring to here?

When she went around on the world stage right after the Afghanistan debacle and tried to castigate China. Ooof. She looked awful. It so obvious how poor her geopolitical skills are and how out of her league she is when it comes to international relations and geopolitics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Democrats prove short-sighted again? Is water wet???

Nope and we need to import millions of low wage workers because wages are rising

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris is terrible. There's NO WAY the Dems can run her in 2024.

Amtrak Joe is running in '24.

In your dreams. He'd be way too old.

Magoo is barely hanging on by a thread as it is.

The Dems have a big problem. And if Trump comes back it's all over.

Not really. Trump is just as old and senile but is virulently hated by most of the population.

Correction: Trump is virulently hated by the Democrats, beloved by the Republican voters, and the independents/moderates are very ambivalent about him with a wide range of views and it comes down to who is the lesser of two evils.

There have been a couple of recent polls showing Trump defeating Biden in a hypothetical match up if held today. Much of it has to do with Biden losing his independent vote substantially. And Trump improving on his margins in friendly states. For example, the Des Moines Register poll two days ago showed Trump increasing his lead in Iowa from a healthy win to close to a blowout.

On a personal level I don't want to see Trump running for reelection in 2024 but I'm not so blinded that I can't acknowledge it is a distinct possibility and that he has substantial support. The continuing weaknesses of the Biden Administration and their increasing failure to claim the mandate of competence only makes it easier for the independents to overlook Trump's many flaws and reluctantly vote for him. The good news is that three years is a long way off.

No, he's virulently hated by independents and moderates as well. That's why Youngkin tried to ignore him. He is however loved by Republicans.

The Democrats need to focus on generating a better impression with vast swathes of the electorate. That Trump is still an even half way serious force just shows the Democrats are still in denial of their past failures.