Kamala Harris for President

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m losing hope she’s going to win. I’ve basically accepted another Trump admin. Sorry to be a Debbie downer maybe it’s the weather but all the hype and hope we had a few weeks ago has basically fizzled and I miss don’t think she’s got the votes.

You are not the only one to think this way.
Ask yourself, have you tried to help one orangehad-felon-voting person change their decision to even think of voting for that orange head felon? If you have not, go out there (or from inside your place) and DO SOMETHING! If each sane one of us can change the mind if just one to vote Harris, we are not going back.

You aren't changing the minds of stubborn MAGA idiots. What Harris can do is to continue introducing herself to swing voters in swing states and telling them whatever it may be they want to hear in order to bring them on board. Those people just want to be promised something to make their lives better. That's what Trump did in 2016. If Harris can detach herself from from the dark Biden cloud, come up with some new shiny promises, and then work her butt off to sell those promises in a handful of swing states, she will win and possibly win big. The thing is, most of those swing state voters aren't looking for cash handouts or debt cancellation promises. They want to hear fairy tales about jobs, industry, manufacturing,

You all keep reference this, but Biden has a positive approval rating, gas prices are low, GDP is growing, inflation is down, NATO is stronger than ever. Life isn't perfect, but it is a heck f a lot better than it was 4 years ago.

You are cherry picking statistics. Prices are much higher than they were four years ago, housing is unaffordable, people are struggling to get by. Millions of illegals have been brought into the country and been given expansive public services. Public polling shows most do not agree with your assertion that life is better now than under Trump’s presidency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m losing hope she’s going to win. I’ve basically accepted another Trump admin. Sorry to be a Debbie downer maybe it’s the weather but all the hype and hope we had a few weeks ago has basically fizzled and I miss don’t think she’s got the votes.

You are not the only one to think this way.
Ask yourself, have you tried to help one orangehad-felon-voting person change their decision to even think of voting for that orange head felon? If you have not, go out there (or from inside your place) and DO SOMETHING! If each sane one of us can change the mind if just one to vote Harris, we are not going back.

You aren't changing the minds of stubborn MAGA idiots. What Harris can do is to continue introducing herself to swing voters in swing states and telling them whatever it may be they want to hear in order to bring them on board. Those people just want to be promised something to make their lives better. That's what Trump did in 2016. If Harris can detach herself from from the dark Biden cloud, come up with some new shiny promises, and then work her butt off to sell those promises in a handful of swing states, she will win and possibly win big. The thing is, most of those swing state voters aren't looking for cash handouts or debt cancellation promises. They want to hear fairy tales about jobs, industry, manufacturing,

You all keep reference this, but Biden has a positive approval rating, gas prices are low, GDP is growing, inflation is down, NATO is stronger than ever. Life isn't perfect, but it is a heck f a lot better than it was 4 years ago.

You are cherry picking statistics. Prices are much higher than they were four years ago, housing is unaffordable, people are struggling to get by. Millions of illegals have been brought into the country and been given expansive public services. Public polling shows most do not agree with your assertion that life is better now than under Trump’s presidency.

What will Trump do to lower prices?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the latest polls that make a Madame President seem far more likely...
@MorningConsult
battleground tracking among LVs:

AZ: Harris 47%, Trump 49%
GA: Harris 48%, Trump 48%
MI: Harris 49%, Trump 46%
NV: Harris 48%, Trump 48%
NC: Harris 48%, Trump 48%
PA: Harris 49%, Trump 46%
WI: Harris 49%, Trump 46%

These are not great at all.

Why not? If she wins PA, her path to 270 i pretty easy.

PA is one of the biggest Trump states in the NE so don’t count on it. Biden only won by 1.4% and that’s his home state. PA is Pennsyltucky after all.


Western PA and Ohio are all Trump
Land.

She has more of a shot in Georgia than PA.

You are believing your rural Pennsyltuckey friends and family far too much. With the exception of 2016, when Trump scored PA because the Clinton campaign manager screwed up, PA has not voted for a Republican for president since Bush in 1988--36 years. Trump scored a coup when the Clinton campaign essentially relied on Pennsylvania voting reliably blue and did not defend it. Trump's went and campaigned in rural PA and some of the smaller cities and managed to get just enough votes (barely 0.5%) to win the state. Note that Biden's campaign was wise to pay attention in 2020 and they won the state by 2.2%. Harris' campaign will do that again.

The Philadelphia metropolitan area has 50% of the state voters and is reliably blue. Pittsburgh metropolitan area is blue in the most populous county, Allegheny county. The area is 20% of the state population and tends to vote about 75% Democratic, mostly in Allegheny county, the other counties tend to lean slightly red. Scranton, Allentown, Harrisburg, State College and Eric all lean blue.

So the areas that you cite as Trump county add up to barely 1/3 of the state voter population.

Trump has a very weak chance of taking Pennsylvania again as long as Harris and her surrogates campaign there, which they have been doing regularly throughout the campaign. It would be very unlikely that Trump takes PA.

+1 And Harris is not ignoring rural Pennsylvania voters.

Rural Pennsylvania voters will not vote for this left-wing California socialist.

Saying that she wants to eliminate the filibuster will not help win over swing voters.

It will when you finish the sentence, which is the fact that she will get back the rights for women that the GOP gleefully stripped from us.

What right?

The right to have full autonomy to control one's own body, health and medical treatment.

Does that apply to the covid vaccine as well?

That was different. That was a case of public safety.

A pregnancy does not endanger any other citizen's health or life. At the time the vaccines were mandated, there was no treatment. This was before Paxlovid was approved for medical use. Coronavirus was known to be an extremely infectious disease that was fatal for many vulnerable subgroups of the population. So, one unvaccinated person could expose many others to the virus that could be known to kill them because there was no way to treat them.

Once paxlovid and other successful treatments (not H-ine or I-tin) were available, the vaccine mandates were dropped. But at the time, it was the only solution known to protect many in the community.

So, in the case of the covid vaccine, there are limits on full body autonomy due to a potential injury to another person from that autonomy. But, there should not be limits on full body autonomy due to an injury to another person from that autonomy, if the other person is a baby?

Fetuses aren’t babies

They will be if you leave them alone.

The ones we are talking about will not only be babies, but they'll be orphans. Republicans talk so much about the intact family unit and needing a father and a mother, but they are more than willing to kill the mother to force the birth of a baby that may not live more than a few days or weeks. They are also willing to allow a woman to be sterilized to avoid getting rid of a baby that will not live at all, let alone a few days. So, they want to force these women with ectopic pregnancies to be childless cat ladies because they aren't willing to allow the doctors to terminate a baby that has a heartbeat but will never have a functioning brain.

So we agree that they will be babies.

What a fetus will be isn’t the question. What matters is what it is. An acorn can become a tree. That doesn’t make it a tree.

Poor analogy. A tree is nothing like a baby.

Why don’t you want to own what you’re doing and call it what it is?

A fetus is not a baby, just as an acorn is not a tree. How is it a bad analogy? You said it was, but you’ve offered no explanation.

This must be a deflection. If you’re ok with abortion, you have to admit to yourself that you’re ok with ending the life of an innocent human.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the latest polls that make a Madame President seem far more likely...
@MorningConsult
battleground tracking among LVs:

AZ: Harris 47%, Trump 49%
GA: Harris 48%, Trump 48%
MI: Harris 49%, Trump 46%
NV: Harris 48%, Trump 48%
NC: Harris 48%, Trump 48%
PA: Harris 49%, Trump 46%
WI: Harris 49%, Trump 46%

These are not great at all.

Why not? If she wins PA, her path to 270 i pretty easy.

PA is one of the biggest Trump states in the NE so don’t count on it. Biden only won by 1.4% and that’s his home state. PA is Pennsyltucky after all.


Western PA and Ohio are all Trump
Land.

She has more of a shot in Georgia than PA.

You are believing your rural Pennsyltuckey friends and family far too much. With the exception of 2016, when Trump scored PA because the Clinton campaign manager screwed up, PA has not voted for a Republican for president since Bush in 1988--36 years. Trump scored a coup when the Clinton campaign essentially relied on Pennsylvania voting reliably blue and did not defend it. Trump's went and campaigned in rural PA and some of the smaller cities and managed to get just enough votes (barely 0.5%) to win the state. Note that Biden's campaign was wise to pay attention in 2020 and they won the state by 2.2%. Harris' campaign will do that again.

The Philadelphia metropolitan area has 50% of the state voters and is reliably blue. Pittsburgh metropolitan area is blue in the most populous county, Allegheny county. The area is 20% of the state population and tends to vote about 75% Democratic, mostly in Allegheny county, the other counties tend to lean slightly red. Scranton, Allentown, Harrisburg, State College and Eric all lean blue.

So the areas that you cite as Trump county add up to barely 1/3 of the state voter population.

Trump has a very weak chance of taking Pennsylvania again as long as Harris and her surrogates campaign there, which they have been doing regularly throughout the campaign. It would be very unlikely that Trump takes PA.

+1 And Harris is not ignoring rural Pennsylvania voters.

Rural Pennsylvania voters will not vote for this left-wing California socialist.

Saying that she wants to eliminate the filibuster will not help win over swing voters.

It will when you finish the sentence, which is the fact that she will get back the rights for women that the GOP gleefully stripped from us.

What right?

The right to have full autonomy to control one's own body, health and medical treatment.

Does that apply to the covid vaccine as well?

That was different. That was a case of public safety.

A pregnancy does not endanger any other citizen's health or life. At the time the vaccines were mandated, there was no treatment. This was before Paxlovid was approved for medical use. Coronavirus was known to be an extremely infectious disease that was fatal for many vulnerable subgroups of the population. So, one unvaccinated person could expose many others to the virus that could be known to kill them because there was no way to treat them.

Once paxlovid and other successful treatments (not H-ine or I-tin) were available, the vaccine mandates were dropped. But at the time, it was the only solution known to protect many in the community.

So, in the case of the covid vaccine, there are limits on full body autonomy due to a potential injury to another person from that autonomy. But, there should not be limits on full body autonomy due to an injury to another person from that autonomy, if the other person is a baby?

Fetuses aren’t babies

They will be if you leave them alone.

The ones we are talking about will not only be babies, but they'll be orphans. Republicans talk so much about the intact family unit and needing a father and a mother, but they are more than willing to kill the mother to force the birth of a baby that may not live more than a few days or weeks. They are also willing to allow a woman to be sterilized to avoid getting rid of a baby that will not live at all, let alone a few days. So, they want to force these women with ectopic pregnancies to be childless cat ladies because they aren't willing to allow the doctors to terminate a baby that has a heartbeat but will never have a functioning brain.

So we agree that they will be babies.

Some of them will. Others will not. The ectopic pregnancies will kill their mothers and still will not become babies.

There are babies with heartbeats but no brain waves that will kill their mothers and never live.

Some will become babies, some for hours, days or weeks and will destroy their parents ability to have other children.

And none of them have rights until they are born. Whereas the mothers have rights as citizens of the US.

The vast majority of healthy babies will not get to be born because their mothers did not want to be inconvenienced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She has now delivered a major speech and sat for a few interviews with great skill.

Great skill? LOL.
Reading from a teleprompter is not difficult.
Her interviews have been a joke. Her responses have been recycled talking points from her stump speech. Vacuous answers.

Would love to see her give a press conference where she actually takes questions from the media without a list of people chosen to call on.

[Anonymous]

OMG, what's happening in Pennsylvania?

https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/pennsylvania/trump-vs-harris

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OMG, what's happening in Pennsylvania?

https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/pennsylvania/trump-vs-harris

538 rates Trafalger 279th. They are known to lean very conservative and they do not use demographics to balance their polling candidates and over-represent conservative pollees, so they are basically propaganda for the conservatives, rather than actual statistics.

538 rates Atlas 22nd, so not terrible, but not the strongest. Also, their demographics might be a little off:
https://cdn.atlasintel.org/9e0da6ea-7e9c-498c-89e3-511bd7344cd0.pdf
They use 50% female, 48.7% male. Pennsylvania, like most of the US, has about 55% female to 45% male ratio of voters. Additionally, since Dobbs, PA has had many more female new voters than male (about +12% female, so about 56-44).
Atlas also overrepresented the racial demographics.
PA is about 73% White, 10% Black, 8 Hispanic, 4% Asian
Atlas polled 81% White, 9% Black, 6% Hispanic and 2% Asian

538 rates InsiderAdvantage 95th, pretty low down. This poll was conducted 9/14-15, two weeks ago and was before the attempted assassination attempt on Trump in Florida. It was also before Trump and Vance spread the false Haitians dogs and cats rumor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m losing hope she’s going to win. I’ve basically accepted another Trump admin. Sorry to be a Debbie downer maybe it’s the weather but all the hype and hope we had a few weeks ago has basically fizzled and I miss don’t think she’s got the votes.

You are not the only one to think this way.
Ask yourself, have you tried to help one orangehad-felon-voting person change their decision to even think of voting for that orange head felon? If you have not, go out there (or from inside your place) and DO SOMETHING! If each sane one of us can change the mind if just one to vote Harris, we are not going back.

You aren't changing the minds of stubborn MAGA idiots. What Harris can do is to continue introducing herself to swing voters in swing states and telling them whatever it may be they want to hear in order to bring them on board. Those people just want to be promised something to make their lives better. That's what Trump did in 2016. If Harris can detach herself from from the dark Biden cloud, come up with some new shiny promises, and then work her butt off to sell those promises in a handful of swing states, she will win and possibly win big. The thing is, most of those swing state voters aren't looking for cash handouts or debt cancellation promises. They want to hear fairy tales about jobs, industry, manufacturing,

You all keep reference this, but Biden has a positive approval rating, gas prices are low, GDP is growing, inflation is down, NATO is stronger than ever. Life isn't perfect, but it is a heck f a lot better than it was 4 years ago.

You are cherry picking statistics. Prices are much higher than they were four years ago, housing is unaffordable, people are struggling to get by. Millions of illegals have been brought into the country and been given expansive public services. Public polling shows most do not agree with your assertion that life is better now than under Trump’s presidency.

+1

[Anonymous]

Jesus, lady.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Well yeah when you cut her off when she starts explaining her plan, her plan isn’t in the clip.

[Anonymous]

https://youtu.be/bzThwqnQJDY?t=752

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well yeah when you cut her off when she starts explaining her plan, her plan isn’t in the clip.

The whole interview is grievance politics. That's all she's good for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m losing hope she’s going to win. I’ve basically accepted another Trump admin. Sorry to be a Debbie downer maybe it’s the weather but all the hype and hope we had a few weeks ago has basically fizzled and I miss don’t think she’s got the votes.

You are not the only one to think this way.
Ask yourself, have you tried to help one orangehad-felon-voting person change their decision to even think of voting for that orange head felon? If you have not, go out there (or from inside your place) and DO SOMETHING! If each sane one of us can change the mind if just one to vote Harris, we are not going back.

You aren't changing the minds of stubborn MAGA idiots. What Harris can do is to continue introducing herself to swing voters in swing states and telling them whatever it may be they want to hear in order to bring them on board. Those people just want to be promised something to make their lives better. That's what Trump did in 2016. If Harris can detach herself from from the dark Biden cloud, come up with some new shiny promises, and then work her butt off to sell those promises in a handful of swing states, she will win and possibly win big. The thing is, most of those swing state voters aren't looking for cash handouts or debt cancellation promises. They want to hear fairy tales about jobs, industry, manufacturing,

You all keep reference this, but Biden has a positive approval rating, gas prices are low, GDP is growing, inflation is down, NATO is stronger than ever. Life isn't perfect, but it is a heck f a lot better than it was 4 years ago.

You are cherry picking statistics. Prices are much higher than they were four years ago, housing is unaffordable, people are struggling to get by. Millions of illegals have been brought into the country and been given expansive public services. Public polling shows most do not agree with your assertion that life is better now than under Trump’s presidency.

Inflation is down, but groceries and housing are expensive, very true.

It has been established that the grocery prices are high due to price gouging, where the stores raised prices during Covid and the supply chain breaking, but then never lowered them once fixed.

Harris has proposed to strengthening anti-price gouging laws but we do live in a capitalist society - do you expect someone to set fixed prices that the public can afford, like communism or socialism?
In terms of housing, Harris has committed to dedicated billions of dollars to get millions of new housing units built.

Trump has proposed raising taxes on goods like groceries, and he has proposed deporting migrant workers - both are inflationary, particularly to grocery prices.
Trump has no proposal, or perhaps there is some unarticulated concept of a proposal out there for housing.

What is the GOP plan? Complaining about it is fair, but who has solutions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the latest polls that make a Madame President seem far more likely...
@MorningConsult
battleground tracking among LVs:

AZ: Harris 47%, Trump 49%
GA: Harris 48%, Trump 48%
MI: Harris 49%, Trump 46%
NV: Harris 48%, Trump 48%
NC: Harris 48%, Trump 48%
PA: Harris 49%, Trump 46%
WI: Harris 49%, Trump 46%

These are not great at all.

Why not? If she wins PA, her path to 270 i pretty easy.

PA is one of the biggest Trump states in the NE so don’t count on it. Biden only won by 1.4% and that’s his home state. PA is Pennsyltucky after all.


Western PA and Ohio are all Trump
Land.

She has more of a shot in Georgia than PA.

You are believing your rural Pennsyltuckey friends and family far too much. With the exception of 2016, when Trump scored PA because the Clinton campaign manager screwed up, PA has not voted for a Republican for president since Bush in 1988--36 years. Trump scored a coup when the Clinton campaign essentially relied on Pennsylvania voting reliably blue and did not defend it. Trump's went and campaigned in rural PA and some of the smaller cities and managed to get just enough votes (barely 0.5%) to win the state. Note that Biden's campaign was wise to pay attention in 2020 and they won the state by 2.2%. Harris' campaign will do that again.

The Philadelphia metropolitan area has 50% of the state voters and is reliably blue. Pittsburgh metropolitan area is blue in the most populous county, Allegheny county. The area is 20% of the state population and tends to vote about 75% Democratic, mostly in Allegheny county, the other counties tend to lean slightly red. Scranton, Allentown, Harrisburg, State College and Eric all lean blue.

So the areas that you cite as Trump county add up to barely 1/3 of the state voter population.

Trump has a very weak chance of taking Pennsylvania again as long as Harris and her surrogates campaign there, which they have been doing regularly throughout the campaign. It would be very unlikely that Trump takes PA.

+1 And Harris is not ignoring rural Pennsylvania voters.

Rural Pennsylvania voters will not vote for this left-wing California socialist.

Saying that she wants to eliminate the filibuster will not help win over swing voters.

It will when you finish the sentence, which is the fact that she will get back the rights for women that the GOP gleefully stripped from us.

What right?

The right to have full autonomy to control one's own body, health and medical treatment.

Does that apply to the covid vaccine as well?

That was different. That was a case of public safety.

A pregnancy does not endanger any other citizen's health or life. At the time the vaccines were mandated, there was no treatment. This was before Paxlovid was approved for medical use. Coronavirus was known to be an extremely infectious disease that was fatal for many vulnerable subgroups of the population. So, one unvaccinated person could expose many others to the virus that could be known to kill them because there was no way to treat them.

Once paxlovid and other successful treatments (not H-ine or I-tin) were available, the vaccine mandates were dropped. But at the time, it was the only solution known to protect many in the community.

So, in the case of the covid vaccine, there are limits on full body autonomy due to a potential injury to another person from that autonomy. But, there should not be limits on full body autonomy due to an injury to another person from that autonomy, if the other person is a baby?

Fetuses aren’t babies

They will be if you leave them alone.

The ones we are talking about will not only be babies, but they'll be orphans. Republicans talk so much about the intact family unit and needing a father and a mother, but they are more than willing to kill the mother to force the birth of a baby that may not live more than a few days or weeks. They are also willing to allow a woman to be sterilized to avoid getting rid of a baby that will not live at all, let alone a few days. So, they want to force these women with ectopic pregnancies to be childless cat ladies because they aren't willing to allow the doctors to terminate a baby that has a heartbeat but will never have a functioning brain.

So we agree that they will be babies.

What a fetus will be isn’t the question. What matters is what it is. An acorn can become a tree. That doesn’t make it a tree.

Poor analogy. A tree is nothing like a baby.

Why don’t you want to own what you’re doing and call it what it is?

A fetus is not a baby, just as an acorn is not a tree. How is it a bad analogy? You said it was, but you’ve offered no explanation.

This must be a deflection. If you’re ok with abortion, you have to admit to yourself that you’re ok with ending the life of an innocent human.

LOL, no, false analogy. More appropriate...If you are ok with abortion, you are ok with squirrels eating acorns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has now delivered a major speech and sat for a few interviews with great skill.

Great skill? LOL.
Reading from a teleprompter is not difficult.
Her interviews have been a joke. Her responses have been recycled talking points from her stump speech. Vacuous answers.

Would love to see her give a press conference where she actually takes questions from the media without a list of people chosen to call on.

One doesn't give an interview with a teleprompter. what are you even talking about? If you think Harris is bad at this, then you must think Trump is a blithering idiot if you are comparing the two.