What happens to Kamala’s momentum now the DNC is over?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:can someone explain to me how in a democracy the dems nominated a person without the actual people voting for her? It just seems odd from the party that screams democracy will be lost if trump wins but the basic idea of democracy is being altered.

Again….(again!) how the party nominates its candidate is not the same thing as whether or not a nation has free and fair elections in which voters can choose between candidates who have been put forward. We can vote for her! Or we can vote for the other guy! Or we can write in someone else entirely! Or we can not vote!

+1. How she got there on the ballot is irrelevant. She's on there now. So make your choice

It is 100% relevant. No one voted to get her on the ballot. You really think that’s OK?

Who cares? She's on the ballot. Deal with it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is Kamala giving an interview today?

Tomorrow?

She said before the end of the month.

I know you are trying to make this a thing.

Just so you, I am not worried. She is a candidate that keeps her word and pays attention to details so she would not have made this commitment without planning to meet it.

I realize this is confusing to Trump supporters as he was always promising some sort of plan (e.g. healthcare, infrastructure) in two weeks and that two weeks never came.

Harris will keep her word and she will show up at the debate prepared and she will share more policy details.

The thing is, the vast majority of people calling for these details do not care, they support a candidate that provides no details, flips wherever and whenever is serves his interest.

You are not looking for solutions to the country’s issues, you are looking for sound bites that misconstrue the policies.

She has said what she intends to do and that she is pragmatic and will govern with common sense.

Everything else is MAGA flailing for a sound bite.

Exactly.

+1. She’s obviously smarter, more articulate and more capable of governing than Trump has ever beebn, nor will ever be. Sounding confident is not the same as competence.
There are strategic reasons for including Walz in interviews that have nothing to do with lack of competence to govern with respect to Harris.

She failed the bar exam.

And then she passed, and then had a career.

Trump failed at everything except inheriting $400M from his father and keeping some of the money he stole from business projects.

Good God. You cannot possibly make this statement in any seriousness if you know anything about his business.

Which business exactly. Trump university-fraud. Trump airlines - bust. Trump steaks- bust. Trump casino - bankrupt. Trump real estate -bankrupt seven times. Trump trading cards -grifter 101. Trump social media- stock down 70% and Trump currently being sued by the actual founders.

+1 if he'd put those hundreds of millions of dollars daddy gave him into a nice index fund he'd be MUCH better off today than he is. we'd all be much better off.

who in the he** bankrupts a casino?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is Kamala giving an interview today?

Tomorrow?

She said before the end of the month.

I know you are trying to make this a thing.

Just so you, I am not worried. She is a candidate that keeps her word and pays attention to details so she would not have made this commitment without planning to meet it.

I realize this is confusing to Trump supporters as he was always promising some sort of plan (e.g. healthcare, infrastructure) in two weeks and that two weeks never came.

Harris will keep her word and she will show up at the debate prepared and she will share more policy details.

The thing is, the vast majority of people calling for these details do not care, they support a candidate that provides no details, flips wherever and whenever is serves his interest.

You are not looking for solutions to the country’s issues, you are looking for sound bites that misconstrue the policies.

She has said what she intends to do and that she is pragmatic and will govern with common sense.

Everything else is MAGA flailing for a sound bite.

Exactly.

+1. She’s obviously smarter, more articulate and more capable of governing than Trump has ever beebn, nor will ever be. Sounding confident is not the same as competence.
There are strategic reasons for including Walz in interviews that have nothing to do with lack of competence to govern with respect to Harris.

She failed the bar exam.

And then she passed, and then had a career.

Trump failed at everything except inheriting $400M from his father and keeping some of the money he stole from business projects.

Good God. You cannot possibly make this statement in any seriousness if you know anything about his business.

Which business exactly. Trump university-fraud. Trump airlines - bust. Trump steaks- bust. Trump casino - bankrupt. Trump real estate -bankrupt seven times. Trump trading cards -grifter 101. Trump social media- stock down 70% and Trump currently being sued by the actual founders.

+1 if he'd put those hundreds of millions of dollars daddy gave him into a nice index fund he'd be MUCH better off today than he is. we'd all be much better off.

who in the he** bankrupts a casino?!

^ though as I write this, it occurs to me how ridiculously naive I must be. no one bankrupts a casino - unless they're doing it to hide money or conceal some other shady stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kamala's economic plan is taking shape, starting with *5 trillion dollars* in new taxes.

These include a 39.6% top rate on small business, the highest-ever capital gains tax, and taking the corporate rate from one of the best in the world to one of the worst -- higher than China, Canada, and even Europe.

But the very dumbest is taxing "unrealized capital gains" -- money you didn't actually make.

You just pulled this number out of the crack of your butt. BS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:can someone explain to me how in a democracy the dems nominated a person without the actual people voting for her? It just seems odd from the party that screams democracy will be lost if trump wins but the basic idea of democracy is being altered.

Again….(again!) how the party nominates its candidate is not the same thing as whether or not a nation has free and fair elections in which voters can choose between candidates who have been put forward. We can vote for her! Or we can vote for the other guy! Or we can write in someone else entirely! Or we can not vote!

+1. How she got there on the ballot is irrelevant. She's on there now. So make your choice

It is 100% relevant. No one voted to get her on the ballot. You really think that’s OK?

Who cares? She's on the ballot. Deal with it

I cannot imagine the cacophony of millions of Dem heads exploding if the Republicans had pulled a move like this. But for you guys? Totes cool!

[Anonymous]

I don't worry about her momentum. Trump has to deal with this new indictment as well as his felony sentencing this month. Aside from the debates, these will remind those still willing to change their opinions that they probably don't want to back a convicted felon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Harris was actually being smart and strategic she should be out there doing interviews and appearing on various podcasts like Trump has been doing. By doing so she would reach a wider range of audience especially the younger demographic. Trump recently did interviews with Dr. Phil, Theo
Von and Shawn Ryan. Instead the only interview she will be doing as of now is one pre taped edited interview with CNN. This makes her look weak and not confident in herself or whatever her proposed policies may be for the country.

Her handlers fear what she may say and do in a live, unscripted solo interview.
Not worth the risk. And, that in itself speaks volumes.

+1 I'm old enough to remember when she first started doing interviews at the beginning of this administration and she was such an awkward disaster that the staff put her through intensive media training... And it still didn't get her to acceptable level of composure to handle media engagements. I'm pretty sure it was discussed here on DCUM too but we know that memories are selectively short around here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:can someone explain to me how in a democracy the dems nominated a person without the actual people voting for her? It just seems odd from the party that screams democracy will be lost if trump wins but the basic idea of democracy is being altered.

Again….(again!) how the party nominates its candidate is not the same thing as whether or not a nation has free and fair elections in which voters can choose between candidates who have been put forward. We can vote for her! Or we can vote for the other guy! Or we can write in someone else entirely! Or we can not vote!

+1. How she got there on the ballot is irrelevant. She's on there now. So make your choice

It is 100% relevant. No one voted to get her on the ballot. You really think that’s OK?

Who cares? She's on the ballot. Deal with it

I cannot imagine the cacophony of millions of Dem heads exploding if the Republicans had pulled a move like this. But for you guys? Totes cool!

You could not be more wrong. Do it. Convince trump to withdraw and then replace him. The Dems will be fine with that. Totes cool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What makes anyone think Kamala is going to an amazing job in a debate vs Trump? I’m no Trump lover, but let’s get real here. If she has a Biden type debate then it could be game over for the Dems.

Call her stupid all you want. She’s not. She’s a former prosecutor who has run a campaign with amazing message discipline— and discipline, period. It’s going to be an amazing contrast to Trumps rambling and erratic behavior.

Plus, she’s younger than Trump and much more attractive. I think the visual of youth v age and Trump rambling and her shrugging, saying she can’t respond because he’s incoherent and weird and looking younger and better is a JFK v Nixon moment.

She does not need to be policy heavy to win because Trump’s main policies are grievances and retribution. Her upbeat campaign will do well against that.

Plus, Trump is on his heels. He has yet to find a good response to her. None of his insults are sticking. He can’t even land a good nickname.

Maybe I’m wrong. But, I think Trump looks like Biden did in his first debate when he goes against her. Definitely think more people than normal will tune is.

What is her message though? Other than criticizing Trump and throwing out some grand ideas she can never accomplish, what’s her platform?

1. Not Trump
2. No insurrections
3. Pro-choice.
4. Pro-NATO
5. Pro-Israel, but has separated herself from Biden on Gaza
6. Child Tax Credit

Etc. You realize she has a website with her policies, yes. Google is your friend.

That is, BTW is much more coherent than Trump, who has no policy positions.

Trump's policy position is project 2025 that was written by someone else.

Oh you mean the one that he keeps saying he isn’t a part of? That Project 2025?
You guys can keep claiming that’s his platform. But it’s not.

And yet he was for it before he was against it once the contents were sunshined. Also he can say whatever he wants, the proof is in the pudding. The people he surrounds himself are involved in the 2025 project. People he intends to out in a positions of power should he win a second term. And then, when did people start believing what Trump says. Watch what he does, not what his lying lips whisper.

Hmmm. Reminds me of someone who was for open borders just a few short weeks ago, but is now all about closing them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:can someone explain to me how in a democracy the dems nominated a person without the actual people voting for her? It just seems odd from the party that screams democracy will be lost if trump wins but the basic idea of democracy is being altered.

Again….(again!) how the party nominates its candidate is not the same thing as whether or not a nation has free and fair elections in which voters can choose between candidates who have been put forward. We can vote for her! Or we can vote for the other guy! Or we can write in someone else entirely! Or we can not vote!

+1. How she got there on the ballot is irrelevant. She's on there now. So make your choice

It is 100% relevant. No one voted to get her on the ballot. You really think that’s OK?

Who cares? She's on the ballot. Deal with it

I cannot imagine the cacophony of millions of Dem heads exploding if the Republicans had pulled a move like this. But for you guys? Totes cool!

B.S. You must not recall the heads exploding over whether Obama was actually an American born citizen. I even think some lawsuits were filed.
For me it was irrelevant because he did get on the ballot, and when I went to vote, I had two choices -- just like we do now

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She was CA AG and got the huge mortgage settlement. Other states were caving to big banks and going to accept a smaller settlement - she didn’t blink.

As goes California so does the rest of the nation. Homeowners screwed by banks all over the nation benefited from AG Harris work.

And she was CA AG when Beau Biden was DE AG - where all those f:::ing banks are incorporated. You don’t think AG Biden didn’t tell VP Biden about AG Harris’ negotiating skills and will of steel. He sure the f did. That’s how she ended up as VP Harris.

Debate….bring it.

Really? The only President from California in recent memory was Ronald Reagan, and Kamala ain't no Reagan on any level

Thank God for that. Reagan was a disaster with his trickle down economics, drug trafficking and IRAN contra dealings. And don’t get me started on his just say no and amnesty for all immigration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't worry about her momentum. Trump has to deal with this new indictment as well as his felony sentencing this month. Aside from the debates, these will remind those still willing to change their opinions that they probably don't want to back a convicted felon.

Or it will make him a political martyr and get more to vote for him out of spite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:can someone explain to me how in a democracy the dems nominated a person without the actual people voting for her? It just seems odd from the party that screams democracy will be lost if trump wins but the basic idea of democracy is being altered.

Again….(again!) how the party nominates its candidate is not the same thing as whether or not a nation has free and fair elections in which voters can choose between candidates who have been put forward. We can vote for her! Or we can vote for the other guy! Or we can write in someone else entirely! Or we can not vote!

+1. How she got there on the ballot is irrelevant. She's on there now. So make your choice

It is 100% relevant. No one voted to get her on the ballot. You really think that’s OK?

Who cares? She's on the ballot. Deal with it

I cannot imagine the cacophony of millions of Dem heads exploding if the Republicans had pulled a move like this. But for you guys? Totes cool!

You could not be more wrong. Do it. Convince trump to withdraw and then replace him. The Dems will be fine with that. Totes cool.

Agree! Replace Trump with Haley!! Dump Trump!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And women keep registering to vote.

https://www.nj.com/politics/2024/08/massive-175-increase-in-voter-registration-among-this-group-you-just-dont-see-this.html

Keep calling her an idiot….women have experienced this in work environment forever.

Belittled, man ‘splained, gaslighting, idea grabbing - women know this all well. We have learned that complaining doesn’t work - working harder and smarter works. Showing who you are and not being defined by colleagues - wins in the work place.

So keep call her names and whispering she’s not up for it. When she has an entire career of wining local, state, and national elections. What track record do you have on the GOP ticket?

Let’s take our future and our daughters’ future into our own hands (looking at you girl dads). And as Gov Whitmer says women get “stuff” done.

GOTV!
Let’s get this done!

Fair enough. Bit I still keep wondering why white women didn't go for Hilary in 2016. So why is Kamala going to do better with this all-important demographic?

In a word, Dobbs.

?? Neither Harris nor Trump is going to be able to change Dobbs. So that makes no sense

Wrong
If either get a controlling Congress, they can codify abortion rights, or lack thereof into law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:can someone explain to me how in a democracy the dems nominated a person without the actual people voting for her? It just seems odd from the party that screams democracy will be lost if trump wins but the basic idea of democracy is being altered.

Again….(again!) how the party nominates its candidate is not the same thing as whether or not a nation has free and fair elections in which voters can choose between candidates who have been put forward. We can vote for her! Or we can vote for the other guy! Or we can write in someone else entirely! Or we can not vote!

+1. How she got there on the ballot is irrelevant. She's on there now. So make your choice

It is 100% relevant. No one voted to get her on the ballot. You really think that’s OK?

Who cares? She's on the ballot. Deal with it

I cannot imagine the cacophony of millions of Dem heads exploding if the Republicans had pulled a move like this. But for you guys? Totes cool!

B.S. You must not recall the heads exploding over whether Obama was actually an American born citizen. I even think some lawsuits were filed.
For me it was irrelevant because he did get on the ballot, and when I went to vote, I had two choices -- just like we do now

Wasn’t he democratically elected to the ballot? Or did the Dems just say “here’s your candidate!”?