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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP - The New York Times is reporting that number--$5 trillion over 10 years: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/22/us/politics/kamala-harris-tax-plan.html

Here's another source from The Brookings & Urban Institute's Tax Policy Center: https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/daily-deduction/harris-backs-5-trillion-tax-increases-wealthy-corporations

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP - The New York Times is reporting that number--$5 trillion over 10 years: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/22/us/politics/kamala-harris-tax-plan.html

Here's another source from The Brookings & Urban Institute's Tax Policy Center: https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/daily-deduction/harris-backs-5-trillion-tax-increases-wealthy-corporations

Now tell us what the deficit will be if Trump is elected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

The Dobbs decision told us that nothing is settled law. This SC is willing to overrule long standing legal precedent. Justice Thomas is on the record as wanting to overturn even more important decisions. In his concurring opinion on Dobbs, he wrote that the Justices “should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell”. If Griswold falls, the right to contraception without interference from the government goes away.

Trump has already appointed 3 justices to the SC, and might have the opportunity to appoint 3 more during his term. Scalia and Thomas could retire, and Sotomayor’s health is not great. The conservative court could have impact on not only our lives, but that of our children and their children.

Scalia is dead. I think you meant Alito, but that creep will die in office. I agree with everything you said. And although Thomas conveniently left out Loving v Virginia, that was also a right to privacy along the same vein as the other cases. So a Roberts court is willing to revisit contraception rights, interracial marriage and same sex marriage to leave it up to the states. We as a nation should be moving forward and not regressing.

100%

[Anonymous]

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.

The fact that she has given you nothing but feels and you're running with this whole narrative of "she is pragmatic and will govern with common sense" means you either are her campaign worker or as simple as you make Trump voters out to be. What specific initiative has she delivered on while VP that supports your claim of how she will govern and keep her promises?

Who cares? She'll be the first black female president and she's not Trump. Isn't that really all that matters?

No, actually that isn't enough. She said flat out in a taped interview said that she would do nothing for Black Americans. This was in a question asked by a reporter with the Root in regard to reparations. There are clips of this if you search. At least she's not even promising anything to <b>you</b> this time.

That single word speaks volumes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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!”?

I think you need to familiarize yourself with the nomination process.

Enlighten me please

The parties decide individually how they want to select their nominees.

Read up on U.S. history. Focus on presidential elections in the post WWII era.

The ignorance is disappointing.

So why do we even have a primary if the party is going to decide regardless of my vote?

[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.

And yet, he’s still worth upwards of 5+ billion. Total failure he is.

Gangsters gonna be gangsters, and grifters gonna grift. There’s a sucker born everyday, and y’all keep making him richer. Al Capone was worth 100 million dollars in 1927. In today’s dollars that’s 1,807,801,149. All money ain’t good money, or legit money. However for so many of y’all, it doesn’t matter how your idols and heroes get their money, as long as they get it.

[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: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!”?

I think you need to familiarize yourself with the nomination process.

Enlighten me please

The parties decide individually how they want to select their nominees.

Read up on U.S. history. Focus on presidential elections in the post WWII era.

The ignorance is disappointing.

So why do we even have a primary if the party is going to decide regardless of my vote?

You know what? You don’t even have to go to a library to educate yourself anymore.

Read! Think!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Before politician Trump, it was often rumored in the NYC streets that he was laundering money for the Russian mob.

[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: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!”?

I think you need to familiarize yourself with the nomination process.

Enlighten me please

The parties decide individually how they want to select their nominees.

Read up on U.S. history. Focus on presidential elections in the post WWII era.

The ignorance is disappointing.

So why do we even have a primary if the party is going to decide regardless of my vote?

You know what? You don’t even have to go to a library to educate yourself anymore.

Read! Think!!

If you know the answer, why can’t you educate me? I’m trying to learn something here.

[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?

She has enormous support. Are you paying attention at all?

Hahaha. She has enormous support because she’s the only option against Trump. If people loved her that much why did she tank in the primaries?

And her favorability ranged from 16%-30% during her time as VP.

Just imagine how bad the other guy must be, that she's beating him in the general.

[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.

How ignorant are you PP. you cannot be an ADA, DA, or AG without passing the state bar exam. Jeeze. Go back to your Moscow basement.

I am not the pp, but she did flunk it the first time. To be fair though, California's is a tough bar exam. I think this only comes up when comparing her credentials to JD Vance who was on Yale's Law Review. I think she should be judged on her positions and comments made in public appearances (where she doesn't come off sounding real bright to be honest).

So she failed the first time. BFD. FDR, one of the top five US presidents, failed the NY bar first time out. Jerry Brown former California governor and Kathleen Sullivan, former Stanford Law school Dean failed the California bar the first time. And republican governor Pete Wilson failed that bar there or four times before passing. Hilary Clinton flunked the DC bar first time out.

Haha . Well that's all well and good, but those people all went to Yale and Berkeley. C'mon, UC Hastings isn't exactly Ivy league now is it?

[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: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!”?

I think you need to familiarize yourself with the nomination process.

Enlighten me please

The parties decide individually how they want to select their nominees.

Read up on U.S. history. Focus on presidential elections in the post WWII era.

The ignorance is disappointing.

So why do we even have a primary if the party is going to decide regardless of my vote?

You know what? You don’t even have to go to a library to educate yourself anymore.

Read! Think!!

If you know the answer, why can’t you educate me? I’m trying to learn something here.

I do know the answer. You need to learn how to fish. Read up on U.S. primaries post WWII. Knowledge will set you free.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP - The New York Times is reporting that number--$5 trillion over 10 years: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/22/us/politics/kamala-harris-tax-plan.html

Here's another source from The Brookings & Urban Institute's Tax Policy Center: https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/daily-deduction/harris-backs-5-trillion-tax-increases-wealthy-corporations

Now tell us what the deficit will be if Trump is elected.

I didn't see that in the NYT but encourage you to share a reputable linked source if you have one. I'd sincerely be interested in the figure, as would others.

[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.

5 pages this morning with MAGA throwing out any 💩 trying to make it stick to Harris. And, that in itself speaks volumes.

[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: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!”?

I think you need to familiarize yourself with the nomination process.

Enlighten me please

The parties decide individually how they want to select their nominees.

Read up on U.S. history. Focus on presidential elections in the post WWII era.

The ignorance is disappointing.

So why do we even have a primary if the party is going to decide regardless of my vote?

Please read this and then you can come back and comment.

https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/state-primary-election-types

Everyone loves to be an armchair critic, but understanding how things actually work is important!