Joe is out

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it true Obama declined to endorse Harris?

Yep.

"We will be navigating uncharted waters in the days ahead. But I have extraordinary confidence that the leaders of our party will be able to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/barack-obama-biden-dropping-out-2024-presidential-race-full-statement/

[Anonymous]

Democrats just need to start bringing up all the “Leopards Ate My Face” stories coming from GOP women after the overturn of Roe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kamala has never had kids.

That alone is a massive turn off to a huge number of voters. She's never known what it is like to be a mother of her own kids and had to make sacrifices to make a career and family work.

A presidential candidate who doesn't have kids is just unelectable in this country. It's the way it is.

I believe this is the stupidest thing I’ve read yet on this thread.

+1 let's be honest, MAGA would rather vote for a rapist, criminal, 3x married swine who cheats on his wife while she's pregnant, than a woman who's never had a child, as if that's sooo important to being a POTUS. As if Trump has ever changed a diaper or had to juggle parenting responsibilities with working for a company.

-mother of two and former R

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DEI: A cudgel used by racists pretending every single person of color didn't earn what they have while ignoring the white 2.0 GPA "legacies" and those with daddies writing checks, who get into the Ivies or a business school where their brother knew someone.

I suspect those who bleat "DEI" also had no problem voting for a VP who needed five mediocre colleges and six years, just to get a communications degree.

Funny how you can be some GED felon and get votes from the same people who think Justice Jackson is a "DEI" hire. But sure, no racism involved in your thought-process while we see the buffoons who get elected on the right.

Defending DEI and blasting its critics mindlessly as “racist” is just not the centrist platform the Dems need right now to turn this election around.

It isn't about defending it, it's about pointing out the extremely low standards required of WHITE politicians on the right while in the same breathe as calling anyone non-white a "DEI" hire.

That you called it "mindless" when anyone with even two, functioning brain cells can see the racism from those who attack it, is your limitation.

The same people who think Boebert is qualified to be in Congress, think Jackson has no business being on the SC, despite the fact that she is more qualified than several of her white counterparts. Tough sh*t if you can handle the glaring hypocrisy from the right. We all see it. The Obamas had to be the "Huxtables" while Trump could get away with being Bill Cosby. Spare me your inability to see the cancer of racism being the entire reason someone as disgusting as Trump IS the Republican party. That stupid man wouldn't know the constitution if Madison used puppets to explain to him. The moment he used racism was the moment he galvanized the party. Mediocrity for one race, rules the GOP and has for a long time. It's why someone as unqualified as Dubya became president. It's why a moron like Palin got to be a nominee. The GOP has NO standards.

Boebert was voted into her current position. Harris couldn't even win a primary for President. How will they credibly argue she can win swing states?

I don't think Harris can win. I'm the one who said I dislike her. I simply don't like her, but that doesn't change the fact that the GOP is a f***ing joke when they talk about "DEI" when their party is full of people who are the reason dry cleaning bags read: "This is not a toy." Where in the hell does ANY Republican get the nerve to talk about "DEI" with the morons they elect and nominate? Dubya was a C/D student who got into two of the most prestigious universities in the world. Palin was an idiot.

The GOP doesn't get to mention "DEI" when they vote for ACTUAL affirmative action candidates.

29 year old Kamala did have an affair with a married man who helped her with her political career.

That should win over some Trump voters. Or does she not have enough affairs on her resume to impress the Republican base?

Trump cheated on every one of his wives, so you're a hypocrite to speak about "affairs."

Also, it should be noted that Kamala Harris's political career went far beyond the reach of whatever political influence he had which speaks to the fact that she got to where she is on her own merits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it true Obama declined to endorse Harris?

He just released his formal statement about 15 minutes ago and he did not endorse anyone or even mention Kamala. Not sure if he’s trying to appear neutral or he really doesn’t think she’s the right choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A PP said people wouldn't vote for Kamala because she's never had children. What?? That's ridiculous.

Ohhhh no it's not - not in evangelical circles. And I don't think Trump surrogates will be able to stay away from the issue. Trump/MAGA already have a problem with women. This is not going to help. Can you imagine Donald Trump choking out the words that's it's perfectly fine for women to make the choice not to have children. Not to mention the evangelical reaction to that. Very rock and a hard place position here.

? Evangelicals wouldn't vote for a Dem anyways, so moot point.

Not a moot point. Trump has a problem with women. If you have Trump surrogates out there attacking Kamala Harris for being childfree you aren't turning out women who don't want to vote Dem but are on the fence for the GOP. And if the GOP/Trump try to distance themselves from this POV you start losing the evangelicals. Trump has already made the hard line abortion folks angry.

By and large this election isn't about winning large swaths of voters over. It's about maintaining your 2020 support and undermining the support for your opponent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it true Obama declined to endorse Harris?

He released a statement and did not endorse her.

If you're paying attention the narrative is shifting to this can't be seen as a coronation it needs to be an open process etc. Let's see how she polls.

And only Klobschar has endorsed her.

You know the same way the narrative was Biden must go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DEI: A cudgel used by racists pretending every single person of color didn't earn what they have while ignoring the white 2.0 GPA "legacies" and those with daddies writing checks, who get into the Ivies or a business school where their brother knew someone.

I suspect those who bleat "DEI" also had no problem voting for a VP who needed five mediocre colleges and six years, just to get a communications degree.

Funny how you can be some GED felon and get votes from the same people who think Justice Jackson is a "DEI" hire. But sure, no racism involved in your thought-process while we see the buffoons who get elected on the right.

Defending DEI and blasting its critics mindlessly as “racist” is just not the centrist platform the Dems need right now to turn this election around.

It isn't about defending it, it's about pointing out the extremely low standards required of WHITE politicians on the right while in the same breathe as calling anyone non-white a "DEI" hire.

That you called it "mindless" when anyone with even two, functioning brain cells can see the racism from those who attack it, is your limitation.

The same people who think Boebert is qualified to be in Congress, think Jackson has no business being on the SC, despite the fact that she is more qualified than several of her white counterparts. Tough sh*t if you can handle the glaring hypocrisy from the right. We all see it. The Obamas had to be the "Huxtables" while Trump could get away with being Bill Cosby. Spare me your inability to see the cancer of racism being the entire reason someone as disgusting as Trump IS the Republican party. That stupid man wouldn't know the constitution if Madison used puppets to explain to him. The moment he used racism was the moment he galvanized the party. Mediocrity for one race, rules the GOP and has for a long time. It's why someone as unqualified as Dubya became president. It's why a moron like Palin got to be a nominee. The GOP has NO standards.

Boebert was voted into her current position. Harris couldn't even win a primary for President. How will they credibly argue she can win swing states?

I don't think Harris can win. I'm the one who said I dislike her. I simply don't like her, but that doesn't change the fact that the GOP is a f***ing joke when they talk about "DEI" when their party is full of people who are the reason dry cleaning bags read: "This is not a toy." Where in the hell does ANY Republican get the nerve to talk about "DEI" with the morons they elect and nominate? Dubya was a C/D student who got into two of the most prestigious universities in the world. Palin was an idiot.

The GOP doesn't get to mention "DEI" when they vote for ACTUAL affirmative action candidates.

29 year old Kamala did have an affair with a married man who helped her with her political career.

That should win over some Trump voters. Or does she not have enough affairs on her resume to impress the Republican base?

She has to have cheated with a man whose wife was pregnant at the time. That will surely impress them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true Obama declined to endorse Harris?

Yep.

"We will be navigating uncharted waters in the days ahead. But I have extraordinary confidence that the leaders of our party will be able to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/barack-obama-biden-dropping-out-2024-presidential-race-full-statement/

Oh wow. That’s not good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DEI: A cudgel used by racists pretending every single person of color didn't earn what they have while ignoring the white 2.0 GPA "legacies" and those with daddies writing checks, who get into the Ivies or a business school where their brother knew someone.

I suspect those who bleat "DEI" also had no problem voting for a VP who needed five mediocre colleges and six years, just to get a communications degree.

Funny how you can be some GED felon and get votes from the same people who think Justice Jackson is a "DEI" hire. But sure, no racism involved in your thought-process while we see the buffoons who get elected on the right.

Defending DEI and blasting its critics mindlessly as “racist” is just not the centrist platform the Dems need right now to turn this election around.

It isn't about defending it, it's about pointing out the extremely low standards required of WHITE politicians on the right while in the same breathe as calling anyone non-white a "DEI" hire.

That you called it "mindless" when anyone with even two, functioning brain cells can see the racism from those who attack it, is your limitation.

The same people who think Boebert is qualified to be in Congress, think Jackson has no business being on the SC, despite the fact that she is more qualified than several of her white counterparts. Tough sh*t if you can handle the glaring hypocrisy from the right. We all see it. The Obamas had to be the "Huxtables" while Trump could get away with being Bill Cosby. Spare me your inability to see the cancer of racism being the entire reason someone as disgusting as Trump IS the Republican party. That stupid man wouldn't know the constitution if Madison used puppets to explain to him. The moment he used racism was the moment he galvanized the party. Mediocrity for one race, rules the GOP and has for a long time. It's why someone as unqualified as Dubya became president. It's why a moron like Palin got to be a nominee. The GOP has NO standards.

Boebert was voted into her current position. Harris couldn't even win a primary for President. How will they credibly argue she can win swing states?

I don't think Harris can win. I'm the one who said I dislike her. I simply don't like her, but that doesn't change the fact that the GOP is a f***ing joke when they talk about "DEI" when their party is full of people who are the reason dry cleaning bags read: "This is not a toy." Where in the hell does ANY Republican get the nerve to talk about "DEI" with the morons they elect and nominate? Dubya was a C/D student who got into two of the most prestigious universities in the world. Palin was an idiot.

The GOP doesn't get to mention "DEI" when they vote for ACTUAL affirmative action candidates.

29 year old Kamala did have an affair with a married man who helped her with her political career.

That should win over some Trump voters. Or does she not have enough affairs on her resume to impress the Republican base?

I think sleeping with a man who helps you succeed in your career is different than just having an affair. Would Kamala be where she is today if she hadn’t slept with a 60 year old married mayor? He appointed her to highly paid government positions and admitted her helped her with her career. So she slept with him to get jobs? Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true Obama declined to endorse Harris?

He just released his formal statement about 15 minutes ago and he did not endorse anyone or even mention Kamala. Not sure if he’s trying to appear neutral or he really doesn’t think she’s the right choice.

Given she is VP, this is tantamount to an anti-endorsement:

"We will be navigating uncharted waters in the days ahead. But I have extraordinary confidence that the leaders of our party will be able to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Man, having the prosecutor against the felon. A thing of beauty really.

Good point - I hadn't thought about it that way. The ad just writes itself!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it true Obama declined to endorse Harris?

He made a statement praising Biden and has not yet endorsed (did not mention) Harris. See WSJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true Obama declined to endorse Harris?

He released a statement and did not endorse her.

If you're paying attention the narrative is shifting to this can't be seen as a coronation it needs to be an open process etc. Let's see how she polls.

And only Klobschar has endorsed her.

You know the same way the narrative was Biden must go.

Clintons endorsed her

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A PP said people wouldn't vote for Kamala because she's never had children. What?? That's ridiculous.

Ohhhh no it's not - not in evangelical circles. And I don't think Trump surrogates will be able to stay away from the issue. Trump/MAGA already have a problem with women. This is not going to help. Can you imagine Donald Trump choking out the words that's it's perfectly fine for women to make the choice not to have children. Not to mention the evangelical reaction to that. Very rock and a hard place position here.

? Evangelicals wouldn't vote for a Dem anyways, so moot point.

Not a moot point. Trump has a problem with women. If you have Trump surrogates out there attacking Kamala Harris for being childfree you aren't turning out women who don't want to vote Dem but are on the fence for the GOP. And if the GOP/Trump try to distance themselves from this POV you start losing the evangelicals. Trump has already made the hard line abortion folks angry.

By and large this election isn't about winning large swaths of voters over. It's about maintaining your 2020 support and undermining the support for your opponent.

Let me see if I get this straight: Evangelicals will be stumping for Trump by saying that Harris has never had any children of her own and doesn't know what it's like to juggle being a real mother with working, while Trump has never changed a diaper in his life, and never had to try to juggle parenting and working. And that will win over on the fence women voters?

Did I get this right?

Any women with any self respect would support Harris after such an attack.