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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Kamala was actually ahead in the polls, they would not be:

-Copying Trump’s policies
-Trying to appear moderate
-Forcing RFK Jr. to stay on the ballot
-Weaponizing DOJ against Trump
-Attempting to assassinate Trump

The enemy’s behavior tells the story.

They are afraid.

No, comrade, we aren't afraid of the fat fraud and his weird VP candidate.

I am. Even if I think the risk of them being elected is relatively small, the damage would be huge. I'm truly afraid of what they will do if they gain power again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Trump, however, lost the last time he ran for President. It is very rare that a party is willing to renominate the person who cost them the last presidential election.

The Republican party wanted nothing LESS than to nominate Trump. However, their voters voted for him so what they were willing to do was of no consequence. See how that works?

The MAGA party doesn’t know how to govern. That’s what’s happened. They could have gotten rid of Trump at any time but they are weak losers.

How would you propose they "get rid" of Trump? Ban him from social media? Indict him with multiple felonies? Assassin's gun?

Uhhh - nominate someone else and stop letting him lead them all into the deep blue sea? It's not that hard.

As I keep saying, they CAN'T nominate someone else when the VOTERS KEEP PICKING TRUMP. Unless they skip primaries altogether. Hmm

Dude, REPUBLICAN VOTERS could have picked someone else. That is what everyone is saying. You picked this monstrous f'in weirdo. Again. You didn't have to! You had as many other options as you could have wanted!

It's all moot now, though!

[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.

Trump, however, lost the last time he ran for President. It is very rare that a party is willing to renominate the person who cost them the last presidential election.

The Republican party wanted nothing LESS than to nominate Trump. However, their voters voted for him so what they were willing to do was of no consequence. See how that works?

The MAGA party doesn’t know how to govern. That’s what’s happened. They could have gotten rid of Trump at any time but they are weak losers.

How would you propose they "get rid" of Trump? Ban him from social media? Indict him with multiple felonies? Assassin's gun?

Senate Republicans had two easy chances to impeach him for crimes they knew he committed.

[Anonymous]

Is the message from the Harris campaign that women should bring men to interviews with them? Feels like we are taking a step backwards here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is the message from the Harris campaign that women should bring men to interviews with them? Feels like we are taking a step backwards here.

Misogynist says what?

[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.

Trump, however, lost the last time he ran for President. It is very rare that a party is willing to renominate the person who cost them the last presidential election.

The Republican party wanted nothing LESS than to nominate Trump. However, their voters voted for him so what they were willing to do was of no consequence. See how that works?

The MAGA party doesn’t know how to govern. That’s what’s happened. They could have gotten rid of Trump at any time but they are weak losers.

How would you propose they "get rid" of Trump? Ban him from social media? Indict him with multiple felonies? Assassin's gun?

Senate Republicans had two easy chances to impeach him for crimes they knew he committed.

This election would have been a cakewalk if Haley was the nominee against someone like Biden. I’m still marveling that the Republicans didn’t see this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is the message from the Harris campaign that women should bring men to interviews with them? Feels like we are taking a step backwards here.

Project 2025 wants to get rid of no fault divorce. After no fault divorced was adopted, women’s suicide rates dropped by 20% and domestic abuse declined by a larger margin.

The GOP represents a total loss of rights for women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Trump, however, lost the last time he ran for President. It is very rare that a party is willing to renominate the person who cost them the last presidential election.

The Republican party wanted nothing LESS than to nominate Trump. However, their voters voted for him so what they were willing to do was of no consequence. See how that works?

The MAGA party doesn’t know how to govern. That’s what’s happened. They could have gotten rid of Trump at any time but they are weak losers.

How would you propose they "get rid" of Trump? Ban him from social media? Indict him with multiple felonies? Assassin's gun?

Senate Republicans had two easy chances to impeach him for crimes they knew he committed.

This election would have been a cakewalk if Haley was the nominee against someone like Biden. I’m still marveling that the Republicans didn’t see this.

Haley said it herself! At some point in the primaries. That the party that ditched the geriatric candidate first would win the election.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is the message from the Harris campaign that women should bring men to interviews with them? Feels like we are taking a step backwards here.

Misogynist says what?

Please. Romney took Ryan to interviews. I searched DCUM today and there was no hand-wringing from that era.

[Anonymous]

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.

Trump, however, lost the last time he ran for President. It is very rare that a party is willing to renominate the person who cost them the last presidential election.

It’s not just rare, it’s unprecedented that a party would nominate a person who did not participate in a primary.

Because it is unprecedented that a leading primary candidate has withdrawn after the primaries but before the convention. Once Biden withdrew from the race, we were in uncharted territory, but the DNC used the procedure that was dictated for such an occurrence to move forward.

What did you want them to do when BIden withdrew? Still run the Biden/Harris ticket? No matter what they did, it was going to be unprecedented, but the party legally followed the rules to have a convention selected nominee on the ticket for the general election. They did what they could in the time that was allowed and they have a very unified party and candidate

[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.

Trump, however, lost the last time he ran for President. It is very rare that a party is willing to renominate the person who cost them the last presidential election.

The Republican party wanted nothing LESS than to nominate Trump. However, their voters voted for him so what they were willing to do was of no consequence. See how that works?

The MAGA party doesn’t know how to govern. That’s what’s happened. They could have gotten rid of Trump at any time but they are weak losers.

How would you propose they "get rid" of Trump? Ban him from social media? Indict him with multiple felonies? Assassin's gun?

Don’t vote for him. Don’t donate to him (and it really is him, not his campaign). Don’t engage with him on social media. Don’t buy his trading cards. Don’t buy his stock. Don’t defend him on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let’s face it, none of the candidates this year are on an intellectual level with say Clinton or Obama. Vance probably has the best academic credentials of the lot. Which is why there are multiple jokes about coach surfing, donuts, etc. It’s called deflection.

The man is bright so of course some will seek to discredit him.

LOL, Vance handles that himself. He hired an advance team that couldn’t even handle collecting B roll @ donut shop!

I also appreciate that Walz demonstrates that effective MoCs and Governors can be found in classrooms. He didn’t need to go to YLS or get mentored by a broligarch to understand how to put citizens, not donors at the center of governance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If Kamala was actually ahead in the polls, they would not be:

-Copying Trump’s policies Harris's 'no tip' policy is VERY different than Donalds, fact.
-Trying to appear moderate The dems are the dems, maybe you are realizing they aren't all crazy communists?
-Forcing RFK Jr. to stay on the ballot following the law is important, on or off the ballot
-Weaponizing DOJ against Trump so enforcing the law is bad? That isn't "weaponizing the DOJ" - maybe Trump should do less criming?
-Attempting to assassinate Trump That was a registered republican

The enemy’s behavior tells the story. enemy? we are all Americans...the Russians are the enemy.

They are afraid.

[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: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.

Trump, however, lost the last time he ran for President. It is very rare that a party is willing to renominate the person who cost them the last presidential election.

The Republican party wanted nothing LESS than to nominate Trump. However, their voters voted for him so what they were willing to do was of no consequence. See how that works?

The MAGA party doesn’t know how to govern. That’s what’s happened. They could have gotten rid of Trump at any time but they are weak losers.

How would you propose they "get rid" of Trump? Ban him from social media? Indict him with multiple felonies? Assassin's gun?

Senate Republicans had two easy chances to impeach him for crimes they knew he committed.

This election would have been a cakewalk if Haley was the nominee against someone like Biden. I’m still marveling that the Republicans didn’t see this.

Haley said it herself! At some point in the primaries. That the party that ditched the geriatric candidate first would win the election.

And she was 100% correct. Ideally, Biden would have bowed out sooner and the GOP voters would have been smart enough to say no to Trump but Biden's addiction to power was too strong and modern day GOP voters aren't the sharpest tools in the shed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

What exact economic proposal from Kamala did they used for this calculation?