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.

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.

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!

Anonymous wrote:Taxing unrealized gains and losses is simple. If you asset goes up in value, youre taxed. If it goes down in value you should get a refund.

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.

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.

But consumer advocates who worked with California homeowners during the mortgage crisis say the most vulnerable – limited English speakers, the disabled, widows and minorities - had the least luck obtaining relief.

"What we heard repeatedly was people who should be getting loan modifications weren’t getting them," said Kevin Stein, deputy director of the California Reinvestment Coalition, an association of about 300 nonprofit consumer finance groups.

The state did not track individual consumers who applied for or received help under the settlement, or gather information on ethnicity, income or other circumstances. However, repeated detailed surveys of California Reinvestment Coalition's member organizations during the financial crisis showed the difficulty credit counselors had obtaining help for their clients. The surveys, seen by Reuters, highlight in particular the trouble faced by disadvantaged groups.

Sams said Harris brought numerous mortgage fraud cases, including several against middlemen who profited from predatory loans. State records show the attorney general's mortgage fraud strike force filed 41 cases during her tenure.

Of the roughly $18 billion offered to consumers to reduce what they owed on loans, about $9.2 billion was used to forgive money lost when people sold their homes for less than they owed, known as a short sale. Another $4.7 billion was used to forgive some or all of the money owed on second mortgages.

Putting nearly $14 billion toward short sales and second mortgages allowed the banks to use settlement money to reimburse themselves for money they might have lost anyway, said Bruce Marks, founder of the Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America, a national nonprofit home ownership and advocacy organization that was active in California during the crisis.

Marks said Harris stepped back once the big settlement was negotiated, however, and failed to aggressively police the way the money was used.
"That would give me pause supporting her," Marks said.

And because the state did not keep track of individual consumers and what happened to them, there is no way to know how well her solutions really worked.
"It was very impressive politically," said Thornberg, director of the University of California, Riverside, Center for Economic Forecasting and Development. "But we don't really know ultimately if she moved the needle."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New York Times is starting to turn on her also.

"Joy is not a strategy"

The “joy” strategy just makes her look clueless.

Joy is to explain her nervous laughter.

Reagan was joyful but he knew how to deliver lines without world salad and he was much older than Kamala.

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.

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

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.

So vote for Trump if that bothers you
Reminds me of the debate over whether Obama was actually born in America. Who cares, there's two names on the ballot, pick one -- hopefully for all the right reasons.

Nice non answer

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.

So vote for Trump if that bothers you
Reminds me of the debate over whether Obama was actually born in America. Who cares, there's two names on the ballot, pick one -- hopefully for all the right reasons.

Nice non answer

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?

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.

So vote for Trump if that bothers you
Reminds me of the debate over whether Obama was actually born in America. Who cares, there's two names on the ballot, pick one -- hopefully for all the right reasons.

Anonymous wrote:Taxing unrealized gains and losses is simple. If you asset goes up in value, youre taxed. If it goes down in value you should get a refund.