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?

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.

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?

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.

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.

And yet, he is worth 4.3 billion. What a failure!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But that could go on year after year if you don't sell. It seems a paperwork nightmare for the taxpayer and for the IRS

Lots of us have carryover losses from year to year. It’s a thing (tax loss harvesting and carryovers).

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?

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.

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?

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.

That "huge mortgage settlement" success is questionable.....

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."

https://www.reuters.com/article/world/kamala-harris-stood-up-to-big-banks-with-mixed-results-for-consumers-in-crisis-idUSKCN1SF0Z4/

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.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But that could go on year after year if you don't sell. It seems a paperwork nightmare for the taxpayer and for the IRS

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.

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