It was just comparing what Kamala said regarding more police on the streets.What does it say? For some reason the image isn’t showing properly for me.
In 2009, Kamala Harris said “if we take a show of hands of those who would like to see more police officers on the street, mine would shoot up,” and in 2020 said the "status quo thinking that more police creates more safety is wrong." It's just wrong.
Thanks!It was just comparing what Kamala said regarding more police on the streets.
Giving to AOC just 60 seconds is ridiculous IMO considering that she is the fourth most popular Democrat (after Obama, Biden and Sanders). It makes no sense.
I would have thought the same but just checking yougov(Not sure how old these polls are)she is about as popular as Hilary ClintonGiving to AOC just 60 seconds is ridiculous IMO considering that she is the fourth most popular Democrat (after Obama, Biden and Sanders). It makes no sense.
Saw someone on twitter mention john kasich will have more speaking time then AOC.
Which fair play to the Biden team, they know how to celebrate a win.
I would have thought the same but just checking yougov(Not sure how old these polls are)she is about as popular as Hilary Clinton
https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/Democrats/all
Doesn't even make the top ten.
she does best with millennials and men which leads me to a slightly dirtier conclusionWithin the party is different I think she's higher. (Unlike Bernie, the tougher part for her will be the general not the primary).
e - shes +2 overall (36-34) while Hillary is -12 (36-48).
she does best with millennials and men which leads me to a slightly dirtier conclusion
Can you make a post without corporate? Honestly, it is becoming ridiculous, it is like chatting with kids.It makes sense in satisfying the corporate donors.
Yeah, but some of them are totally not relevant anymore (Carter, Albright etc), and I would be surprised if Pelosi is more popular than her (for example 8M+ followers for AOC and 5M+ for Pelosi).I would have thought the same but just checking yougov(Not sure how old these polls are)she is about as popular as Hilary Clinton
https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/Democrats/all
Doesn't even make the top ten.
It makes no sense.
It makes sense in satisfying the corporate donors.
Can you make a post without corporate? Honestly, it is becoming ridiculous, it is like chatting with kids.
Can you make a post without corporate? Honestly, it is becoming ridiculous, it is like chatting with kids.
She’s just a junior House Rep. She hasn’t earned her stripes within the DNC to get more airtime at the Convention, and they obviously aren’t relying on the Progressive vote to win.Yeah, but some of them are totally not relevant anymore (Carter, Albright etc), and I would be surprised if Pelosi is more popular than her (for example 8M+ followers for AOC and 5M+ for Pelosi).
I know that AOC policies differ a lot from Biden's, and she made that stupid comment, but still. She is a big asset to the party and brings votes.
What a weird post
I would have thought the same but just checking yougov(Not sure how old these polls are)she is about as popular as Hilary Clinton
https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/Democrats/all
Doesn't even make the top ten.
I know that she hasn't earned her stripes, but she is insanely popular and famous. To the point, that she has a very good chance (if she decides so) to unseat senate minority leader if she runs for senator. Which likely she won't (at least for now).She’s just a junior House Rep. She hasn’t earned her stripes within the DNC to get more airtime at the Convention, and they obviously aren’t relying on the Progressive vote to win.
Can you make a post without corporate? Honestly, it is becoming ridiculous, it is like chatting with kids.
Yeah, but some of them are totally not relevant anymore (Carter, Albright etc), and I would be surprised if Pelosi is more popular than her (for example 8M+ followers for AOC and 5M+ for Pelosi).
I know that AOC policies differ a lot from Biden's, and she made that stupid comment, but still. She is a big asset to the party and brings votes.
I think the novelty of her career and her attractive charisma has led many to overestimating her importance. It is not a given that the DNC sees her as the future of the party: if anything, evidence would suggest they don’t yet.I know that she hasn't earned her stripes, but she is insanely popular and famous. To the point, that she has a very good chance (if she decides so) to unseat senate minority leader if she runs for senator. Which likely she won't (at least for now).
So while it is true that she is simply a junior House Republican, she is also so popular and someone might say the future of the party.
If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a grateful sloberring tongue - forever.
Related, since when did politicians become cool? I've liked 2 in my whole life, and feel that both need to be replaced because they can no longer deliver. I thought Corbyn should have been out in August last year and Bernie needed to go negative or go away after March 3rd this year. I like them as people, but they've done what they could, and failed, and that's it. The ideology they have had consistently for decades was not served by them continuing in their position, and that's the only thing that matters.
But since I've been following US politics closely, every mediocrity has been idolised. Pete was a transformational candidate to dance to. Kamala Harris has a deranged online army who think she's god. Neither have any ideology. Even the charisma vacuum of Biden has built a fervent following. Beto o'Rourke is the kind of man who will make your calves cramp. Hillary was more than a president, she was Athena, she was MLK, she was light itself. Zero ideology again, and unlike some other women before her in politics (Sarah Palin!) not even self-made.
I wasn't following it then but I can't imagine this being said about like John Kerry or Al Gore. Probably not even Bill Clinton (an actual 2-time winner). Were there Blair evangelicals in 1997 who actually believed sincerely every word he said? Was Obama the turning point (that's my theory)? Is this online-only (that's my hope)? A symptom of Trump derangement? My mother noticed the same thing even in India, with obvious careerists gaining stans who then get shocked when they openly support what Modi is doing.
Have people suddenly become credulous rubes or did everyone always idolise every semi-prominent political figure? To this tune, where has all the cynicism gone?
to be clear, stuff like this
or search twitter for grandpa tim kaine
A tad ominous
Get off twitter and it's not as big as you think. If you're extremely online and wear your ideology as your personality then being fanboys of politicians is going to be part of the experience.
Possibly. My point isn't that he is as famous as Biden or Bernie, but that she is very famous, and giving to her only 1 minute is a bit weird, especially at a time when Biden needs the progressive/left votes.Followers on twitter is an awful metric. She has more followers than Biden.
Scary that this can be ‘explained away‘ as bureaucratic process.It’s very ominous. I genuinely believe they know they are going to be able to hack voting machines in certain areas and this is the second prong in the attack.
Guys, not everything needs to be revolved on 'pleasing the corporate donors'. Come on, you can do better than that.
What's the public reaction to the Post Office business? It feels like something that would cause major protests in most countries as it's blatantly an attempt to steal an election.
Not a big story at the moment, although it is getting more attention of late.
Is it just a kind of resignation knowing that the Senate won't do anything to combat it? Do you reckon it could be enough to swing an election in his favour? I assume that some of his potential voters would be disenfranchised too.
The funny thing is it could also cost Donny the election if it eats further into his assumed lead in Florida amongst older voters, who vote by mail more than anyone.I'm sure Trump is throwing anything against the wall to see what will stick. The mail issue will at a minimum delegitimize the election results so even if he loses, he can walk away under the pretext of grievance that it was stolen from him. Obviously under the worst circumstances, it will suppress voter turnout enough to allow him to actually win the election.
The fact that Plump is stating that he could win NY lends much credence to your worry that the voting apparatus / system in the US is able to be manipulated.It’s very ominous. I genuinely believe they know they are going to be able to hack voting machines in certain areas and this is the second prong in the attack.
