As a chilean I can say that this is absolutely false.
2024 U.S. Elections | Trump v Harris
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
Democrats don't believe in fig leaves that's a GOP thingAh, but is it a 'proposed coup'... or an 'actual coup'..... or a 'failed coup'.... or is it just being called a 'coup' to give the fecked up democrats a vestige of a 'fig leaf cover'..... coup?
Last edited:
Would agree with this sentiment. Fortunately, she does seem to poll better than Trump? Maybe I recall incorrectly and we'll have to see more in the next months of course.
Until that debate, she was polling worse than Biden. Now, she polls better than Biden, but still loses in polls against Trump.
From a British pov, surely Harris over Biden is a positive step? They've gone from no chance of winning and being humiliated to a wildcard that can easily press Trumps buttons.
He won't take well to a black woman debating him and he's going to struggle to insult her otherwise the racist card will be played. She might not be favourable now, but one good debate can change public opinion and she's got wealthy backers. I think she'll have his number personally.
He won't take well to a black woman debating him and he's going to struggle to insult her otherwise the racist card will be played. She might not be favourable now, but one good debate can change public opinion and she's got wealthy backers. I think she'll have his number personally.
I agree that Harris may not be the best candidate. However, this situation isn't primarily about the candidate's quality. It's simply too late to prepare a proper campaign, given the messy situation the Democrats are in.
No serious candidate would try to enter the race at this point for that reason. And they would have to attack some of Biden's policies and it would make the infighting in the party worse. At least with Harris, there is hope that she could continue some of Biden's 'good' policies and motivate disheartened Democrats to come out and vote.
But if you say "Just so depressing that neither party can put a human you’d admire up for the presidency" and "By politician I admire I mean one who is ethical and will do what’s best for the country", you seem to imply that Harris is not someone who's ethical and will do what's best for the country, at least in your opinion.
I found it fascinating because it's the whole "both sides are the same" or "all politicians are corrupt" view that greatly benefits actually corrupt politicians while hurting those who you may disagree with or find mind numbingly boring, but are trying to do their best for the country.
Depends. Not if you're Farage.
I read a couple of pieces back in the day when Sinema when independent so only recall that notion that she changed. She was coming form the greens and as switching to democrats he had some anticapitalism and anti inequality sentences. Also anti Iraq war. She had an image a bit as a socialist. Sure you can dig some articles that goes more in depth
Yes, that was a long time ago. She was fairly centrist-independent by the mid 2010s and has remained so since, eventually leaving the Dem party because they wouldn't tolerate her independent streak of doing whatever she wanted.
Seems like a piece of work, therefore fits well
Could Connor Roy run? Has a chance imo.
Something tells me that @Suedesi has nothing to say in regards to the fact that the richest man in the world, Elon Musk, just decided to endorse Trump and also to give huge amounts of money to him, nor the fact that Trump's VP pick is Peter Thiel's puppet.
Last edited:
Not trying to defend her, but as the AG could she have done anything other than represent the State agency in defending it's guidlines?
About Bernie and the Democrats: he's running unopposed as a Democrat in the state primary so at this point we can safely call him a Democrat.
Schumer and Jeffries expected later today
Of course, it’s only bad when it’s Soros. I wonder what it is that’s so bad about him to the far right?
The demonization of the Soros family is quite weird. Are they even the biggest donors of Democrats?
But then Dems talked so much for Koch family, despite that there were many others who were putting even more (Mercer and Adelston for example, when it came to Trump 2016). Or now Mellon or Griffin who do not get half the attention of Koch's family.
But then Dems talked so much for Koch family, despite that there were many others who were putting even more (Mercer and Adelston for example, when it came to Trump 2016). Or now Mellon or Griffin who do not get half the attention of Koch's family.
Won't be her then, maybe Beshear, he at least had a strong endorsement, and left himself semi-open to the possibility.
Wouldn't be a bad choice.
Koch aren’t demonised for their donations to the Republican Party.
Kentucky has a Republican Lt Governor, so if Bashear went VP, the Dems would lose a Governors seat. Kelly or Shapiro on the other hand, would work out nicely. No matter what Vance thinks he's accomplished by way of having a book and a movie about his life, he sure as feck hasn't been in outer space.
The entire idea is that they give money, thus influence policy. Which is the case for all massive donors. I don't understand why Soros and Koch get so much attention, where there are others who give even more money, thus influence even more policy. Lots would say that Trump does not become president without Mercer's backing for example, and he definitely influenced his policy, including choosing his original staff.
Not sure Kelly is a good choice as Arizona has "resign to run" laws. He would have to resign his Senate seat, and while Hobbs could appoint another Dem, I wonder if that would put his seat in play this cycle as a special election.
If true, that would be a problem, but then again it depends how much she wants a particular VP candidate to join her. From what I've seen she has long standing relationships with Kelly and Cooper.
Shapiro would be ideal, though for Kelly, is the usual arguement as usual, senator from a swing-state, and dems needs every senate seat they can get, as they are at an inherent disadvantage there.
Sure, its a few years down the line, but it could come back to bite, Arizona is not quite blue yet.
As far as Kentucky goes, Beshear is the only one who can win there, he can only stall the worst of that state for a couple more years anyway.
No, she is a Democrat.
We probably have to see how things shake out now that she's going to be the nominee. She certainly will perform better than Biden, that's for sure. But her debate performances have been unimpressive at best so I am more worried about any lift there than I would it was Newsom who is a far better speaker.
Isn't representing the state and state agencies part of the job description of a state AG?
You're right. I got KY and NC mixed up
The trouble with Bashear is he isn't very well spoken. There's a clear gulf between him and someone like Shapiro.
"She did her job" doesn't seem like a great criticism
Is this that message of unity they were talking about?
Speaking of conspiracy theories, Biden didn’t even bother with a televised, statesmanlike announcement for his campaign withdrawal. Instead, he tweeted it with a digitally generated signature on Elon’s X. How classy! This wasn’t just an insult to the American public—it’s the latest act in the coup happening right under our noses while we’re being told that democracy is on the line.
"Guys, I'm dropping out of the race. I talk to you about it sometime next week"
President of the United States
That's what absolutely baffles me.
He would be, at best, center-left in Europe or any normal country.
Do you think that it's because she doesn't want any part of a losing battle which would damage her chances in 2028?
A Whitmer-Newsom (or vice-versa) would be powerful ticket for the next presidential elections.
I think part of it is she's a woman and knows Harris will be under immense pressure to select a white male given her own race/gender background. There is also some degree of wanting to preserve her gunpowder for 2028. Same thing applies to Newsom as well.