What to do with Kamala?

You have people here in this thread who supported and still support a failed businessman that set records for filing bankruptcy, who had no policy making experience for President only because he's white and we see no mention of identity politics.
Interesting that you don't cite a single example of his poor policy making as President.
 
Many that I have posted again and again and you have rated as fake news again and again. So I won't bother repeating. Everybody who has bothered to educate themselves knows I didn't exaggerate anything in that post.
Yes, you posted this nonsense HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE, and many more times, but you never include a link to back it up.

I call bullshit.
 

What to do with Kamala?​


Oh my gosh I love that question. I'm just not allowed to answer publically.
 
Why do you cling to this right wing stupidity?

Harris was a 2 time AG for the second largest DOJ in this country. She was a senator. She was most certainly more qualified to be Vice President. You have people here in this thread who supported and still support a failed businessman that set records for filing bankruptcy, who had no policy making experience for President only because he's white and we see no mention of identity politics.

End the stupidy Mac, you are better than this.
Two facts remain: First, Biden would have been in deep shit with the party if he had chosen a white male. So, in his search for a running mate, he had to immediately eliminate a large percentage of potential veeps. It would be dishonest to pretend that summarily eliminating a large percentage of perfectly viable options -- in any situation, for any kind of choice -- does not hamstring the process and potentially end up with a choice that is based on lower standards.

Second, the proof is in the pudding: I've been paying close attention to how the Democrats are dealing with Biden's biggest weakness by far, the one thing he can't fix or improve, his age. I'm reading the articles that are popping up everywhere about who might be a viable alternative if Biden didn't run. Guess what? I'm not seeing Harris mentioned as a top choice. I'm seeing Whitmer, Newsom, Buttigieg, Klobuchar. Harris is sometimes mentioned, but only with clear doubts.

The party's first option if Biden didn't run should absolutely be his Veep. Easily. Clearly. Obviously. And it's not. To ignore a possible reason why is dishonest. The party has played stupid political games with race and gender for a long time now, and it's biting them in the ass. It's largely what brought us Trumpism.
 
Two facts remain: First, Biden would have been in deep shit with the party if he had chosen a white male. So, in his search for a running mate, he had to immediately eliminate a large percentage of potential veeps. It would be dishonest to pretend that summarily eliminating a large percentage of perfectly viable options -- in any situation, for any kind of choice -- does not hamstring the process and potentially end up with a choice that is based on lower standards.

Second, the proof is in the pudding: I've been paying close attention to how the Democrats are dealing with Biden's biggest weakness by far, the one thing he can't fix or improve, his age. I'm reading the articles that are popping up everywhere about who might be a viable alternative if Biden didn't run. Guess what? I'm not seeing Harris mentioned as a top choice. I'm seeing Whitmer, Newsom, Buttigieg, Klobuchar. Harris is sometimes mentioned, but only with clear doubts.

The party's first option if Biden didn't run should absolutely be his Veep. Easily. Clearly. Obviously. And it's not. To ignore a possible reason why is dishonest. The party has played stupid political games with race and gender for a long time now, and it's biting them in the ass. It's largely what brought us Trumpism.
She was iminently qualified and you need to stop adopting white racist narratives. White republicans or white presidential candidates have never been accused of playing identity politics when they pick white running mates. Yet if you think Trump didn't pick Pence because he was a white evangelical, then you are insane. Harris would be the Democrats first choice if Biden doesn't run. In 2016 Clinton was not VP. But she was the choice. This is just how far you have fallen into the right wing rabbit hole while claiming to not take sides. Democrats are not the ones playing political games with race and gender.That is not what made trumpism.

Right wing Republicans play the game like this: They know that if they can keep portraying democrats as playing racial identity politics that democrats will try to show republicans how they aren't. Meanwhile republicans will continue playing whiteracial identity politics shamelessly. Trumpism is the same old white racism that has always existed. So stop falling for the trick
 
She was iminently qualified and you need to stop adopting white racist narratives. White republicans or white presidential candidates have never been accused of playing identity politics when they pick white running mates. Yet if you think Trump didn't pick Pence because he was a white evangelical, then you are insane. Harris would be the Democrats first choice if Biden doesn't run. In 2016 Clinton was not VP. But she was the choice. This is just how far you have fallen into the right wing rabbit hole while claiming to not take sides. Democrats are not the ones playing political games with race and gender.That is not what made trumpism.

Right wing Republicans play the game like this: They know that if they can keep portraying democrats as playing racial identity politics that democrats will try to show republicans how they aren't. Meanwhile republicans will continue playing whiteracial identity politics shamelessly. Trumpism is the same old white racism that has always existed. So stop falling for the trick
I take sides all the time. I just don't care about whether either silly end of the spectrum likes it.

How is your approach working for you? Lots of racial healing, is that what we're seeing?

No, it's all the other side's fault. Both ends always tell me that, no matter what the topic.
 
The Dems are walking a tightrope on what to do about Kamala Harris. They know that Biden will not renominated and may not complete his current term. In that event, Kamala would serve as a token FBF President for the remainder of the term, but would obviously not be considered a serious Presidential candidate.

This raises the question of how to deal with Kamala until the 2024 election. If Biden leaves office early, she would have to be treated with enough deference as to not offend their racial- and gender-motivated constituents. On the other hand, she would be continuing reminder of the gross incompetence and malfeasance of the current administration. Perhaps the best way would be for her to be appointed to a prestigious academic position, effective at the end of her term?

That way she could remove herself from any further political considerations and act as President solely in a care taking capacity. Would that generate enough sympathy and distraction among the know-nothing masses to elect another Democrat in 2024?
RFK Jr as VP?
 
She was iminently qualified and you need to stop adopting white racist narratives.
She may have been imminently qualified (i.e., available), but she was not eminently qualified. And you need to stop adopting historical revisionism.
 
Why do you cling to this right wing stupidity?

Harris was a 2 time AG for the second largest DOJ in this country. She was a senator. She was most certainly more qualified to be Vice President. You have people here in this thread who supported and still support a failed businessman that set records for filing bankruptcy, who had no policy making experience for President only because he's white and we see no mention of identity politics.

End the stupidy Mac, you are better than this.

She is an abject moron.
 

Forum List

Back
Top