Kamala Harris critics corner

[JerryBaumchen 1,362]

23 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Oh, the only appointed president was Gerald Ford, with Nelson Rockefeller as his vice president (also appointed).

Wendy P.

Hi Wendy,

Which brings me to something I have been thinking about.

The two highest offices in this country, are the only two [ that I know of ] in which a direct vote by the people is not how we elect them.

There may have been a fair argument for the Electoral College in the late 1700's, but not anymore.

The US should get rid of that old, non-functioning system.

Now, back to your regular scheduled programming.

Jerry Baumchen

PS)  l think that both Ford & Rockefeller were quite good choices.

 

Edited August 28, 2024 by JerryBaumchen

[jakee 1,489]

40 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

And Biden threw gas on an overstimulated economy.

I tend not to take economic advice from parrots.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

1 minute ago, JerryBaumchen said:

There may have been a fair argument for the Electoral College in the late 1700's, but not anymore.

There was never a "fair" argument.

The argument was always: Hey us southern states have more black people and without the Electoral College we cannot win any election. 

The fair solution was always treating black people as humans.

[winsor 236]

3 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

A more well rounded understanding, with a lower perception of being a bit of a biased hack.

Unlike who in particular?

[olofscience 480]

18 minutes ago, jakee said:

I tend not to take economic advice from parrots.

News just in - SC poster who's not very good with numbers fancies himself an expert in economic policy, a field which makes extensive use of...numbers.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

18 minutes ago, winsor said:

Unlike who in particular?

Unlike people who support candidates that call for travel bans on pregnant women.

[JerryBaumchen 1,362]

35 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Unlike people who support candidates that call for travel bans on pregnant women.

Hi Sky,

Like the dog that finally catches the car; the GOP, after the Dobbs decision, is in a 'now what' situation.

IMO of all of the issues that will bite the GOP in the ass in Nov, it will be the abortion decision that does them the most damage.

And, well deserved damage.

Jerry Baumchen

 

[SkyDekker 1,465]

16 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Sky,

Like the dog that finally catches the car; the GOP, after the Dobbs decision, is in a 'now what' situation.

IMO of all of the issues that will bite the GOP in the ass in Nov, it will be the abortion decision that does them the most damage.

And, well deserved damage.

Jerry Baumchen

 

The Republican VP is now on record as supporting a ban on pregnant women travelling to states they may be able to get an abortion in.

Now a few of the Republican voters here would fully support that, but for many more sane people, this will likely give some pause. This isn't some faraway potential, this is a VP Candidate saying this just a few years ago.

[winsor 236]

1 hour ago, SkyDekker said:

Unlike people who support candidates that call for travel bans on pregnant women.

Who supports what candidate?  You lost me.

[tkhayes 348]

2 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Back on topic. Harris is to do her first interview but they won’t let her do it alone or on live Television. You guys expect her to run the country yet she is unable to answer questions without a minder.

yeah, I have no problem with that, because television interviews actually have fuck all to do with anyone's ability to run anything.  We already know how much you worship the television fake reality star, so your position does not matter to me.

How is that Trump interview with Rachel Maddox shaping up?  With John Stewart?  With Bill Maher?  nothing?  Crickets?

Edited August 28, 2024 by tkhayes

[tkhayes 348]

1 hour ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Wendy,

Which brings me to something I have been thinking about.

The two highest offices in this country, are the only two [ that I know of ] in which a direct vote by the people is not how we elect them.

There may have been a fair argument for the Electoral College in the late 1700's, but not anymore.

The US should get rid of that old, non-functioning system.

Now, back to your regular scheduled programming.

Jerry Baumchen

PS)  l think that both Ford & Rockefeller were quite good choices.

 

certainly whatever justification there was in the 1700's for an electoral college needs to be re-examined.  Just like the 27 're-examinations' of the Constitution that have taken place already.  But hey, when was the last time we had representative government for the people?

[tkhayes 348]

16 minutes ago, winsor said:

Who supports what candidate?  You lost me.

JD Vance called for travel restrictions for pregnant women in 2022 - https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/26/jd-vance-abortion-ban-travel

 

[winsor 236]

19 minutes ago, tkhayes said:

JD Vance called for travel restrictions for pregnant women in 2022 - https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/26/jd-vance-abortion-ban-travel

 

Okay, so who supports that?

[JerryBaumchen 1,362]

18 minutes ago, winsor said:

Okay, so who supports that?

Hi winsor,

Now, you are being inane.

Jerry Baumchen

[JerryBaumchen 1,362]

55 minutes ago, tkhayes said:

yeah, I have no problem with that, because television interviews actually have fuck all to do with anyone's ability to run anything.  We already know how much you worship the television fake reality star, so your position does not matter to me.

How is that Trump interview with Rachel Maddox shaping up?  With John Stewart?  With Bill Maher?  nothing?  Crickets?

Hi tk,

Note, that no GOP member complained when Trump AND his running mate showed up on 60 MINUTES in 2016.

Jerry Baumchen

[tkhayes 348]

15 minutes ago, winsor said:

Okay, so who supports that?

JD Vance does.  Project 2025 and its authors do.  I suspect the Proud Boys do.  I suspect the oath keepers do.  I suspect that all the legislations in the USA that currently have legislation in the house or committees do.... “MOMS Act” Threatens Government Tracking of Pregnant People | Progress Texas

Kavanaugh said that Roe v Wade was settled law, and then voted to overturn it.  Just like the gun lobby sees ANY PIECE of legislation as a slippery slope on gun issues, I also see ANY PIECE of legislation as a slippery slope to tracking women and banning abortion across the country at a federal level.

Can you at least acknowledge that there are laws at state levels, proposed to track women and their periods, their pregnancies and their abortions?  What do YOU think is behind these laws....?  Women's health care and their best interests?

[tkhayes 348]

8 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi tk,

Note, that no GOP member complained when Trump AND his running mate showed up on 60 MINUTES in 2016.

Jerry Baumchen

yeah and that was the LAST time he ever did anything like that.  You cannot control the narrative if you are not in control of the narrative.

[JoeWeber 2,720]

33 minutes ago, winsor said:

Okay, so who supports that?

It's less about who supports it than who'll look past it for selfish, personal reasons thus, effectively, throwing support behind the proponent. For a bonus guess three who post here.

[winsor 236]

2 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi winsor,

Now, you are being inane.

Jerry Baumchen

Nope.  If it's a veiled accusation, drop the veil.  If it's a reference to someone in particular, get specific.

[kallend 2,026]

11 hours ago, winsor said:

Okay, so who supports that?

Vance supporters come to mind.

[winsor 236]

47 minutes ago, kallend said:

Vance supporters come to mind.

Can't say that I know any

[jakee 1,489]

14 hours ago, winsor said:

Okay, so who supports that?

The comment was about supporting candidates who hold those views. JD Vance holds that view and while Trump personally doesn’t give a shit, he’s also happy to kowtow to whatever the anti-abortion lobby wants because he thinks it’s a vote winner

As to who supports that ticket - it’s you. Sure you do the whole ‘ I hate everyone’ schtick, but it’s obvious that it’ll be a cold day in hell before you vote Kamala (the whole black and a woman thing) while your criticism of Trump is often qualified by some comment about him being decent at the economy so what the hell. So in practice, despite the rest of what you say? You’re a Trump voter and we all know it.

Edited August 29, 2024 by jakee

[Phil1111 1,149]

23 minutes ago, jakee said:

The comment was about supporting candidates who hold those views. JD Vance holds that view and while Trump personally doesn’t give a shit, he’s also happy to kowtow to whatever the anti-abortion lobby wants because he thinks it’s a vote winner

As to who supports that ticket - it’s you. Sure you do the whole ‘ I hate everyone’ schtick, but it’s obvious that it’ll be a cold day in hell before you vote Kamala (the whole black and a woman thing) while your criticism of Trump is often qualified by some comment about him being decent at the economy so what the hell. So in practice, despite the rest of what you say? You’re a Trump voter and we all know it.

So in fewer words a misogynist, racist without the pseudo cover of hating them all?

[wmw999 2,444]

Guys, calling someone a racist and a misogynist is definitely a personal attack. Attack the behavior, not the person.

Wendy P.

[normiss 798]

3 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Guys, calling someone a racist and a misogynist is definitely a personal attack. Attack the behavior, not the person.

Wendy P.

These days, it seems more like a proud title for those guilty of that behavior.