New Candidates?

[mikbone]

I have no idea what is gonna happen.

Republican national convention July 15-18

Obviously Trump will get the presidential nominee.  I’m hearing Marco Rubio’s name being repeated for VP.  
 

Marco Rubio / Nikki Haley 2028 is reasonable.

Democratic national convention Aug 19-22

Kamala Harris / ???

I hope Gavin Newsom won’t be in the running.  His CA governorship has been a disaster.

[ZealoulyStriving]

Tim Scott 4 VP. Trump is already doing better with black voters than any other Republican since they were duped into voting Democrat. He needs to seal the deal.

[LDSGator]

If I was a democrat I’d be spending a lot of time praying that Biden gets sacked. I think pretty much anyone else can beat Trump. 

[mikbone]

Id love to see both Trump and Biden out of the race.  

I wish the Lord would return and reign for 1000 years.

Unfortunately, we will have to endure our poor choices.  One would wish that the public could learn from its mistakes and make wise decisions. 

Proverbs 26:11 As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly.

Edited July 6, 2024 by mikbone

[NeuroTypical]

Quote

Cantidates

This wasn't a misspelling, was it.   

I'm throwing it on the pile of new words for 2024, along with "lawfare".

Edited July 6, 2024 by NeuroTypical

[mikbone]

3 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

This wasn't a misspelling, was it. 

I don't spell real good. 

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

 

[Traveler]

I firmly believe that if you only know one way to spell a word, you are uneducated. 

 

The Traveler

[ZealoulyStriving]

One of Trump's top VP contender is Tom Cotton. A white guy named "Cotton"? Are they trying to lose votes? 😂

[NeuroTypical]

I'm all about perspective.   Here's the opening lines of the new 2024 Republican Party Platform:

Quote

A Return to Common Sense
Our Nation’s History is filled with the stories of brave men and women who gave everything they had to build America into the Greatest Nation in the History of the World. Generations of American Patriots have summoned the American Spirit of Strength, Determination, and Love of Country to overcome seemingly insurmountable challenges. The American People have proven time and again that we can overcome any obstacle and any force pitted against us.

In the early days of our Republic, the Founding Generation defeated what was then the most powerful Empire the World had ever seen. In the 20th Century, America vanquished Nazism and Fascism, and then triumphed over Soviet Communism after forty-four years of the Cold War. 

 

And here's the opening lines from the 2024 Democratic Party Platform (well, the lines of the Preamble, which is on the page following the Land Acknowledgement where they talk about how our country was build on Indigenous homelands:

Quote

America is an idea—one that has endured and evolved through war and depression, prevailed over fascism and communism, and radiated hope to far distant corners of the earth. Americans believe that diversity is our greatest strength. That protest is among the highest forms of patriotism. That our fates and fortunes are bound to rise and fall together. That even when we fall short of our highest ideals, we never stop trying to build a more perfect union. 

When the American people go to the polls this fall, we will be choosing more than a candidate. Character is on the ballot in this election. The character of our President, yes, but more than that: the character of our democracy, our society, and our leadership in the world.

The challenges before us—the worst public health crisis in a century, the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, the worst period of global upheaval in a generation, the urgent global crisis posed by climate change, the intolerable racial injustice that still stains the fabric of our nation—will test America’s character like never before.

 

(For comparison, here are the first words from chapter one of the Gospel Principles manual

Quote

There Is a God

 

Edited July 9, 2024 by NeuroTypical

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

Not sure how I feel about RFK now that I have seen this. 

 

[ZealoulyStriving]

For any who liked Vivek Ramaswamy for VP....

JD Vance's wife is Indian and they have a son name Vivek....

So he's like a consolation prize.

[Carborendum]

On 7/6/2024 at 9:51 PM, Traveler said:

I firmly believe that if you only know one way to spell a word, you are uneducated. 

No, it means that you have no imagination.

[Carborendum]

The default for the Dems will, of course, be Kamala.  But that would be disastrous.  So, whom would they pick instead?

I can only think of one person who would make any kind of "rousing the base" effect that Michelle Obama would have.  She has the charisma.  She can give speeches.  And she would periodically drop hints that she wouldn't really be running things, but Barack would be the power behind the throne.

She, like her husband, can read a teleprompter.  Unlike her husband, she knows how to express emotion and rouse a crowd without hyping by the media.  Can you imagine how effective she'd be if she were also hyped by the media as well as giving a powerful speech?

Where it would all fall apart is if she were to ever do a debate with Trump.  She's be completely flattened. She cannot think on her feet about any political issue with any level of complexity.  She'd have to fall back completely on worn out rhetoric and a bunch of talking points.  But at this point, how effective would those be?

The white liberal who is already enamored with her would vote for her anyway -- with or without the speech.  The black vote is being dilluted.  A WHOLE LOT of black people are being converted to Trump.  And the failed assassination revved up that effect even more.

So, I'm just wondering what Dems really hope to accomplish with all the hatred they are spewing on the media and social media.

[NeuroTypical]

At this point, I don’t think it matters who the Democrats run. I think all of the serious ones already know that. The money is drying up. They’ll go with Plan B which involves strategy to deal with a pretty red country.

[Phoenix_person]

Some on the left are already speculating about the potential VP pick for Kamala run. Locally, there's a lot of homerism for Tim Walz. Texan Dems are pulling for Beto, and I've also seen Pete Buttegieg mentioned a few times. But it seems clear that Kamala is the favorite to be the nominee if it's not Biden.

[NeuroTypical]

I wonder if that's what is running through Pres Biden's brain. 

Edited July 19, 2024 by NeuroTypical

[Just_A_Guy]

I think a big liability that Kamala has with her party (at least the semi-reasonable ones) is that people are going to ask how it was that she, as VP, whose one job is to take over for the president when he’s incapacitated, failed to notice or raise the alarm when he was clearly incapacitated.

Either she was part of the cover-up, or Biden (when he was still competent) and his staff considered her so dotty that they made a point of keeping her out of the loop.

Neither makes for a very reassuring presidential nominee.

[mikbone]

Since I live in CA, I don’t have a dog in the race.  My vote does not count.  Although I have tried to influence my many children.

I have been monitoring the news channels though.

Fox News is already taking a victory lap.

CNN and MSNBC are either spouting democratic propaganda, commiserating in failure, or assigning blame.

I also monitor BBC, Scripps, Sky News, Al Jazeera, AP, and Apple news.

There is no way Kamala Harris can win.  Have you even been in a room with a bunch of African American women?  Man they are brutal to each other.

Her speeches are poor and confusing.

She slept her way into politics.

Her one significant job was border czar…

 

Edited July 19, 2024 by mikbone

[Phoenix_person]

2 hours ago, mikbone said:

There is no way Kamala Harris can win.  Have you even been in a room with a bunch of African American women?  Man they are brutal to each other.

Racist nonsense. 

2 hours ago, mikbone said:

Her speeches are poor and confusing.

So are a lot of Trump's.

2 hours ago, mikbone said:

She slept her way into politics.

How do you figure? 

Also, so did Nancy Reagan.

 

[mikbone]

1 minute ago, Phoenix_person said:

Racist nonsense. 

So are a lot of Trump's.

How do you figure? 

Also, so did Nancy Reagan.

 

No response to border czar?

[Phoenix_person]

14 minutes ago, mikbone said:

No response to border czar?

I think you're mistaking me for someone who cares about the border. Are you going to explain why you think Kamala "slept her way into politics"? 

[mikbone]

27 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

I think you're mistaking me for someone who cares about the border. Are you going to explain why you think Kamala "slept her way into politics"? 

Nope, you win.

[Vort]

2 hours ago, Phoenix_person said:

4 hours ago, mikbone said:

She slept her way into politics.

How do you figure?

Oh, please. You cannot be serious.

2 hours ago, Phoenix_person said:

Also, so did Nancy Reagan.

This is even more absurd than your previous statement. Nancy Reagan was not a politician running for President of the United States, and gained no political advantage to that end by sleeping her way to power.

[Phoenix_person]

32 minutes ago, Vort said:

Oh, please. You cannot be serious.

I am. This is a common accusation directed at powerful women. We see male-centric nepotism all over the place, but gods forbid a woman dates a politician and then gets a job in politics. It's a crass accusation to make, especially against someone who continued to work her way up long after her romantic "influence" dried up. Are you seriously suggesting that Kamala would not be in the position she currently is in if she didn't date certain people over 30 years ago? Is this an accusation that you'd be inclined to make against a man who rose to power under similar circumstances (very much a hypothetical question, given the typical power dynamics around gender)?

32 minutes ago, Vort said:

This is even more absurd than your previous statement. Nancy Reagan was not a politician running for President of the United States, and gained no political advantage to that end by sleeping her way to power.

Fair enough. 

[Vort]

40 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

I am. This is a common accusation directed at powerful women.

Only when those powerful women furthered their career on what Hollywood euphemistically calls the casting couch. If men were to do such a thing, I would hold them in equal contempt.

40 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

We see male-centric nepotism all over the place, but gods forbid a woman dates a politician and then gets a job in politics.

A shameless mischaracterization of the issue. Harris did not merely "date a politician". She slept with a married man specifically in order to take advantage of his political favors so as to further her introduction into politics. Even Harris herself does not deny this.

42 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

It's a crass accusation to make, especially against someone who continued to work her way up long after her romantic "influence" dried up.

No. Rather, it is a crass and scummy thing to do, sleeping with a married man in order to receive political favors from him. It is nothing less than prostitution. I hold her male love in equal or greater contempt, but then, he is not the Vice President of the United States of America, with better than even odds of soon becoming the presidential nominee of the major party that currently controls the Presidency.

42 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

Are you seriously suggesting that Kamala would not be in the position she currently is in if she didn't date certain people over 30 years ago?

Oh, yes. Are you seriously suggesting that, without sleeping with her political benefactor, Harris would have accomplished what she did in politics anyway and would currently be the vice president of the US? If so, why did she bother having an ongoing sexual relationship with a married man to whom she was not even particularly attracted?

48 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

 Is this an accusation that you'd be inclined to make against a man who rose to power under similar circumstances (very much a hypothetical question, given the typical power dynamics around gender)?

Given the same situation? Absolutely. Kamala Harris is a sack of scum, not because she is female, but because she acts the way that human sacks of scum act. Specifically, she engaged in outrageous and probably illegal actions to further her political position, the very accusation that Democrats make (probably mostly falsely) against Donald Trump. (Yes, receiving political advantage as payment for sexual favors is very probably illegal.)