Democratic VP candidates - Kamala Harris Is The Choice (2 Viewers)

[The Gator]

Washington (CNN)

Presumptive Democratic vice presidential nominee Kamala Harris has chosen "Pioneer" as her Secret Service code name, a law enforcement official told CNN on Monday.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Washington (CNN)

Presumptive Democratic vice presidential nominee Kamala Harris has chosen "Pioneer" as her Secret Service code name, a law enforcement official told CNN on Monday.

Some of these are fun. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_Service_code_name

Pioneer is  This feels like Trump and "Mogul". Not something you pick for yourself. But whatever. Mondale as Cavalier and Dragon. Nice. 

Nelson Rockefeller's wife was named "Happy"? Did not know that. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

Jimmy Carter as Deacon is perfect. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

And I bet Eisenhower was pissed Truman sniped "General" from him right before the turn. 

 

[tommyGunZ]

Ok, you win.  The D vs. R way is the best way.  And they get so much done when they are in office.  Clinton to Bush to Obama was pretty much the same and got nothing accomplished (except for making rich people richer) for 30 years, but you keep accepting this and let's see what changes.  Our political system is broken.

I'm not going to change anyone's minds in here.  You all are firmly entrenched on "your" team - and we all want to be winners! (Even though you both lose in the long run)

Disclaimer: I will again "waste my vote" and support a 3rd party because both of "your" candidates are horrible.

Your 3rd party candidates are worse than the mainstream candidates you so cynically dismiss. Our Democracy, while flawed, essentially exists as a marketplace for ideas by which politicians compete for support. The 3rd party candidates you support without scrutiny compete in that marketplace, and fail.  Continuously.  

 

[Hov34]

Ok, you win.  The D vs. R way is the best way.  And they get so much done when they are in office.  Clinton to Bush to Obama was pretty much the same and got nothing accomplished (except for making rich people richer) for 30 years, but you keep accepting this and let's see what changes.  Our political system is broken.

I'm not going to change anyone's minds in here.  You all are firmly entrenched on "your" team - and we all want to be winners! (Even though you both lose in the long run)

Disclaimer: I will again "waste my vote" and support a 3rd party because both of "your" candidates are horrible.

Your 3rd party candidates are worse than the mainstream candidates you so cynically dismiss. Our Democracy, while flawed, essentially exists as a marketplace for ideas by which politicians compete for support. The 3rd party candidates you support without scrutiny compete in that marketplace, and fail.  Continuously.  

How on earth could you ever know this???

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Your 3rd party candidates are worse than the mainstream candidates you so cynically dismiss. Our Democracy, while flawed, essentially exists as a marketplace for ideas by which politicians compete for support. The 3rd party candidates you support without scrutiny compete in that marketplace, and fail.  Continuously.  

How on earth could you ever know this???

Whether you agree with the thought or not, his rationale  is already explained.

 

[Hov34]

Your 3rd party candidates are worse than the mainstream candidates you so cynically dismiss. Our Democracy, while flawed, essentially exists as a marketplace for ideas by which politicians compete for support. The 3rd party candidates you support without scrutiny compete in that marketplace, and fail.  Continuously.  

How on earth could you ever know this???

Whether you agree with the thought or not, his rationale  is already explained.

Quite a "competition" we have in this country.  Carry on I guess.

 

[ren hoek]

Because my lack of enthusiasm is heavily influenced by what they (may?) have to deal with on the other side. A side that over the last decade...two...plus...will not compromise...listen when it to comes to problem solution.

The biggest myth in the world is that Washington can't agree on stuff.  They agree on everything of consequence to them- billion dollar bailouts for banks, mass surveillance, trillion dollar wars, weapon sales to Saudi butchers, endless occupation of foreign lands, propping up terrorist networks across the Middle East.  If the stock prices start going down they swoop in to the rescue no problem.  They agree just fine when it's horrible policy that damages innocent people and helps their friends. 

It's only when poor and disenfranchised people are hurting that Washington gets "divided" and the fingerpointing starts. That's when it turns to gridlock.  

You may not align with their goals, but if you want our country to get out of a 'bipartisan war state' then the GOP as currently constructed must die. We can go back to our 3 party arguments sometime after that happens.

Yes- the GOP must die.  But the neoliberal establishment must die as well.  I think people have a tendency to overestimate what Trump is really capable of- which is certainly dangerous in its own right- versus what smooth men in suits with pretty rhetoric and a nominally appealing value set are capable of.  To this day I don't think people have honestly reckoned with the damage the Obama/Biden admin did to this country (and the world).  I can not emphasize enough to you what an insult it would be to reward Joe Biden for his 40+ years of disastrous policy decisions.  We can't afford another 4 years of that either.  It's now or never.  

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Your 3rd party candidates are worse than the mainstream candidates you so cynically dismiss. Our Democracy, while flawed, essentially exists as a marketplace for ideas by which politicians compete for support. The 3rd party candidates you support without scrutiny compete in that marketplace, and fail.  Continuously.  

Imagine posting this while Donald Trump is president.

 

[Ocram]

And, yet you have not proposed a viable alternative.



But, I would love to hear who you think would be "the best candidate" for VP for Joe Biden.

Two things, will answer the 2nd part first:

1. Stacey Abrams - I think she ticks all the same boxes but has a little less baggage (if you want to call it that).  Either way, I’m fine with Harris pick.

2. I fall somewhere between Hov and you/General - I’ve railed pretty consistently about the 2-party system.  Maybe Hov nor  I have a better solution but just because we don’t doesn’t mean it’s not an issue.  If Trump never happened and we currently had President Kasich then I think the argument would be better received.

An honestly my biggest problem with the two-party system currently is that we as a country have become so divided - the two “sides” don’t even listen to each other and think the other side is borderline evil.  

 

[Ocram]

Your 3rd party candidates are worse than the mainstream candidates you so cynically dismiss. Our Democracy, while flawed, essentially exists as a marketplace for ideas by which politicians compete for support. The 3rd party candidates you support without scrutiny compete in that marketplace, and fail.  Continuously.  

I’m going to happily vote for Biden and may never vote GOP again but it’s laughable to imply that 3rd parties have a legitimate shot.  It’s fantasy.

 

[The Commish]

Clearly,  it's not.... he seemed pretty confident it's true. So I'm asking for his list/reasons. I doubt he'll answer (telling imo) but i think it's a valid question to those who aren't happy with the pick. 

What's the point?  No one is going to change your mind, are they?

So nothing here??

 

[KiddLattimer]

The biggest myth in the world is that Washington can't agree on stuff.  They agree on everything of consequence to them- billion dollar bailouts for banks, mass surveillance, trillion dollar wars, weapon sales to Saudi butchers, endless occupation of foreign lands, propping up terrorist networks across the Middle East.  If the stock prices start going down they swoop in to the rescue no problem.  They agree just fine when it's horrible policy that damages innocent people and helps their friends. 

It's only when poor and disenfranchised people are hurting that Washington gets "divided" and the fingerpointing starts. That's when it turns to gridlock.  

It's a big club and we ain't in it

 

[Hov34]

Clearly,  it's not.... he seemed pretty confident it's true. So I'm asking for his list/reasons. I doubt he'll answer (telling imo) but i think it's a valid question to those who aren't happy with the pick. 

What's the point?  No one is going to change your mind, are they?

So nothing here??

No

 

[KiddLattimer]

Tulsi, not even close.

But she won't toe the line.

My preferences were Tulsi, Barbara Lee and Nina Turner in that order... but like you said no chance any of them would have happened in this Democrat establishment.

 

[The Commish]

My preferences were Tulsi, Barbara Lee and Nina Turner in that order... but like you said no chance any of them would have happened in this Democrat establishment.

What do you feel these would bring to the base to motivate them that Harris doesn't?  Ren's given me "condemn the Iraq war" for Lee.  I'm not that confident the base cares about the Iraq war anymore, but I could be wrong.  What else?

 

[MAC_32]

Yes- the GOP must die.  But the neoliberal establishment must die as well.  I think people have a tendency to overestimate what Trump is really capable of- which is certainly dangerous in its own right- versus what smooth men in suits with pretty rhetoric and a nominally appealing value set are capable of.  To this day I don't think people have honestly reckoned with the damage the Obama/Biden admin did to this country (and the world).  I can not emphasize enough to you what an insult it would be to reward Joe Biden for his 40+ years of disastrous policy decisions.  We can't afford another 4 years of that either.  It's now or never.  

I respect your politics, but not your gamesmanship. With the hand that's been dealt you can't kill both targets in 2020. Pick one; target the other one sometime after accomplishing goal #1. Thinking the optimal strategy is now or never to take both down at once is pure folly.

 

[KiddLattimer]

What do you feel these would bring to the base to motivate them that Harris doesn't?  Ren's given me "condemn the Iraq war" for Lee.  I'm not that confident the base cares about the Iraq war anymore, but I could be wrong.  What else?

Ending the wars has been my #1 issue for quite some time so that's a huge factor.

Aside from that... Medicare For All and livable minimum wage at a time when 30M+ Americans are out of work.  Harris gave M4A lip service for a minute but backed away very quickly.

 

[The Commish]

Ending the wars has been my #1 issue for quite some time so that's a huge factor.

Aside from that... Medicare For All and livable minimum wage at a time when 30M+ Americans are out of work.  Harris gave M4A lip service for a minute but backed away very quickly.

I do appreciate the personal preferences.  Knowing what the VP is generally designed to do, I was trying to understand how people might think a different pick would play to those general goals.  However, it appears that you're simply looking at it from a personal preference POV (which is fine).  That's what I do initially as well.  So while it might not be my personal preference, understanding the meaning of the pick and what they want to accomplish, I find it tough to single out any other option that would fill those desires in a significantly better way (even if I can list many reasons why I like another person).  This is a symbolic pick for the most part.....well unless one's of the opinion that there's a movement in place where Biden takes office only to give it up in a matter of minutes/hours/days/weeks as a ploy to circumvent democracy and turn the country into communist China.

 

[KiddLattimer]

I do appreciate the personal preferences.  Knowing what the VP is generally designed to do, I was trying to understand how people might think a different pick would play to those general goals.  However, it appears that you're simply looking at it from a personal preference POV (which is fine).  That's what I do initially as well.  So while it might not be my personal preference, understanding the meaning of the pick and what they want to accomplish, I find it tough to single out any other option that would fill those desires in a significantly better way (even if I can list many reasons why I like another person).  This is a symbolic pick for the most part.....well unless one's of the opinion that there's a movement in place where Biden takes office only to give it up in a matter of minutes/hours/days/weeks as a ploy to circumvent democracy and turn the country into communist China.

Well the war part is certainly my personal preference but I don't see how M4A + livable wage at a time like this wouldn't be a boost when people are broke and suffering. At that point it's really just playing to your audience.

 

[The Commish]

Well the war part is certainly my personal preference but I don't see how M4A + livable wage at a time like this wouldn't be a boost when people are broke and suffering

I lost track on the M4A and who was for it/against it etc.  But I seem to remember, all the way back to 2017, Harris too being on the 'living wage' train at $15 an hour.  Is that not correct?  Maybe I am misremembering, but it seems that one is covered.  You say she paid lip service to M4A, but backed away.  What is her official position?  Personally, I'm not a big fan of it.  I think the public option is the next logical step.  The government is going to need to show me they can handle it before I turn the keys over on that one.  The public option allows them to do that...if successful, things take care of themselves and people break the ties with their company insurance and move over.

 

[KiddLattimer]

I lost track on the M4A and who was for it/against it etc.  But I seem to remember, all the way back to 2017, Harris too being on the 'living wage' train at $15 an hour.  Is that not correct?  Maybe I am misremembering, but it seems that one is covered.  You say she paid lip service to M4A, but backed away.  What is her official position?  Personally, I'm not a big fan of it.  I think the public option is the next logical step.  The government is going to need to show me they can handle it before I turn the keys over on that one.  The public option allows them to do that...if successful, things take care of themselves and people break the ties with their company insurance and move over.

You're right, the public option is probably the compromise that will eventually be arrived upon (especially if COVID keeps going and businesses fail) but I don't think we get to there without M4A pressure pulling them. My concern is that with a split private/public insurance system there would be a big difference in care (best doctors taking more profitable insurance) but that's way off topic for this thread.

For Harris... she signed on with M4A then backed away as I mentioned. All the primary contestants had to call their plan something similar to M4A (except Joe ironically). If I remember correctly she still called her idea was basically a public option with a 10-12 year roll out. Seemed poorly thought out. Given the political tension between parties it likely wouldn't survive long enough (3 presidential cycles) to actually happen. 

 

[ren hoek]

I respect your politics, but not your gamesmanship. With the hand that's been dealt you can't kill both targets in 2020. Pick one; target the other one sometime after accomplishing goal #1. Thinking the optimal strategy is now or never to take both down at once is pure folly.

You’re not getting it my friend.  There’s not going be a ‘next time’- there’s just going to be some new excuse for why we have to vote against the next greatest evil of all time.  You are misplacing your faith in an electoral system that sold us out a long time ago.  Biden/Kamala are not going to restore decency to anything.  We’re not going to push them in a positive direction.  And after 4 years of that, there will be some new rationale for why third parties are a waste of time and we have to consolidate behind the two corporate-owned sellout parties again.  How much more obvious can it get?

They’re not even pretending to be a party for workers, civil libertarians, antiwar people anymore, at least in the past they pretended to be during the campaign season, when it cost them absolutely nothing and they could betray voters after the fact.  Now they are just Corrupt But Not Trump.  They’re not even really against his policies, they’ve enabled him time and time again.  

 

[Murph]

But if you ever want your goals to be serious considerations then in this particular election I think you need to support them

I have to strenuously disagree with this. The only way to force change in the party is to send a strong signal that your vote cannot be taken for granted. The powers that be will always promise reform later in exchange for your vote now because it's THE MOST IMPORTANT ELECTION EVER (until the next one). Until we do something about it, it's just going to be Lucy and the Football again and again.

 

[MAC_32]

You’re not getting it my friend.  There’s not going be a ‘next time’- there’s just going to be some new excuse for why we have to vote against the next greatest evil of all time.  You are misplacing your faith in an electoral system that sold us out a long time ago.  Biden/Kamala are not going to restore decency to anything.  We’re not going to push them in a positive direction.  And after 4 years of that, there will be some new rationale for why third parties are a waste of time and we have to consolidate behind the two corporate-owned sellout parties again.  How much more obvious can it get?

They’re not even pretending to be a party for workers, civil libertarians, antiwar people anymore, at least in the past they pretended to be during the campaign season, when it cost them absolutely nothing and they could betray voters after the fact.  Now they are just Corrupt But Not Trump.  They’re not even really against his policies, they’ve enabled him time and time again.  

...and that will represent your opportunity to shove them into the position as a rebranded GOP then your ideology splinters off to form a more progressive democratic party. 

This ####'s chess; not checkers.

 

[Boston]

I have to strenuously disagree with this. The only way to force change in the party is to send a strong signal that your vote cannot be taken for granted. The powers that be will always promise reform later in exchange for your vote now because it's THE MOST IMPORTANT ELECTION EVER (until the next one). Until we do something about it, it's just going to be Lucy and the Football again and again.

For the most part our government is nothing more then legalized mafia...they even control weed and gambling now.

 

[KiddLattimer]

I have to strenuously disagree with this. The only way to force change in the party is to send a strong signal that your vote cannot be taken for granted. The powers that be will always promise reform later in exchange for your vote now because it's THE MOST IMPORTANT ELECTION EVER (until the next one). Until we do something about it, it's just going to be Lucy and the Football again and again.

Sadly they don't seem to have learned from the last one

 

[Joe Summer]

For the most part our government is nothing more then legalized mafia...they even control weed and gambling now.

Are you under the impression that they didn't control it before?

 

[Mr Anonymous]

It's a big club and we ain't in it

Be proud that you're not ignorant and being led around by your tail like most people.

 

[Mr Anonymous]

You’re not getting it my friend.  There’s not going be a ‘next time’- there’s just going to be some new excuse for why we have to vote against the next greatest evil of all time.  You are misplacing your faith in an electoral system that sold us out a long time ago.  Biden/Kamala are not going to restore decency to anything.  We’re not going to push them in a positive direction.  And after 4 years of that, there will be some new rationale for why third parties are a waste of time and we have to consolidate behind the two corporate-owned sellout parties again.  How much more obvious can it get?

They’re not even pretending to be a party for workers, civil libertarians, antiwar people anymore, at least in the past they pretended to be during the campaign season, when it cost them absolutely nothing and they could betray voters after the fact.  Now they are just Corrupt But Not Trump.  They’re not even really against his policies, they’ve enabled him time and time again.  

The next Republican President or candidate will be the "Devil" just like they tell everyone the current one and the previous ones were. Look no further than GWB. He was Satan personified and now he's such a great, likable guy.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I have to strenuously disagree with this. The only way to force change in the party is to send a strong signal that your vote cannot be taken for granted. The powers that be will always promise reform later in exchange for your vote now because it's THE MOST IMPORTANT ELECTION EVER (until the next one). Until we do something about it, it's just going to be Lucy and the Football again and again.

Exactly. There is always an excuse to not vote for a 3rd party candidate. "Don't do it this time, do it next time."  Until the next time comes around and the same people sing the same song. I've been hearing that since Ross Perot ran as a 3rd party candidate in '92.  I get that Trump is an outlier and ousting him is something many see as vitally important (which I don't necessarily disagree with) , but I would rather people vote their conscience and for whichever candidate they like the most and let the chips fall where they may.  And if that candidate doesn't have a D or R in front of their name, so be it.

 

[TripItUp]

The next Republican President or candidate will be the "Devil" just like they tell everyone the current one and the previous ones were. Look no further than GWB. He was Satan personified and now he's such a great, likable guy.

 

[sho nuff]

GEB wasn’t Satan...Cheney was the devil of that group.  Bush just didn’t have the gall to go against him.

 

[rockaction]

For all of the arguing, we have a man that was a third party candidate that is now our president. Donald Trump is the inevitable result of the GOP leaning third party with Perot, actually. Trump himself was a member of a Third Party for a long time, and he brought that party and its politics and rhetoric to the GOP platform, and it succeeded.

The question isn't whether a third party can determine an election or even be an electable candidate; it's how much of the progressive platform does the country really want? 

 

[MAC_32]

For all of the arguing, we have a man that was a third party candidate that is now our president. Donald Trump is the inevitable result of the GOP leaning third party with Perot, actually. Trump himself was a member of a Third Party for a long time, and he brought that party and its politics and rhetoric to the GOP platform, and it succeeded.

The question isn't whether a third party can determine an election or even be an electable candidate; it's how much of the progressive platform does the country really want? 

I am skeptical this election can be different, but it's because I don't think enough of those that are 'tired of the same ole bs' actually see the big picture. The GOP is hanging out on the edge of a cliff. They ended up there because their party was hijacked, but if they are going to fall over then enough people are going to have to give them a shove. 

Millennials are not turning republican as they age at anywhere near the rates as prior generations. America is much less white. Much less catholic. Leaving the current GOP reliant on non educated white males and rural populations - the latter of which are aging and shrinking in size. The median age of a republican voter is 9 years older than it was just 20 years ago. The demos have been working against the GOP, but if the kill shot does not come now then the opportunity may have been missed. 

Progressives can't look at centrists and say 'you do it.' And centrists can't look at progressives and say 'no, you.' It'll take a collaborative effort. I think it's the responsibility of a progressive to support their reps that are on the ballot where applicable and quietly vote for the centrist where it's not. I think it's the responsibility of a centrist to support their reps that are up for election and quietly vote for the progressive when necessary. The numbers are there to make it happen, but not without action. And I write all that from the perspective of a 3rd party voter in the last 2 elections. No party speaks to me, so I follow the beat of my own drum. I'm not singing the same song that I have before. But I am willing to put that aside for now because I think this particular election represents an opportunity to reform. I don't think the census year talk gets enough run. The gerrymandered advantages the GOP have manufactured can be undone. We can take steps towards a centrist/progressive existence then see where the populace really does stand on rock's question.

But if the populace doesn't coalesce to take down Trump and the band of minions that enabled him then I may revert back to that apathetic 3rd party voter, middle fingers in the air. I'm a healthy suburban white male in a light red state. I'd rather not exist in a world with the GOP as currently constructed, but if not enough people unite to take them down then I can adapt. Cause if centrists and progressives won't collaborate in this environment then I have no confidence they ever will.

 

[Opie]

Why I am against the DNC nominee for POTUS (Harris)
Which, by the way, isn't basing your choice of a running mate, based solely on race and gender, the epitome of "racism"?

1. In open debate, she claimed that she could ban all assault weapons....by Executive Order.
   
2. Wants to ban fracking
   
3. Wants to get rid of private insurance
   
4. Wants to decriminalize illegal border crossings
   
5. Has declared, in amicus briefs, that freedom of religion should be reserved to the private sphere.
   
6. Backs the Green New Deal
   
7. Backs illegal immigrants receiving Medicare
   
8. Compared ICE to the KKK
   
9. Backs 70% tax rates
   
10. Her behavior during the Kavenaugh hearings.
    
11. Claims to have believed the accusers of Joe Biden....then joined his ticket
    

....and you wonder why the Trump campaign is salivating over the DNC's choice of VP? (the presumable POTUS)

The fatal flaw of Socialism is that, if everything is a right, you owe everything to the government.

 

[huthut]

Why I am against the DNC nominee for POTUS (Harris)
Which, by the way, isn't basing your choice of a running mate, based solely on race and gender, the epitome of "racism"?

1. In open debate, she claimed that she could ban all assault weapons....by Executive Order.
   
2. Wants to ban fracking
   
3. Wants to get rid of private insurance
   
4. Wants to decriminalize illegal border crossings
   
5. Has declared, in amicus briefs, that freedom of religion should be reserved to the private sphere.
   
6. Backs the Green New Deal
   
7. Backs illegal immigrants receiving Medicare
   
8. Compared ICE to the KKK
   
9. Backs 70% tax rates
   
10. Her behavior during the Kavenaugh hearings.
    
11. Claims to have believed the accusers of Joe Biden....then joined his ticket
    

....and you wonder why the Trump campaign is salivating over the DNC's choice of VP? (the presumable POTUS)

The fatal flaw of Socialism is that, if everything is a right, you owe everything to the government.

I can't help but feel that Republican attack ads are doing more to sell Biden/Harris than Biden and Harris themselves. If only those bullet points 1-9 were true (10 and 11 are not really policy based). I can go to a more left forum and see the exact opposite, don't vote for them because they don't want to ban fracking, won't raise taxes on the rich, don't back the green new deal, won't get rid of private insurance, etc.

 

[sho nuff]

Why I am against the DNC nominee for POTUS (Harris)
Which, by the way, isn't basing your choice of a running mate, based solely on race and gender, the epitome of "racism"?

1. In open debate, she claimed that she could ban all assault weapons....by Executive Order.
   
2. Wants to ban fracking
   
3. Wants to get rid of private insurance
   
4. Wants to decriminalize illegal border crossings
   
5. Has declared, in amicus briefs, that freedom of religion should be reserved to the private sphere.
   
6. Backs the Green New Deal
   
7. Backs illegal immigrants receiving Medicare
   
8. Compared ICE to the KKK
   
9. Backs 70% tax rates
   
10. Her behavior during the Kavenaugh hearings.
    
11. Claims to have believed the accusers of Joe Biden....then joined his ticket
    

....and you wonder why the Trump campaign is salivating over the DNC's choice of VP? (the presumable POTUS)

The fatal flaw of Socialism is that, if everything is a right, you owe everything to the government.

When you start out with two lies...why keep going.  I mean before you get into your numbered reasons...you start with 2 false statements.

And then you end with the socialist boogeyman.  Good stuff.

 

[KiddLattimer]

When you start out with two lies...why keep going.  I mean before you get into your numbered reasons...you start with 2 false statements.

And then you end with the socialist boogeyman.  Good stuff.

Three lies... Her plan specifically included private insurance, that's the main reason she backed away from Bernie's plan

 

[sho nuff]

Three lies... Her plan specifically included private insurance, that's the main reason she backed away from Bernie's plan

Well...I meant 2 before even getting to his numbered list.

 

[KiddLattimer]

Well...I meant 2 before even getting to his numbered list.

Gotcha missed that

 

[ren hoek]

I can't help but feel that Republican attack ads are doing more to sell Biden/Harris than Biden and Harris themselves. If only those bullet points 1-9 were true (10 and 11 are not really policy based). I can go to a more left forum and see the exact opposite, don't vote for them because they don't want to ban fracking, won't raise taxes on the rich, don't back the green new deal, won't get rid of private insurance, etc.

It’s annoying that leftists spent a year and a half absolutely dismantling Kamala Harris for the cop that she is, only for the Trump folks to barge in and yell ‘she’s from the looney left!!!!!’  

Not even close- she is an authoritarian, status quo politician.  She supports all the wars and never deviates from the official line on national security.  Trumpguys really helping news media rehabilitate her image as a progressive.  

 

[shadrap]

It’s annoying that leftists spent a year and a half absolutely dismantling Kamala Harris for the cop that she is, only for the Trump folks to barge in and yell ‘she’s from the looney left!!!!!’  

Not even close- she is an authoritarian, status quo politician.  She supports all the wars and never deviates from the official line on national security.  Trumpguys really helping news media rehabilitate her image as a progressive.  

your take on politics reflects my take much more than not.  both sides are so guilty of making promises to get elected that THEY HAVE NO INTENTION of ever keeping and both sides are guilty of endless carnage all over the world including the deaths of young American men & women.  tired of it all, especially the nation building that takes the lives of people.  Biden is a career politician & Harris will do & say anything to get elected.  IMO

thanx for listening.

 

[tri-man 47]

Why I am against the DNC nominee for POTUS (Harris)
Which, by the way, isn't basing your choice of a running mate, based solely on race and gender, the epitome of "racism"?

1. In open debate, she claimed that she could ban all assault weapons....by Executive Order.
   
2. Wants to ban fracking
   
3. Wants to get rid of private insurance
   
4. Wants to decriminalize illegal border crossings
   
5. Has declared, in amicus briefs, that freedom of religion should be reserved to the private sphere.
   
6. Backs the Green New Deal
   
7. Backs illegal immigrants receiving Medicare
   
8. Compared ICE to the KKK
   
9. Backs 70% tax rates
   
10. Her behavior during the Kavenaugh hearings.
    
11. Claims to have believed the accusers of Joe Biden....then joined his ticket
    

....and you wonder why the Trump campaign is salivating over the DNC's choice of VP? (the presumable POTUS)

The fatal flaw of Socialism is that, if everything is a right, you owe everything to the government.

I don't agree with all of her positions.  But I'd rather have Joe and her in the White House due to their sense of commitment, compassion, and empathy and trusting in the moderating effects of the political process rather than Donald Trump and his numerous personal flaws and lack of any defined strategies for our nation.

 

[gruecd]

I can't help but feel that Republican attack ads are doing more to sell Biden/Harris than Biden and Harris themselves. If only those bullet points 1-9 were true (10 and 11 are not really policy based). I can go to a more left forum and see the exact opposite, don't vote for them because they don't want to ban fracking, won't raise taxes on the rich, don't back the green new deal, won't get rid of private insurance, etc.

A forum that’s more “left” than this one? 

 

[sho nuff]

A forum that’s more “left” than this one? 

Yeah.  There are many way further left.  Don’t mistake anti trump for being very left.

 

[Widbil83]

This has to be one of the worst VP picks selections history. I know you guys will say “oh no Palin is”, but at least she brought some energy and enthusiasm for a little while. Kamala hasn’t excited anybody. She brings absolutely nothing of value to this ticket either in critical states Biden needs to win. It’s completely bizarre she was selected.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

...Kamala hasn’t excited anybody. She brings absolutely nothing of value to this ticket either in critical states Biden needs to win. It’s completely bizarre she was selected.

Eh I think there were a few reasons why she was the first pick and the ultimate pick, but one is that she robs the Trump campaign of energy. I've noticed it, the Trump campaign has largely thrown contradictory messages at the wall. But regardless Biden and Harris don't have the "hate"/negative factor that worked so well vs Hillary in 2016. 

 

[Sinn Fein]

Not particularly relevant, but I loved the shots of Harris wearing her Chuck Taylors.