I didn’t say she was getting a break. The poster suggested that she was perhaps getting more scrutiny than others. I used Trump as an example that others have gotten more scrutiny. Could have used Clinton(Bill) also but didn’t as it was decades ago pre social media so it’s harder to compare.
They painted themselves with a broad brush when they agreed to run on that party platform. It is not too dissimilar to someone choosing to wear a swastika. If you choose to identify with a symbol like that, then you judge yourself.
This. Also, when the leading right wing "news" sites regularly post literally doctored, or minimally subjectively edited, clips of him it's easy to dismiss everything said by them or anyone who trafficks their lies.
The swastika is just a symbol. It is a symbol that became defined by the deeds of those who wore it. The donkey and the D next to someone’s name on the ballot is the same. The red MAGA hat is the same. These are symbols defined by the deeds of those who carry the symbol. Advocating and defending modern child sacrifice, a slaughter that claims 1/3 of each generation, is almost universal among those who run for office in the DNC. That is definitional to what it means to be a Democrat.
Ha. Definitely an interesting analogy given the obvious political leanings of those wearing swasticas or confederate flags. A few even showed themselves on 1/6.
The people who raise this issue are not concerned that she had sex. They are concerned that her political opportunities came about because of having sex with the most powerful man in California politics. Could she have achieved political success on her own merit? Maybe, or maybe not.
My main concern with her is that she was given one job as VP and that was the border. She took months before she even showed up there to check it out, and then has done nothing about it in four years that I can tell. Was that job not glamorous enough? Did she not have any interest in it? The most capable people tackle their responsibilities whether they like them or not. I don’t see her doing that. I see a Harris presidency focusing on a lot of minor issues that have progressive symbolism, as well hanging out with a lot of celebrities.
Funny how when Trump was elected the left tried using the 25th to get him out nearly from the beginning, yet now with the world to see Biden’s clear cognitive issues few are talking much about it….
Her voting to break ties is about like voting present. She wouldn’t have ever voted against a Dem bill. So that’s not a lot to lean on ImHo
Since I’ve run alzheimer’s clinical trials for a decade and see dozens of 80 year olds every week(both normal, abnormal and in between), I can tell you Biden’s terrible debate performance was NOT just due to “stress”. Stop ignoring it man.
LOL. This is just yet another example of how clueless the vast number of Americans are about how our government is supposed to work. The VP has no power or authority to DO anything on the border. Anything a VP does, any “appearances”, is going to be photo op fluff. The way some crazies talk about it, you’d think she needed to be down there helping to man machine gun turrets. I recall that situation and remember it being kind of politically stupid that she seemed to take awhile to do the appearance, but in realistic terms it never mattered because there’s no world where any one figure goes down there and solves a damn thing unilaterally. Fundamentally, the same statement also applies to a POTUS. Know what might do it? Congress passing a bill and the President signing it. What would be in that bill? Money. Money to direct and allocate resources of the government. Money to hire border agents. Money to deploy drones. Money to hire more judges to handle immigration cases. Such a bill was on the table. High bi-partisan support for some of the additional “non-money” aspects that put limits on immigration. As far as this bill: wonder what happened to it?
Nope, that is not it. She will run on women's reproductive rights, clean energy, fair taxes, strong economy/low unemployment, universal affordable healthcare, climate change mitigation, and quality education for all (not just the moochers who want big gov handouts).
No, it’s very real and should be top of mind to Dems or Pubs on the importance of this presidential election with the zero margin in the Senate.
I thought she was a strange choice for vp. She was from a safe state. It seemed to be a strange calculus that had her as an answer. I really don’t know much about her. All I really read is the mysoginistic drivel that comes from the right.
