Can someone explain what she said?

That’s true, and if their had been a normal primary I doubt shoe would have gotten $200 million to run.

When she was the one to go against Trump it was the only choice. Easy to raise money when you’re going against one of the most hated POTUS candidates in the modern era.
I know much was small donations, same people that donate their nickels and dimes in churches every week.

 

Except she wasn't the only choice. The delegates could support anybody. Yet, people donated an insane amount of money to her, and the delegates chose to back her. Because she handled the situation masterfully.

That's reality. You can talk out of your hindquarters about some hypothetical primary all you'd like. I'm speaking on reality here. Consolidating support before anybody could meaningfully challenge her is simply good politics. There was an open convention, and she won it. That is a fact.

 

Nobody stuggled. Nobody poofread, either.

 

Fact-check: Harris’ CNN town hall in Pennsylvania

 

Who?

 

Yes

 

Thank you for the compliments, but really that was a jest about those claiming "degree" authority. As to the rest - well, just repeat everything your wrote and direct it at yourself. Doesn't persuade you of anything, does it? I had the same reaction.

Happy to continue the discussion and distinctions about defamation law and criminal convictions, but it seems we are beyond having a meaningful debate. Feel free to choose another constitutional issue you find of interest - my degree is not necessary to that discussion but I would be immodest if I didn't claim some experience and knowledge in the foundational structure and jurisprudence relating to the constitution. And, I cannot avoid disclosing that I likley have a bit closer insight into the accusations you've repeated from the liberal press machine.

Call me an agent of destruction as you wish (albeit misguided) - at least that imparts a measure of a cognitive/informed decision and not simply an uninformed banner puppet.

 

You sure do write a lot....to justify voting for a convicted felon, who both admitted and was adjudicated guilty of sexual abuse, and who enacted a criminal conspiracy to overturn an election.

That said, it's certainly amusing for you to claim to be the only one making a "cognitive/informed decision"....... but if you feel like specious personal attacks minimize your shameful decision on this, I hope it helps.

I was trying to be polite and honest regarding your educational achievement. But you have to also be honest with yourself; you enthusiastically support a person who attacked the very fabric of our country - the integrity of elections.

You support a person who attacked America. You should feel an immense amount of shame.

 

All you have to do is take your ADD meds so you can focus and listen to her. There isn't enough meds for the one:

 

To be fair, it’s a stupid and unanswerable question. What should the federal govt do on offering childcare? Uhh… nothing. Nada. Zilch. Not the govts job and anyone that thinks it is, is an idiot. Govt is already pretty generous with child tax credits and such, maybe they need to be bumped up to keep with overall inflation (including childcare) but that’s about it. Handing out more money is in itself inflationary.

Kind of reminds of the question that has been repeated a few times “what are you doing to do bring down grocery prices”. I saw that asked again at the town hall. The only honest and correct answer would be to say “not a damn thing, and screw you for asking that question”. Kamala said some garbled stuff about price gouging, before getting into the answer on tariffs which is a little better answer. Obviously no sane politician is going to give the truthful “stupid question” answer above, but I think hammering home the idea that pandemic inflation is behind us and future tariffs will make inflation worse (because they will) is the appropriate response. Similar to the question on childcare, anyone that thinks the govt can reverse grocery prices is a moron. In a free market govt doesn’t control prices, so to frame any question as “what are you going to do to lower grocery prices” can only lead to garbage-in garbage-out response that basically all politicians will ramble through rather than speak the truth.

 

Then he should have said tax credits. They should pay for childcare or at least lower the out of pocket cost. Is he even offering to extend or increase them for families? The point was his rambling. It wasn't even a level headed response.

 

7th?

 

Kudos to you on this post.

Silly that now it’s expected for the Gov to do something about every issue people face.

Increase amount to borrow for college tuition shoots up(just one more example).

 

Do you not think the political parties have leadership?

I wondered how long it would take before someone pulled out the sexist card from their deck of excuses. Don’t try to lay that sexist card on me. I voted for Nikki Haley.

I can assure you that if a man with her exact experience spoke like she does without a teleprompter, and had her extremely liberal policies, there is no way on earth I would vote for him. So stuff that card back in your deck and use it on someone else.

Regarding DA, Attorney General, Senator, and VP, listening to her speak I’ve been baffled how she ever won statewide office in California. So I looked into it a little bit. As we all know, she was the girlfriend of Willie Brown, who was the king of Democratic politics in California. Browns promoted her for that office.

She ran for DA against two other candidates. California lumps all candidates, regardless of party, into one primary, and the two highest vote getters runoff in the general election.

The three candidates received roughly equal votes and Harris was in a runoff with one other person. The other person had a tremendous amount of baggage and Harris won. I don’t know the extent of Willie Brown’s influence in that election.

When she ran for Attorney General, she was the only Democrat in the primary going against four or five Republicans. Why was there only one Democrat who wanted to be Attorney General? Was this the influence of Brown and party leadership? The runoff was between her and a Republican, and since California is a Democratic state, she won.

The Senate primary had 34 candidates of which only seven were Democrats, and five of the people I’ve never heard of. Harris and another Democrat, Loretta Sanchez, had a runoff. There was controversy surrounding Sanchez, and Harris won.

So I don’t consider her experience as awe inspiring as you feel it is.

 

^^ One of the most informative and concise posts I've ever seen here.

She's basically Willie Brown's old intern. And isn't it so convenient after all of which you report above, she just happened to be handed the POTUS nomination without recording a single vote? What a massive coincidence.

 

Wow, I don't know who you quoted but that was the funniest thing I've read in a long time. Having said that ... it's a bit concerning that someone actually "thinks" that about Kam Harris.