Well, now that everyone is hacking on Biden like 'hack a shack', its an obvious tactic. But Biden seems to be gaining ground despite it, so the spotlight on Biden might be helping him.
Who will face Trump in the election of 2020?
- Thread starter Hobie
- Start date
Well, now that everyone is hacking on Biden like 'hack a shack', its an obvious tactic. But Biden seems to be gaining ground despite it, so the spotlight on Biden might be helping him.
Right Divider
Body part
The problem is not his age, but what he thinks.
If you're going to be the first black woman president you'd better have spotless optics and come across as an optimistic, compassionate crusader. I think she made a serious misstep with Biden and it hurt her image. It was a Hillary like move.
I wouldn't, but I think she'll fail if at the head of the ticket. As a VP? Could be. Even there she needs a little damage control. . .Biden isn't going to wow, but he's like a different version of Gerald Ford, widely considered a decent person with a history of being on the side of the constituency. It will play better to the middle and unaligned as well.
Thought you'd like that one.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
I have to disagree. In general, assertive women are not looked upon equally with men. Their assertiveness is given all kinds of negative connotations while in men they're given positive connotations. To beat Trump, she has to be able to slice him and dice him, and I think she's the only one who can.
She's certainly not as progressive as Warren, but she and Warren could complement each other well. Harris/Waren or Warren/Harris - either one works for me, and could be a winning ticket.
I'm unconvinced. I'd vote for him, but really as a vote against Trump.
I think that's right and that it will work against her.
I disagree. Hillary did that. We need comfort and sanity to contrast the Orange at the lead position and a prize fighter at VP who can dole out damage and appeal to progressives without frightening the moderates. Biden and Warren make more sense to me as a winning ticket.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
I know you're not of that mindset, but that message is a bad message.
Hillary didn't do it like Harris can. Harris is a fighter, Warren is a policy wonk. I'd rather see the two women carry the ticket and let Joe ride off into the sunset. (But I will absolutely vote for him.)
drbrumley
Well-known member
Yeah about the witch from California..
says Caitlyn Johnson
Attacking the authoritarian prosecutorial record of Senator Kamala Harris to thunderous applause from the audience, Gabbard criticized the way her opponent “put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana,” “blocked evidence that would have freed an innocent man from death row until the court’s forced her to do so,” “kept people in prisons beyond their sentences to use them as cheap labor for the state of California,” and “fought to keep the cash bail system in place that impacts poor people in the worst kind of way.”
says Caitlyn Johnson
Attacking the authoritarian prosecutorial record of Senator Kamala Harris to thunderous applause from the audience, Gabbard criticized the way her opponent “put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana,” “blocked evidence that would have freed an innocent man from death row until the court’s forced her to do so,” “kept people in prisons beyond their sentences to use them as cheap labor for the state of California,” and “fought to keep the cash bail system in place that impacts poor people in the worst kind of way.”
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Any distorted right-wing talking points in there?
Meanwhile Harris was just endorsed by Dolores Huerta, because of her record.
Oh, and Gabbard's getting boosted by RT. Surprise, surprise...
Richard StengelVerified account @stengelFollowFollow@stengel
Richard Stengel Retweeted Clint Watts
This is a clear example of Russian disinformation happening in real time. A hashtag created & promoted by Russia Today against Kamala Harris & supporting Rep. Gabbard, who is an apologist for another Putin puppet, Bashar Assad. This is a sign that Harris is seen as a threat.
And what’s top story at RT (Russia Today) this morning after #DemDebate? Of course, what everyone saw right? social media going wild for Tulsi Gabbard, populist, after she went after establishment Dem Harris who happens to be on Senate Intel Committee (Russia Investigation)
I can understand why some like Gabbard's non-interventionism, but her whole Assad thing is just very weird. I don't know how you can reconcile the two.
drbrumley
Well-known member
Oh, and Gabbard's getting boosted by RT. Surprise, surprise...
[FONT=&]
[FONT=&][/FONT][/FONT]@stengelRichard Stengel Retweeted Clint Watts[FONT=&]This is a clear example of Russian disinformation happening in real time. A hashtag created & promoted by Russia Today against Kamala Harris & supporting Rep. Gabbard, who is an apologist for another Putin puppet, Bashar Assad. This is a sign that Harris is seen as a threat.[/FONT][FONT=&][FONT=&][/FONT]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&][/FONT][FONT=&]And what’s top story at RT (Russia Today) this morning after #DemDebate? Of course, what everyone saw right? social media going wild for Tulsi Gabbard, populist, after she went after establishment Dem Harris who happens to be on Senate Intel Committee (Russia Investigation)
[/FONT]
Oh and right on cue, you spout off Harris talking points....Gabbard must be anti American and she must be a Russian agent....she is been written about by Russia Today....oh the horror..
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
:freak: I never expected you would. :chuckle:
However, I do expect you'll cheer anyone who can be 2020's Jill Stein.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
You're rather overreacting here.
These aren't Harris' talking points, do you even know who Clint Watts is?
If you'd read up on the senate report you pretend has no importance, this might all make sense to you. Until then you'll remain befuddled, I guess.
drbrumley
Well-known member
So she wasn't factually correct...Got it..
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
So you're still befuddled... got it..
Back to my earlier post...
Were Tulsi Gabbard’s attacks on Kamala Harris’ record as a California prosecutor on target?
drbrumley
Well-known member
So your article says she didn't allow the DNA, yet your really going to argue about it...
Suit yourself.
bibleverse2
New member
Not like identity politics is about race. For MLK wanted race eliminated as a topic with regard to identifying people. Instead, he wanted all people identified by the content of their character, never by the color of their skin. But all identity politics cares about is the latter.
Note that even a member of the Supreme Court referred to her "wise Latina" heritage as an integral part of her decision making. But only under the awful atmosphere of identity politics, which Trump recognizes has polluted the thinking of even federal judges, who should follow MLK's teachings instead.
Never as President. He has even expressly denounced white supremacy. For he knows how dangerous racism can become, including the evil, reverse-racism of identity politics, which reviles whites.
Like the Nazi brownshirts, they are starting with street-level thuggery, against innocent people.
They will not begin their genocide against their political opponents until they come into total power politically, i.e. under the future Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of Revelation's "beast" in Revelation 13:4-18), who will even behead his enemies, especially Biblical Christians (Revelation 20:4-6).
But have there been liberals in Congress doing so who were born in a foreign country which is white?
If there ever are, Trump and his followers will still want them "sent back", just as much as any other radical-leftist, foreign-born member of Congress; and just as they chanted "Lock her up!" against white Hillary.
Because race is irrelevant. All that matters to Trump and his followers is someone's politics.
bibleverse2
New member
But he doesn't have the aggressiveness needed to overtake Trump in a one-on-one debate.
For he is basically a nice guy, who has political ambitions which dictate what he pursues or goes against, regardless of his personal beliefs, whereas Trump (like Warren) actually believes what he says.
Harris is a pure politician, like Biden, going with whatever view will get them elected. But Harris is ruthless, whereas Biden has qualms.
The Dems better hope that Harris makes a comeback. For Biden will be destroyed by Trump in one-on-one debate.
Also, Biden is caving to far-leftist notions as he thinks this will help him to get the Dem nomination, whereas Harris can go back and forth between far-left, and left, and even moderate positions; whatever it takes, to get both the Dem nomination and then subsequently win over moderates to get the Presidency.
Biden will get bogged down in far-left garbage during the primaries, and then never be able to get out of it while debating Trump one-on-one, causing moderates to flee from Biden, and so giving Trump the Presidency.
But Harris can easily jettison far-left nonsense after getting the Dem nomination, and then go head-to-head with Trump. And she can enlist Warren as VP to still get all of the far-left votes. For Harris can make it clear (only to the far-left) that she will be far-left after getting elected, while snookering moderates into getting her elected.
Harris is the most dangerous person for the right, as for moderates. For she can appear as not what she is.
--
Of course. For the latter is a complete chameleon.
"Kama chameleon."
There's a song that sounds like that, which Trump should play at his rallies if she gets the Dem nomination.
trump doesn’t debate ... he blusters and bulllies. Regardless, it doesn’t matter. I am not voting for someone based on their debating skills but rather on their character. There is not one Dem running who wouldn’t be 100 percent better than what is currently in office.