you lose if all you can do is name call ..sort of like Harrisdajo9 said:
Lol at the old white men who are so far behind the times
You 'bout this from your candidate?Oakbear said:
I Have been following politics since 1952 when my dad bought a tv so we could watch the conventios, up late at night
Before harris i thought mccain was the weakest candidate but harris is much worse, a shame as i am not a big trump fan
MOST. LIBERAL. SENATOR. pic.twitter.com/1OreQiXEmj
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) November 2, 2024
she ain't creepy like your team:bear2034 said:MOST. LIBERAL. SENATOR. pic.twitter.com/1OreQiXEmj
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) November 2, 2024
She's a puppet for left wing extremism and authoritarianism.
Tonight, Trump:
— Kamala HQ (@KamalaHQ) November 2, 2024
—Complained about having to hold a microphone, threatening to “knock the hell out of” the staff and calling them “stupid”
—Went on an unintelligible rant about “the weave” and said he has a “very fertile brain”
—Acknowledged that more and more people are calling… pic.twitter.com/D9pNmS6x52
Best case: she’s drunk
— Still Boneless (@still_boneless) November 2, 2024
Worst case: she’s not
pic.twitter.com/eCkifc6yXq
His aides say nobear2034 said:
It's interesting that Trump doesn't have a nickname for Kamala like he usually has with all his opponents. What about Drunk Kamala?Best case: she’s drunk
— Still Boneless (@still_boneless) November 2, 2024
Worst case: she’s not
pic.twitter.com/eCkifc6yXq
They are unserious clowns who unfortunately vote.chazzed said:
Anybody who does not label Trump as such does not deserve to be taken seriously.
dajo9 said:
Lol at the old white men who are so far behind the times
— COL Conrad Reynolds (@ColonelReynolds) November 2, 2024
This is a delusional and ill informed take.AunBear89 said:
It looks more like Trump's base.
tequila4kapp said:This is a delusional and ill informed take.AunBear89 said:
It looks more like Trump's base.
tequila4kapp said:This is a delusional and ill informed take.AunBear89 said:
It looks more like Trump's base.
tequila4kapp said:This is a delusional and ill informed take.AunBear89 said:
It looks more like Trump's base.
Yup, Proud Boy and Klan is the MAGAt base. Need to root them out.AunBear89 said:
It looks more like Trump's base.
AunBear89 said:tequila4kapp said:This is a delusional and ill informed take.AunBear89 said:
It looks more like Trump's base.
And can we assume, given your predictable response, that you believe the original post to be clear eyed and well informed? That a bunch of KKK members from likely the 1940s is going to vote for a woman. A brown skinned woman?
If you honestly believe that, you are as stupid as 003.
dajo9 said:
Lol at the old white men who are so far behind the times
Oakbear said:
I Have been following politics since 1952 when my dad bought a tv so we could watch the conventios, up late at night
Before harris i thought mccain was the weakest candidate but harris is much worse, a shame as i am not a big trump fan
She had very little time to campaign. She did well considering, and if she had more time, I suspect she wins. When they do a post-mortem, I suspect the take away ends-up being covering-up Biden's health issues sunk the election for the Dems.Oakbear said:
I Have been following politics since 1952 when my dad bought a tv so we could watch the conventios, up late at night
Before harris i thought mccain was the weakest candidate but harris is much worse, a shame as i am not a big trump fan
That and for some reason, there are men that will not vote for a woman. Trump went for them and it really resonated, across races.wifeisafurd said:She had very little time to campaign. She did well considering, and if she had more time, I suspect she wins. When they do a post-mortem, I suspect the take away ends-up being covering-up Biden's health issues sunk the election for the Dems.Oakbear said:
I Have been following politics since 1952 when my dad bought a tv so we could watch the conventios, up late at night
Before harris i thought mccain was the weakest candidate but harris is much worse, a shame as i am not a big trump fan
dajo9 said:
Lol at the old white men who are so far behind the times
Oakbear said:
I Have been following politics since 1952 when my dad bought a tv so we could watch the conventios, up late at night
Before harris i thought mccain was the weakest candidate but harris is much worse, a shame as i am not a big trump fan
dimitrig said:Oakbear said:
I Have been following politics since 1952 when my dad bought a tv so we could watch the conventios, up late at night
Before harris i thought mccain was the weakest candidate but harris is much worse, a shame as i am not a big trump fan
Harris and McCain were weak but not as weak as Bob Dole
Nope.wifeisafurd said:She had very little time to campaign. She did well considering, and if she had more time, I suspect she wins. When they do a post-mortem, I suspect the take away ends-up being covering-up Biden's health issues sunk the election for the Dems.Oakbear said:
I Have been following politics since 1952 when my dad bought a tv so we could watch the conventios, up late at night
Before harris i thought mccain was the weakest candidate but harris is much worse, a shame as i am not a big trump fan
Bob Dole went against a popular incumbent, Trump could have repeated the 1984 election if his campaign didn't goof around after the Biden debate, that is how bad Harris wasconcordtom said:No.dimitrig said:Harris and McCain were weak but not as weak as Bob DoleOakbear said:
I Have been following politics since 1952 when my dad bought a tv so we could watch the conventios, up late at night
Before harris i thought mccain was the weakest candidate but harris is much worse, a shame as i am not a big trump fan
Bob Dole was 10x better than Donald Trump!!!
wifeisafurd said:She had very little time to campaign. She did well considering, and if she had more time, I suspect she wins. When they do a post-mortem, I suspect the take away ends-up being covering-up Biden's health issues sunk the election for the Dems.Oakbear said:
I Have been following politics since 1952 when my dad bought a tv so we could watch the conventios, up late at night
Before harris i thought mccain was the weakest candidate but harris is much worse, a shame as i am not a big trump fan
BearGoggles said:Nope.wifeisafurd said:She had very little time to campaign. She did well considering, and if she had more time, I suspect she wins. When they do a post-mortem, I suspect the take away ends-up being covering-up Biden's health issues sunk the election for the Dems.Oakbear said:
I Have been following politics since 1952 when my dad bought a tv so we could watch the conventios, up late at night
Before harris i thought mccain was the weakest candidate but harris is much worse, a shame as i am not a big trump fan
She was deeply unpopular as VP. She ran a terrible campaign, dodging media and the press, with no real message other than "Trump is bad." She didn't distance herself from Biden (and her own) bad policies. She never explained her massive changes in position and in fact lied about that in many cases. She was a bad retail politician. And then she was anointed by the dem oligarchs - the same people who hid Biden's condition - without any type of primary.
She, like Biden before her, thought hiding and "not being Trump" would be enough. It was not.
Had the dems run a better candidate - Manchin, Newsome, Shapiro, or others - they likely would have won. I would have voted for Manchin and likely Shapiro. Instead they ran the deeply unpopular, not bright, and farthest left candidate they could find.
Obama and the rest of the Dem politburo called the shots. They could have picked anyone or simply called for a primary/convention vote. They wanted Kamala and she was/is as far left as they come. The dems had a chance to go a different direction and didn't.dimitrig said:BearGoggles said:Nope.wifeisafurd said:She had very little time to campaign. She did well considering, and if she had more time, I suspect she wins. When they do a post-mortem, I suspect the take away ends-up being covering-up Biden's health issues sunk the election for the Dems.Oakbear said:
I Have been following politics since 1952 when my dad bought a tv so we could watch the conventios, up late at night
Before harris i thought mccain was the weakest candidate but harris is much worse, a shame as i am not a big trump fan
She was deeply unpopular as VP. She ran a terrible campaign, dodging media and the press, with no real message other than "Trump is bad." She didn't distance herself from Biden (and her own) bad policies. She never explained her massive changes in position and in fact lied about that in many cases. She was a bad retail politician. And then she was anointed by the dem oligarchs - the same people who hid Biden's condition - without any type of primary.
She, like Biden before her, thought hiding and "not being Trump" would be enough. It was not.
Had the dems run a better candidate - Manchin, Newsome, Shapiro, or others - they likely would have won. I would have voted for Manchin and likely Shapiro. Instead they ran the deeply unpopular, not bright, and farthest left candidate they could find.
I don't think "farthest left" was what they were looking for. They wanted a black woman in 2020. That got her the job.
After that she got it because she was the VP and being on the ticket had access to the donations. It also made it more palatable to say "Well, you voted for Biden AND Harris" so she did get your vote. Biden is old so it could have happened organically anyway.
There is nothing about today's Dem party that is embracing the farthest left at all. They are very centrist. She wouldn't have been the pick if not for being the VP already.
BearGoggles said:Obama and the rest of the Dem politburo called the shots. They could have picked anyone or simply called for a primary/convention vote. They wanted Kamala and she was/is as far left as they come. The dems had a chance to go a different direction and didn't.dimitrig said:BearGoggles said:Nope.wifeisafurd said:She had very little time to campaign. She did well considering, and if she had more time, I suspect she wins. When they do a post-mortem, I suspect the take away ends-up being covering-up Biden's health issues sunk the election for the Dems.Oakbear said:
I Have been following politics since 1952 when my dad bought a tv so we could watch the conventios, up late at night
Before harris i thought mccain was the weakest candidate but harris is much worse, a shame as i am not a big trump fan
She was deeply unpopular as VP. She ran a terrible campaign, dodging media and the press, with no real message other than "Trump is bad." She didn't distance herself from Biden (and her own) bad policies. She never explained her massive changes in position and in fact lied about that in many cases. She was a bad retail politician. And then she was anointed by the dem oligarchs - the same people who hid Biden's condition - without any type of primary.
She, like Biden before her, thought hiding and "not being Trump" would be enough. It was not.
Had the dems run a better candidate - Manchin, Newsome, Shapiro, or others - they likely would have won. I would have voted for Manchin and likely Shapiro. Instead they ran the deeply unpopular, not bright, and farthest left candidate they could find.
I don't think "farthest left" was what they were looking for. They wanted a black woman in 2020. That got her the job.
After that she got it because she was the VP and being on the ticket had access to the donations. It also made it more palatable to say "Well, you voted for Biden AND Harris" so she did get your vote. Biden is old so it could have happened organically anyway.
There is nothing about today's Dem party that is embracing the farthest left at all. They are very centrist. She wouldn't have been the pick if not for being the VP already.
Obama wanted Kamala because, like Biden, he would be able to control her (Susan Rice and her crew have been running the country).
And your take that the dem/Kamala platform is "centrist" is as out of step as many of your other California bubble takes.
