BearGoggles said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

wifeisafurd 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

---

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.

---

Nope.

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 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.

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.

---

They were worried about being able to use the donations.

Give me a break. Obama and Fidel Castro. Two peas in a pod, amirite?

---

It is a good thing they got to use the money. That worked out really well. Great choice.

And they raised far more money after Biden resigned than what was held before. That money would have been raised for any other candidate (donors were withholding to pressure Biden to abdicate).

Obama and his crew (likely including Pelosi) wanted Kamala. That is the beginning and end of it.

---

BearGoggles said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

wifeisafurd 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

---

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.

---

Nope.

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 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.

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.

---

They were worried about being able to use the donations.

Give me a break. Obama and Fidel Castro. Two peas in a pod, amirite?

---

It is a good thing they got to use the money. That worked out really well. Great choice.

And they raised far more money after Biden resigned than what was held before. That money would have been raised for any other candidate (donors were withholding to pressure Biden to abdicate).

Obama and his crew (likely including Pelosi) wanted Kamala. That is the beginning and end of it.

---

Probably, but not because she was the farthest left candidate they could find.

Others were waiting in line but told to back off. I think it will be Gavin Newsom's race to lose next time. With the Olympics in LA and after 4 years of a Republican in the White House he seems like the best candidate.

I wonder what will become of JD Vance. They don't even have his name on the campaign signs and there's a good chance that weasel may become President.

---

I'm baffled by your Vance comments. His name has been on signs I've seen and he has been the unsung hero of the campaign. He's been on all of the Sunday shows (when Trump, Kamala and Watz dodged) and was a great spokesman for Trump and the party. I don't know any conservative or republican who thinks he underperformed. Compare that to Walz.

The funniest part to me is that you call him a weasel. Vance and his personal story were considered inspiring (and the subject of hit books and movies) . . . until he supported Trump. Then the left demonized him - as they do to all republican candidates.

If you learn anything from this campaign, it should be that calling republicans Fascist/Weasels/Nazis/etc. doesn't work anymore.

---

🚨 BREAKING: 20M FEWER PEOPLE VOTED FOR KAMALA THAN BIDEN. KAMALA WAS LESS POPULAR THAN BIDEN

— Autism Capital 🧩 (@AutismCapital) November 6, 2024

concordtom said:

---

wifeisafurd 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

---

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.

---

That, and the fact that she has a vagina, breasts, and dark skin.
I mean, let's be real. America is not so deep.

---

concordtom said:

---

That, and the fact that she has a vagina, breasts, and dark skin.
I mean, let's be real. America is not so deep.

---

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

That, and the fact that she has a vagina, breasts, and dark skin.
I mean, let's be real. America is not so deep.

---

While Latino males are attracted to breasts, they are largely sexist and won't vote for a WOMAN.
Let alone a BLACK woman . . . and especially one who is championing women's reproductive rights/abortion.

Yes, welcome to Dumberica!

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

He's currently at @71M, @3M less than 2020.
She's currently at @66M, @15M less than Biden in 2020.

We do not know how many people are still left to be counted.

I think there is usually an increase in numbers simply due to population growth. Curious to see the numbers @18M lower, especially considering this was not a low interest election.

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Gretchen Whitmer would have been better than Harris. She's a popular Governor, would have least won Michigan and maybe some others. Being a governor also means legislative accomplishment and a Midwestern moderation not vacuous windbaggery.

---

philly1121 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

concordtom said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

That, and the fact that she has a vagina, breasts, and dark skin.
I mean, let's be real. America is not so deep.

---

While Latino males are attracted to breasts, they are largely sexist and won't vote for a WOMAN.
Let alone a BLACK woman . . . and especially one who is championing women's reproductive rights/abortion.

Yes, welcome to Dumberica!

---

If this is the only lesson liberals take away from this result, then they will continue to lose elections going forward.

---

I dunno what else to conclude. I mean, Trump is an outrageous character, a cultural terrorist, a blatant scofflaw and criminal. He's as horrible a candidate imaginable.

Lessons? You think there are profound lessons here? Give me a break.

---

There absolutely are a million lessons. If you can stomach the fact he's on Fox go find some clips from Harold Ford, Jr. I thought he made some pretty insightful comments about what the election lessons are and where his party needs to go from here.

---

Perhaps there are some complexities involved. But I think its obvious that the US is not ready to elect a woman as President. I think, as Tom describes, there is just a tendancy in this country to want a man to do this job. We can muse about whether Joe should have stepped aside earlier. I don't think he was up to the challenge and probably would have lost anyway. But if she had gone through the primary process and went head-to-head with a Josh Shapiro or Andy Breshear, I don't think she would have won. So I suppose its the Dems fault but what options did we have? We couldn't "redo" the primaries or have a floor fight at the convention.

As for the "why" that so many men, women - both whites and minorities - feel a woman can't do the job. I think its masculinity. Its faith based. Its probably anti-feminism and certainly racism as well. I mean, what it all comes down to is that Trump won with a dip**** campaign. He was fellating a microphone. Held a Nazi type rally at MSG. Has Project 2025 as a map for all to see. No one cared. So, if its ok to be that openly crass - what else is there to turn to except the base instincts of racism and misogyny?

---

concordtom said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

He's currently at @71M, @3M less than 2020.
She's currently at @66M, @15M less than Biden in 2020.

We do not know how many people are still left to be counted.

I think there is usually an increase in numbers simply due to population growth. Curious to see the numbers @18M lower, especially considering this was not a low interest election.

---

Morning Joe said it this morning early.

They were asking the what ifs:

* Maybe Biden should have stayed in.

* Maybe Biden should have gotten out a long time ago so she could have had a longer time to campaign.

* Maybe the Democrat Party should have held a long, open Primary process to select the candidate.

Then Joe mused: "Maybe if she was a 6'4" white male with blue eyes and blonde hair, who liked shooting pool and watching football, who could drink beer and spit tobacco."

For me, the take away is clear.
I mentioned this a few times: in 2016, I was getting tires and in the waiting room there were a small group of bored people. I struck up conversation. Two women told me they were voting for Trump because a woman can't do the job.

This is a cultural bias that is no different than racism. It's just commonly believed. A black guy might be a great athlete, but he can't be quarterback. Stuff like that. As father to 5 girls, it's certainly motivation to vote for a woman. Break the glass ceiling.

---

“When you break through a glass ceiling, you're going to get cut, and it's going to hurt.”

— Markeisha Everett (@MarkeishaDenise) October 18, 2023

concordtom said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

concordtom said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

That, and the fact that she has a vagina, breasts, and dark skin.
I mean, let's be real. America is not so deep.

---

While Latino males are attracted to breasts, they are largely sexist and won't vote for a WOMAN.
Let alone a BLACK woman . . . and especially one who is championing women's reproductive rights/abortion.

Yes, welcome to Dumberica!

---

If this is the only lesson liberals take away from this result, then they will continue to lose elections going forward.

---

I dunno what else to conclude. I mean, Trump is an outrageous character, a cultural terrorist, a blatant scofflaw and criminal. He's as horrible a candidate imaginable.

Lessons? You think there are profound lessons here? Give me a break.

---

There absolutely are a million lessons. If you can stomach the fact he's on Fox go find some clips from Harold Ford, Jr. I thought he made some pretty insightful comments about what the election lessons are and where his party needs to go from here.

---

Perhaps there are some complexities involved. But I think its obvious that the US is not ready to elect a woman as President. I think, as Tom describes, there is just a tendancy in this country to want a man to do this job. We can muse about whether Joe should have stepped aside earlier. I don't think he was up to the challenge and probably would have lost anyway. But if she had gone through the primary process and went head-to-head with a Josh Shapiro or Andy Breshear, I don't think she would have won. So I suppose its the Dems fault but what options did we have? We couldn't "redo" the primaries or have a floor fight at the convention.

As for the "why" that so many men, women - both whites and minorities - feel a woman can't do the job. I think its masculinity. Its faith based. Its probably anti-feminism and certainly racism as well. I mean, what it all comes down to is that Trump won with a dip**** campaign. He was fellating a microphone. Held a Nazi type rally at MSG. Has Project 2025 as a map for all to see. No one cared. So, if its ok to be that openly crass - what else is there to turn to except the base instincts of racism and misogyny?

---

Please stick around and spread your intelligence here!!!!!!!

---

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

That, and the fact that she has a vagina, breasts, and dark skin.
I mean, let's be real. America is not so deep.

---

While Latino males are attracted to breasts, they are largely sexist and won't vote for a WOMAN.
Let alone a BLACK woman . . . and especially one who is championing women's reproductive rights/abortion.

Yes, welcome to Dumberica!

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Gretchen Whitmer would have been better than Harris. She's a popular Governor, would have least won Michigan and maybe some others. Being a governor also means legislative accomplishment and a Midwestern moderation not vacuous windbaggery.

---

Plus, she's white.

---

More, not an incumbent with a 38% approval rating

---

concordtom said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Gretchen Whitmer would have been better than Harris. She's a popular Governor, would have least won Michigan and maybe some others. Being a governor also means legislative accomplishment and a Midwestern moderation not vacuous windbaggery.

---

Plus, she's white.

---

More, not an incumbent with a 38% approval rating

---

The low rating is because FoxNews successful conditioned people into thinking everything is ***** To the contrary,

the stock market is at an all time high

inflation is only barely above the target rate. Well done!

employment is at full levels.


The fake news network also wrongly blames Biden for Gaza and Israel.

Etc etc etc

They have not been patriotic cheerleaders. They've worked to spur the mood amongst many.

Queue your justifications response of why things actually do suck, only for you to reverse yourself in 6 months.

---

concordtom said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Gretchen Whitmer would have been better than Harris. She's a popular Governor, would have least won Michigan and maybe some others. Being a governor also means legislative accomplishment and a Midwestern moderation not vacuous windbaggery.

---

Plus, she's white.

---

More, not an incumbent with a 38% approval rating

---

The low rating is because FoxNews successful conditioned people into thinking everything is ***** To the contrary,

the stock market is at an all time high

inflation is only barely above the target rate. Well done!

employment is at full levels.


The fake news network also wrongly blames Biden for Gaza and Israel.

Etc etc etc

They have not been patriotic cheerleaders. They've worked to spur the mood amongst many.

Queue your justifications response of why things actually do suck, only for you to reverse yourself in 6 months.

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Gretchen Whitmer would have been better than Harris. She's a popular Governor, would have least won Michigan and maybe some others. Being a governor also means legislative accomplishment and a Midwestern moderation not vacuous windbaggery.

---

Plus, she's white.

---

More, not an incumbent with a 38% approval rating

---

The low rating is because FoxNews successful conditioned people into thinking everything is ***** To the contrary,

the stock market is at an all time high

inflation is only barely above the target rate. Well done!

employment is at full levels.


The fake news network also wrongly blames Biden for Gaza and Israel.

Etc etc etc

They have not been patriotic cheerleaders. They've worked to spur the mood amongst many.

Queue your justifications response of why things actually do suck, only for you to reverse yourself in 6 months.

---

Fox News is irrelevant

I agree somewhat about the economy but the economy is not distributed equally, hence the swing state issue. Secondarily, the administration has done a poor job of capitalizing on their build back better successes- which is producing infrastructure in red states. This should have been front and center along with raising minimum wage, and reinstating child credit not "is Trump a fascist.

Biden does own the ongoing slaughter in Gaza but it wasn't an election issue outside of Michigan

---

HKBear97! said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

concordtom said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

That, and the fact that she has a vagina, breasts, and dark skin.
I mean, let's be real. America is not so deep.

---

While Latino males are attracted to breasts, they are largely sexist and won't vote for a WOMAN.
Let alone a BLACK woman . . . and especially one who is championing women's reproductive rights/abortion.

Yes, welcome to Dumberica!

---

If this is the only lesson liberals take away from this result, then they will continue to lose elections going forward.

---

I dunno what else to conclude. I mean, Trump is an outrageous character, a cultural terrorist, a blatant scofflaw and criminal. He's as horrible a candidate imaginable.

Lessons? You think there are profound lessons here? Give me a break.

---

There absolutely are a million lessons. If you can stomach the fact he's on Fox go find some clips from Harold Ford, Jr. I thought he made some pretty insightful comments about what the election lessons are and where his party needs to go from here.

---

Perhaps there are some complexities involved. But I think its obvious that the US is not ready to elect a woman as President. I think, as Tom describes, there is just a tendancy in this country to want a man to do this job. We can muse about whether Joe should have stepped aside earlier. I don't think he was up to the challenge and probably would have lost anyway. But if she had gone through the primary process and went head-to-head with a Josh Shapiro or Andy Breshear, I don't think she would have won. So I suppose its the Dems fault but what options did we have? We couldn't "redo" the primaries or have a floor fight at the convention.

As for the "why" that so many men, women - both whites and minorities - feel a woman can't do the job. I think its masculinity. Its faith based. Its probably anti-feminism and certainly racism as well. I mean, what it all comes down to is that Trump won with a dip**** campaign. He was fellating a microphone. Held a Nazi type rally at MSG. Has Project 2025 as a map for all to see. No one cared. So, if its ok to be that openly crass - what else is there to turn to except the base instincts of racism and misogyny?

---

Racism and misogyny - I believe that's a key lesson right there. Liberals cling to this view that so many people's daily existence revolves almost exclusively around race, gender and sexual preference. Yes, those are hugely important, but they are not THE determining factor in how someone will vote. People care about the economy, affordability, safety, maintaining their standard of living and almost all distrust career politicians. Say what you will about Trump, but he's managed to position himself as an outsider and a quasi third-party candidate with some of his economic positions that straddle the right and left. Kamala is a career politician who ran for president in 2020 and received no support. She was an unpopular vice president and at one point was even considered a liability for Biden's reelection. She was given the nomination, it wasn't earned, and then proceeded to change her positions in a very stereotypical politician flip-flop. As the original post states, she was a terrible candidate for the Democrats. Biden should have stood by his original intent of being a transitional candidate and let the party go through a proper primary. Hindsight is 20/20, but it's very doubtful she would have won the nomination and if the Democrats let the people choose as opposed to dictating the nominee to them, their candidate would have likely won yesterday.

---