Writes Nate Silver in "Bulletpoint: Does Kamala Harris Need A Win Before California?"
Is it too early to start talking about the potential for a brokered convention? No. From 2 days ago, Oregon Dem at Kos, "Prediction: The 2020 Democratic Convention Will be Contested, and Harris Will Emerge as the Nominee":
Per the revised DNC rules, “Superdelegates”... cannot vote on the first ballot.... Because of this change, for the current contest, those who are Superdelegates appear to be less vocal in who they may be supporting. I haven’t seen a single tabulation this time as to which candidates have which Superdelegate’s support....If one candidate is significantly ahead of the others, the Superdelegates will feel a lot of pressure to pick that person, but with all the race-and-gender politics these days, the pressure can be overcome if the top vote-getter in round 1 is a white male. We all know what "checks more boxes" means.
While Biden is still clearly the leader, he’s no lock at all to win 50 percent of the Pledged Delegates. If Sanders, Warren, and Harris all stay in the race, which is likely given their strong polling averages and good fundraising totals, and if Biden’s polling average slips into the upper 20s while they all stay in the 15 to 20 percent range, the likelihood that no candidate goes into the convention with more than 50 percent of the Pledged Delegates increases....
If Superdelegates split their support more broadly during a second ballot, one can imagine the rare situation where we’d see an even more contested convention (requiring a third ballot) because no candidate earns a majority of Total Delegates on a second ballot.
Were that to occur, I think that Kamala Harris would emerge as the consensus candidate because she checks more boxes....
Let's go back to what Silver wrote: "Harris probably needs to start plotting out a media and expectations-management strategy now that allows her to remain viable even if she strikes out in the first four states. California and some of the other Super Tuesday states should be good states for her, by contrast, but she needs to get there and to remain above the 15 percent threshold first." The 15% matters because in Democratic Party primaries, candidates need at least 15 percent to get a share of the delegates. (It's never winner take all.) Silver never mentions the convention in this piece. He's mostly talking about "momentum" and what gets media attention. But it seems to me that Harris (and others) should be "plotting out" not just "a media and expectations-management strategy" but an argument for choosing them on the second ballot.
Or is Harris already home free because she "checks more boxes"? What about the other candidates? Do they need to build their case for choosing them on the second ballot? Or is it obvious that all the others can only hope to win on the second ballot — if Harris reaches the convention relatively unscathed — if they get the most votes on the first ballot?
Posts
114 comments:
Perhaps Harris has already been anointed, it's just a matter of convincing everyone else. The worst outcome would be for primary voters to feel like they've had their choice taken away from them, like many Bernie supporters evidently did in 2016.
I saw Joe Biden in Iowa yesterday. He's finished. It will be Kamala. Omar will be her UN ambassador. Hillary will be Secretary of State again. The deal between KH and HRC is that KH will get the full backing of the Clinton machine and since HRC will be back at State, she can payoff on the bribes she already received and collect new bribes.
If the Dems end up with a brokered convention and the candidate is chosen by the superdelegates & not by the voters themselves, then you can kiss the Democratic Party as an institution good-bye.
Understand that there is now a sizable far Left faction in the Democratic Party that would welcome the destruction of the party if they thought that they could pick up a goodly number of the Democratic voters into a new, more explicitly left-wing party.
2020 is going to be a dangerous year for the Democratic Party.
This is a slow-news-day item of zero meaning even for political junkies. What does Megan Rapinoe say about it?
That would make Milwaukee even more of a circus than it will already be. Bring in the clowns!
To expand on the above comment, the Dems must nominate a person of color for the 2020 election. Joe, Liz and Bernie don't qualify.
Joe will make another blunder in a debate. Yesterday in CB, he told the small crowd "good afternoon" at 11:15. He's done.
Harris is being sucked into the vortex of a brokered convention....
All the Democrats need to do to have a chance at winning is not be crazy. Be it Congress or the presidency.
I wonder who will be the target of Kamala Harris's next racism accusations.
I'll start reading articles about a brokered convention on June 1, 2020.
If both parents were foreign born and temporarily here on Green Cards, then Kammie being born in the USA does not make her a natural born American citizen. Which is OK for Senate but not for President.
If both parents were foreign born and temporarily here on Green Cards, then Kammie being born in the USA does not make her a natural born American citizen.
If she will be the Democrat Party's candidate, then President Trump will make an issue of that -- rightfully so.
Trump made an issue of Ted Cruz's natural-born status.
'Were that to occur, I think that Kamala Harris would emerge as the consensus candidate because she checks more boxes....'
Heck of a way to pick a candidate, but I fully support Kamala for the nomination. She lacks the temperament to debate Trump, as she's nothing but a punk who 'checks more boxes' - emotionally unprepared to be punched in the nose. Watching her flame out will be delicious.
SO far the Democrats running for the presidency are either morons, Communists, crazies or check off the box affirmative action hires with no discernable competence. Trump will really want to lose in order for him to lose. As for Congress, they are behind the Commie Quad of anti-Semites, anti-American, anti-white and pro-Marxist. Even Schumer has sold himself out by supporting the anti-Semitic Omar.
Hillary will endorse Kamala very soon. Labor Day.
“If both parents were foreign born and temporarily here on Green Cards, then Kammie being born in the USA does not make her a natural born American citizen.”
Uh, yes it does. Other than that, you’re exactly right.
The jurisdiction for the US Constitution's natural-born-citizen qualification is not the judiciary. Rather, the jurisdiction is the electorate.
There is no mechanism for the judiciary to rule on this qualification. The issue does not become moot until after the Presidential Inauguration.
Therefore, each voter decides the proper definition of the expression "natural-born citizen", and each voter may vote against a candidate on that basis.
In these circumstances, the Government must provide the electorate with its best evidence of a candidate's birth circumstances, when this is an issue.
When the issue arose in the case of Barack Obama, the government failed to provide its best evidence to the electorate. Instead, the government provided only a summary of Obama's birth certificate, which had been written by an anonymous civil-registry clerk.
Donald Trump eventually -- although belatedly -- compelled Obama to establish a new, excellent precedent that a candidate should facilitate the provision of the government's best evidence.
Trump again, if Harris will be a general-election candidate, compel her and the government to provide the best available evidence about her birth circumstances. Furthermore, Trump will argue that voters should vote against her because she does not qualify in accordance with the US Constitution.
During the Democrat Party's primary-election race, any of her opponents could make similar demands and arguments, but none will do so.
Crazy. I'm wondering what exactly recommends this woman? It is not her record - even Democrats don't like her record as a prosecutor. It is not her policy positions, as she doesn't seem to be able to commit to any and often contradicts herself. What is it? Democrats are so very superficial. It is skin deep.
As a conservative, I find Klobuchar and Gabbard far more compelling and authentic. And intelligent. Seriously. But the Democrats have gone nuts so I'm laughing at a the thought of Kamala/Trump matchup. Trump isn't going to go after her in the same way he did Hillary, but it will be just as lethal.
Hillary will endorse Kamala very soon. Labor Day.
Not sure if that would be much of an endorsement. And that's before even considering what may come of the whole Epstein affair. If some of the rumblings I've heard are true... ohhh boy.
Darcy:
All the Dems have essentially the same far left policy positions. KH is a good looking, young, female person of color. That's all she needs to win. And she's running against a bunch of stiffs and old people.
"Yesterday in CB, [Biden] told the small crowd "good afternoon" at 11:15. He's done."
He was on Eastern time.
If Bill is drawn into the Epstein thing, Hillary will divorce him. A loving marriage destroyed by Bill's infidelity or a business partnership finally dissolved when it no longer worked to make money for both of them.
OM
He'd been in Iowa for a few days. Central Daylight Time.
Harris needs to have someone remove that stick rammed up her ass
Never Harris!
Howard:
She's a knockout. Movie star looks.
I wonder what the London bookies odds are going to be on Epstein getting the shiv. I'm sure Hillary has the connections to make that happen.
Darcy! Is that really you? Haven’t heard from you in a while. It took the prospect of Kamala Harris being nominated in a back room deal to get you to comment again?
Maybe all the characters are there to simply run interference for Harris until the general election. That way she at least gets to participate in the general election. She’d be goner if the media had to focus on her more.
@Dave Begley: Yes. As I said, it is skin deep. But Harris waffles more than any of them and she does not come off as very sharp IMO. Trump will exploit that unmercifully. But I admit to not understanding current Democratic party voters at all, even though I was once a staunch Dem. So my two cents is probably worthless.
Since Harris is by far the most evil candidate I'm assuming she's going to be the nominee.
There isn't a one of them, running on the platform all espouse, could beat Trump.
Hey Big Mike! C'est moi! #HorizontalHarris happens to be the thread I landed on, but still reading when I can and always love spotting vintage Althousians when I do! Hope you are well.
Hillary will offer herself up as a unity candidate at the convention.
Darcy said...
"Crazy. I'm wondering what exactly recommends this woman?"
Willie Brown says she gives good head.
Witch hunts, warlock trials, and Democrats will make a Choice whether Harris is... will remain viable. A tragicomedy.
I think Harris is very attractive too, Dave Begley, but I often wonder whether her demeanor and her facial expressions detract from a male perspective? She often comes off as really bitchy IMO. I would think that would turn men off, but have no idea.
She often comes off as really bitchy IMO. I would think that would turn men off, but have no idea.
According to Swift, men have a masochistic orientation. Perhaps some, but I think that most men and women have a gentleman and lady, a reconciliation of equals, orientation. Well, at least they do in my circles.
Hillary really is the unity candidate. Practically everybody can agree she's despicable.
The leftie elite despise the notion of actual voters choosing their nominees. It's still a coronation. They didn't change the rules that much...
She's a knockout. Movie star looks.
Given the available evidence, she's a look but don't court type, which may have been engendered by a #MeToo #HerToo #SheProgressed experience.
Only a dot in their rear view mirror, Hi, Hi; closer, closer, Hill, Hill; in the wings at the convention, Hillar, Hillar; deadlock, Hillary, HILLAR
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE.
Kamala Shamala. Any Democrat will carry California. And everyone is beginning to hate the place. Maybe the plague will be there by 2020.
No one believes Biden is a racist and or that he hates America. But will he stand up to the Four Donkey of the Apocalypse? That question isn't in the polling but it's being asked. The answer is, no.
So, SPRONG, a new candidate appears. Rodham in 2020. Hillary in purple hair.
Superdelegates.
In case the people vote the wrong way.
What will the Bernie Bros do THIS time when their candidate gets ripped off?
I mean, Bernie will get another house out of it, but what do you suppose they'll do?
Vote for the Democrat candidate?
Willie Brown checked her box.
Sorry.
Larvell said... (first quoting traditionalguy):
'“If both parents were foreign born and temporarily here on Green Cards, then Kammie being born in the USA does not make her a natural born American citizen.”
Uh, yes it does. Other than that, you’re exactly right.'
Uh, still a problem if Harris is only a "native born citizen" (anchor baby) instead of meeting the qualifications of being a "natural born citizen".
Fodder for a lawyer's relief act:
Is Kamala Harris Eligible to be President?
August 19, 2018
'...Former Obama eligibility litigant Commander Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (Ret) recently posted an article arguing that Harris is not constitutionally qualified. “Senator Harris is not being transparent on this issue and her office staff has refused to answer any questions on this subject,” Kerchner wrote. “Given Kamala Harris’s year of birth, and her parents emigration years, she was born in the USA to two foreign nationals and thus inherited their respective birth nation’s citizenship when she was born, in addition to being a basic Citizen by being born in the USA to aliens legally domiciled here. Thus Senator Kamala Harris was born with citizenship and required allegiance at birth to three countries. This is hardly what the founders and framers intended when they selected the “natural born Citizen” requirement for the person who would in the future be permitted to be the President and Commander in Chief of our military, once the founding generation was gone.”
'...Citing the Wikipedia entry and the five-year naturalization requirement, Wilmott told us, “Each of the parents has to be here five years to apply for citizenship. So if she was born in 1964 and the [Jamaican]father came in 1961 [and the Indian mother in 1960], adding five years to that, [neither] could not have become an American citizen until [1965 or] 1966, at the earliest.
https://www.thepostemail.com/2018/08/19/is-kamala-harris-eligible-to-be-president/
Inference: this guy may indeed have a arguable case because Harris' Senate office refuses to answer questions about this.
If Harris ever takes the lead in the polls (or the nomination via brokered convention), she'll buckle under the attention and attacks.
I don't get this notion that Kamala's such a knockout. I think she's sorta' horse-faced.
Tulsi is infinitely more attractive.
Ho-hum. If she loses the nomination, her place will be taken by some other State-shtupper, probably worse.
Those of you who have been around here for a while may recall my "Statist Scale," aka "The Coercion Meter." I may have to revise it with the Dems going Batshit State Crazy. On a scale of 0 to 10, with 0 being a pure pacifist libertarian anarchist a la Robert LeFevre (look him up) to 10 being outright tyrants a la Hitler, Mao and Stalin, I used to consider 6 to 9 what I called "the State Fellator Zone," including Hillary and Obama. But Red Diaper Barry and Queen Cacklepants seem like relatively sane State Fellators compared, say, to AOC.
What does Google want? that is the only question that matters now, isn't it?
Blogger Wilbur said..."I don't get this notion that Kamala's such a knockout. I think she's sorta' horse-faced."
I'm with you.
this guy may indeed have a arguable case because Harris' Senate office refuses to answer questions about this.
Just raising the question could be lethal to the Harris campaign.
Start talking about her childhood and her 7-8 years in Canada comes up.
And her attempt to identify with inner city black voters goes down.
Trump will tell Kamala to go back where she came from.....Willie Brown's bed
If it does go to a second ballot, isn't it true that all pledged delegates are no longer pledged? If it is true, then the second ballot could involve, not just the votes of the superdelegates, but also wheeling and dealing, and could end up nominating someone who is not BIden, or Harris, or Sanders, or Warren, or Buttigieg. A fellow commenter straightened me out on the 15% rule in an earlier comment thread here, so I really am sincere in soliciting an answer about the unpledging.
You people don't get it. She's historic. The historic first female person of color president. And good looking to boot. Nothing else matters. And, of course, Trump is understood to be a racist.
In the event of a brokered convention we will hear that "Hillary is the only person who can bring this fractured party together." The only question is whether they can resist.
Cookie,
Kamala Harris' deplorable record as a prosecutor will be used to show that she is a moderate.
If we’re going woman and good looking, then Gillibrand is the answer. Blond, guns and twice the cray cray. More entertainment, just in a way that’s very bad for the USA, but all the Dems are.
Eric: "In the event of a brokered convention we will hear that "Hillary is the only person who can bring this fractured party together." The only question is whether they can resist."
Michelle obama will emerge from any brokered convention with one caveat: If Trump and the republicans are successful in fully exposing the corruption of the federal govt under obama related to spying and framing opposition political candidates.
Huh. I find Gillibrand as unattractive as Warren. She's so pinkish pale. Never underestimate the blonde factor, I guess. :)
She has movie star good looks. Which movie stat would that be?
Yeah, she looks better viewed from the front with a heavy load of professionally applied cosmetics but some of you are being fooled by older photos (from when she was quite attractive), photoshopped glossies, and a TV make-up job that she can't put on at speaking events.
She had her day and, looks wise, she has not aged well in recent years.
This matters because her appearance is being touted an an exceptional aid to her electoral prospects and I don't think that will hold true.
As the New Yorker profile, parsed by Althouse, showed, Harris has no significant accomplishment, no discernible political talent, no major idea or proposal. She is a second-rate female Obama. But that may be good enough, certainly for the nomination.
The Dems have to take the identity politics plunge. Will the public at large plunge with them? Certainly she will unite the anti-Trump forces and attract some women turned off by the uncouth Orange Man. Althouse will be tempted: she can tout Harris' airhead non-answers as "pragmatic" (just like Barry!), she can be sure Harris will favor "women's bodies" (no more sorta-rapist Kavanaughs!), and of course electing Harris will make up for all the slights she and other women faced in recent decades (payback!). I predict that for her and other "feminists," such considerations will outweigh the coup attempt (what coup attempt? Russia, Russia!), the southern invasion (yeah, but "concentration camps"), and a great economy (well, that started under Obama).
1. A "green card" is issued to PERMANENT" residents. You don't seem terribly well informed on the issue.
2. She is a natural born citizen and the people pushing the idea that she is not should...
3. I'm just not gonna write what they should do. It's too nasty for an upclass place like this.
"You people don't get it. She's historic. The historic first female person of color president."
Gotta say that, in the person of Harris, being a woman and Black could be a net liability. Black, fine. A woman, sure. But both together might be a turn-off in some historically sympathetic parts of the electorate.
Just a gentle word of advice not to get sucked into whom Althouse votes for again. I appreciate very much how objective she is regarding Trump, but I don't believe for one minute she would pull the lever for him. And that's ok by me. These days, a liberal voter who can fairly look at Trump and the fake news media is welcome sight.
Dave Begley said...
KH is a good looking, young, female person of color. That's all she needs to win. And she's running against a bunch of stiffs and old people.
Yah, but what will the super delegates think about that aspect for a nominee?
I say this: they will reject her. Listen to her, nobody wants what she's selling, and right now, that includes the "normal" Democratic voters.
Rabel: 2. She is a natural born citizen and the people pushing the idea that she is not should..
Are you certain? I heard she grew up in Canada and spent 10 years attending one of those fancy private schools that inner city families aren't allowed to get vouchers for.
And that she spent thousands of dollars bleaching her skin whiter to fit in.
Maybe someone should ask her about that during the next national debate.
Harris doesn't need to plot a "media strategy".
The media will plot Harris' strategy.
Case in point:
Stats since Sunday:
CNN calling Trump racist: 1,720
CNN reports on Antifa terror attack that left one American dead: 0
A brokered convention... one can only wish! I read somewhere yesterday that the Obamas are trying to get Harris nominated. I don't know how, but Barack is such a snake in the grass that I would have no doubt that is happening. If there is no clear primary winer the Dem convention is going to be a war. The survivors will be still be warring when the polls open in November. The far left slant of the early campaign, if not incorporated by the nominee, will lose as many votes as nominating a black might gain - probably more. Of course staying left is the Rs fondest wish.
"Are you certain?"
Unless her birth certificate is fake, yes. Absolutely. Positively. Categorically.
People that call Harris a natural born citizen need to explain the difference between a citizen and a natural born citizen.
As far as I can tell, the only place "natural born citizen" has ever been written is in the Constitution, as a prerequisite to eligible to becoming the President of the United States.
I take it to mean born of in America of parents born in America.
I say this: they will reject her. Listen to her, nobody wants what she's selling, and right now, that includes the "normal" Democratic voters.
Yup. That's my Disney Theory on why Harris is doomed.
Disney had a choice to cast Captain Marvel as the original MCU Captain Marvel: Monica Rambeau, an african-american native to Louisiana who became the leader of the Avengers.
They chose instead to go with a white chick as the masthead for Avengers Phase 4, because they don't think America will flock to a black female in a leadership role.
I don't like Disney, but they know their American audience.
---
As an aside: remember this next time Brie Larson preaches about opening up Hollywood to minorities. Larson appropriated a role that SHOULD have gone to a black actress. When Larson lectures about white people stepping aside, she means you not herself.
Unless her birth certificate is fake, yes
It could be a "certificate of live birth", which doesn't establish anything beyond an unplanned birth.
Unless her birth certificate is fake, yes
I was being facetious. My point is that the issue will be raised regardless of merit, because it starts a conversation about how Harris can't identify with the Democrat's african-american base and their problems.
Add to that what appears to be trending - Trump shaving off 10+% from that voting bloc, and the Democrats are in serious trouble if they nominate her.
I deliberately said Harris spent 10 years in Canada when it is really 7-8, because when the network anchor corrects the number, the voter watching from the couch shrugs: "yah no diff"
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
The inference is drawn that if not naturalized, then "persons born", is based on the assertion that non citizens have constitutional rights, unless explicitly excluded (e.g. diplomatic immunity), rather than subject to the jurisdiction of statutory laws and conventions. This is the basis for democratic gerrymandering, incentive for foreign invasion, and progress of American civil rights.
Rabel: It's too nasty for an upclass place like this.
Uh-huh.
Weren't you calling me a jackass yesterday? Or an asshole? I forget. What was that all about?
Did you mean it as a term of endearment or were you just being classy?
Not that you're wrong, just...
Harris is a barren, childless woman.
The reason this culture holds women in such high regard is the nurturing, caring aspect of child rearing. The indescribable bond between mother and child that only a woman understands.
Why all revere their mothers.
She has the qualifications of speaking to family issues of an 160 lb. scruffy bearded millennial at Starbucks.
Sebastian said...
"As the New Yorker profile, parsed by Althouse, showed, Harris has no significant accomplishment, no discernible political talent, no major idea or proposal. She is a second-rate female Obama. But that may be good enough, certainly for the nomination."
Worked for Hillary.
on a similar vein, the previous flash in the pan, wendy davis, who they groomed to look almost human, is running for congress in texas,
Hope you are well.
@Darcy, I should ask the same about you. As I recall you were complaining about a back injury on your blog then it went dry. That was years ago. I ‘m afraid I stopped checking on it years ago.
I've heard scuttlebut of a video taken by someone Harris worked for. Let's just describe it as shot from a perspective of someone sitting as her head bobs up and down.
It's probably just gossip, but as a thought experiment I am wondering what effect that would have it was leaked in October 2020. Would it hurt or maybe even help?
Not very presidential though.
The reason this culture holds women in such high regard is the nurturing, caring aspect of child rearing
Yes, and society normalizes a favorable juxtaposition of the male and female sex, the masculine and feminine gender, respectively, for the sake of the people and our [unplanned] posterity. Unfortunately, with liberal license this social construct progressed with the sexual revolution generally, and planned parenthood specifically. Now (pun intended), it is merely bitter clingers grasping to Nature's sex and gender attributes rendered a quaint anachronism by social progress and urbane insularity.
Props to Monica Rambeau, but she was not Marvel's original "Captain Marvel". That was a renegade Kree man named "Mar-Vel". He shuffled off this mortal coil in 1982.
You can althouse portal read his complete adventures here and his send-off in The Death Of Captain Marvel.
Monica took up the mantle and name in 1982's Amazing Spider-Man Annual #16.
That was a renegade -
Yah, but I'm going of the actual Marvel Comics names:
Mar-Vel
Miss Marvel
Captain Marvel
Or is Harris already home free because she "checks more boxes"? What about the other candidates — if they get the most votes on the first ballot?
Votes can be racist, sexist, and LGBTQXYZ-phobic. In America's radiant future, only boxes will count.
If Harris wants to sew it up, though, she really needs to come out as a lesbian. And faking a limp wouldn't hurt.
What is your story, Fen?
I am very suspicious of your purpose here.
Pamela Harris will run to the left of Lenin to get the nomination. Then she will sound like Barry Goldwater in the general election as to more easily pick up conservative church-going blacks and moderate Hispanics. The voters, who pretty much have the institutional memory of garden slugs, will then decide the election on the basis of gotcha lines and come-backs in the debates.
Trump should have an advantage here. He won't fall for the notion that only a racist would criticize a minority candidate.
I am very suspicious of your purpose here.
I'm a forward scout from Antares. My mission is to determine if you guys are palatable.
I'm only confessing to it because everyone will think I'm just being silly.
But seriously, really? Why are you suspicious? No worries, I won't bite, I just find that interesting and I enjoy talking about myself. Speak freely. Please.
It is very, very unlikely to be a brokered convention- people just don't vote that way. If, after New Hampshire you haven't finished at least 3rd in a vote, your support vanishes like a fart in the wind along with all your campaign donations. If, on the first multi-primary day you haven't finished 1st or 2nd, your support vanishes like a fart in the wind along with your campaign money. The model you should be using is 2016 Republican primary- after Super Tuesday it was a 2 man race. The Democrats in 2020 will do the same- it will be heads up by mid March, and it likely end up a lopsided heads up, too, with the final candidate dropping out before Memorial Day.
The original Captain Marvel is now called Shazam.
Dunno what his entire story is, but in another thread Fen said that he wants to discourage citizens from voting at all if they ain't gonna vote for Trump. I'm no longer suspicious of his purpose, 'cause he has flat-out admitted what his intentions and goals are.
I have a hard time beleiving that an actual Marine would spit & shit all over those who made the ultimate sacrifice so that America remains the land of the free...can't trust anything he says after seeing him advocate for evilness like he did. The jerk probably also lied about Somali currently being controlled by a central gov't.
Purple: but in another thread Fen said that he wants to discourage citizens from voting at all if they ain't gonna vote for Trump.
LOL I never said anything like that.
Purple: The jerk probably also lied about Somali currently being controlled by a central gov't.
Oh my bad. You're just playing. Nicely done, you hooked me.
"The reason this culture holds women in such high regard is the nurturing, caring aspect of child rearing. The indescribable bond between mother and child that only a woman understands."
And almost no one thinks their own mother is presidential material.
I never said anything like that.
Nothing like that at all, eh? You never-ever made a post expressing hope that your party's leadership will develop a strategy to depress voter turnout among Dems in 2020, eh?
Nothing even close to that was ever said by you, correct? That is your Final Answer?
Jerk, not jackass. That would have been rude.
I can see PurplePenguin doesn't inhabit the Planet Earth. All negative campaign ads are designed to depress the opposition's voter turnout. All of it. Doing so isn't even un-American.
Jerk, not jackass. That would have been rude.
Hehe. Okay. Just giving you a little shit in return. Thanks for keeping it fun.
You know what's funny, when I first got on the net I was a naive fool anticipating all the deep and rational debates I would have with the Left.
I found myself surrounded by Ingas, Ritmos and Howards.
Everything I am now I learned from them. In a way, I am their Frankenstein monster :)
And almost no one thinks their own mother is presidential material.
Mother won't like that.
You never-ever made a post expressing hope that your party's leadership will develop a strategy to depress voter turnout among Dems in 2020, eh?
I'm not a Republican, but I did say that the RNC should take advantage of divisions within the Democrat party to depress voter turnout. Specifically, play on the fact that the Democrats promised impeachment if they were given control of the House and, not only did they fail to deliver, they shelved a motion to impeach.
That has to steam the radical Left and should be taken advantage of.
But it's not the same as your interpretation that I want to "discourage citizens from voting at all if they ain't gonna vote for Trump."
"Everything I am now I learned from them. In a way, I am their Frankenstein monster"
Which is ironic because the three of them together couldn't build a fire.
Which is ironic because the three of them together couldn't build a fire.
LOL. What does that make me? I kinda stepped into that one eh?
@BigMike: Victoria, Blake, Ron, MichaelHaz, chickenlittle, Lem, Pogo, and others I'm forgetting are all on Twitter if you'd care to check it out. I'm uncommentari there. Back is now in great shape - thank you!!
All negative campaign ads are designed to depress the opposition's voter turnout.
I disagree about the "all". Many, if not most, are designed to show why that person shouldn't be in office - not that people should stay home on election day.
Trying to convince your fellow citizens to not even vote is evil and goes against the principles our country is supposed to stand for.
Can someone else please explain how depressing voter turnout is not anything at all like discouraging people from voting? 'cause I truly don't see how there is a difference between the two.
Already we're down to 4 candidates:
Warren, Biden, Harris, and Bernie.
Bernie is dead man walking - Warren stole his platform.
Biden is crowding everyone out of the moderate lane but he's too old, too slow.
Warren is what the dems want.
Harris is what the D's need. A black woman who's not too far Left.
Purple: Can someone else please explain how depressing voter turnout is not anything at all like discouraging people from voting?
They are pretty much the same thing.
Try comparing what was actually said to what you pretended I said.
I'm curious if you are capable of distinguishing between the two.
Think of it as an intelligence test. Because it is. Lets time it too.
Ready? (click) Go!
“If, after New Hampshire you haven't finished at least 3rd in a vote, your support vanishes like a fart in the wind along with all your campaign donations. If, on the first multi-primary day you haven't finished 1st or 2nd, your support vanishes like a fart in the wind along with your campaign money. ”
The problem there is that CA doesn’t appear to vote that early. And that is Harris’ strength. Maybe. But the rule may be waived for her, due to her intersectionality points for being a black woman, until after the CA primary. We shall see.
I don't think the people in charge care who they nominate at this point.
None of them can beat Trump in close to a relatively honest election.
Their focus right now is on "voter registration" and "vote harvesting."
Once they deem her not viable... a tragicomedy in progress.
Browndog,
So you agree with me that neither McCain nor Cruz are eligible "natural born citizens"
They are clearly citizens by statute. "naturalized" They are not constitutional citizens under the 14th Amendment because they were not born in the "United States"
Their citizenship could not be removed retroactively but Congress could pass a law tomorrow that in the future people born in such circumstances are not automatically citizens.
John Henry
I dunno. Harris ticks a lot of boxes, but that was true on the very first day of the campaign. She's been running for months; she should have a better argument than ticking boxes.
Harris's expression always reminds me of someone whose credit card got rejected at a fancy restaurant. Exasperation, embarrassment, a hint of anger: "Why don't you run it again? There must be some mistake -- I'm sure that I'm good for this."
I mean, if the Democratic party were in a box-checking frame of mind, she should be in first place, shouldn't she? Or maybe duking it out with Cory Booker or Julian Castro.
The only person who's made an immediate splash in the polls upon entering this cycle is Biden. I have trouble thinking that he's going to be the nominee, but there are a lot of people who are receptive to the *idea* of Biden.
The Democrats have been running a "historic first" candidate for the last three cycles. Maybe they're tired of historic firsts.
Post a Comment