Jump to content

Kamala Harris 2021

GRHorn

By GRHorn
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Js1

Js1 85110

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Negged for irony deafness and humorlessness. Negged with some reservation because it's like making fun of a kid born ugly.

Don’t drag Eric Trump into this 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
UpperWestside

UpperWestside 6136

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Js1 said:

Both grifter BS and way easier to blame the sitting VP than acknowledge that your mom embezzled from your grandma’s trust into her personal company.  The granddaughter now claims she might have to become a stripper to pay her bills.  Instead of leeching off grandma’s estate that her mom mishandled 

What a time to be alive.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Post Oak

Post Oak 20187

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Js1 said:

Both grifter BS and way easier to blame the sitting VP than acknowledge that your mom embezzled from your grandma’s trust into her personal company.  The granddaughter now claims she might have to become a stripper to pay her bills.  Instead of leeching off grandma’s estate that her mom mishandled 

 

tenor.gif?itemid=6116268

 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Hank Kingsley

Hank Kingsley 20707

Posted
Posted

Yeah, it's Politico, and yeah, I'm pretty sure Kamala gets criticism that a man in her position wouldn't have to deal with. 

But this is the second time she's had a real messy team behind her (there was a long article about problems with her presidential campaign and the results kind of proved it) and it's a legitimate red flag. 

She should not be the Dem presidential candidate in waiting. Or at the very least, it should not be handed to her at this very moment. I don't have confidence in her organizational or political skills to handle the onslaught coming in 2024 or 2028. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
Posted

As bad as she is, she’s still better than many alternatives.  In hindsight with the VP pick, her presidential campaign was never serious so I’m not going to count that against her.  I mean, have you seen Joe Biden’s previous Presidential campaigns? No one cares.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85110

Posted
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Yeah, it's Politico, and yeah, I'm pretty sure Kamala gets criticism that a man in her position wouldn't have to deal with. 

But this is the second time she's had a real messy team behind her (there was a long article about problems with her presidential campaign and the results kind of proved it) and it's a legitimate red flag. 

She should not be the Dem presidential candidate in waiting. Or at the very least, it should not be handed to her at this very moment. I don't have confidence in her organizational or political skills to handle the onslaught coming in 2024 or 2028. 

 

 

How strange of Politico that there was literally an article earlier this week that Tina Flournoy was doing her job extremely well, blocking outside noise from the VP's office and acting as gatekeeper (which is the Chief of Staff's job) to keep the donors out of her ear and out of her office.    Donors who want to talk policy have to talk to *gasp* policy advisors first! 

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/29/kamala-harris-chief-of-staff-limits-access-to-vice-president.html

Politico though would be the first to find a counter narrative and some nameless unhappy people who can't get their calls returned or can't get their coveted access. 

Edited by Js1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank Kingsley

Hank Kingsley 20707

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

As bad as she is, she’s still better than many alternatives.  In hindsight with the VP pick, her presidential campaign was never serious so I’m not going to count that against her.  I mean, have you seen Joe Biden’s previous Presidential campaigns? No one cares.  

This is a very lazy take. Her presidential campaign was "never serious"? She was considered one of the favorites early on and surged after the first debate. But her organizational leadership is weak (her team ended up being a disaster and it eventually knocked her out of contention) and her political instincts aren't very sharp. The GOP will have guns blazing in 2024 or 2028 and I'm not confident in her ability to handle it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bateshorn

Bateshorn 9904

Posted
Posted

Her Senate office always had a reputation as hard to get a meeting with.  I never found that, but I always got a junior staffer, who were usually very competent.  She certainly wasn’t a player in the Senate, so unless you had Cali specific business, it was a pass and there have been rumors she was hard to work for, but she’s no Pramila Jayapal. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85110

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, freyguy said:

what does the VP do again?

Whatever the president tasks them with. She’s been tasks with the border and voting rights. Biden had implementing the recovery act, gun control and Afghanistan. Pence had COVID and fluffing Trump’s mushroom. Cheney got to wage a war in 2 countries by himself! 

Edited by Js1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

This is a very lazy take. Her presidential campaign was "never serious"? She was considered one of the favorites early on and surged after the first debate. But her organizational leadership is weak (her team ended up being a disaster and it eventually knocked her out of contention) and her political instincts aren't very sharp. The GOP will have guns blazing in 2024 or 2028 and I'm not confident in her ability to handle it. 

 

The take is lazy because her campaign was lazy. She had no great ideas (except to ban Trump from Twitter), reversed course on a few occasions, couldn’t win Black voters, and got out hustled quickly. She never led in any poll at any time so I don’t know where the high expectations came from other than she looked good on paper with all the boxes she checked.  Her unusually aggressive online supporters did a better job of promoting her than she did.  Biden is going to run again anyway so she’s pretty much irrelevant for the next five years. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neonmoon

Neonmoon 38127

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

No doubt that Biden putting Kamala in charge of the border is a lose-lose situation for her. Curious decision. 

 

It's an unsolvable problem. It was a mistake by Biden unless he actually wanted to keep the target off him. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Incredulity

Incredulity 11555

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

It's an unsolvable problem. It was a mistake by Biden unless he actually wanted to keep the target off him. 

I have started to believe that giving her this assignment and also putting her on point for voting rights(days after key votes said no) are payback for the first Democratic Debate knifing she gave Ol'Joe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank Kingsley

Hank Kingsley 20707

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

I have started to believe that giving her this assignment and also putting her on point for voting rights(days after key votes said no) are payback for the first Democratic Debate knifing she gave Ol'Joe.

You're not alone. It's a possibility. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GW Hayduke

GW Hayduke 1952

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Yeah, it's Politico, and yeah, I'm pretty sure Kamala gets criticism that a man in her position wouldn't have to deal with. 

But this is the second time she's had a real messy team behind her (there was a long article about problems with her presidential campaign and the results kind of proved it) and it's a legitimate red flag. 

She should not be the Dem presidential candidate in waiting. Or at the very least, it should not be handed to her at this very moment. I don't have confidence in her organizational or political skills to handle the onslaught coming in 2024 or 2028. 

 

 

That article was lame. Typical politico. This is not the "second time she's had a real messy team behind her" or a "legitimate red flag."  This is a bunch of he said, she said, unsubstantiated rumors. A similar article could be written about any politician in office.  Anyone who factors this article into their decision making process concerning support for a presidential candidate, should take a pause.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bama Chick

Bama Chick 28596

Posted
Posted

Whatthefuckever.

Throw a binder at someone, make an intern feed you salad with a hairbrush, be demanding as all fuck.

We’ve had 250 years of old white assholes with cocks running shit and acting the fool the whole time.

Let the women do the work and maybe in 300 years we too can reach the pinnacle of male assholery we have now.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank Kingsley

Hank Kingsley 20707

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

That article was lame. Typical politico. This is not the "second time she's had a real messy team behind her" or a "legitimate red flag."  This is a bunch of he said, she said, unsubstantiated rumors. A similar article could be written about any politician in office.  Anyone who factors this article into their decision making process concerning support for a presidential candidate, should take a pause.  

Kamala has had a history of staffers leaking their complaints to the press. It's not ideal. I understand why you'd think it's overblown, but you shouldn't put your head in the sand either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Buzzrock

Buzzrock 14871

Posted
Posted

I thought she was a shrewd choice for VP, but whenever I see her interviewed now it just seems like she doesn’t want to be there. I have to wonder if her real passion was as a prosecutor and she would be a better fit there.

Everyone is an A player somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GW Hayduke

GW Hayduke 1952

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Kamala has had a history of staffers leaking their complaints to the press. It's not ideal. I understand why you'd think it's overblown, but you shouldn't put your head in the sand either. 

It isn't putting my head in the sand by acknowledging the article was just he said, she said, unsubstantiated rumors that could written about any politician.  I mean there was zero substance.  Literally, nothing of substance happened.  It is just unnamed people saying things. This is like middle school politics. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85110

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

It isn't putting my head in the sand by acknowledging the article was just he said, she said, unsubstantiated rumors that could written about any politician.  I mean there was zero substance.  Literally, nothing of substance happened.  It is just unnamed people saying things. This is like middle school politics. 

Oh so you are familiar with Politico

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...
  • 4 weeks later...
Incredulity

Incredulity 11555

Posted
Posted

https://www.sfgate.com/national-politics/article/Kamala-Harris-approval-rating-poll-history-Biden-16602512.php

 

According to the poll, conducted among 1,000 registered voters from Nov. 3-5, Biden has an approval rating of 38% and Harris has an even worse 28% approval rating. The poll found that Harris is more unpopular than both congressional Democrats (29% approval) and congressional Republicans (35% approval), which is pretty hard to do as members of Congress often receive low marks in public opinion polls (overall congressional approval is at 12%).

 

The Los Angeles Times' polling tracker shows that Harris is more unpopular than Mike Pence, Joe Biden, Dick Cheney and Al Gore were at this point in their respective vice presidencies

 

Holy shit.

Kamala Harris Veep GIF by Election 2020

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mo Horn

Mo Horn 8807

Posted
Posted

How could someone even have a no-preconceived opinion to give. She's been basically invisible. I really like her, and I'm not sure I could give an honest, new, opinion about her. As for job performance, she's broken the ties in the senate when needed, and always voted how I want her to vote. There's an article behind a payroll about her not being more visible, and rather that's her choice or Biden's, so I haven't read it. But I really don't understand how she hasn't been more visible. I'm sick of old white guys leading political parties, and I'm an old white guy. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
C-Man

C-Man 27056

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Satoshi said:

This is an obvious insider hit piece on Kamala. So you have to ask why is CNN publishing it? Seems to me that it’s Biden friendly people throwing this story out there. 
 

 

Maybe because unlike Fox News, Newsmax or OAN, CNN at least tries to be bipartisan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satoshi

Satoshi 129

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Not like there’s independent third parties that actually study this kinda thing…A7A809CB-1F75-484E-A9A6-0788D84A4DAC.thumb.jpeg.b93665cb4cd78313d2a65fa213138eb8.jpeg

Great so according to that chart CNN level of bias is essentially equal to Fox News. Thanks for sharing. 
 

But that chart is a fucking joke. NPR falls in the neutral category? Their existence is largely dependent on leftist government funding. Lolololol

Edited by Satoshi
  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites
VivaNaranja

VivaNaranja 466

Posted
Posted (edited)

I mean, Satoshi is definitely illiterate (Fox News Network clearly skews further than CNN in that chart), but I think there's issues with those rankings. In what world are OANN and Newsmax as centrist as CNN and Newsweek? Not to mention the New York Post's placement

Edited by VivaNaranja
  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satoshi

Satoshi 129

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

big surprise that you suck at reading charts as much as everything else you do

 

4 minutes ago, VivaNaranja said:

I mean, Satoshi is definitely illiterate (Fox News Network clearly skews further than CNN in that chart), but I think there's issues with those rankings. In what world are OANN and Newsmax as centrist as CNN and Newsweek? Not to mention the New York Post's placement

Fox News is like a millimeter more to the right than cnn is to the left. That’s why I said essentially equal in terms of bias. 

  • Fuck You 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 12846

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

Great so according to that chart CNN level of bias is essentially equal to Fox News. Thanks for sharing. 
 

But that chart is a fucking joke. NPR falls in the neutral category? Their existence is largely dependent on leftist government funding. Lolololol

So you can’t read a table. Good to know.

NPR does depend on government funding. It’s also one of our most non biased news sources. Unless you have some data that proves them wrong. Oh you don’t and are jjst talking out of your ass.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 12846

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, VivaNaranja said:

I mean, Satoshi is definitely illiterate (Fox News Network clearly skews further than CNN in that chart), but I think there's issues with those rankings. In what world are OANN and Newsmax as centrist as CNN and Newsweek? Not to mention the New York Post's placement

Look at the dotted lines. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...