Vice-President Kamala Harris

That wasn't a bill for the boarder, it had hidden billions for Ukraine and other DS elite agencies.

The pResident doesn't need a bill he can sign an executive order just like he did when he too office.

Hey PB, remember when Trump drew over a hurricane map with a sharpie? What was that all about?

Probably.

I mean I am not voting for her but devils advocate says she only raised money for felons but wasn't convicted of a felony.

MrDavitWilliam, please give yourself a short timeout from posting until you’re calm enough to post without violating the personal attacks rule. Thank you

I'd suggest the Democrats get a much less liberal candidate. Biden won because he pretended to be moderate. Americans are tired of this progressive nonsense. Americans are tired of liberals catering to the criminals.

Once we make being a dumbass a crime you'll be pretty glad we cater to the criminals.

Is there any particular reason I should be excited about a Kamala Harris presidency? Or is it simply a matter of she isn't Donald Trump, and that should be reason enough to vote for her?

Off the top of my head the 3 items I associate her Vice Presidency the most with is:

1. Biden appointing her the border czar and nothing coming of it
2. Her endorsing rioters in the Summer of Floyd
3. Equity memes

--Nothing really jumps off the page. But she isn't Trump or senile, so there is that.

She likes to laugh, which is a big no-no in right wing circles. I mean, even that mountain dew zinger didn't raise a smile with the MAGA crowd.

But on the plus side, she has a solid record for locking up minorities, so that might balance the scales for you.

Yes, tired of liberals catering to criminals but seemingly endless patience for conservative criminals. Okay.

I’m curious what you think makes Harris, who has historically been weak with progressive voters, substantially more liberal than Biden, other than being a black woman of course.

Would you prefer I refer to what I call a genocide as the killing of tens of thousands of innocent people based on their ethnicity and where they live? It kind of obviates the value of words though don't you think? I mean, instead of saying all that I can just say genocide and we both know exactly to what I am referring.

Since we're talking about definitions and all, I think you meant "obliterates". Pretty much the only thing that can follow "obviates" is "the need to", or something where that is implied.

I thought there was a thing about her fighting to keep someone (or multiple people?) locked up when there was evidence of factual innocence. Just a vague inkling I might have heard something along those lines somewhere, could well be confusing her with someone else.

She has no singular policy achievement or vision strongly associated with her, so in a sense there is more of her available to be pure Trump negation. To give people something affirmative to support, the media and her campaign are going to go full Obama campaign mode and try to represent her as some kind of cultural phenomenon. You're supposed to want to vote for her because she is a woman, a person of color, and as such represents some kind of evolution or enlightenment of our politics itself. You should be excited about voting for her because you want to be excited to be a better, more enlightened person who is "in the know" culturally. I think that side of the campaign is going to fail because she isn't Obama. She doesn't have anything like his talent and I think you need that to make this kind of campaign work.

Really she's just another sociopathic social climber. Her record as the California AG shows that. That means she is going to carry out the Washington consensus. That's nothing to get excited over, at least not in the positive expectation sense of the word. She will continue everything Biden is doing, edging us closer to WWIII a little more every day. She will continue getting Ukrainians and some Russians killed over nothing. She will continue green lighting the genocide of the Palestinian people. She will continue inflaming tensions with China. She is going to let concentrated capital run our country and our lives, maybe ending them, maybe ending all humanity.

When I say she will do these things I really mean other people in her administration will. Her job will be to look at some cliffs notes, fix her hair, and come out to the podium to brush off, with a cackle, the latest atrocity of the American war machine. I don't see her being engaged with actual policy crafting, so it's just the same evil foreign policy and class warfare at home.

No. It was probably her. She has definitely been attacked from the left over her career as a DA, and it is definitely something the right has cynically brought up. But most of it is bad faith coming from both sides.

The Overton Window has since shifted so that if you are a DA and not a pro crime activist, you fail the progressive political purity test. But at the time, even San Francisco progressives expected DA's job should entail charging and prosecuting criminals.

I do say, the more Marxists criticize her from the left, the more ok I am with the prospect of voting for her. If she is President I just hope you are right, and she isn't more aligned with your ideology than you give her credit for.

I suppose. Or do I mean "I guess"? The word genocide obviates the need to spell out the scenario playing out in Gaza, but spelling out the scenario in Gaza invokes or makes necessary the use of the word genocide. So I almost said the opposite of what I meant. What about "obliviates"? That's closer to the word I misused, actually only off by a few letters and so my mistake is smaller.

I am not familiar with "obliviate" which appears to be a verb formed from the same root as "oblivion". Suffice to say it's not a commonly used word. I suppose if you wanted to send readers to their dictionaries you could use it.

She doesn't have an ideology. She serves her narcissism by serving the rich. Making money is not really an ideology. She is the oligarch's agent representative, there to tell people the lie that policies designed to benefit large corporations are designed to help American individuals. The mandate of liberalizing capital tends to produce rightwing policies. For example, killing tens of thousands of Palestinians to preserve a relationship with a client state which serves a large cross section of elite financial interests has nothing to do with Leftism, Marxism, or progressivism.

The attack ads will try to portray her as some kind of radical "liberal" or something, but those are ads aimed at casual conservative voters, largely people who don't know what words mean.

Sounds pretty good to me. You should work for her campaign!

+1. I haven't done a deep-dive yet into Harris' policies or anything, but that there is so much anger from the insane-left toward her is certainly a promising sign.

I'd like this to be a landslide. Not that regular 51 vs 49 **** but 60% for Harris in the election. We need to part from Trumpism for good. Enough badly ruled countries as it is.

to be elected or u to be happy if she gets elected ?