Kamala Harris

ericgtr12

Elite Member
Staff member
Aug 10, 2020
1,093
1,672
She's my pick and hopeful for Biden, IMO aside from diversity she brings a wealth of experience and knowledge to the job, something sorely lacking right now. It sounds like we'll know before the day is out, fingers crossed. 🤞
 

Scepticalscribe

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 12, 2020
588
876
I'm struck not just by the usual Right wing nonsense - what the old USSR (and - in a previous life - I taught Russian & Soviet politics & history) used to refer to as "agitprop" - (and the perfervid response to her selection as VP candidate suggests the extent of their fear), but the outraged response on MR - by conservatives!! - claiming concern that she is not "progressive" (that is hilarious) suggests that these conservatives doth protest too much, and also, that they wish to hold liberals/progressives/Democrats to a far higher standard of behaviour/consistency/ethics than they would ever begin to expect from their own appalling side of the political divide/fence/spectrum.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huntn

Alli

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 11, 2020
948
1,339
I'm struck not just by the usual Right wing nonsense - what the old USSR (and - in a previous life - I taught Russian & Soviet politics & history) used to refer to as "agitprop" - (and the perfervid response to her selection as VP candidate suggests the extent of their fear), but the outraged response on MR - by conservatives!! - claiming concern that she is not "progressive" (that is hilarious) suggests that these conservatives doth protest too much, and also, that they wish to hold liberals/progressives/Democrats to a far higher standard of behaviour/consistency/ethics than they would ever begin to expect from their own appalling side of the political divide/fence/spectrum.
They want to hold everyone who’s not a member of the GOP to a standard. They aren’t held to any standard at all, of course.
 

Scepticalscribe

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 12, 2020
588
876
They want to hold everyone who’s not a member of the GOP to a standard. They aren’t held to any standard at all, of course.
I just think to myself: Black man (president) condemned for wearing tan suit ..

Woman - a VP nominee - (did you read Goldberg's post?) condemned for not being "likeable".

Incumbent excused for corruption, charging SS to stay in his own hotels (how is that acceptable?), not supplying a tax clearance, appointing his unqualified corrupt relatives to positions in his administration, gutting agencies, racism, misogyny, vicious vindictive malevolent narcissist cruelty..... incompetence, recklessness, negligence, laziness....
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Huntn and Edd70

Alli

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 11, 2020
948
1,339
I missed Goldberg’s post, but I rarely read his meandering walls of text.

Honestly, I have so many people on my ignore list at this point that I can have pages full of “you are ignoring this content.” LOL!
 

Scepticalscribe

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 12, 2020
588
876
What really annoys me with him is the utterly "fake" pretence (so carefully crafted) that he is, in reality, remotely "neutral".

However, any male who dismisses a woman seeking election on the grounds that she is not "likeable" sets off alarm bells, and red flags both.

Only men demand that women seeking public office are "likeable"; is this asked of the appalling & awful Trump, the prissy Pence, the ghastly Ivanka, the fake-fucking-Ken-doll Kushner? No.

Personally, I want my friends to be "likeable" (and decent, kind, generous, progressive, their lives informed by ethics, intelligent, funny - but one cannot ask all of this from those who are friends) - but I do not ask this of those who seek political office.

For that, I will rest content with some combination of the following: Intelligence, integrity, experience, flexibility, judgment, competence, compassion (for those who have fallen between life's cracks), a rough sense of decency, a sense of fairness, a sense of humour (and an awareness of human fallibility, or imperfection), a life informed by an awareness of what it means to lead an ethical existence, and yes, some sense of a vision of what can be achieved (for the better) when one is elected to public office with a mandate.
 
Last edited:

Chew Toy McCoy

Site Champ
Aug 15, 2020
405
645
She’ll be rebranding the southern border wall as the southern wall of the world’s largest for profit prison she plans to build. :p:oops:
 

lizkat

Site Champ
Aug 15, 2020
492
1,006
Catskill Mountains
All presidents (except Trump)** are made malleable by the platform of their own party plus the power balances in Congress as essential realities of the job itself. So I wouldn't worry about Harris going rogue about anything really.

**Trump is an exception because he's past malleable and into gullible. He listens to anyone with ability to present an agenda as something absolutely genius-level that Trump himself has invented, and the presenter is merely agreeing how brilliant Trump's idea really is.​

Harris is not that stupid, nor so stubborn as to imagine everything she ever figured would "fix" America's problems can be implemented.
 

thekev

Power User
Aug 15, 2020
52
87
What really annoys me with him is the utterly "fake" pretence (so carefully crafted) that he is, in reality, remotely "neutral".
I called this out a couple times if I recall correctly. I don't recall geting a response.

However, any male who dismisses a woman seeking election on the grounds that she is not "likeable" sets off alarm bells, and red flags both.

Only men demand that women seeking public office are "likeable"; is this asked of the appalling & awful Trump, the prissy Pence, the ghastly Ivanka, the fake-fucking-Ken-doll Kushner? No.

Personally, I want my friends to be "likable" (and decent, kind, generous, progressive, their lives informed by ethics, intelligent, funny - but one cannot ask all of this from those who are friends) - but I do not ask this of those who seek political office.
The likability thing comes up every now and then, regardless of the candidate's sex. Sometimes it masquerades as personality. During Obama's primary run against Clinton, the two were trying to avoid being labeled as "elitist", which ultimately seems to refer to a similar quality. The elitist argument ultimately came down to whether people felt they could relate to common problems, which naturally correlates with likability.

The idea of likability as a campaign element has appeared at least since Eisenhower. I recalled the existence of this campaign focus, although I was not aware of this animation before googling. I


I realize sexism comes up, but I don't think it's completely one sided here. If anything Ivanka gets less hate than the other 2 jackasses or Golem Kushner. I figured any hatred toward her would be dismissed as sexism or misogyny.
 

Alli

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 11, 2020
948
1,339
I realize sexism comes up, but I don't think it's completely one sided here. If anything Ivanka gets less hate than the other 2 jackasses or Golem Kushner. I figured any hatred toward her would be dismissed as sexism or misogyny.
And that is equally unfair. I remember having a disagreement on Twitter after making disparaging remarks about Sarah Huckabee Sanders. I did not go so far as to call her an ugly bloated mouthpiece. All I did was refer to her constant lies and condescending attitude. I got a response about “supporting our sisters.” Ummm...no. That’s why we’re in the mess we’re in now. We cannot support someone because they are [fill in the blank] any more than we can hate them because they are [fill in the blank].

Ivanka is a lying snob who wouldn’t recognize hard work if she watched it all day - but even watching it is too much work for her.
 

Scepticalscribe

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 12, 2020
588
876
And that is equally unfair. I remember having a disagreement on Twitter after making disparaging remarks about Sarah Huckabee Sanders. I did not go so far as to call her an ugly bloated mouthpiece. All I did was refer to her constant lies and condescending attitude. I got a response about “supporting our sisters.” Ummm...no. That’s why we’re in the mess we’re in now. We cannot support someone because they are [fill in the blank] any more than we can hate them because they are [fill in the blank].

Ivanka is a lying snob who wouldn’t recognize hard work if she watched it all day - but even watching it is too much work for her.
Agree completely re Ivanka. An appalling and entitled individual.

And I remain stupefied that the GOP seems to see nothing wrong whatsoever with her presence (and that of her talentless husband) as a semi-detached part of Mr Trump's administration.

Can you imagine the howls of outrage if a President (Hillary) Clinton had appointed Chelsea Clinton (who, at least has a decent education) to a post as an "advisor" in her administration if she had won the election?

Is nepotism only deemed acceptable when the GOP does it?
 

Alli

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 11, 2020
948
1,339
Not a fan of Ivanka at all, but someone with a D in his party named his brother as US Attorney General...
And don't get me into the Office of the First Lady thing.
I’m guessing you’re referring back to Kennedy, who of course was the reason for the current nepotism rules.

The Office of the First Lady simply needs to be defined in a way that does not reflect poorly on someone who does not choose to be in the public eye by marriage.
 

yaxomoxay

Site Champ
Aug 13, 2020
471
632
The Office of the First Lady simply needs to be defined in a way that does not reflect poorly on someone who does not choose to be in the public eye by marriage.
With the exception of the USSS protection (obviously) I'd abolish it completely. The idea that there is an office which is available exclusively through marriage will always be something that I despise.

(Even more so since in modern times it seems that it is becoming a way to enter politics side-stepping everything else.)