Hanaguma

Track records. The American people weren't buying what the Democrats were peddling, even before the debate. The GOP was ahead on issues like the ecnomy, inflation, the border. Now with the added burden of the intercine war in their party, the Democrats are in a pickle.

It is a pattern, according to the New York Times; A close look at more than two dozen radio and podcast interviews given by Mr. Biden over the past two years reveals a distinct pattern: In appearance after appearance, the president has been served up nearly identical questions, prescreened or suggested ahead of time by campaign staff members. And in nearly every case, the questions set the president up to deliver on-message talking points, without notable flubs. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/11/us/politics/biden-campaign-media-2024.html

ANY Democrat? Not necessarily. But the two you named, sure. What those in the so-called "Lucky Country" choose to name their political parties is irrelevant. Mildly interesting, but irrelevant. My references to Harris are accurate, and important. They are the reasons she was picked as VP. I agree that her skin colour SHOULD be irrelevant when discussing her suitability for office. But sadly, that is not the case. Her pigmentation and the presence of ovaries were key components to her selection as VP. Without them, she would not have been in the running. Trump was very much convicted. And look where that has gotten us- nowhere. As a political attack, it went flat. His trial and conviction have been rather controversial, with many astute observers on the left asserting that it was a purely political witch hunt (eg. Alan Dershowitz, Andrew Cuomo). Hardly fans of the Bad Orange Man to be sure. The Americans have put themselves into a position where they (so far) have to choose between a felon and a vertical corpse. I'll take the former.

Tautologies are generally disparaged by most people in the business of rhetoric as lazy and unnecessary. Like saying "800pm in the evening". Makes one sound a bit uneducated. I would call it redundant.

As long as the interviews are scripted and with very friendly 'journalists', they will probablly backfire. Twenty minutes of gentle prodding from former Clinton operative Stephanopoulis did nothing for Biden.

Thanks, appreciate it. And my character assassination would be different for Whitmer or Newsom, have no fear. No disciple of Trump either, sorry. I was a previous fan of Chris Christie and Doug Burgum. But with the race (apparently) a binary between Biden and Trump, the choice is easy. Love to hear more about my racism and bigotry though. Care to elaborate? Or is it just another inane ad hom attack... ...and enough of the convicted felon nonsense, please. It didn't stick the first time, and won't stick from now on. You'll have to come up with something better.

As absurd as saying "convicted" felon. ALL felons have been convicted, it is baked into the word. It isn't necessary to repeat it, just to make it sound more epic and serious. It's like saying wet water.

'Convicted felon' is the word salad and redundant．But I guess some are too married to it to see.

Better than a non-convicted felon.

All very reasonable. Yet the problem is HOW do you get Kamala to step aside if Joe resigns? She would be fully justified in saying that, as VP, she is next in line. Case closed. I have to admit it would be fun to watch, but...

It is a place where mean Tweets get people criminal prosecution. Or brief videos of a dancing dog doing the Nazi salute. And don't get me started on the ridiculous idea of "protected groups"....

Sure, why not? But seriously, is that the best analogy you can draw? A hundred and sixty year ago issue? You can do better. I am not sure why you have such little faith in your fellow citizens to decide for themselves how they want to regulate their lives.

Good lord, what a load of pap. She was moderately prepared and experienced. Won a senate seat as a Democrat in New York- not much of a feat. Was an average at best Sec State. No experience as a leader. Undeniably smart, but terrible political skills. If you want "most prepared", I would say Mitt Romney. Successful businessman and entrepeneur, governor, nearly beat a Kennedy in Massachusetts, morally unimpeachable and good family man. Plus great hair.

I don't know a whole lot about Gov. Shapiro, but he seems like a fairly middle-of-the-road type, might make a good president some day. However, why are you not sold on Harris? What is it that keeps her out, do you think? It would creat a huge stink to replace a Woman of Color with a Man of No Melanin. I don't think she will give up voluntarily.

In other words, no freedom. All the appalling acts in your first paragraph are already illegal. This law won't make them MORE illegal. Threats are already illegal. But that tricky "incites hatred" bit..... far too open to interpretation and abuse. People getting arrested for saying rude words or insulting others is idiocy. It leaves people vulnerable to lawfare and stifles free expression.

He wasn't my first choice, but still far ahead of anyone the Democrats have on their rather thin bench. Lots of potential democrat candidates are stepping aside. On the surface, they are pledging allegiance to Biden (and therefore Harris). But the reality is that they are looking ahead to 2028 and don't want to screw up their chances next time. Shapiro, Gov. Wes Moore, Sen. Mark Kelly, all will bide their time.

Yet another good reason not to live there, then.

Wanna bet? But also irrelevant. It may be rude, but it should not be illegal, and certainly not a crime worthy of prison.

I think EVERYONE should be able to engage in hate mongering. Hurt feelings should not be a matter for the law to adjudicate. The exceptions should be direct threats of physical harm, specific threats or encouragement of immediate violence.... well, that's it really. Of course copyright violations, national security, NDA agreements excepted. But emotion charged rhetoric? Fill yer boots.

She would be crushed. But.... you just never know, given that she would be given 24 hour tongue-baths by the media for 4 months. She is perhaps the worst actual politician on a retail level that the Democrats could choose. Not saying she is stupid, but she IS in way over her head. She does do a couple things right, though. Most important, she allows the Democrats to use the millions of dollars donated to Biden- other candidates can not use it. She also checks the necessary boxes of having 2 X chromosines and having melanin. She is most assuredly NOT "African American" in how most people would define the term- her largest part is Bramhin Indian, but she is brown so I guess that is enough.

Rather simplistic. I don't think anyone wants Russia to win, or doesn't blame Russia for starting the war. Those are needless statements. The only real question to answer is "how to end the war". My answer is to cut a deal that prevents NATO direct involvement and therfore prevents WW3. A big problem is that many NATO countries have allowed their militaries to atrophy. Germany for example, can field less than 150 main battle tanks, and the same number of combat aircraft. So a land war may not be the answer. Plus, the fantasy of crippling Russia is attractive, but.... that would leave a power vacuum that China would love to exploit. Better to keep Russia at least marginally strong and able to be a counterweight to China in Asia, instead of a crippled (and therefore dangerous) former power. As for Zelensky, I confess that I do not like him. He is an autocrat, his country is not free, corruption is rife. The concept that fighting for Ukraine is "fighting for freedom" or "fighting for democracy" is both hilarious and sad.

Yeah, center right as you look at the podium. Lots of cabinet members on the left. And probably Jill behind the curtain at the back with a loooong shepherd's crook ready to grab Joe if he starts malfunctioning.

Trump at least is entertaining. He still has good timing for his jokes and can speak extemporaneously. Biden cant finish a sentence. He couldn't even finish the first sentence of his "press conference" without coughing. Not to mention, I don't think I have seen a press conference where the President's cabinet and staff all sit in the front row.

Amazing that this is called a press conference. I don't remember other presidents getting a list of pre-selected reporters to call. From my memory, a press conference is a free-for-all, with reporters shouting questions over each other, asking follow-up questions, and so on. This was staged and rehearsed. And still the President could not handle it.

How quickly you deflect to "b-b-but Trump!". Not surprising, but rather tedious. Why do you think he needed a prepared list of reporters to call on, as well as a list of their questions? Do you think this is normal for a Presidential press conference?