Trump v. Hillary II?

[Thingamabob]

BS. 

[charleskerins]

4 hours ago, impulse said:

 

 Nobody's going to choose HRC as their VP running mate.  Not if they want to survive their term.  Ask Obama why he didn't make that "obvious choice" to choose Hillary...

Because she was more effective as a Secretary of State -duh.

[cdemundo]

2 hours ago, Stevemercer said:

If Michelle Obama was nominated, and she accepted, she would be a shoe-in.

For Michelle it would be a step down.

My guess is she and Barack can go the rest of their lives without picking up the tab.

What a life!

[BerndD]

12 hours ago, attento said:

Come on America.  She is far too young.     Can't you find someone older ?

Older, more mature and more experienced!  

[susanlea]

On 7/21/2024 at 9:37 AM, jas007 said:

As I predicted somewhere the other day, sources are now suggesting that Hillary will replace Biden at the convention.   And of course, the outcome in November will be the same as it was in 2016.  Great fun.

Awesome. She is hopeless.

[impulse]

16 hours ago, charleskerins said:

Because she was more effective as a Secretary of State -duh.

 

Yeah. Hillary always dreamed of being SOS. That's the big prize.

 

Though, being 4th in line of succession, she probably gave it some thought.  But the odds of getting caught were just too high with that many...

[jas007]

Well, it looks like it really might be Kamala. At least so far.  And they’re already pushing the narrative with phony poll numbers.  Maybe they’re going this route because they know something we don’t.  I’ve seen lots of speculation about false flag jobs and cancelled elections.  A nationwide power grid failure, perhaps.  Someone is predicting that. No power = state of emergency and no election.  People are all too complacent about the possibility of that happening. And it doesn’t take much. I can still remember when power in much of the U.S. northeast went out back in 1977.  That happened because a thunderstorm knocked out part of the grid and the outage cascaded.  Anyway, it was a mess and it would be a real mess if something like that happened nationwide.  

 

 

[Jingthing]

16 minutes ago, jas007 said:

Well, it looks like it really might be Kamala. At least so far.  And they’re already pushing the narrative with phony poll numbers.  Maybe they’re going this route because they know something we don’t.  I’ve seen lots of speculation about false flag jobs and cancelled elections.  A nationwide power grid failure, perhaps.  Someone is predicting that. No power = state of emergency and no election.  People are all too complacent about the possibility of that happening. And it doesn’t take much. I can still remember when power in much of the U.S. northeast went out back in 1977.  That happened because a thunderstorm knocked out part of the grid and the outage cascaded.  Anyway, it was a mess and it would be a real mess if something like that happened nationwide.  

 

 

Kamala Harris has already reached enough committed delegates to be the democratic party nominee to run against way too old and way too mentally challenged disgraced former president Trump.

It's over.

She's it. 

Deal with it.

I'll ignore your silly tin foil hat stuff.

 

 

Edited July 24 by Jingthing

[jas007]

I think you’re delusional.  Harris may well be the nominee, but she can’t win.  Just wait and see.

[Jingthing]

11 minutes ago, jas007 said:

I think you’re delusional.  Harris may well be the nominee, but she can’t win.  Just wait and see.

Logically explain how she can't win.

Obviously you don't like her but there will be a republican vs. a democrat without a strong third party option as usual, so logically either the republican or the democrat will win.

[jas007]

5 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Logically explain how she can't win.

Obviously you don't like her but there will be a republican vs. a democrat without a strong third party option as usual, so logically either the republican or the democrat will win.

For sure, she could possibly win, but the odds are very much against her.  So in the real world, she might as well forget about it.

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, jas007 said:

For sure, she could possibly win, but the odds are very much against her.  So in the real world, she might as well forget about it.

Got it. You have nothing.

[jas007]

23 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Got it. You have nothing.

I have my gut sense on the matter.  
 

You do realize that we’re not talking about a mathematical problem?  It’s politics.  No “logical “ proof of any particular outcome is possible. 

[Jingthing]

Just now, jas007 said:

I have my gut sense on the matter.  
 

You do realize that we’re not talking about a mathematical problem?  It’s politics.  No “logical “ proof of any particular outcome is possible. 

I'll put it this way.

After the shooting, during the convention, before Trump's garbage Hannibel Lechter convention speech when everyone including democrats was thinking we're in for a maga fascist landslide, I was talking to a Trump sympathizer and said yeah it looks very bad but in American politics the mood can change on a dime dramatically and there is still plenty of time for that to happen (multiple times) before the election. 

Well we have our first such change on a dime.

Predicting this election is a fool's game.