4 hours ago, newbee2022 said:

How is your view after the first 100 days? What did he achieve? 

Still war in Ukraine, Putin gaining ground, China is unimpressed by tariffs. Same EU or Canada. One good thing: he's making Europe great again.

But, sorry, I asked you! What you're thinking. And now I gave you my opinion already. Isn't it similar how Trump does it with Putin?

 

Trying to see the relevance to the topic of Kamala.  Don't see it.  BTW you need to broaden your reading if you think China isn't impressed with the tariffs.  They are coming to the table as we speak. 

4 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

Jasmine Crockett says she is made for this moment. 

 

If she gets the DEM nomination I will investigate her.  Honestly I don't live politics and don't know if you mean this as a joke or she is a good candidate. 

1 hour ago, jimmybcool said:

 

If she gets the DEM nomination I will investigate her.  Honestly I don't live politics and don't know if you mean this as a joke or she is a good candidate. 

When you believe in the dem party one isn't exclusive of the other.

19 hours ago, Tug said:

She’s absolutely correct in her assessment no more no less.

Right Tug.  You will never learn.

3 hours ago, jimmybcool said:

 

Trying to see the relevance to the topic of Kamala.  Don't see it.  BTW you need to broaden your reading if you think China isn't impressed with the tariffs.  They are coming to the table as we speak. 

Good that there exist people like you. I'm relieved😂

15 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

Good that there exist people like you. I'm relieved😂

 

Happy to make your day.  It brings me much joy that I can share good on the internet.

Posts using derogatory and toxic nicknames or intentional misspelling of people’s names will be removed. If you don’t want your post to be removed, spell people’s names correctly.

On 5/2/2025 at 4:00 AM, Social Media said:

After months of political silence following her departure from Washington, Kamala Harris returned to the national spotlight with a pointed warning about the future of American democracy.

 

Is this the same Kamala Harris who lied about Biden being fit to rule, then, once that was exposed, was super careful about what she said so that as little of her true self was exposed during her campaign?  She's the one to warn people that democracy is in danger?

On 5/2/2025 at 4:00 AM, Social Media said:

The 16-minute speech struck a tone of urgency and alarm, echoing concerns that many Democrats have been voicing for months.

 

22 hours ago, Mike_Hunt said:

This shows the democrats lack a coherent message.  

Noone is listening to the Old Dems anymore. They got the boot or are ignored. Kamala Is still young. However, by allowing her to do this means the Dems did not learn anything about their loss in the elections even within their own Dem party. 

To use her this way is and probably will be remembered as one of their most stupid ploys. 

On 5/2/2025 at 3:22 PM, kimothai said:

"it was only 1.5% difference to Donnie".  Who cares?  The popular vote does NOT elect a President.  As usual, the left never wants to talk about the mandate that the "Electoral College" gave Trump.

     'Mandate'?  You've got to be kidding.  You could theoretically win every state plus DC by one vote and take all the EC votes. The entire map would be blue or red.  Would that be a 'mandate'--winning by a handful of votes?  Of course not.  Same with Trump's win.  The truth is he's run 3 times and never even got 50% of the vote.  He's never had a mandate, and he's lost the popular vote twice.

The archetypal lying career politician.

 

She probably do well in DEI Cali.

13 hours ago, newnative said:

     'Mandate'?  You've got to be kidding.  You could theoretically win every state plus DC by one vote and take all the EC votes. The entire map would be blue or red.  Would that be a 'mandate'--winning by a handful of votes?  Of course not.  Same with Trump's win.  The truth is he's run 3 times and never even got 50% of the vote.  He's never had a mandate, and he's lost the popular vote twice.

I'm guessing you don't understand the results of the electoral college. Your own lefty, James Carville was spot on when he characterized the left as "stunningly stupid" (his words, not mine). 

14 hours ago, newnative said:

     'Mandate'?  You've got to be kidding.  You could theoretically win every state plus DC by one vote and take all the EC votes. The entire map would be blue or red.  Would that be a 'mandate'--winning by a handful of votes?  Of course not.  Same with Trump's win.  The truth is he's run 3 times and never even got 50% of the vote.  He's never had a mandate, and he's lost the popular vote twice.

So the result only counts when the Dems win?

And if the Dems win with less than 50%, you'll demand another election?

I'd suggest picking better candidates, rather than complaining about Trump.

55 minutes ago, kimothai said:

I'm guessing you don't understand the results of the electoral college. Your own lefty, James Carville was spot on when he characterized the left as "stunningly stupid" (his words, not mine). 

I understand it quite well.  It remains that Trump lost the popular vote not once but twice.  Actual American voters, not a relic like the EC, rejected him twice.  Did not want him--the majority of the actual voters wanted the other candidate.  He did win the popular vote in 2024, but still did not reach 50% of the vote.  Not a mandate and way you slice it.  

That's how corrupted and bias the lame stream media are

27 minutes ago, newnative said:

I understand it quite well.  It remains that Trump lost the popular vote not once but twice.  Actual American voters, not a relic like the EC, rejected him twice.  Did not want him--the majority of the actual voters wanted the other candidate.  He did win the popular vote in 2024, but still did not reach 50% of the vote.  Not a mandate and way you slice it.  

Well, if you want to discount the only thing (Electoral College) that actually counts, that's up to you.  I chose to consider what counts and that WAS a mandate.

51 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

So the result only counts when the Dems win?

And if the Dems win with less than 50%, you'll demand another election?

I'd suggest picking better candidates, rather than complaining about Trump.

       My post had nothing to do with accepting, or not accepting, election results, and there was no 'complaining' about Trump.  To refresh, the point I was making was if you win by such a small margin, whether Dem or Rep, and you don't even reach 50% of the vote, you can't crow that you have a 'mandate'.  

On 5/2/2025 at 6:41 PM, newbee2022 said:

Not for me because I don't know what you think is pathetic? Telling the truth?

If you don't think she is the most pathetic person ever too run for President as a Democrat than you are totally delusional

Start of the CA Governor campaign?  This election I can't see anyone who can deny her. The only issue is will the big money donors give to her again after spending one billion dollars to lose the POTUS election. 

On 5/2/2025 at 5:58 PM, BritManToo said:

Slightly off topic,

Do I see three chins in the op, or is it just shadows?

Better three chins than zero brains.

On 5/2/2025 at 8:36 AM, Tug said:

She’s absolutely correct in her assessment no more no less.

 

13 minutes ago, flexomike said:

If you don't think she is the most pathetic person ever too run for President as a Democrat than you are totally delusional

Maybe you? Why you think you're right?

On 5/2/2025 at 7:05 PM, Mike_Hunt said:

Never.  Harris is dumb. 

She’s a checklist recipient.

Joe’s social Justice warrior.

She admitted there was nothing she would do differently than Joe during a View Tv interview.

She was so inept at speaking , that she avoided press gaggles for fear a press member might ask a gotcha question or she would go into a deep dialogue 

of being burdened by the past.

 

She’s a space cadet more suited for a jaunt in space with Bezo aerospace.

 

She was  the installed choice of

leftist oligarchs .

23 minutes ago, flexomike said:

If you don't think she is the most pathetic person ever too run for President as a Democrat than you are totally delusional

They dont get it Mike!

The left on here love those Polished Politicians, unfortunately Harris wasn't a politician or polished .

Quote

Kamala Harris Reemerges with a Stark Warning on Democracy’s Future

 

Just the fact that this birdbrain is still getting any air time is a stark warning to Democracy's future. We really did dodge a bullet on this one.

 

She is the absolute last person in the USA to be trash talking anything after her four years of letting millions of skanks run free across our borders into the USA before trying their best to also allow them to vote while putting them up in hotels with tax dollars. 

 

Not to mention the numerous other problems her & the walking dead president never dealt with

51 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

Better three chins than zero brains.

You think she doesn't have both?

When "Are you his daughter" is her most memorable moment.

Not that good for a presidential candidate.

24 minutes ago, mania said:

 

Just the fact that this birdbrain is still getting any air time is a stark warning to Democracy's future. We really did dodge a bullet on this one.

 

She is the absolute last person in the USA to be trash talking anything after her four years of letting millions of skanks run free across our borders into the USA before trying their best to also allow them to vote while putting them up in hotels with tax dollars. 

 

Not to mention the numerous other problems her & the walking dead president never dealt with

My prediction:
They'll run Harris and AOC as primary candidates for 2028 Presidential Primaries, and with $200 million USD pumped into the various PACs and SuperPAC - AOC will be the DNC 2028 Presidential candidate - thus exemplifying the Peter Principle to the max.
The war chest for AOC presidential run will be in excess of $3 Billion USD.  I've come to the conclusion that the average American want's the loonyist of the loons running the country.

 

On 5/2/2025 at 5:26 AM, newbee2022 said:

It means a lot. Because half of the populace didn't vote for tariffs. And so the approval rate is down to 39%, the lowest in the great history of America within the first 100 days.

 

But no one hardly understands anything about economics. 

That's probably why they don't check in with people every time they make a decision. 

 

3 hours ago, newbee2022 said:

Maybe you? Why you think you're right?

I don't have to think about it, I know for a fact. What the hell are you on?