Kamala Harris

idahoblues said:
In short (I’m on my sixth shit today) what has any VP offered that was recognized, other than Pence actually standing up for the Country
Click to expand...
Exactly!

The job virtually demands quiet, blind loyalty and the ability to carry the baton for a (hopefully) brief period if the HMFIC pops his clogs!

In the modern era, we have had the likes of Quayle, Gore, Cheney, Biden, Pence, and now Vance/Walz. Some of them were pine riders designed to “balance a ticket,” while others were behind the scenes operatives for Presidents who were either too busy or inept to do the heavy lifting on Capitol Hill to achieve the desired results!

In short, they don’t usually help, but can definitely hurt, the candidate, but are mainly designed to be an inoffensive house plant for the background in the media frenzy that surrounds El Jefe everywhere he goes!
 
Bigga said:
So, NATO has never sent troops for 'exercises' in countries within short access to Russian borders?

So This is Made Up, Then...?

What's with the disingenuous conflating of Harris and Pelosi?? I mentioned Pelosi, not Harris, in regard to the 'Roe V Wade' policy not to codify as well you know! So you ignored what I said about it.

So, if inflation occurred under Trump through covid, Biden also inherited the same covid issues and handled those 'issues' poorly. If Harris is citing 'price-gouging' as a 'policy', what stopped Biden enacting the same or similar action for policy within his tenure??

Doesn't surprise me the Clown liked your comment of conflation!

No point in discussing anything in bad faith, so I'm good with any potential reply.
Click to expand...
I am stopping now, as you are going further into nonsense mode. For example, the original post was comparing current Democratic Party policy with Trump policy. You then quoted Pelosi’s historical stance which I said was not apt.. and apparently I am the one conflating the two! Bye.
 
It’s all very well, people moaning about Harris, but given the time-frame of when Biden decided not to run for re-election, the Democrats had little choice, but to back her.

Also, Biden must have seen/known something about her to make her his VP pick.
 
idahoblues said:
In short (I’m on my sixth shit today) what has any VP offered that was recognized, other than Pence actually standing up for the Country
Click to expand...
I was about to write, we didn’t hear much about/from Pence, while he was VP, or Biden, in the four years before that.

Or from any Vice President, come to that, but I don’t doubt that they were all working hard behind the scenes to support their president.
 
Bigga said:
I, also, posted the negatives of the Dem party actions when it could have changed things when it wielded full power.
Click to expand...

I see this written all the time, but wonder when this might have been??? (I know, but most don’t. Nor do they know why.)

When did the Dems hold the White House, the House and 60 votes in the Senate to get whatever Dem policy agenda you speak of passed into law?

I know you understand the convoluted process, created (by design) to be an arduous one to stop reflexive change. So, when did the Dems have carte blanche to do what they wanted and what we were issues of the day they sought to address?
 
ChicagoBlue said:
I see this written all the time, but wonder when this might have been??? (I know, but most don’t. Nor do they know why.)

When did the Dems hold the White House, the House and 60 votes in the Senate to get whatever Dem policy agenda you speak of passed into law?

I know you understand the convoluted process, created (by design) to be an arduous one to stop reflexive change. So, when did the Dems have carte blanche to do what they wanted and what we were issues of the day they sought to address?
Click to expand...
I think the answer is the late 1930s under Roosevelt but I might be wrong.
 
FogBlueInSanFran said:
He had a supermajority for the first half of his term; you are correct.
Click to expand...
One of the criticisms of jimmy’s time in office is that despite having both houses, he didn’t push through as much legislation as he could have..

We met jimmy and Rosalynn on two occasions, and they are lovely people.
 
ChicagoBlue said:
I see this written all the time, but wonder when this might have been??? (I know, but most don’t. Nor do they know why.)

When did the Dems hold the White House, the House and 60 votes in the Senate to get whatever Dem policy agenda you speak of passed into law?

I know you understand the convoluted process, created (by design) to be an arduous one to stop reflexive change. So, when did the Dems have carte blanche to do what they wanted and what we were issues of the day they sought to address?
Click to expand...

Do you agree with any of the posted information above, since your response?
 
Vienna_70 said:
It’s all very well, people moaning about Harris, but given the time-frame of when Biden decided not to run for re-election, the Democrats had little choice, but to back her.

Also, Biden must have seen/known something about her to make her his VP pick.
Click to expand...

She's not really a "Biden pick" by choice.

He had no other choices since she pierced him in their debates of which failed lost her own State for support, hence dropped out! He had the chance to pick Stacey Abrams, but he opted to lean into Amy Klobuchar, who ended up fucking it for herself over Derek Chauvin, who she could have prosecuted before the 'George Floyd Incident'. That left Biden and the Dem hierarchy no feasible choices.

But, like Biden himself who failed to make any headway in the original debates before his challengers were made to drop out against Sanders (everything I've said is factual), the selectors for Pres/ Veep spotlighted their 'chosen one' in Harris for a repeat prescription on the American voter.
 
Bigga said:
Do you agree with any of the posted information above, since your response?
Click to expand...
Yes, Obama had a short period, where he made legislative history for getting things done, but Sen. Kennedy fell ill and reduced it to about 44 days of in-session activity.

The ability to delay and block legislation in Congress is an early learned trait and is used to try to stop legislation dead in its tracks. Without a long period of 60+ votes in the Senate, plus the House, plus the White House, legislative paralysis can be all too real.
 
Bigga said:
She's not really a "Biden pick" by choice.

He had no other choices since she pierced him in their debates of which failed lost her own State for support, hence dropped out! He had the chance to pick Stacey Abrams, but he opted to lean into Amy Klobuchar, who ended up fucking it for herself over Derek Chauvin, who she could have prosecuted before the 'George Floyd Incident'. That left Biden and the Dem hierarchy no feasible choices.

But, like Biden himself who failed to make any headway in the original debates before his challengers were made to drop out against Sanders (everything I've said is factual), the selectors for Pres/ Veep spotlighted their 'chosen one' in Harris for a repeat prescription on the American voter.
Click to expand...
It might be factual. Pity it's incomprehensible.
 
ChicagoBlue said:
Yes, Obama had a short period, where he made legislative history for getting things done, but Sen. Kennedy fell ill and reduced it to about 44 days of in-session activity.

The ability to delay and block legislation in Congress is an early learned trait and is used to try to stop legislation dead in its tracks. Without a long period of 60+ votes in the Senate, plus the House, plus the White House, legislative paralysis can be all too real.
Click to expand...

Oh, you mean replacing 'RomneyCare' with 'ObamaCare'/ ACA when he could have, actually, did 'medicare for all', but ended up compromising with Big Pharma over it?

Cool. Fair enough...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top