Author Topic: 2024  (Read 171787 times)

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Medicare negotiates prices down
« Reply #1650 on: August 15, 2024, 07:37:03 AM »
But headlines very misleading of course
prices negotiated on medicines that cost Medicare 50 billion (I presume to the penny!)
prices negotiated down by 38- 79 %!!!
Wow, but not so fast
This is before other discounts etc .
and it would save taxpayers "6 billion" (to the penny!)
which is only 12%
and it "could" save up to 1.5 billion (to the penny!)
which even if true or even close to accurate is only 3%.  In other words, your drug that cost $300 is not only $291 .

Big deal  :roll:

Yet looking at the headline that the media will run across the goal line it sounds like a lot.
Gaslighting !

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/white-house-says-deals-struck-090414809.html

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72294
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1651 on: August 15, 2024, 08:54:52 AM »
Please post that on the Politics of Health Care thread as well!

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1652 on: August 15, 2024, 10:51:09 AM »
Hey CD
actually

I was looking for that thread but cannot find it and the search is not working for me when I put in politics of health care.
does not find it or if it does then does not allow me to post in it.
frustrating honestly
can we make search for threads to post in easier somehow?

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72294
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1653 on: August 15, 2024, 04:29:08 PM »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1654 on: August 15, 2024, 04:51:31 PM »
I dunno .  when I do search it does not allow me to reply
so I see the thread but no where to post new message in thread.
I clicked on link you provided though and able to "reply"
when I do it
no button to
"reply"

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
Parody?
« Reply #1655 on: August 15, 2024, 04:52:05 PM »
https://redstate.com/bonchie/2024/08/06/harris-releases-a-video-of-her-calling-tim-walz-that-is-so-cringe-its-being-compared-to-an-snl-skit-n2177818

[Doug]  They never show the screen of her phone.  She is reading her phone call!  Same for him.  It's all scripted.  Talk about weird!

And he ends with, "let's win this" [election].  Is the idea to win an election (ego) or to make America great again (care about others)?  Two different approaches.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72294
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1656 on: August 15, 2024, 06:25:43 PM »
I dunno .  when I do search it does not allow me to reply
so I see the thread but no where to post new message in thread.
I clicked on link you provided though and able to "reply"
when I do it no button to "reply"

===============

I agree the search function here is not very good.   That said, in this case I used "Health" for the subject line and a few threads that met that criterion were proffered, one of them being the one I gave you.   In point of fact what it gave me was the first page of that thread and so I just clicked on the number of the last page of the thread and gave you the link that appeared with it.

Does this help?

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72294
    • View Profile
I hate your stupid face
« Reply #1657 on: August 16, 2024, 03:50:43 AM »
https://danconiajournal.substack.com/p/i-hate-your-stupid-face?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1016875&post_id=147763113&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=z2120&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

I Hate Your Stupid Face...
... and I thank you for saving our country.

Francisco D'Anconia
Aug 15, 2024



In the heat of political discourse, it’s easy to lose sight of what really matters. It’s easy to get caught up in the personality clashes, the sound bites, the media frenzy, and the endless parade of social media posts designed to provoke and polarize. You hear your friends, read the posts on social media, scroll past reel after reel of this influencer or that celebrity telling you what all the cool kids think and how you ought to vote if you want to be a cool kid like them. But beneath all that noise lies something that’s actually important: the policies that shape our lives, our communities, and our country. It’s time we got a few things straight.

Let’s begin with a simple truth: Hanging on to your hatred of a particular candidate because you can’t stand their stupid face is your right. You get to cast your vote any way you want to. That’s the beauty of a free society. But let’s not confuse personal disdain with sound judgment. Let’s not pretend that voting based on a candidate’s personality, rather than their policies, is anything other than self-indulgent pettiness.

It is NOT a radical right-wing idea to strive for international peace and cooperation. This is common sense. A diplomatic environment in which every ally carries their weight ensures that wars, attacks, invasions, and killings are less likely to occur. The notion that America should work towards global stability, using diplomacy and alliances to prevent conflict, is not a partisan fantasy—it’s a pragmatic approach that benefits everyone. We’ve seen this in action with successful peace treaties and international agreements that have brought hostile nations to the table, de-escalated tensions, and promoted cooperation over conflict. The Abraham Accords, for example, normalized relations between Israel and several Arab nations, reducing the likelihood of war in one of the world’s most volatile regions.

It is NOT a radical right-wing idea to want to bring an end to wars and the killing of hundreds of thousands of people on foreign battlefields, even if they aren’t in your backyard. The desire to avoid unnecessary conflict, to protect both American lives and those of innocents abroad, is a moral imperative. We’ve seen the disastrous consequences of endless wars in the Middle East, where decades of conflict have destabilized entire regions, created power vacuums filled by terrorists, and cost countless lives. Seeking to end these conflicts and bring our troops home is not isolationism—it’s the responsible use of American power.

It is NOT a radical right-wing idea to want a secure border. This is about maintaining the integrity of our nation, ensuring that immigrants who come here are productive, creative, law-abiding individuals who want to contribute to our country’s success. A secure border isn’t about xenophobia; it’s about safety, stability, and the rule of law. Every nation has the right—and the responsibility—to control its borders. We’ve seen the consequences of lax border policies in Europe, where unchecked migration has strained resources and led to social unrest. We’ve watched so-called Sanctuary Cities here in the US absolutely implode when they have to live under their own declared policies. America can and should welcome immigrants, but it must do so in a way that protects the interests of its citizens and the security of the nation.

It is NOT a radical right-wing idea to want energy independence. Disentangling ourselves from alliances with unstable or theocratic dictatorships is crucial to our national security. America’s reliance on foreign oil has dragged us into wars, compromised our foreign policy, and made us vulnerable to the whims of regimes that do not share our values. The development of domestic energy resources, whether through traditional means like oil and gas or renewable sources like wind and solar, strengthens our independence and reduces the likelihood of conflict. The shale oil boom, for example, turned the United States into a net exporter of energy, giving us leverage on the global stage and reducing our dependence on foreign powers.

It is NOT a radical right-wing idea to want a prosperous economy that encourages robust competition on a level playing field. Prosperity comes from innovation, entrepreneurship, and the freedom to compete. Small businesses are the backbone of the American economy, and they thrive in an environment where competition is fair, where the government does not pick winners and losers, and where taxes and regulations do not stifle growth. We’ve seen the benefits of a competitive economy in the tech sector, where companies like Apple, Google, and Amazon grew from garage startups into global giants, creating jobs and wealth on an unprecedented scale. We now, arguably, see a need to allow new small businesses and innovators the freedom to step up and challenge Google and Apple and Amazon - maybe even displace them in the marketplace. Economic policies that favor competition over cronyism benefit everyone, regardless of their political affiliation.

It is NOT a radical right-wing idea to want people to keep more of the money they earn. The government should not be allowed to spend whatever it wants on the backs of taxpayers. Fiscal responsibility is a cornerstone of good governance. When the government spends recklessly, it leads to higher taxes, higher debt, and ultimately, economic instability. We’ve seen the dangers of runaway government spending in countries like Greece, where fiscal irresponsibility led to a sovereign debt crisis, crippling the economy and leading to austerity measures that devastated the population. A government that lives within its means, that prioritizes essential services over wasteful spending, is one that serves the people rather than burdens them.

It is NOT a radical right-wing idea to want to see American productivity increase and diversify. American factories, American innovation, and the onshoring of American businesses mean more jobs for Americans, more money in American communities, and less susceptibility to foreign influences, supply chain disruptions, and wars. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the dangers of relying too heavily on foreign supply chains, particularly in critical sectors like pharmaceuticals and medical equipment. Bringing manufacturing back to America is not about protectionism; it’s about resilience and security. When we produce goods at home, we create jobs, stimulate economic growth, and reduce our vulnerability to global crises.

It is NOT a radical right-wing idea to love this country. Loving the place that provides us all with a place to live, work, and change things for the better is the foundation that allows us all to work together for the common good. Patriotism is not about blind loyalty or uncritical acceptance of our nation’s flaws. It’s about recognizing the unique opportunity we have to build a better future, to correct our mistakes, and to strive for a more perfect union. Loving America means believing in its potential, in the principles of freedom, justice, and opportunity that it was founded upon, and in the power of its people to overcome challenges and create a brighter tomorrow.

Let’s quit pretending that advocating for these things makes someone a "Trumper" or a radical or a "right-winger." It doesn’t. It makes them a sensible American. Let’s quit pretending that a person who votes for these things is "brainwashed" into some cult of personality. They aren’t. They’re people with eyes and ears and an interest in making life better for everybody. Let’s quit pretending that there’s something wrong with wanting these things, or that there is some evil, malevolent streak that motivates them. There isn’t. There’s just an apples-to-apples comparison of how well one set of ideas works in comparison to what’s being offered on the opposite side of the ticket. Objectively, by any criteria you measure, one is better than the other.

Common sense and reason tell us that these ideas are not just good for one political party—they are good for all Americans. They are the foundation of a prosperous, secure, and free society. They have been demonstrated, time and again, to work better than the policies currently affecting American life. They are not radical; they are the principles that have guided this nation to greatness.

No matter who you like, no matter whose stupid face you can’t stand, no matter who your friends or favorite influencers tell you to vote for, you really do owe it to every single person in the country to vote for the policies you know will make things better. It’s easy to be glib or snarky or petty about a candidate, but this is important. This is the future of our country, the future of our children, the future of everything we hold dear.

Get it right, please.








DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
Re: I hate your stupid face
« Reply #1658 on: August 16, 2024, 05:19:32 AM »
Excellent.  Thank you for sharing that.

"Let’s not pretend that voting based on a candidate’s personality, rather than their policies, is anything other than self-indulgent pettiness."

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: August 16, 2024, 04:09:49 PM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
2024 Serious economic times, Harris brings Gimmicks, WashPost
« Reply #1660 on: August 16, 2024, 05:06:46 PM »
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/08/16/harris-economy-plan-gimmicks/
Paywall

Vice President Kamala Harris’s speech Friday was an opportunity to get specific with voters about how a Harris presidency would manage an economy that many feel is not working well for them. Unfortunately, instead of delivering a substantial plan, she squandered the moment on populist gimmicks.

Americans are clearly still anxious and angry about the high cost of groceries, housing and even $5.29 Big Macs. While the inflation rate has cooled substantially since the 2022 peak, an ostensible Biden-Harris administration accomplishment, prices remain elevated relative to the Trump years. So it’s a real political issue for Ms. Harris. One way to handle it might be to level with voters, telling them that inflation spiked in 2021 mainly because the pandemic snarled supply chains, and that the Federal Reserve’s policies, which the Biden-Harris administration supported, are working to slow it. The vice president instead opted for a less forthright route: Blaming big business. She vowed to go after “price gouging” by grocery stores, landlords, pharmaceutical companies and other supposed corporate perpetrators by having the Federal Trade Commission enforce a vaguely defined “federal ban on price gouging.”

Scroll right   ---->


Never mind that many stores are currently slashing prices in response to renewed consumer bargain hunting. Ms. Harris says she’ll target companies that make “excessive” profits, whatever that means. (It’s hard to see how groceries, a notoriously low-margin business, would qualify.) Thankfully, this gambit by Ms. Harris has been met with almost instant skepticism, with many critics citing President Richard M. Nixon’s failed price controls from the 1970s. Whether the Harris proposal wins over voters remains to be seen, but if sound economic analysis still matters, it won’t.
(Paywall, more at link)
« Last Edit: August 20, 2024, 12:42:40 PM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72294
    • View Profile
Kommie rally
« Reply #1661 on: August 17, 2024, 04:59:20 PM »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
wonder if Biden sent them a billion in $100 bills to do this.
« Reply #1662 on: August 19, 2024, 07:00:29 PM »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
2024, Business experience (in pink): Lots versus almost none
« Reply #1663 on: August 20, 2024, 12:38:00 PM »
NO BUSINESS EXPERIENCE (according to The New York Times)
Scroll right to see more.  Sorry I don't know how to re-size the charts.

Scroll right to see all  ----->   (Pink is business experience.)    Source data: NY Times

https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/meips/ADKq_NZAUvuGbW-2tOLDsWmf0k4BVj3jR_6KcHx-aSmwExipdw6308q12ouXOjVhGaJZ5Hnfr2uOpKJHThskNQsHJIkTTxfr5768zgu8Ct3wcX_igGCtYv-vx03AWonaieYZ6iI7HBGinpGCaoNSfke9p-3WLcgR5tS-Js4=s0-d-e1-ft#https://mcusercontent.com/dc8d30edd7976d2ddf9c2bf96/images/e11d7f2f-ec0d-50e8-7c1a-eb741e93d2c5.png

« Last Edit: August 20, 2024, 12:43:53 PM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72294
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Scott Jennings
« Reply #1665 on: August 20, 2024, 08:08:16 PM »
the only honest breath of fresh air on CNN

and he has gotten bolder in sticking up for our side against the rest of the CNN onslaught.

love to watch the annoyed look on Axel douches face after Scott tells the truth.

surprised he hasn't been fired.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72294
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1666 on: August 21, 2024, 07:27:05 PM »
Most certainly, the Constitution grants no one 'rights' or anything else. It defines a structure and system of government. Arguments to the contrary seem silly to me.

Yes, both are true as far as I know, but neither really address what I interpret is the intent of this question directly?

If we take the first, then no "Constitution" will suffice and the question seems moot.

If the second, then it begs the original question as to the suitability of our current Constitution to support us to keep "a Constitutional Republic" if we can?
================

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
here it comes; gaysters at it again
« Reply #1667 on: August 21, 2024, 08:05:16 PM »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72294
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Oprah was for Donald
« Reply #1669 on: August 22, 2024, 06:14:54 AM »
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2024/08/22/oprah-used-to-love-trump-n2643753

Now:
Oprah was for Donald

Race, race, race, women, women, women, therefore we need Harris

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72294
    • View Profile
Trump on gun rights
« Reply #1670 on: August 22, 2024, 07:49:49 AM »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
2024 - polling
« Reply #1671 on: August 22, 2024, 08:17:09 AM »
After Kamala honeymoon, the riddance of Slow Joe and all the hype of the Kamala Surge, Trump still leads this dead even race:

Betting odds: Betting Odds, RCP Average, Trump 50.3, Harris 48.3
https://www.realclearpolling.com/betting-odds/2024/president

RCP also:  Battleground RCP Avg: Trump +0.2
No Toss Ups: Trump 287, Harris 251
----------------------------------------
This is on the day of the Kamala acceptance speech.  She's supposed to get a convention bump, but all the great speakers already spoke.  Tim Walz already told us the attack lines and the false promises. 

Cut taxes on the middle class?  DID HE FORGET INFLATION IS A TAX.  Does he not know the corporate income tax gets passed on to middle class consumers?

Doubtful any bold new thoughts are coming out tonight.  Just a lot of platitudes, head nodding, false promises, selected memories. 

She and the lamestream will cover her record and previous positions - with a pillow until they stop breathing.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72294
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1673 on: August 22, 2024, 08:21:11 AM »
please see reply #1699
 :-D

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
The Economist poll/youGOv poll of latinos
« Reply #1674 on: August 22, 2024, 08:54:49 AM »
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/kamala-harris-more-than-triples-gap-with-hispanic-voters-in-one-month-poll/ar-AA1pcJFj?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=dbc656c351f04829bd18c5b254818182&ei=201

I forget where ,  but I think on Newsmax two objective pollsters were on and were saying hoe the polls are mostly skewed to Democrats and even mentioned the Economist poll by 6 to 9 %.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Shapiro Walz good pick
« Reply #1675 on: August 22, 2024, 12:57:25 PM »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
Re: Shapiro Walz good pick
« Reply #1676 on: August 22, 2024, 01:57:15 PM »
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/shapiro-lauds-walz-ahead-of-dnc-speech-she-made-the-exact-right-pick/ar-AA1pdM6n?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=7b19e594d3fa42b4ac9a44b790ca7152&ei=12

Oh such a good DNC team player
Maybe 2032 since Harris Walz in for '24 and '28   :|

what a mench! 
and we are just stupid.

If Harris Walz lose, neither will be the nominee in 28, (IMHO).

The Dem, Muslim, appeasement of Palestinians and hatred of Israel and Jews isn't going to go away.  For the same reason she didn't pick him this year, he won't be the nominee either.

They largely dodged the protests by speaking out against Israel.

He and Fetterman should switch parties and endorse Trump, but that isn't going to happen either.

https://justfacts.votesmart.org/candidate/political-courage-test/46832/josh-shapiro

The problem with polarization, he is too centrist to be a national party Democrat and too liberal on too many issues to fit with the Republicans.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72294
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1677 on: August 22, 2024, 05:23:24 PM »
I caught a piece of the Shapiro speech and switched away as he accused the Reps of censorship for keeping grooming out of grade schools.

Speaking of which:

https://www.oann.com/newsroom/cnns-dana-bash-suggests-that-tim-walz-and-doug-emhoff-inspire-male-voters-with-lower-testosterone/
« Last Edit: August 22, 2024, 05:31:47 PM by Crafty_Dog »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
Dem speechwriters offer "New Way Forward" with no details
« Reply #1678 on: August 23, 2024, 07:24:31 AM »
I guess they rejected the slogan, "More of the same".

RCP, Wegmans:  "She made no mention of inflation and discussed rising costs exactly once, promising only generally to work to lower the costs of groceries, healthcare, and housing."

(Doug). And that was the number one issue facing voters. Orwell would be proud, she's running as though Trump is the incumbent.  Was she part of this administration or wasn't she?

Besides her behind the scenes work, she was the last one to leave the room relating to the failed Afghanistan pullout, she very publicly cast the deciding votes for all the inflation legislation largess.

Someone hold her accountable.

The straw man she uses is Project 2025, which is not a Trump or Trump campaign or even Republican Party document. It's from a think tank and has good and bad ideas in it.

She calls for her side to "fight for the values we cherish" and abortion is number one with no thought of the plight of the innocent unborn wanting to grow and live.

Number two is trans men in girls and women's sports.  Isn't that the only issue today in "LGBTQ", did she miss some letters there.  Gay marriage is settled law.  Nobody is proposing to legislate who you can marry.  Trump was way out front on this.

But without straw to argue there'd be no winning argument.

It's all written by the writers that got Obama elected twice, that's an amazing political achievement, but not good governance.

If you want to read her own political policy stands, not the speechwriters stands, you'll have to go to a Trump website or do your own research.  You're not going to hear about ban fracking, ban offshore drilling, ban gas cars, close pipelines, end private healthcare and the rest here.

Otherwise you are just voting for or against the speech writers.  She has already proven she can turn on a dime politically.  Those who know her better than we do, Bernie, AOC, Omar, etc. all trust her to turn back once in office.  People should trust them on this.  She didn't change her stripes, she rehearsed and read what was given to her as convincingly as she could.
« Last Edit: August 23, 2024, 07:58:50 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72294
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1679 on: August 23, 2024, 07:41:02 AM »
A frenzy of delusional self-gaslighting.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
2024, Thomas Sowell, WSJ today
« Reply #1680 on: August 23, 2024, 07:53:06 AM »
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/republicans-better-get-on-the-ball-thomas-sowell-2024-election-kamala-harris-91883df6?st=4vfozdq4k745l6u

Republicans Better Get on the Ball
They haven’t made the case against Harris. The clock is ticking.
(Paywall)

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
Harris courts women and minorities, but they fared well in Trump economy
« Reply #1682 on: August 24, 2024, 06:38:54 AM »
As she courts women and minorities, Harris faces harsh reality they fared well in Trump economy

https://justthenews.com/nation/economy/thuharris-faces-harsh-economic-reality-she-seeks-win-women-minorities

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1683 on: August 24, 2024, 07:29:55 AM »
the problem is can we get the word out not just to the choir but to the independents.

if independents do not tune in to our media and either are tuned out or only listen to MSM then what good is the truth if they never hear it?

All they see is Trump is evil and Harris is fantastic .

Some say the "American people" are smart enough to see behind the MSM blitz.

Sadly I disagree , if one still cannot make up their mind as to which side they want to choose they are thus confused by the MSM .


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72294
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
suggestion for environmentalists
« Reply #1685 on: August 24, 2024, 11:11:51 AM »
just dream we can win some young climate change youth to our side.  The same ones who get brainwashed daily by the LEFT.

Instead of simply calling climate change a "scam"  from a person whose strategy is to keep banging a head against a wall we actually embrace it.

Such as we are concerned about the evidence suggesting climate change is man made or partly man made.

Thus we propose to combat it "smartly!"

And without destroying the economy in the process.

Yes wind and solar is ok but think
do we really want huge proportions of land covered by windmills and solar panels that will later require replacement and disposal of components?

Plus these will never alone replace our present energy sources.
Lets push to nat gas and appoint Doug to Dept of Energy to push for nuclear and yes we think Bill Gates is on to something that would be a real great long term investment that is economically feasible.

We continue to drill because we have to.
Electric cars still require electric grids fed by gas oil and coal .
Plus to build out the infrastructure would cost no less then nuclear which is totally clean.
And we could still have cars people want to drive.

We push for fusion as the best long term solution as well (before CCP get it and quant computing)

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72294
    • View Profile
Kommie vs. Kommie
« Reply #1686 on: August 26, 2024, 04:17:48 PM »

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3244
    • View Profile
Fixing the Failures of Democratic Polls
« Reply #1687 on: August 26, 2024, 05:06:27 PM »
Some interesting inside baseball polling info in this piece. I feel it’s telling, however, that it spends no time speaking about the 800 lbs gorilla in the room: erroneous polling data is used to demoralize the opposition in the hope of keeping them away from the voting booths:


Democratic pollsters have a warning about Kamala Harris’ lead

By STEVEN SHEPARD
08/22/2024 10:39 PM EDT
CHICAGO — The Democratic Party’s pollsters have spent the past three and a half years preparing for the next 75 days.

The last presidential election was an “Oh, shit” moment for them: Joe Biden beat Donald Trump by a closer margin than a lot of the polling suggested, and Democrats were projected to expand their House majority but instead saw it shrink.

It prompted five of the party’s top polling firms — who typically compete for business — to collaborate on an autopsy aimed at fixing what went wrong.

So now that Kamala Harris has caught Trump in the polls in her first month as a candidate, it’s left Democrats wondering: How real is her surge?

Here at the Democratic convention this week, some in the party’s professional class are trying to tamp down the exuberance. Officials with the top pro-Harris super PAC said their polling “is much less rosy” than public surveys. Other Democratic pollsters noted that — even if their polling is right — Trump still maintains a lot of advantages.

“It’s still a very tough race, and that feels consistent with everything we know,” said Margie Omero, a partner at the Democratic polling firm GBAO Strategies.

There are plenty of warning signs hidden in the data: A poll commissioned by the Democratic messaging firm Navigator Research and unveiled during the convention showed Harris and Trump essentially tied across the swing-state map. And the candidate characteristics that are best correlated with voters’ preferences — whether a candidate is up to the job, has the right vision and is a strong leader — generally favored Trump in the survey.

And then there’s the prospect of another polling error.

Polls underestimated Trump in both 2020 and 2016. Back in 2021, when the Democratic pollsters announced their joint effort, some had hoped that the former president’s hard-to-measure appeal would be negated if he wasn’t on the ballot in 2024.

But he is, of course, and pollsters across the spectrum are still grappling with making sure polls are correctly measuring his support.

“I spent a ton of time and analysis trying to dig into those problems. And I feel much better educated about those problems,” said Nick Gourevitch, a partner at Global Strategy Group and a driving force behind the post-2020 Democratic polling autopsy. “I don’t think there’s any Democratic pollsters have a warning about Kamala Harris’ lead

Burned by numbers that were too rosy in 2016 and 2020, Democrats are holding their breath as Harris surges against Donald Trump.
 
The last presidential election was an “Oh, shit” moment for them: Joe Biden beat Donald Trump by a closer margin than a lot of the polling suggested, and Democrats were projected to expand their House majority but instead saw it shrink.

It prompted five of the party’s top polling firms — who typically compete for business — to collaborate on an autopsy aimed at fixing what went wrong.

So now that Kamala Harris has caught Trump in the polls in her first month as a candidate, it’s left Democrats wondering: How real is her surge?

Here at the Democratic convention this week, some in the party’s professional class are trying to tamp down the exuberance. Officials with the top pro-Harris super PAC said their polling “is much less rosy” than public surveys. Other Democratic pollsters noted that — even if their polling is right — Trump still maintains a lot of advantages.

“It’s still a very tough race, and that feels consistent with everything we know,” said Margie Omero, a partner at the Democratic polling firm GBAO Strategies.

There are plenty of warning signs hidden in the data: A poll commissioned by the Democratic messaging firm Navigator Research and unveiled during the convention showed Harris and Trump essentially tied across the swing-state map. And the candidate characteristics that are best correlated with voters’ preferences — whether a candidate is up to the job, has the right vision and is a strong leader — generally favored Trump in the survey.

And then there’s the prospect of another polling error.

Polls underestimated Trump in both 2020 and 2016. Back in 2021, when the Democratic pollsters announced their joint effort, some had hoped that the former president’s hard-to-measure appeal would be negated if he wasn’t on the ballot in 2024.

But he is, of course, and pollsters across the spectrum are still grappling with making sure polls are correctly measuring his support.

“I spent a ton of time and analysis trying to dig into those problems. And I feel much better educated about those problems,” said Nick Gourevitch, a partner at Global Strategy Group and a driving force behind the post-2020 Democratic polling autopsy. “I don’t think there’s any pollster in America who can sit here and say … that they’re 100 percent sure that they fixed any issues in polling. I think that would be silly.”

One major part of the effort was a lengthy experiment in the swing state of Wisconsin. The goal wasn’t to predict the result of an election; it was to see which voters could be captured by a monthslong survey using multiple ways of finding people, including a door-to-door component — and how that group differs from the voters reached in the typical phone or web surveys conducted over the course of a few days.

The main finding: Standard polls capture voters who are more engaged with politics and consider it more important to their identity. That kind of bias wouldn’t necessarily cause problems in a low-turnout election, like an off year or midterm, because those are exactly the kind of voters who show up.

But in a presidential race, when lower-propensity voters also turn out, that could be an issue. And the kind of time, effort and expense that went into getting those voters to participate isn’t scalable in a fast-changing election.

“You can’t recreate the Wisconsin project” in the heat of the campaign, Omero said. “Polling is still a challenge.”

Harris’ candidacy has significantly changed some of the campaign dynamics, but Democratic pollsters interviewed here are cautious about upending all of their assumptions about the race, like turnout models, after only a few weeks.

“We very carefully discuss when we’re going to change our assumptions due to events, and we look at lots of lots of data, rather than letting a single poll dictate how we’re going to change things,” said Gourevitch. “We need to see things shift across many polls before we’re going to change some of those things.”

So for now, despite the palpable sense of renewed hope throughout the convention, most elected and professional Democrats are trying to temper their enthusiasm.

Like the polling firms, House Democrats launched their own autopsy following a disappointing election cycle in 2020. Though the party retained control, its majority shrunk — a narrowing that set the stage for Republicans to flip control of the chamber two years later.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s post-2020 report found larger-than-expected numbers of low-propensity GOP voters turned out, giving Republican candidates an unforeseen boost.

Asked during a roundtable discussion with reporters this week whether she trusts the internal polling this year, the current DCCC chair, Rep. Suzan DelBene of Washington state, demurred.

“Is it a piece of information that can be helpful? Absolutely,” she said, downplaying the role of polling in the committee’s strategy decisions. “It’s just another input we have and that campaigns have.”

Democratic pollsters have spent nearly four years trying to fix what went wrong last time. But, they warn, there might still be some other issues. The polls could again underestimate Trump this year — though it might be for some other, unknown reasons.

“Every year, we’ve had different curveballs. This is a difficult industry,” said John Anzalone, who was the lead pollster on Biden’s 2020 campaign. “Something’s gonna happen in 2024. You and I, right now, don’t know what that is.” in America who can sit here and say … that they’re 100 percent sure that they fixed any issues in polling. I think that would be silly.”

One major part of the effort was a lengthy experiment in the swing state of Wisconsin. The goal wasn’t to predict the result of an election; it was to see which voters could be captured by a monthslong survey using multiple ways of finding people, including a door-to-door component — and how that group differs from the voters reached in the typical phone or web surveys conducted over the course of a few days.

The main finding: Standard polls capture voters who are more engaged with politics and consider it more important to their identity. That kind of bias wouldn’t necessarily cause problems in a low-turnout election, like an off year or midterm, because those are exactly the kind of voters who show up.

But in a presidential race, when lower-propensity voters also turn out, that could be an issue. And the kind of time, effort and expense that went into getting those voters to participate isn’t scalable in a fast-changing election.

“You can’t recreate the Wisconsin project” in the heat of the campaign, Omero said. “Polling is still a challenge.”

Harris’ candidacy has significantly changed some of the campaign dynamics, but Democratic pollsters interviewed here are cautious about upending all of their assumptions about the race, like turnout models, after only a few weeks.

“We very carefully discuss when we’re going to change our assumptions due to events, and we look at lots of lots of data, rather than letting a single poll dictate how we’re going to change things,” said Gourevitch. “We need to see things shift across many polls before we’re going to change some of those things.”

So for now, despite the palpable sense of renewed hope throughout the convention, most elected and professional Democrats are trying to temper their enthusiasm.

Like the polling firms, House Democrats launched their own autopsy following a disappointing election cycle in 2020. Though the party retained control, its majority shrunk — a narrowing that set the stage for Republicans to flip control of the chamber two years later..

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s post-2020 report found larger-than-expected numbers of low-propensity GOP voters turned out, giving Republican candidates an unforeseen boost.

Asked during a roundtable discussion with reporters this week whether she trusts the internal polling this year, the current DCCC chair, Rep. Suzan DelBene of Washington state, demurred.

“Is it a piece of information that can be helpful? Absolutely,” she said, downplaying the role of polling in the committee’s strategy decisions. “It’s just another input we have and that campaigns have.”

Democratic pollsters have spent nearly four years trying to fix what went wrong last time. But, they warn, there might still be some other issues. The polls could again underestimate Trump this year — though it might be for some other, unknown reasons.

“Every year, we’ve had different curveballs. This is a difficult industry,” said John Anzalone, who was the lead pollster on Biden’s 2020 campaign. “Something’s gonna happen in 2024. You and I, right now, don’t know what that is.”

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72294
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1688 on: August 27, 2024, 06:50:53 AM »
" I feel it’s telling, however, that it spends no time speaking about the 800 lbs gorilla in the room: erroneous polling data is used to demoralize the opposition in the hope of keeping them away from the voting booths"

THIS.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Media states TRump to opt out of debate
« Reply #1689 on: August 27, 2024, 07:27:42 AM »
They offer debate on a violent left wing network with left wing "moderators"

They demand hot mic so Kamala can interrupt Trump before he can say anything with her canned prepared smart ass remarks.

They demand she can use crib notes

Then when DJT's team refuses obvious rules that favor her ,  the media runs around calling Trump a coward or the one who refuses to debate.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-threatens-to-pull-out-of-harris-debate-hot-mics-an-issue/ar-AA1psNZr?ocid=msedgntphdr&cvid=a9ae00c25950438a9903c074920200cb&ei=18



Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72294
    • View Profile
Kwame Kilpatrick endorses Trump
« Reply #1691 on: August 27, 2024, 03:28:51 PM »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
200 former Bush, McCain, Romney aides endorse Kamala
« Reply #1692 on: August 27, 2024, 03:38:38 PM »

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3244
    • View Profile
Dems Do Damage Control on the QT
« Reply #1693 on: August 28, 2024, 06:59:23 AM »
A big chunk of 2024 electoral effort appears to be focussed on pretending like Kamal's election is inevitable, while quietly working behind the scenes to make sure she doesn't tank various congressional races. An interesting, and telling, dichotomy.

Oh, and I'm so stealing "Cackles and Cankles:"

Democrats are fractured, in-fighting and preparing for defeat
AUG 28, 2024

This should be no contest. A failed vice president of a failed presidency is up against a successful president who has been indicted, convicted and shot. He’s a Timex watch who keeps on ticking.

Oh, the fluffers in the press are trying to make Cackles look inevitable just like they made Cankles look inevitable up until Election Day 2016.

But Democrats do not seem confident in Hyena Harris.

Congressmen and senators seeking re-election dumped FJB only to have him replaced by his ignorant understudy. They had to pull the plug on the Demented One because the debate opened the curtain and showed he was just a humbug and not a wizard.

On June 28, AP reported, “President Joe Biden’s unsteady debate performance reverberated among candidates up and down the November ballot on Friday, but nervous Democratic candidates mostly kept their discomfort to themselves or downplayed it, even as gleeful Republicans looked to seize the opening.

“Wisconsin’s Democrat Sen. Tammy Baldwin, who is facing a tough reelection bid against a Trump-endorsed Republican, distanced herself from Biden and did not answer questions Friday about the debate or calls for him to be replaced at the top of the ticket.”

Comrade Kamala is not running a presidential campaign. She is running an SOS campaign as in Save Our Senate. And Democrats cannot save the Senate because West Virginia, Montana and Ohio will flip. Chuck the Grillmaster Schumer wants to have a minority large enough to work with RINOs to stop Trump, something they have failed to do in two elections without an unprecedent mail-un cheating scam.

The party definitely is not united.


Subscribe
The Daily Mail reported, “Michelle Obama's secret feud with Biden... what Nancy Pelosi thinks of Kamala Harris... and why the president was left physically shaking: EMILY GOODIN's dispatch reveals what REALLY went down at the DNC.”

This conforms with Rush Limbaugh’s Two Queen Bees Theory of DC politics.

He explained that a hive can only have one queen. He applied it to Pelosi. As House Speaker, Pelosi was the most powerful woman in DC. She wasn’t about to let Hillary top her and she is not about to let Kamala top her.

But she had to shove Biden out of the way in order to save Democrats in Congress.

The story said:

Earlier this month, the Mail exclusively reported how former speaker Nancy Pelosi sent a message to Biden on Saturday, June 20, threatening to go public with her concerns about his candidacy if he did not withdraw from the election race. The next day, Biden tweeted a letter confirming his withdrawal, before endorsing Harris.

Pelosi's ultimatum is said to have left the Bidens furious — and has all but ruined a 50-year friendship between their families.

The Biden clan left Chicago almost immediately after his speech had wrapped. The flight to California was about four hours, with the president taking foreign security briefings for much of that time. It's unlikely that he managed to get much sleep at all.

Speaking Queen Bees, the story also said:

On Tuesday, the turbulence continued, as Michelle and Barack Obama took the keynote slots in Chicago's United Center.

While Barack lauded his former Vice President with praise, referring to him as his 'brother' and thanking him for his service, Michelle notably did not name Biden a single time during her rousing, 23-minute speech.

Was it a snub? Insiders say it was — adding that the former First Lady allegedly refused to speak at the convention while Biden was still in the 2024 race.

Michelle is said to remain angry with the Bidens over their treatment of her close friend Kathleen Buhle, Hunter Biden's ex-wife.

Buhle has been exiled by the family during a lengthy separation from Hunter dating back to 2017.

The Queen Bee in that passage is not — I repeat NOT — Barack Obama.

You can bet your boots that Trump knows Kamala is a white flag operation by Democrats who have given up on the Oval Office. Their plan is to neutralize him again as president. They hope to repeat the resistance they had last time. They also believe they control the military through years of DEI.

Trump knows all this post-election strategy too. He’s a very sane genius. He knew in 2016 he could beat Hillary. The press didn’t.

8 Augusts ago, the Economist published a story, “Inevitable once more: The Democratic nominee is starting to look unbeatable. Thank Donald Trump.”

It began by reporting on a cheerless rally for Hillary in Florida. The story then said:

A visiting Martian might be surprised to learn, on the basis of Mrs. Clinton’s rallies, that she is a strong favorite for the presidency. As The Economist went to press, she led Donald Trump by eight percentage points in an average of recent polls, by a similar margin in several important swing states, including Virginia and Pennsylvania, and her lead was growing. Groups that have not voted Democratic in decades, such as college-educated whites, are flocking to her. So are some Republicans, including a good few of the 50 Republican security gurus who denounced Mr. Trump on August 8th. All are repelled by him, which is no wonder. In a speech in North Carolina on August 9th Mr. Trump appeared to ponder Mrs. Clinton’s assassination: “If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks,” he goaded the crowd, “although the Second Amendment people — maybe there is, I don’t know.” Yet it is still striking how little Mrs. Clinton, America’s probable next president, is loved.

Interesting that he was the one shot.

The story did throw some shade on her: “She is an amazingly poor orator, considering her long record and her easy charm in private, with a default shouting mode that would grate less if she would at least shout in the right places.”

It also noted: “voters like Mr. Trump even less. Yet her unpopularity is at the least liable to make the next three months more nerve-racking, given the disaster a Trump victory would represent for America, than they might otherwise be. It is also a poor basis for a presidency.”

But the piece ended, “Almost all her best lines and biggest applause in Kissimmee referred to her rival; this election, she said, is ‘a choice between two different views of who we are as Americans.’ Indeed it is, and the polls suggest that the inclusiveness and moderation that inform her vision, whatever her character flaws, her fudgy policies and the anti-politics mood, are shining through. In this election, those qualities alone are worth cheering.”

Kamala is not Hillary. People had a quarter century of Hillary to judge her on. Most people loved her husband and dumped what they didn’t like about him on her. Kamala benefits from being unknown and being under 60, even if it is barely.

Hillary had a bigger advantage. A Trump presidency also was an unknown and had she played on that more than the grab-them-by-the-pussy stuff, the outcome may have been different.

Also, now we know what a Trump presidency is like: more jobs, more money and lower prices. Bogey-manning Trump is an exercise in futility. Project 2025 comes off as another Putin-will-rig-the-election. Democrats have run out of times they can cry wolf.

Politico reported on August 12, “GOP insiders: Trump can’t win.”

Again, that was in 2016. Its story said:

Roughly half of Republican members of The Politico Caucus — activists, strategists and operatives in 11 swing states — believe that Trump’s path to 270 electoral votes is basically shut off after another week in which the GOP nominee appears to have ceded ground in national and most battleground state polls.

Ah yes, Republicans in disarray. Well, Trump carried Wisconsin — Paul Ryan’s alleged home state — without Ryan’s help. That broke a 28-year winning streak for Democrats in presidential races in Wisconsin.

The press still promotes RINOs as being the true heart of the party — a party whose presidential nominee RINOs have rejected since 2012.

On August 7, 2016, ABC reported, “Clinton Opens 23-Point Lead Among Women, Gains With Democrats as Trump Struggles.”

Jeff Bezos and his Washington Post got on their broom on August 26, 2016, and buzzed Oz with the message: Surrender Republicans.

It reported:

Every major indicator and poll shows Hillary Clinton winning the presidency. So be it.

There isn’t a snowball’s chance that Donald Trump will stop his bombast and preening. If he’s in trouble today, just bet that it’s going to be worse tomorrow.

It appears a political landslide will sweep the country. That’s not all bad. The larger the margin, the greater the chances a Clinton administration will overplay its hand, handing Republicans a clear opportunity to repair the damage in 2018 and 2020.

Second, a massive educational program needs to be initiated on how to “split ticket” vote. Staying home is not an option. Turnout for the down-ticket races is key. Trump will drag down the entire ticket, but it is vital that Republicans maintain control of the Senate, if possible, and at the very least, the House.

The snowball beat the hell of an egomaniac woman candidate and her flying monkeys in the media.

But the media beat their drums for Hillary and convinced her and themselves that she was inevitable.

On October 23, 2016, CNN reported:

Hillary Clinton has a 12-point lead over Donald Trump and has reached 50% support nationally among likely voters, a new ABC News tracking poll shows.

The poll shows Clinton with 50% support to Trump’s 38%, with 5% backing Libertarian Gary Johnson and 2% supporting the Green Party’s Jill Stein.

The poll comes on the heels of the third presidential debate, which a post-debate CNN/ORC snap poll showed Clinton won.

The ABC News survey’s results show Clinton with a 20-point advantage among women, and a 3-point edge with men — a group that has tilted toward Trump for most of the 2016 race.

Kamala won’t make the same mistake of inevitability that Hillary made. Kamala will make some other mistake that likely will be deadlier because she is a fool.

Tim Walz was a monstrously bad pick because his target audience — veterans — overwhelmingly hates him because he lied about his rank and retired to dodge a deployment to Iraq.

That was bad enough, but then he had the nerve to brag about seeing combat — something he refused to do.

It is difficult to make a worse decision than going to the Walz but I have full faith in Kamala. I am confident that she is up to the task of topping herself. Just how us anyone’s guess.

In 2016, it was Hillary the Hare against Trump the Tortoise.

This time, it is the Hyena versus the Lion. In both cases, the media wanted to give their favorite candidate the Cloak of Inevitability. Bear that in mind when you get a little down over the next 10 weeks. Campaigns are marathons but I do not believe the Lord spared Trump that assassin’s bullet to elect Kamala.

https://donsurber.substack.com/p/inevitable-once-more?r=1qo1e&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&triedRedirect=true

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
2024
« Reply #1694 on: August 29, 2024, 05:17:35 AM »
3 liberals are going to o sit and talk, pre-recorded, and air tonight on liberal TV, and somehow this propaganda session is the most anticipated event in the country.  We already know the story is what wasn't asked and what wasn't answered.

Thanks for coming, but why have you been hiding from questions, why did insist on pre-recorded, why did you need your running mate with you.
Will they ask about this?
https://nypost.com/2024/08/07/us-news/harris-and-walz-fiddled-as-minneapolis-burned-during-blm-riots/

When Walz jumps in to save Harris, will he be asked about his long list of self untruths?  No, of course not. When they answer with straw arguments, will they be called out on it.

Is there a way, other than limited government, free market capitalism, to bring prosperity to mass numbers of people to prosperity?

What will you do to ensure the ID dollar is the world reserve currency after 4, 8, 16 years of your presidencies?

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1695 on: August 29, 2024, 05:52:36 AM »
agree Doug
we all know how this will turn out.
Dana will attempt for few seconds to look tough, but the answers are already memorized.

reading Ya's post about suspicion that USA covert operations have tried to destabilize Bangladesh
reminds me of covert overt operations here to get kAmAlA elected.
Same propaganda stuff, legal warfare, bribes, coercion, threats, and cheating .


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Bash/Harris/walz
« Reply #1696 on: August 29, 2024, 08:16:52 PM »
I thought Bash was a bit tougher then I expected.  At least the part I stayed up to watch which was only the first part.

I thought Harris performance was poor in that part.

and I think the headlines on the LEFTist media reporting Trumps photo op at Arlington INSTEAD of discussing the interview is quite telling the LEFT does not want to speak of the interview because she and Walz failed.

Axeldouche on CNN (of course) told us she did what she had to achieve.  Something like, he does not think she won anyone over but she established herself - or some horse shit like that.

Dana must be getting all sorts of emails texts from her gulag network complaining she was too tough
though I thought she could have been tougher.

I am not sure that Harris knew the exact questions  :-o though she seemed to be ready for immigration and inflation - but not convincing.

At least one almost word salad, many non answers, one laugh almost but not quite a cackle




ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
good announcement by Don
« Reply #1697 on: August 29, 2024, 08:23:52 PM »
https://www.newsmax.com/newsmax-tv/donald-trump-rally-michigan/2024/08/29/id/1178437/

right after Walz lies and tells the world Don is against it and against having babies

ME:   what the stupid hell is that ?  The Dems are for killing embryos, fetuses and babies.

Don has also agreed with the exceptions and agreed with compromise at ~ 15 weeks

yet Walz sits there with a straight face and tells us Don is against people having children.


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19447
    • View Profile
Dana, Kamala, Tim, word salads for the gullible
« Reply #1698 on: August 30, 2024, 04:47:09 AM »
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2024/08/29/full_video_cnns_dana_bash_interviews_vp_kamala_harris_gov_tim_walz.html

Video split into 3 parts.

Here's a question, what is one thing you learned in this wasteful hour of non-answers.

I learned she was making pancakes and bacon for nieces on a Sunday when Joe Biden  called and she asked him, are you sure?

"How it does so matters."

That's her answer to Israel's right to defend defend itself, negated the wasted minutes that preceded that.

The one who really can move his lips and not answer is Tim Walz. Confronted with two specific lies, I think he said he's not going to denigrate anyone else's service.  What?

Not one word about Walz' failed record as Governor.  $2 billion more money into schools and no improvement in learning. Turned surplus into deficit and raised taxes into stagnation. Who cares about that?

Other subjects they didn't get to:
Xi Jinping, Taiwan, Ukraine, anything foreign policy beyond the non-answers on Israel.

A new way forward and a break with the last decade, BUT she's running as the incumbent. What is the new way forward, more tax code tampering and higher tax rates?  That's new??

She doubled down on the border crisis being Trump's fault.  She will get that legislation passed and signed!

Isn't there already a law against illegal border crossings and fentanyl smuggling?

They got inflation down below 3%, 50% over target, by starting with inflation at 1.4%, consistently under target, the accomplishments of Bidenomics.  Now Kamalanomics.  More of the same is re-titled "a new way forward".

If you didn't disagree with Joe Biden's first day in office when he launched the war on energy, if you don't regret the vote you made on the trillions in new, excess spending, then your promise, whether Dana pulls it out of you or not, is to return us to spiraling higher prices along paid for with declining real wages.  "A New Way Forward".

$6000 tax credit in the first year of surviving an abortion will help pay for "a new car seat".  Free money from the person who wants to ban the automobile as we know it, and doubles your car insurance.  Where will you put the car seat when the car is garaged and out of service.

Best guess is she won't be doing another interview soon.
« Last Edit: August 30, 2024, 06:28:10 AM by DougMacG »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1699 on: August 30, 2024, 06:00:32 AM »
Her answers made no sense:

https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=harris+statement+about+the+last+10+yrs+in+bash+interview&mid=0BEF16BDBB6E93CFE52A0BEF16BDBB6E93CFE52A&FORM=VIRE

ME:  OMG!     :-o  => complete incompetence to be spokesperson of the USA.

We are in real trouble if she wins!

Obviously, she would not be the one running the country.

Of course, we have that now as well.