KAMALA HARRIS

$81 million has come in already into her campaign fund.

She has been talking about being a prosecutor and how she "knows Trump’s type"

"Vice President Kamala Harris drew on her past as a prosecutor on Monday in her first campaign appearance since President Biden dropped his re-election bid, saying her law enforcement background would help her defeat a rival who is a convicted criminal,” the New York Times reports.

Said Harris: “I took on perpetrators of all kinds. Predators who abused women. Fraudsters who ripped off consumers. Cheaters who broke the rules for their own gain. So hear me when I say: I know Donald Trump’s type.”

Urms, this is becoming distressing. Do think what you are saying and who you are backing.
You must know as well as anyone else that the trial wasn't rigged, that the 2020 election wasn't 'stolen'. And that Donald Trump is a fundamentally dishonest man. That's surely enough.
We who count ourselves your friends on GN are alarmed to see you seemingly in thrall to this man. Or if it's just a provocative tease, do stop.

I think there's a theory around children that any attention is better than no attention. Hence they are naughty and provocative. Its a dopamine hit.

NotSpaghetti

$81 million has come in already into her campaign fund.

She has been talking about being a prosecutor and how she "knows Trump’s type"

"Vice President Kamala Harris drew on her past as a prosecutor on Monday in her first campaign appearance since President Biden dropped his re-election bid, saying her law enforcement background would help her defeat a rival who is a convicted criminal,” the New York Times reports.

^Said Harris: “I took on perpetrators of all kinds. Predators who abused women. Fraudsters who ripped off consumers. Cheaters who broke the rules for their own gain. So hear me when I say: I know Donald Trump’s type.”^

youtu.be/lt9hQpq-nkU?feature=shared

Thanks Macadia - what a warm little clip that is!
I'd heard it on the radio but nice to see the video.
👍 and 🤞

www.forbes.com/sites/erinspencer1/2024/07/22/inside-the-kamala-harris-coalition-and-plan-to-bet-on-female-voters/

Many many women will prefer this offer to Trump!

The zoom call on Sunday had 45,000 women online and still some couldn't get "in".

I knew little about Kamala Harris before Biden endorsed her. I remember her being seen as a great VP when Biden selected her. She seems to have been on the receiving end of shallow criticism from Republicans, eg cackling/coconut nonsense. Sadly all too common where women are concerned,

The more we learn, the more I like her

I agree Iam64 - I hope she energises the party and draws in others.

I hope her prosecution of drug crimes doesn't put people off...
I know some communities are vary wary.

I wish it wasn't a "Coronation" though.

NotSpaghetti

I agree Iam64 - I hope she energises the party and draws in others.

I hope her prosecution of drug crimes doesn't put people off...
I know some communities are vary wary.

I wish it wasn't a "Coronation" though.

It's not really a coronation though. They can't think of anything that betters it. Why they just don't use Elected I've no idea.

I think those who would have liked a competitive process wanted to see how Harris managed being challenged and pushed to define her policies and political positions. That’s not unreasonable, particularly given her weaknesses when she ran for the nomination last time.

Casdon

Let’s try and keep this thread free of nonsense one liner diss posts shall we, we aren’t in the fifth form.

Oh sorry, I hadn’t realised you run the show.
🤣🤣

I recently read a book called Coconut byFlorence Olajide.
Coconut is a term used to describe brown people (as in coconut shell) who reject their heritage for a white one.

It must be timing that prevents a contest Siope. Harris is endorsed already, but it would take several months to run a selection process, and as the election is so soon that would affect a new person’s chances if they are not well known?

I was reading about Harris. Apparently her communication skills and the ability to relay her beliefs were too weak which lost her support in previous years, but she has learned on the job as it were and is now a much better communicator.

Primrose53

Casdon

Let’s try and keep this thread free of nonsense one liner diss posts shall we, we aren’t in the fifth form.

Oh sorry, I hadn’t realised you run the show.
🤣🤣

I recently read a book called Coconut byFlorence Olajide.
Coconut is a term used to describe brown people (as in coconut shell) who reject their heritage for a white one.

And you think that post is relevant because……?

Casdon

It must be timing that prevents a contest Siope. Harris is endorsed already, but it would take several months to run a selection process, and as the election is so soon that would affect a new person’s chances if they are not well known?

All to do with Ohio which Rory Stewart was explaining in the latest TRIP. More here from NBC News. This piece predates Biden’s withdrawal but explains the dilemma and why Harris’s nomination needs to be be seen to be legitimate.

www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/democrats-virtual-nomination-biden-ohio-ballot-rcna154339

As others have said, Trump and his supporters, if defeated in November, are unlikely to take it well. What we don’t need is repeat of 6 January 2021.

Casdon as far as I understand it, others could have decided to stand (as happens normally, even if an incumbent stands for a second term). They would then - still could - solicit supporters (which is all an endorsement is) and campaigned, as Harris is campaigning still.

Agreed, it would been a short contest, as the nominee will be chosen at the Democratic convention in 3 weeks, but it would still have tested Harris somewhat.

WWM I think the argument is that a contest would test the truth of that, at least to some extent.

sipoe yes exactly so. Which is I think is where Obama is coming from, but it seems unlikely now as she appears to have sufficient nominations.

Pity really, as it would have legitimised her candidacy. They are too keen to get on with it.

Merion that’s awkward, as so far, as far as I can tell, there is now no nominee. I’m off to pester barely awake Americans to help me make sense of it.

Siope

Casdon as far as I understand it, others could have decided to stand (as happens normally, even if an incumbent stands for a second term). They would then - still could - solicit supporters (which is all an endorsement is) and campaigned, as Harris is campaigning still.

Agreed, it would been a short contest, as the nominee will be chosen at the Democratic convention in 3 weeks, but it would still have tested Harris somewhat.

WWM I think the argument is that a contest would test the truth of that, at least to some extent.

I don’t know if any other potential delegates have said they would have stood if the consensus hadn’t endorsed Harris Siope, from what I’ve read it sounds pretty unanimous. I don’t disagree that a contest would have been better, but I can understand why they have decided to go with her, too.

Well, whatever the pros and cons of the candidates, I hope they keep a tight control of the voting machines and the postal ballot, this time.

Not only must the election be fair, it must be seen to be fair. Whatever one's views of the 2020 election, it will not be good if there are hundreds more affidavits attesting to voting irregularities in November.

There were four hundred and something lots found to be possible fraud - including, for example instances of genuine mistakes (one where a felon moved from a state where felons can vote to one where they can't but he went to vote as apparently he didn't realise it was different.
Lots of small "frauds" like this.

Generally though it seems fraud is pretty rare.
I doubt, however, that anything anyone can do or say will persuade people otherwise if they have decided it's widespread though.

www.reuters.com/article/fact-check/re-examining-how-and-why-voter-fraud-is-exceedingly-rare-in-the-us-ahead-of-th-idUSL1N2XP2AI/

Just been sent this:

Urmstongran

Well, whatever the pros and cons of the candidates, I hope they keep a tight control of the voting machines and the postal ballot, this time.

Not only must the election be fair, it must be seen to be fair. Whatever one's views of the 2020 election, it will not be good if there are hundreds more affidavits attesting to voting irregularities in November.

Don’t you believe the reports saying that there was no issue?!

Murdoch was fined enormously because he disagreed with the findings, because by doing so he undermined the trust in democracy.

All those affidavits were looked at and found no case to answer.

Forgive my (virtual) shouting, Urms

THE LAST ELECTION WAS FAIR AND THE MACHINES AND POSTAL BALLOTS WORKED PERFECTLY WELL

The result was correct, Trump’s alleged frauds and system failures did not happen, and his lies were proved false in court case after court case l, and none of those were rigged either.

Just for info: the deadline for overseas postal ballots (up to 3 million of them) his, in many states, several days after the election, and that’s not fraud either.

urms hand on heart etc. Do you truly believe that the election was stolen?