Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Now, back to the topic at hand. Although discussing Trump's apparent fondness for and closeness to the Ruskies is certainly more timely and urgent at present.
Great, I can smell it a mile away.
Another one intentionally groomed and with the red carpet laid out for her to rise the ladder.
Let's check her fund-raising donations over time.....I'll bet George Soros or his surrogates have funded her way.
Another Manchurian....no thanks.
Before Hillary even conceded, Van Jones was singing Kamala Harris' praise on CNN for 2020.
The DNC and MSM colluding to rig the primaries for Hillary was a massive *middle finger* to American voters by the establishment.
If the DNC and MSM pull the same kind of stuff it will only help Trump.
I truly doubt she will run for President. I think she will be more in line with a Warren type who wants to pull the party in their direction.
The thing to remember about the 'major Clinton donors' is that she was a foregone conclusion in the last two competitive D primaries. So a hoard of people backed her that were not necessarily Clinton donors but Democratic donors. She also tended to demand loyalty form donors- meaning no donations to multiple candidates. That bit her in the ass last year when new donors felt their opinions/priorities were not going to be heard over existing donors. In 09 it bit her in the ass because it greatly narrowed the field of canidates and meant that Obama and Edwards had a bigger share of non-Clinton voters available in Iowa where they both beat her and set the tone for that year's primary.
Back to topic- I think Harris is simply trying to fill a leadership vacuum in the party. As a CA senator she is going to have a lot of sway since that is such a large Democratic base and home to a lot of political donors. So spreading her footprint is a natural move.
I truly doubt she will run for President. I think she will be more in line with a Warren type who wants to pull the party in their direction.
The thing to remember about the 'major Clinton donors' is that she was a foregone conclusion in the last two competitive D primaries. So a hoard of people backed her that were not necessarily Clinton donors but Democratic donors. She also tended to demand loyalty form donors- meaning no donations to multiple candidates. That bit her in the ass last year when new donors felt their opinions/priorities were not going to be heard over existing donors. In 09 it bit her in the ass because it greatly narrowed the field of canidates and meant that Obama and Edwards had a bigger share of non-Clinton voters available in Iowa where they both beat her and set the tone for that year's primary.
Back to topic- I think Harris is simply trying to fill a leadership vacuum in the party. As a CA senator she is going to have a lot of sway since that is such a large Democratic base and home to a lot of political donors. So spreading her footprint is a natural move.
Interesting post, but the only thing was it made me think of Clinton's ass..
She sounds okay but that's not what we need now. To be electable, the Dems have to find a pleasant, ordinary, male who is moderate. They shouldn't give the nomination to someone just because she is a woman, is black, and comes from CA.
They need to decide if they want to win or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharks With Lasers
Again, why do the Democrats need to run a male candidate in order for that candidate to be electable?
At this point, I don't believe there is a Dem female that could win, that is the reason. And, Ivanka is in line to be the first woman POTUS, so they need to move on and just try to win before they are the forgotten party.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeerGeek40
I'm hoping they nominate Hillary again.
Oh, come on, let's make Trump work for his victory a little bit!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy
OP, why do you think that means they're picking her?
More likely they were telling her not to challenge Hillary in 2020 and that in exchange they'd give her Sec. of State and help launch her in 2028 for higher office.
You don't seriously think Hillary is giving up on a 2020 run do you?
Very interesting post. I think this victory was promised to Hillary Clinton when she backed Obama in 2008 by the party, and she is determined that NO ONE will stand in the way of that promise being fulfilled. I wouldn't want to stand in the way, as I like living above ground!
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashrendar4454
this nonsense that GOP are anti woman of course is just liberal generalization nonsense of course
if anything the liberals are condescending to women in their own way. Believing women need all sorts of special treatment, and people like Hillary and Elizabeth Warren and Madeline Albright using the woman card at every opportunity as if it is some kind of shield to criticism
They'll see when Ivanka is on the ticket in the future. This last election was not anti-woman, it was anti-Hillary. I was infuriated that I was being criticized for not voting for that deplorable woman, as if I owed it to her. Crying equality and asking for such favor is the reason that I do not consider myself one of "those" women. Equality is equality all the time, not just when it serves your purpose!
I really don't think that the conservatives in this country would vote for any woman to be the Republican nominee for President, especially someone that was strong like Thatcher. There's still a lot of "a woman's place" on the righter side of the aisle.
Remember the old joke - What's the difference between Reagan and Thatcher? Thatcher had balls.
Those claims are cheap political tripe and highly divisive.
Case in point, Hillary supporters were deemed racist in 2008 with the same tactic. That actually hurt her in 2016 as black voters just weren't excited about her and had lower turnout as they'd been jaded by the 2008 primary.
Slinging sexism, racism, socialism, communism claims and so forth at opponents is just a cheap common tactic.
I truly doubt she will run for President. I think she will be more in line with a Warren type who wants to pull the party in their direction.
The thing to remember about the 'major Clinton donors' is that she was a foregone conclusion in the last two competitive D primaries. So a hoard of people backed her that were not necessarily Clinton donors but Democratic donors. She also tended to demand loyalty form donors- meaning no donations to multiple candidates. That bit her in the ass last year when new donors felt their opinions/priorities were not going to be heard over existing donors. In 09 it bit her in the ass because it greatly narrowed the field of canidates and meant that Obama and Edwards had a bigger share of non-Clinton voters available in Iowa where they both beat her and set the tone for that year's primary.
Back to topic- I think Harris is simply trying to fill a leadership vacuum in the party. As a CA senator she is going to have a lot of sway since that is such a large Democratic base and home to a lot of political donors. So spreading her footprint is a natural move.
Her problem was not a lack of money. Her problem was a lack of decency.
Her problem was not a lack of money. Her problem was a lack of decency.
Not true. Hillary's problem was 20+ years of Republicans bashing her with untrue accusations--Whitewater, Bengazi, etc. She was found innocent by the FBI (James Comey), yet the Right insists that she is guilty. The Right hates strong women and can't stand that they would have power. They were afraid of Hillary, a smart, competent woman, who would have made a far better President than the one we have in there now.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
