+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums)
+--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0)
+--- Thread: It's Kamala! (/Thread-It-s-Kamala)
RE: It's Kamala! - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 08-12-2020
(08-12-2020, 03:58 AM)Dill Wrote: Kamala Harris shines in commanding Democratic debate performance
https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/27/politics/kamala-harris-democratic-debate-performance/index.html
Kamala Harris Surges in 3 Polls After Strong Debate Performance
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/us/politics/kamala-harris-polls.html
What to make of differing post-debate polls (Hint: It's good news for Kamala Harris)
https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/06/politics/kamala-harris-debate-polls-democrats/index.html
Harris debate performance clearly had an effect. She saw a big 10 point jump after winning near universal praise. Meanwhile, Biden is down 5 points (following a panned performance) and Buttigieg and Sanders are down a less significant 3 and 2 points respectively. Warren held steady at 14%.
The First Democratic Debate In Five Charts
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-first-democratic-debate-in-five-charts/
![[Image: wolfe-DebateExpectations-0628-UPDATED.png]](https://fivethirtyeight.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/wolfe-DebateExpectations-0628-UPDATED.png)
My mistake, I got the actual debate number wrong. Seeing as how you knew that, I'm curious as to why you didn't address the actual point I made instead of focusing on the error. Why is that?
RE: It's Kamala! - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 08-12-2020
(08-12-2020, 08:52 AM)GMDino Wrote: "finally"?
Didn't Jackson condemn it the very next morning? He tweeted about it and Millhouse noted that both he and the Mayor had condemned the looting before he even posted about the looting in another thread.
I'm pretty sure he means "finally" as in this is hardly the first time this has happened recently in Chicago.
RE: It's Kamala! - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 08-12-2020
(08-12-2020, 08:55 AM)GMDino Wrote: So am I to gather that the people who like Biden like this pick and those who more "conservative" here don't?
Who could have seen that coming?!?!
I don't think you realize that this argument cuts both ways. I don't like the pick because I strongly dislike Harris. I'm literally stuck with two awful choices for POTUS. One person sucks less but I despise their party platform. The other sucks way more but I find their party platform more moderate. Truly a "would you rather" election.
RE: It's Kamala! - hollodero - 08-12-2020
(08-12-2020, 11:49 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: My mistake, I got the actual debate number wrong. Seeing as how you knew that, I'm curious as to why you didn't address the actual point I made instead of focusing on the error. Why is that?
At which debate did she get destroyed? I am not even disagreeing, I did not like her in any of the debates I saw, I found her widely praised attack on Biden a dirty cheap shot and her attack on Warren on behalf of banning Trump's twitter account cringeworthy. But I cannot remember when she was destroyed for her record as DA. What happened?
RE: It's Kamala! - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 08-12-2020
(08-12-2020, 11:53 AM)hollodero Wrote: At which debate did she get destroyed? I am not even disagreeing, I did not like her in any of the debates I saw, I found her widely praised attack on Biden a dirty cheap shot and her attack on Warren on behalf of banning Trump's twitter account cringeworthy. But I cannot remember when she was destroyed for her record as DA. What happened?
It was the CNN one. There were so damn many debates they all kind of flowed together for me. Plus Gabbard was the only Dem candidate I liked so this stuck out for me. Here's the clip.
RE: It's Kamala! - GMDino - 08-12-2020
(08-12-2020, 11:50 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'm pretty sure he means "finally" as in this is hardly the first time this has happened recently in Chicago.
I'm pretty sure the mayor and other have condemned the looting and violence many times too though. But okay.
RE: It's Kamala! - Belsnickel - 08-12-2020
(08-12-2020, 11:53 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I don't think you realize that this argument cuts both ways. I don't like the pick because I strongly dislike Harris. I'm literally stuck with two awful choices for POTUS. One person sucks less but I despise their party platform. The other sucks way more but I find their party platform more moderate. Truly a "would you rather" election.
I, truthfully, don't know how one could describe the GOP platform as "moderate." But whatever floats your boat. In all seriousness, aside from a few things, the 2020 DNC platform is fairly moderate: https://www.demconvention.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/2020-07-21-DRAFT-Democratic-Party-Platform.pdf
RE: It's Kamala! - hollodero - 08-12-2020
(08-12-2020, 11:55 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: It was the CNN one. There were so damn many debates they all kind of flowed together for me. Plus Gabbard was the only Dem candidate I liked so this stuck out for me. Here's the clip.
OK, I do not see her getting destroyed there. She gets attacked, on things like her stance on (or her role in prosecuting) marijuana, a stance that according to Harris apparently has changed by now. And that sure can be brought up (but Gabbard is not the ideal person to do that, since her own stances "evolved" similarly regarding same-sex marriages, she was quite opposed to gay rights for a long time). I mean, sure Harris has a record and not everyone is happy about it, but having it brought up imho is not akin to getting "destroyed".
What I find more fascinating is that you liked Tulsi Gabbard of all people. She has a F rating from the NRA, she advocates a common rifle weapons ban and universal background checks, permits and whatnot. She sounds like your political nightmare on that topic alone, imho. Why do you like her?
RE: It's Kamala! - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 08-12-2020
(08-12-2020, 12:05 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I, truthfully, don't know how one could describe the GOP platform as "moderate." But whatever floats your boat. In all seriousness, aside from a few things, the 2020 DNC platform is fairly moderate: https://www.demconvention.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/2020-07-21-DRAFT-Democratic-Party-Platform.pdf
I didn't, I said it was "more moderate". Aside from a few things is a rather important disclaimer. I literally could never vote for a party whose current iteration literally despises me as a person.
RE: It's Kamala! - Belsnickel - 08-12-2020
(08-12-2020, 12:24 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I didn't, I said it was "more moderate". Aside from a few things is a rather important disclaimer. I literally could never vote for a party whose current iteration literally despises me as a person.
I agree that the aside from a few things is an important disclaimer, but there are even fewer things that make the GOP platform moderate. Also, the "literally despises me as a person" statement is rather hyperbolic, and an incorrect usage of the word "literally."
RE: It's Kamala! - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 08-12-2020
(08-12-2020, 08:59 AM)GMDino Wrote: And DJT is already projecting:
Pres Trump on Kamala Harris: "She lied. She said things that are untrue. She is a person who has told stories that are untrue...She was my number draft pick."
— Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) August 11, 2020
He adds: She wants to take away your healthcare plans and raise taxes.
(Note: Harris hasn't said any of those things.)
LOL
The irony of Trump calling someone a liar and the cherry on top of accusing her of wanting to take away healthcare plans when he has been trying to do that for over three years. F’n hilarious.
RE: It's Kamala! - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 08-12-2020
(08-12-2020, 10:22 AM)Benton Wrote: Well, I have no idea what she will do. But trump raised my taxes and took healthcare from lots of folks.
My taxes went up, also.
RE: It's Kamala! - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 08-12-2020
(08-12-2020, 12:15 PM)hollodero Wrote: OK, I do not see her getting destroyed there. She gets attacked, on things like her stance on (or her role in prosecuting) marijuana, a stance that according to Harris apparently has changed by now.
Wow, we must be watching two different clips.
Quote:And that sure can be brought up (but Gabbard is not the ideal person to do that, since her own stances "evolved" similarly regarding same-sex marriages, she was quite opposed to gay rights for a long time).
Sure, just like Obama. In this regard I'm apparently the perfect liberal, as I've been for same sex marriage my entire adult life (ask bfine, we used to argue about it all the time in the early 2000's). I didn't have to "evolve" or a have a talk about it with my daughter. Except now, to many, I'm a racist right winger, maybe other people "evolved"?
Quote:I mean, sure Harris has a record and not everyone is happy about it, but having it brought up imho is not akin to getting "destroyed".
You could clearly see Harris had zero response and just had to absorb it with a grimace. Seriously, it's as close to a perfect take down as you'll ever see in these debates.
Quote:What I find more fascinating is that you liked Tulsi Gabbard of all people. She has a F rating from the NRA, she advocates a common rifle weapons ban and universal background checks, permits and whatnot. She sounds like your political nightmare on that topic alone, imho. Why do you like her?
Like is a relative term. She's by far more preferable than the other Dem candidates. No, I don't like her stance on firearms, but I do like that she is pragmatic and not married to party orthodoxy. It's similar to why I really like 2000 era John McCain, although his stances were much more in line with my own, he spoke his mind and wasn't afraid to go his own way if he felt strongly enough about something. That character trait alone, being so rare in a US politician, is worthy of admiration.
RE: It's Kamala! - CJD - 08-12-2020
I think, given the options and circumstances, Kamala was the safest choice which, in an election where you basically want to keep it as a referendum on Trump, makes it the best choice.
I think Susan Rice would have created controversy because she was NSA during the Obama administration which would have inevitably made people say "But Benghazi!" and that would have potentially relapsed us into a Hillary discussion which no one in the DNC wanted.
I think Karen Bass would have sparked "But communism!" because of her past comments on Fidel Castro which you want to avoid in this scenario as well.
And if he selected Val Demmings, I think a lot of people would have said "Who?" similar to the reaction when Tim "Who is Tim Kaine?" Kaine was selected in 2016.
Kamala is a recognizable person who gained a lot of fame for her questioning of Kavanaugh, which was viewed positively by a lot of people.
I think she can be considered progressive if you squint because she initially sponsored Medicare for All but she's also a moderate if you squint because during her campaign, she backtracked on that sponsoring. It makes me think she's an opportunist who will say whatever gets her the most votes, but that describes a metric shit ton of politicians so...
She will theoretically help with multiple minority groups because she is biracial. There is a question of if she will actually help with black voters when she was responsible for putting a lot of people in jail for marijuana use, which is a relic of the "war on crime" which disproportionately affected and criminalized black people, but I think that will only affect the most informed voters, which the majority of Americans are not.
So you get a lot of small bonuses among several groups of voters by picking Kamala and she doesn't significantly hurt any group of voters like a Bass or Rice selection would have.
She will suffer with LGBTQ+ supporters because of her treatment of trans prisoners, but again, that will only affect the most informed voters.
Am I excited by the pick? No...Am I devastated by the pick? No, not really. I already knew it wasn't going to be a progressive, so given the options, I like that Kamala at least feigns progressivism on occasion...
RE: It's Kamala! - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 08-12-2020
(08-12-2020, 12:30 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I agree that the aside from a few things is an important disclaimer, but there are even fewer things that make the GOP platform moderate. Also, the "literally despises me as a person" statement is rather hyperbolic, and an incorrect usage of the word "literally."
I wish I could agree with you on the latter issue. Then I get bombarded with how straight white men, especially those in law enforcement, are responsible for all that is evil in the world and I find that I can't.
RE: It's Kamala! - Belsnickel - 08-12-2020
(08-12-2020, 12:34 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I wish I could agree with you on the latter issue. Then I get bombarded with how straight white men, especially those in law enforcement, are responsible for all that is evil in the world and I find that I can't.
I think you are conflating the opinion of a small minority of individuals with the position of a political party. Even if some of the politicians feel that way, it's not the literal position of the party. This type of broad brush attitude is part of the problem we are seeing with politics, today, where people readily ascribe certain positions or values to entire groups of people based on the actions of a few that they share some identifiable trait with.
RE: It's Kamala! - Nately120 - 08-12-2020
(08-12-2020, 12:00 PM)GMDino Wrote: I'm pretty sure the mayor and other have condemned the looting and violence many times too though. But okay.
How much can you condemn something before people start to get the wrong idea? I tried going around in my neighborhood and telling everyone that I find child molesters to be abhorrent and all I got were concerned looks.
RE: It's Kamala! - Nately120 - 08-12-2020
(08-12-2020, 12:38 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I think you are conflating the opinion of a small minority of individuals with the position of a political party. Even if some of the politicians feel that way, it's not the literal position of the party. This type of broad brush attitude is part of the problem we are seeing with politics, today, where people readily ascribe certain positions or values to entire groups of people based on the actions of a few that they share some identifiable trait with.
Yeah, but it's just so damn efficient.
RE: It's Kamala! - BmorePat87 - 08-12-2020
Tucker Carlson had a meltdown last night. A guest corrected his pronunciation of Kamala's name Tucker said "so what?". The guest said that "out of respect of someone on a national ticket, we should be pronouncing their name correctly". Tucker then went on a rant about how you're not allowed to criticize Kamala Harris and then intentionally used two mispronunciations of her name.
RE: It's Kamala! - Belsnickel - 08-12-2020
(08-12-2020, 12:49 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Tucker Carlson had a meltdown last night. A guest corrected his pronunciation of Kamala's name Tucker said "so what?". The guest said that "out of respect of someone on a national ticket, we should be pronouncing their name correctly". Tucker then went on a rant about how you're not allowed to criticize Kamala Harris and then intentionally used two mispronunciations of her name.
Aww, sounds like someone triggered the snowflake.
