Elections Kamala Harris indicates she might run again

I think the DNC itself wants to keep breaking barriers but you have to have the right person and they have to naturally rise to the top like Obama did. Biden would definitely have beaten Trump in 16. People think the US isn't ready for a woman but Hillary did win the popular vote so it was close. But it's not just that you have any random woman you have to have the right woman or the right man or the right minority person. It can't be forced or you're going to lose every time like they have.
There is no death knell ringing for the DEMs, though. Trump ran against Hillary in '16 when, like you said, Biden would have beaten him. In '24 all incumbents across the globe took a beating. After elections people always bring out the stretcher for the losing party like its over for them. Politics is cyclical.
 
There is no death knell ringing for the DEMs, though. Trump ran against Hillary in '16 when, like you said, Biden would have beaten him. In '24 all incumbents across the globe took a beating. After elections people always bring out the stretcher for the losing party like its over for them. Politics is cyclical.
And that's the way I like it. I like the pendulum swinging to both sides that way you don't have nearly the issues like if one side dominates too much. I think both sides have good candidates. Trump was an anomaly. I've said I didn't vote for him in any primary but he kept rising to the top anyway. But if you take him out of the equation there's still good candidates. The DNC will rebound. Youre right. Its all cyclical.
 
Please God no.

The democratic party needs a real candidate - It's too bad that Pete Buttigieg is gay (not that there is anything wrong with that). I think he is embodies many of the qualities of a great leader, but America will never elect a homosexual president (at least not in my lifetime).
 
I can't imagine she even gets 2nd place in Democrat primaries.
 
And that's the way I like it. I like the pendulum swinging to both sides that way you don't have nearly the issues like if one side dominates too much. I think both sides have good candidates. Trump was an anomaly. I've said I didn't vote for him in any primary but he kept rising to the top anyway. But if you take him out of the equation there's still good candidates. The DNC will rebound. Youre right. Its all cyclical.
This is a mistake though, because the GOP machinery has been busy building ways to prevent or blunt the pendulum swing. It's been the specific and overarching goal of the party for a whiiiile, and to great effect since 2010.
 
This is a mistake though, because the GOP machinery has been busy building ways to prevent or blunt the pendulum swing. It's been the specific and overarching goal of the party for a whiiiile, and to great effect since 2010.
It still doesn't change my perspective though. One side having too much control is not a good thing.
 
I thought it before.... you know this
Sure, but thinking it kind of falls by the way side it the thoughts never translate into practical effect. And that's not something targeted at just you, but at the very idea of team sports being the deciding factor in our politics. The reality right now is that the SC is facilitating a massive reorganization and concentration of power from what our checks and balances are supposed to be. We aren't moving toward having a better means of the pendulum swinging, but of it swinging far far less due to structural changes. It's one party with a stacked SC making that happen. It's one party which is going to destroy the voting rights act, it's one party which granted the President criminal immunity, it's one party that is highly likely to self-deal the ability for the SC to rewrite (for all practical purposes) the meaning of constitutional amendments in accordance with their personal partisan beliefs. We are long past the point of thoughts mattering at all if that party never holds itself accountable from the inside.
 
You know, I don't think anyone would disagree that Sarah Palin was a dumb cunt & completely unqualified for the job, but Kamala & AOC are even more retarded & incompetent. And yet the Dems are still telling us they're the best people for the job, like how fucking deluded & out of touch with reality are they? Seriously. And then they call everyone who disagrees a racist, sexist, retarded and all kinds of other shit while insisting the dumb cunts are fully qualified & fit for the job. I mean, FFS I'm an actual Liberal, as in I vote for the Liberal party in Canada in most elections, and those dumbass Dems have completely lost me. If I were an American I'd just write in Cthulhu every 4 years.

Don’t disagree with any of this. And I am not sure how things are to the north in Canada with campaigns and such…. But Kamala announcing a run would immediately generate at least ten(s) of millions dollars to her campaign that then immediately goes to her friends and family.

Would be dumb of her not to run again. Similarly, AOC hads continued to create enough buzz about her, especially with Mamdani ascending.

The NYC socialist brand has momentum thanks to her. She will certainly leverage that in a similar fashion, but is also much more effective than Kamala and will eclipse Kamala by far in 2028. But she, AOC, will def eventually be the VP pick for democrats in 2028. It is all but written in stone by god himself
 
If she wanted to run again, she should have just pulled a Trump and claimed to have won and that the election was stolen that way she doesn't get branded a "loser". Seems to have worked for him. Then we can enter a new era of America politics where no one will actually acknowledge that they lost an election.
 
She should probably pull a forrest Gump and keep on running. Ain't nobody want to hear that world salad and cackling
 
Sure, but thinking it kind of falls by the way side it the thoughts never translate into practical effect. And that's not something targeted at just you, but at the very idea of team sports being the deciding factor in our politics. The reality right now is that the SC is facilitating a massive reorganization and concentration of power from what our checks and balances are supposed to be. We aren't moving toward having a better means of the pendulum swinging, but of it swinging far far less due to structural changes. It's one party with a stacked SC making that happen. It's one party which is going to destroy the voting rights act, it's one party which granted the President criminal immunity, it's one party that is highly likely to self-deal the ability for the SC to rewrite (for all practical purposes) the meaning of constitutional amendments in accordance with their personal partisan beliefs. We are long past the point of thoughts mattering at all if that party never holds itself accountable from the inside.
Things will be fine imo. You think one side having all the power indefinitely is a good thing? Ok. I dont. And mid terms will likely swing back to dems. Its normal process imo. Dems are highly unpopular at the moment but moments pass and they will likely be back in the front seat again. Last CNN poll I saw was their favorability rating was only 29% and a record low. I still think they rebound soon.
 
Things will be fine imo. You think one side having all the power indefinitely is a good thing? Ok. I dont. And mid terms will likely swing back to dems. Its normal process imo. Dems are highly unpopular at the moment but moments pass and they will likely be back in the front seat again. Last CNN poll I saw was their favorability rating was only 29% and a record low. I still think they rebound soon.
No I don't, and I said the exact opposite. Furthermore, part of the problem is the illusion of power changing hands. Dems taking the House is a holding action. The real problem is the SC, which nothing can be done about
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,283,030
Messages
58,477,500
Members
176,048
Latest member
gibberish
Back
Top