Not sold on the edits but regardless, Murdock Sky in Australia is like Fox in the US. The point is she gives an easy target for them so this is a problem for democrats they should think about.
Very simply, is Harris an asset or a liability going forward?

Also the OP is a right wing zealot.

[mediabiasfactcheck.com]

@puff Harris is a liability for them, but they really don't care, since, as I said above, winning elections are beside the point to the DNC. She serves a purpose as an identity politics symbol for the party, but that's it.

@TomMcGiverin Historically the VP position has tended to be a nothing job, so no surprise that KH is keeping a relatively low profile.

I wish more so-called liberals would wake up to the reality of what you say about the Dems. I am so fucking sick of their self-serving denial of it simply because they either can't stomach the idea of socialism or because they are too goddamn selfish to ever support socialism, thinking that it would somehow prevent them or their kids from becoming rich someday. But the young people have woke up to this scam and do not trust the Dems at all to do anything for them, after they saw how Bernie really supported things that would benefit them and inspired lots of support for him among young people, then he was defeated and they saw how Biden had no interest in helping them like Bernie would. So the party has probably lost the young people for at least the foreseeable future. They will just give up and sit out elections. And who can honestly blame them for not voting blue?

Bernie has been kneecapping himself by failing to get progressives elected to Congress.

Without progressives there, his presidency would fail.

@yvilletom - I disagree to a certain extent. Bernie energizes people and having the bully pulpit is a great advantage. I would love having all of Congress explain why Medicare for All wouldn't save money because the budget office has shown it does. And more importantly, a majority of Americans support it regardless of party. Sadly, it's further proof that those in office simply don't give a shit as to what the electorate wants.

@WilliamCharles. Count the Democratic progressives in Congress.

@yvilletom - that metric includes the fact the the Dem leadership always works to crush progressives within the party. AOC engineered an upset of the incumbent that was slated to be a possible Speaker of the House replacement. But then AOC got pretty much co-opted.

As the maxim goes, the Democratic Party is where the progressive movement goes to die. The goddamn Dems pontificate about defending democracy, and then work to exclude third parties from ballots nationwide.

Fuggum. They keep playing up the concept of being the only game in town and then campaign like they are entitled to people's votes by way of vote shaming. It does not speak well for them that they struggle so to beat a party as wholly reprehensible as the modern day GOP.

@WilliamCharles The Dems have not run a progressive for prez since 1972. Much has changed since then and the surveys of voters that only look at policies, not labels or political parties, show most Americans are way to the left of the Dems in what policies they support. So how the hell can anyone honestly say that a progressive like Bernie could not win? They can't because it's never been tried since 1972 and the media keeps saying he can't win just because they don't want him as prez and so they beat it into people's heads until it becomes conventional wisdom, etc. Yet, he still remains the most popular pol in America most of the time. What does that say? To me, it says that people really don't care about the socialist label on him and that the media is lying to serve their own agenda. The only way to prove he can't win is to actually try it and see what happens. Hell, I think he could have won in the past as a third party candidate if he had done so and been able to get into the presidential debates, even tho the corporate media would have done everything possible to defeat him in a general election.

I wish that any liberal who says Bernie wouldn't have won the last two times, really needs to read Chomsky's book Manufacturing Consent. They might learn something about how the corporate media, the Dem Party, and public opinion actually work in America and then they would maybe wake up and realize they have been deluded and lied to by and about the Dem Party and Bernie's viability as a prez candidate. But they will never even read the fucking book in the first place, because they prefer to keep their delusions and dismiss anything by Chomsky or any other radical, as too radical for them to be credible, etc. So they prove, in their own way, that liberals can be just as tunnel-visioned and deluded as Trumpers...

@TomMcGiverin - they didn't kneecap Bernie for fear he would lose, but rather they feared he would win.

Mah.Thur.Fah.Curse.
#FUDNC

@TomMcGiverin - the Dems created superdelegates because of McGovern. But imagine instead they worked to convince people of the value of programs such as he was proposing and rally behind someone of that level of integrity.

@WilliamCharles They could have, but they didn't...

@WilliamCharles So true. Both times Bernie ran, he polled better against Trump than any of the Dems running then. In fact, those polls always showed him beating Trump in a two man race. I have no doubt he would have beat Trump both times, so your point is proven, as far as I'm concerned. The liberals I know who keep saying Bernie would have lost the general election seem to keep ignoring this fact.

The DNC undermined Bernie in 2016 (that I believe). But Bernie lost to Biden bigly in the primaries in 2020. As a Bernie supporter, I have to say that it was clear after South Carolina that Biden was the stronger candidate. He was not my choice, but with democracy itself hanging in the balance, we need to continue to support our president. I am certain that Bernie would tell you the same thing. Threads like this are destructive in my opinion. Unfortunately the destructive voices are the loudest these days.

@WilliamCharles That really is all they have these days, campaigning on the slogan of "We're not the Repubs", rather than on substantive policy differences on economic, foreign policy, or health care, environmental, military, or tax policy.

@WilliamCharles, @MyTVC15 Bernie was way ahead of Biden before the SC primary and he was polling better against Trump too, compared to Biden. But then Obama got on the phone to all the other Dem candidates, got them all to drop out and throw their support to Biden, except for Warren, who stayed in until after SC's primary to make sure she kneecapped Bernie there, and also Covid hit and that shut down all campaigning for the rest of the primaries. If Warren had not sold out and done the right thing as a true progressive, instead of a fake one, she would have dropped out then too, and threw her supporters to Bernie, but she didn't, so Biden then became the front runner over Bernie, but only because of the collusion of Warren, Obama, and the DNC all working together to screw Bernie over again. Biden's candidacy was dead after the Iowa primary, but then all the above parties conspired by the time of the SC primary to rig it so he got the nomination over Bernie. Jim Clyburn was also instrumental in smearing Bernie, along with the corporate media, to imply Bernie was racist and to persuade black voters to support Biden over Bernie in the last set of primaries before Biden became the front runner. If Warren had dropped out earlier and Bernie picked up just her supporters, he would have creamed Biden in the primary race.

@TomMcGiverin It is all speculation. We cannot go back and change it. All we can do now is move forward and bashing Biden and Harris is not a progressive move.

@MyTVC15 - "Shut up and do what we say!" is what got us into this predicament in the first place. Fuck them. No fluffing of these mediocre rat bastards. They wanted the goddamn job. If they can't stand the heat...

@MyTVC15 - gonna use this reply as an excuse to post a whole bunch of memes I think represents the reality of what transpired.

@MyTVC15 - for the record, I'm not trying to be obnoxious tagging you on each meme, it just saves me from adding the ten characters of required text manually.

[PS - I hate that my photo gets lost/removed after I edit. I will find and repost]

@MyTVC15

@MyTVC15

@MyTVC15

@WilliamCharles People who throw out memes as a response lack a credible argument. If we lose our democracy people like you will be to blame for it.

@MyTVC15

@MyTVC15

@MyTVC15

@MyTVC15

@MyTVC15

@MyTVC15

@MyTVC15

@MyTVC15

@MyTVC15

@MyTVC15

@MyTVC15 I appear to have reached my upload limit, which is unfortunate as there are many more that drive my point home even better. I'll have to test if it is a limit of 10 in reply to you or the entire thread. This is not me spamming but a useful shorthand for clarifying my position.

@MyTVC15 No, if we lose our democracy it will be because the Dem Party betrayed, sold out, and abandoned the working and middle class long ago in favor of their corporate donors, which set the stage for Trump's election to the White House, and then his followers staging an insurrection that he got away with, because the Dems wouldn't play hardball to nail him for it. They are the ones to blame, not progressives who supported Bernie, as I know that if Bernie had been nominated, he would have won in 2016, and the working class would have returned to supporting the Dem Party, and Trump would have faded into history. There has been tons of evidence that if Bernie had been nominated either time, that many working class voters would have voted for him, instead of Trump, if they had been offered the choice, but since they didn't have it, they went with Trump since he at least was willing to lie to them and appeal to their working class grievances regarding the economy, while neither Hillary nor Biden did appeal to their grievances or have any credibility with them.

The Dem Party leaders, the corporate Dems in congress, and the Dem Party loyalists will be to blame for losing our democracy, not the progressives, as the former groups are who made it possible for Trump to win the working class white voters away from the Dem Party, who they used to support before Trump and esp. before the 90s...

@WilliamCharles So you will always be without a political party, cuz anyone you vote for will be co-opted.

If Bernie’s elected, who will keep him honest?

@yvilletom - I'll keep pushing for instant runoff voting to try to get some proportional representation. Sadly, even Bernie has positions I don't find defensible, and has not pushed in areas I felt he should have. That being said, the people having a champion like Bernie as president would be a sea change to business as usual and had the potential to gain an unstoppable momentum. That's why the establishment fought so hard to derail him. They just hadn't counted on doing it in such a heavy handed manner that it would cost Hillary votes.

I hate having to compromise my principles for any politician, but Bernie warts and all would be a shot across the bow for business as usual.

@WilliamCharles This what I have been saying about dems since reagan was in office. I'm not a fan of simplistic memes but sometimes they do bring the point home.

@silverotter11 - Boss Tweed once remarked,

“Stop them damn pictures! I don’t care what the papers write about me. My constituents can’t read. But, damn it, they can see the pictures! ”

@WilliamCharles

@WilliamCharles

She is someone who is obviously way above her station chosen by Biden, as promised, mainly for being a woman. Being an ethnic minority was backup qualifications for her.
She was appalling in the primaries, with zero vision. And there were far better democratic women in their primaries that Biden could have chosen, which was his main criteria, being a woman. I suppose the whole campaign was run on "I'm not Trump" and her forceful attack style appealed at the time for the party.
I don't understand how she has seemed to impress you.

@puff

That's mean. I disagree with you. She is well qualified to be vice president or even president.

[britannica.com]

@puff Just the phrase, " ...way above her station...", renders your entire "argument" null and void. Shame on you.

@KKGator @LiterateHiker She looks totally uncomfortable public speaking. I am sure she makes an excellent bureaucrat, but being high profile in the public eye, public speaking ie politics is not her thing. She is not in her element. The number of her staff she has retained is a testament to her management style.
We just got rid of a PM who was way above his station here in Oz.
I'm not talking intelligence or sex here, I'm talking about taking on something above your capabilities. When you give the impression of being on the spot and a fish out of water addressing people, don't enter highly visual politics would be my advice. Not for you.
I've met plenty of qualified people who can't do the job.
The sad truth is if you wanted to bet that Biden, once nominated, was going to choose a male running mate to be VP........................truth is no-one would have made the bet. That had already been predetermined long before.

She is also incompetent.

@puff You think that Harris is above her station? Do you remember Sarah Palin? If not, watch Game Change (available for rent on Amazon Prime). Harris was the Attorney General of California and a Senator. She has way more going for her than many VPs that we have had or came close to having.

@KKGator Hear! Hear! I have a sneaking suspicion that the phrase "above HIS station" will not be heard. Misogyny anyone? Sexism in the US gave us Mango 45, the loss of Roe, and the status of a Third World Nation.

@MyTVC15 First, Palan was worse than a joke, she was and remains a jerk. More improtant is that Kamala simply never got anything done. Yes she was a DA and a Senator. Now cite one accomplishment she had in either of those jobs.

@Alienbeing "In 1990, Vice President Harris joined the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office where she specialized in prosecuting child sexual assault cases. She then served as a managing attorney in the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office and later was chief of the Division on Children and Families for the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office.

She was elected District Attorney of San Francisco in 2003. In that role, Vice President Harris created a ground-breaking program to provide first-time drug offenders with the opportunity to earn a high school degree and find employment. The program was designated as a national model of innovation for law enforcement by the United States Department of Justice.

In 2010, Vice President Harris was elected California’s Attorney General and oversaw the largest state justice department in the United States. She established the state’s first Bureau of Children’s Justice and instituted several first-of-their-kind reforms that ensured greater transparency and accountability in the criminal justice system.

As Attorney General, Vice President Harris won a $20 billion settlement for Californians whose homes had been foreclosed on, as well as a $1.1 billion settlement for students and veterans who were taken advantage of by a for-profit education company. She defended the Affordable Care Act in court, enforced environmental law, and was a national leader in the movement for marriage equality." [whitehouse.gov]

@MyTVC15 You need to try again. Virtually everything you posted merely showed she was a D.A or Asst D.A. She did her job. That is not an accomplishment.

The fact that she may have created an avenue for drug offender to earn a high school diploma (not degree) i not part of a prosecutor's job. Her job was to prosecute offenders.

She has no accomplishments.

@MizJ The ugly roots of race and mysogyny in America rise again. Remember Black men got the vote before women and white women in the end threw black women under the bus to get the vote.
Why people do not see the ones to fear are the people who are against certain groups having a say in our governement not the group wanting the vote.

I agree, he should not run again if only for his own health but there seems to be no shinning democratic contender making a name for themselves.

He could have picked Stacey Abrams but I honestly think he preferred "eye candy."

@WilliamCharles I think it was in part due not to "eye candy" but rather in part who had the lighter skin, as a lot of racists got stirred up by Trump. Kamela also had a strong record as the California AG. Abrams, mostly due to racism, was not seen so positively in her home state... even if she should have been.

As they say politics is the art of the possible. Politicians have to weigh out possibilities, and although Biden is not racist, the reality is a lot of voters are. He had to decide which running mate would make him more electable. Harris was both Asian, bringing in two minority groups, and black, but pretty light skinned, which made her more acceptable to voters.

I think Abrams would have been a great running mate, but that is not how things work in our political reality where we have to settle for what is possible instead of what is ideal.

@snytiger6 - I voted for Kamala as AG, but it still pisses me off to know end that she let POS Steve Mnuchin off the hook. That was not her finest hour.

Katie Porter is the woman I would want to see run for pres or vp

@silverotter11

She is good but she overweight. US President race is about personalities, not virtues or abilities. Show me one overweight winning president candidate in the last 20 years. Trump does not count because Hillary gifted him to us with her incompetencies. I have many good candidates on mind but most will not win because American voters want him to look good and feel proud as their representatives. Many had great agendas and messaging including Ron Paul and Ralph Nader but we know how they failed.

I honestly would not care except the US has by far the largest military in the world and have shown they are ready to use it on whim. So who are the holders of all this might? #1 Biden #2 Harris #3 Pelosi.
Sorry but are these 3 muppets the best and brightest America has to offer?

@puff I'm not sure if they are the best and the brightest, but the alternative was (thankfully) not competent and was actively trying to undermine democracy. They are good people trying to do the job, instead of hucksters trying to bilk the public.

There is far too much misogyny here in the US. A woman could be 10 times more qualified and still not get elected. If we were respected and seen as equal Roe would not have been overturned and the Equal Rights Amendment would have been ratified.

Trust me man, you care way more about winning fed elections than the DNC or the party ever will....

@MizJ It was ratified

@Alienbeing WRONG [brennancenter.org]

@Alienbeing It was passed in both houses, never ratified. It is a proposed amendment that nothing has been done about in many years.

@MizJ Actually RIGHT!!!. See below

@MizJ The article you cited STARTS OFF by saying 38 States ratified the Amendment. To Amend the Constitution 66% of the States need to ratify it. Do the math (it is simple) and you will see it was ratified.

@Alienbeing You apparently did not read the whole article. Here is the important part you missed:

"The rati­fic­a­tion dead­lines that Congress set after it approved the amend­ment have lapsed, and five states have acted to rescind their prior approval."

The 38th vote for ratification occurred AFTER the deadline. Therefore it did not count. The proposed amendment WAS NOT ratified. That's why the US Constitution DOES NOT include an Equal Rights Amendment.

@Flyingsaucesir Mmmmm, I sit corrected (I am not standing). I thought I remembered ratification, I was wrong. I guess at my age I shoud not rely on memory as mush as I previously did.

I wonder why the Bill was not reintroduced and passed.

@Alienbeing Good question. In the most simplistic terms, I would say that times change and conditions differ. Could you see such an amendment passing today? (I can't.)

@Alienbeing Some of the states withdrew their votes. You didn't read the entire article.

@Alienbeing, @Flyingsaucesir The bill was first introduced 99 years ago. It hasn't passed because the US does not value and respect women and their rights.

@MizJ That is your opinion.

@Flyingsaucesir I think it would pass, why not?

@Alienbeing 99 years ago it was 1923. The Movement Conservatives along with many Democrats have worked very hard since ronny reagan to take America back to the 1920's. We are future back in the past. Too few failed to see what both parties were doing chasing corporate and the wealthy's cash.

@silverotter11 I fail to see an answer in your reply.

@silverotter11 The parties have plunged us into this hell of neoliberalism, you're right about Raygun. Once they got away with "trickle down economics" aka Reagenomics most cuoldn't even see the danger of Citizens United as they were too busy working a second job to put food on the table. Reaganomics also proved that the dumbing down of America was complete.

@silverotter11, @Alienbeing Alien, YOU are the answer. Look at the difference in your exchanges with men and women. A man and a women can say the same thing to a man (most men, not all) and that man will see what the man says as factual and discount what the woman says. It happens ridiculously often. It affects women's careers, politics, and life in general.

Google it, there are plenty of studies to back up my statement and you will be far more likely to believe a study than me.

@Alienbeing I just think that these days, the religious right patriarchy is feeling more empowered and less willing to negotiate.

@MizJ Not at all it is YOU. You are definatly looking for a reasaon to feel outraged. If you knew my wife, who is a very strong, and vert smart person, you would see how wrong you are.

Heal yourself.

The DNC would back her.

@WilliamCharles So would I. Surprise!

Good. I was only allowed 10 in a particular reply thread. Will try to scatter them throughout. They all help make my point.

Sadly accurate.

@WilliamCharles I agree with all of them, they say it beautifully how we are lied to and filled with bullshit about the Dems and how America has been brainwashed regarding progressive pols.

Sadly accurate in my view.

I am waiting to give a big fat "I told you so!" to the people who slammed me for expressing doubt that he'd complete his term. His cognitive decline is readily apparent, and I think it is kept in check as best they can with a pretty extensive drug regimen.

@WilliamCharles And once they take him off that program, if they ever do, he will decline much more rapidly. I know, my late wife had dementia and I learned a lot about all kinds of dementia from that experience. If you put someone on anti dementia drugs, the drugs only slow the symptoms and effects of the dementia, but the disease still progresses inside their brain, and if you take them off the drugs, their brain turns to mush really fast. and they die fairly soon after.

@WilliamCharles His decline is pretty fucking obvious from the way he does fewer actual press conferences than Trump, as far as actually taking and answering ?s. He can read off a teleprompter, but he can't think and answer ?s he is not expecting, so that's why they protect him from it.

Frankly, I'm amazed he's made it this far into his term, as the dementia was apparent to me during the primaries, but it's likely they didn't put him on the heavy duty dementia meds until after he won the election.

They are currently keeping Joe out of the public eye with bouts of 'Covid' quarantines, and a series of vaccation trips. I seriously believe they willl be using body doubles, CGI , and maybe animatronic puppets for his public appearances. They are already afraid to let him loose in front of a microphone for more than a minute or two before they drag him off stage. This 'presidency' is unpresidented.

@BDair

@WilliamCharles, @BDair I do not know if you are democrats or not, but repeating assertions that Tucker Carlson has made about Biden cognitive abilities is just as bad as the right wing spewing their conspiracy theories. I cannot find any proof that Biden has been diagnosed with or is being treated for dementia.

@MyTVC15 People from the left have been talking about Biden's dementia long before the right wing pundits did. Are you going to accuse them of being pawns or dupes of the right wing?

@TomMcGiverin Democrats, like all people, are capable of making mistakes. I think it is a mistake for Dems to bash Biden, Harris or his administration. I think that people who do that are spreading conspiracy theories and hurting the party and the country. I think that people who are doing that are not really looking at the big picture.

@MyTVC15 I'm not a Dem, I'm a proud socialist who has gotten sick of having no representation in DC and being told for decades to hold my nose, be patient, and wait for the right time, which never seems to arrive, for the Dems to change and do the right thing for the masses, while being vote shamed into voting Blue No Matter Who. Fuck the Dem Party, it needs to be blown up. I am not a Repub sympathizer, as I hate both major parties equally. The Dem Party needs to die and be replaced, as it will never change the way it needs to.

I see the big picture, way more than the Dem apologists and party loyalists, who can't see or don't care, how their party has moved to the right of even Nixon. And the Dems have been hurting the country for decades, starting with the Clintons, not us progressives. None of this is conspiracy theories, these are simply facts, that you don't want to hear...

@MyTVC15 It has nothing to do with Tucker Carlson or what party I align with, (neither party).
Biden's declining cognitive abilities are clearly seen in many of his public appearances.

@BDair I watch a lot of his public appearances and I do not see it. It is easy to see something if you have a preconceived notion that it is there.

It is easy to ignore something if you do not want to believe it.

@TomMcGiverin I consider myself a democratic socialist. I supported Bernie all the way, but I also think that there is a difference between compromise and holding your nose. In a democracy there has to be compromise. To me Biden was a compromise. If we blow up the dem party exactly when the the Republican party is blowing up what will we end up with? Anarchy. A lot of the Republican base fear anarchy, they fear "mob-rule" which is what they have come to believe democracy is. They do not want to be ruled by the diversity that they see around them therefore they are happy to have a totalitarian dictator (like Trump or Desantis) replace the system that we have now. Personally, I would like to see the democratic republic survive. I don't want to blow anything up.

I think the Dems will lose the presidential race in two years, no matter what, and deservedly so. We could have had Bernie for two terms, but they never allowed it, so they deserve to be out of power again, not that they really care about that. Ever since the DLC was established, all they have cared about since in fed elections is just about raking in all the corporate campaign money they can get. Winning elections is beside the point to them.

@TomMcGiverin Isn't campaign money for the campaign? It seems to me that I've heard of some people being prosecuted if that money was used for personal reasons.

@DenoPenno It's supposed to be, but there are always loopholes to end up spending it on other things and personal use. Besides, the campaign finance laws have been mostly gutted by the Citizens United SC decision and even before, they have not been enforced that much anyway, certainly not much after that decision..

The bigger point is, that even if the Dems lose the presidential election in two years, which they will, and also lose control of both houses in congress by then, as I also think they will, all those Dems in congress will still mostly have their congressional seats and perks, even as the minority party. And their kids will still go to Ivy League schools, and the Dem pols and their kids will still have access to all those cushy jobs in government, the corporate world, think tanks, and careers as lobbyists after they leave office. So who cares if they are out of power in DC? They certainly don't, because they will still be on the gravy train, with their kids, for years to come, as the people they have served, their donors, will take good care of them and their kids after they leave office and reward them for all their favors while in congress. All those later rewards for them and their kids, are contingent on them serving the agenda of their campaign donors and preventing any kind of progressive legislation or policy by the party. That is the real purpose these days of the Dem Party in DC, to prevent progressive legislation and policy while serving as the fake opposition party to the Repubs..

All the culture wars shit and identity politics is just a distraction from their real purpose and agenda. That is true with both major parties.

@TomMcGiverin - after Trump won, Pelosi gushed about how he would help as far as fundraising goes. They also said the same after Roe overturned. Their attempts to maintain their stranglehold on the party will be what kills it.

@TomMcGiverin After a big tirade against the Dems you finally say this is true with both major parties. I was beginning to think the Repugs were just too dumb to figure this all out. As for Kamala Harris, let me point out that before she was VP there were good posts of her language skills and how she thought and operated. She was impressive. Now she has the VP job and does what Biden says. VP's are not known for leadership on their own. She is also half black and half Indian. Nobody in the current political set wants a woman president, let alone a black one. Nobody wants all those parts we get from China switching to parts from India. Powers that be do not want this and yet we all know America will not and cannot go back to making our own parts for anything. Don't we see supremacy and the far right here? I know that I do.

@DenoPenno The problem is that both parties, deep down underneath all the culture wars and identity politics, serve the same donor class, but on the surface too many people see the major parties as being way different, when they really aren't on the deeper level. I will not go into what's wrong with Harris as far as her background when she was AG of California, that would be a whole discussion in itself. I fully agree with your last few sentences.

@DenoPenno - Kamala as CA AG is why Steve Mnuchin was Secretary of the Treasury and not in prison for bank fraud. Her own campaign didn't get a single delegate (Tulsi did better).

He (Biden) is 1000 times smarter and more competent than you will ever he on your best day, CJ.

Maybe you got something in common then.

@Flyingsaucesir

Possibly

He'll bike everywhere.

plenty of media show her public speaking. Feel better shooting the messenger? I'll correct myself: Kamala Harris is an absolute star politician. Articulate, with a very human touch. No-one in the US is better able to fulfil the role of VP than Harris.

The democrats/ Biden were a single issue party in 2020.
"I'm not Trump"

Like all single issue parties, no substance.