Kamala Harris - is she fit to be President?

[Valcazar]

Being fit to be president is a low bar. Perhaps start with that before comparing Harris against other standards like Obama. Use the same fitness standard for the other candidate.

An excellent point.

Let's assume 1% of the population is fit to be President.
That gives us several million people who qualify.

Even if you are stricter, say 1 in a thousand people qualify, you get hundreds of thousands.

Like I said earlier, she has more qualifications than either Obama or Clinton in terms of previous experience.
Nothing about her temperment or faculties is obviously disqualfying.

So yes, she clearly seems fit.

This post raises a question, why do many call Harris by her first name?

Same reason they did for Hilary, I would think.

 

[squeezer]

why do you hate success ? Why do successful people owe anyone anything? Why do we have to pay for people that don’t offer a net benefit to society and were mediocre at life. I don’t understand and no it doesn’t make me a bad person if I don’t.

I rather have illegal immigrant farmers bringing food costs down than these administrative clowns in government agencies, contributing nothing of value to anyone and earning 100k.

I don't hate success, I admire successful people and have helped a few people become successful but I DO NOT LIKE A CONMAN who lies and steals to make money. This is where you and I differ, you prop up conmen. Why do you hate working people in the middle class? 100K today is peanuts and if you don't believe me ask a family of 4 how easy it is to survive with 100K.

Food costs, hmmmm, costs in general. Do you not believe they are up because after COVID it's been fashionable to raise their prices. Right from the manufacturer and up the line, everyone jacked them up, to make up for what they lost during COVID. Any service, any product, up, up, and up because nobody wants to fall behind. Tell me you are not so naive to believe if Trump had won a second term prices wouldn't have gone up. Tell me you are a little smarter than what I give you credit for.

Another question, a serious question. Let's take politics out of it. Who is the smarter individual, Trump vs Harris. NO politics, just knowledge about facts, presentation, articulation, problem-solving, reading, and comprehension.

 

[Valcazar]

It does not automatically default to bashing trump. This question of yours is automatically defaulting to bashing Harris.

The last I looked both of them are running for Prez and thankfully, not you. As such they are both under the same microscope. The vote is an election based on comparing the two of them. As such, evaluating one as a stand-alone is not meaningful.

People really don't like having to accept the idea that an election involves making a choice between available options.

 

[Valcazar]

This whole thread appears to be just a means to shit on any accomplishments Harris has achieved.

Indeed.

It’s not a means to shit on her. Voting in America is said to be a privledge.

And there's a pretty good tell.

Wide partisan divide on whether voting is a fundamental right or a privilege with responsibilities

57% of Americans view voting as “a fundamental right for every adult U.S. citizen and should not be restricted in any way.”

www.pewresearch.org

EDIT:: -> I see shakenbake beat me to this.

Voting is a right, not a privilege. Unless you are a republican. A right cannot be taken away. A privilege can be revoked.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-r...l-right-or-a-privilege-with-responsibilities/

 

[jalimon]

Dudes For Kamala Are Gay 🏳️‍🌈

www.youtube.com

Andrew Tate thinks you're gay if you want Kamala to be your president.

I never considered that...

Andrew Tate is a douche back who will shortly get jailed for many years. He is the product of social network vomit.

 

[EddieBrock1500]

I don't hate success, I admire successful people and have helped a few people become successful but I DO NOT LIKE A CONMAN who lies and steals to make money. This is where you and I differ, you prop up conmen. Why do you hate working people in the middle class? 100K today is peanuts and if you don't believe me ask a family of 4 how easy it is to survive with 100K.

Food costs, hmmmm, costs in general. Do you not believe they are up because after COVID it's been fashionable to raise their prices. Right from the manufacturer and up the line, everyone jacked them up, to make up for what they lost during COVID. Any service, any product, up, up, and up because nobody wants to fall behind. Tell me you are not so naive to believe if Trump had won a second term prices wouldn't have gone up. Tell me you are a little smarter than what I give you credit for.

Another question, a serious question. Let's take politics out of it. Who is the smarter individual, Trump vs Harris. NO politics, just knowledge about facts, presentation, articulation, problem-solving, reading, and comprehension.

$100k is peanuts, you are right on this. But $100k is more than these jobs are worth. They are also one of the few jobs in the US where they get paid past their death at their salary to their beneficiary depending on state. So it can be amortized indefinatley, which is a burden on tax payers.

Honestly I don’t know how food prices would have behaved under Trump. It was a given that inflation would increase due to money influx from the govt during Covid. Im not bringing up food prices because of that. I’m mentioning food prices just to give you a comparison that at least immigrants can show tangible benefits. I just don’t agree on how many immigrants were allowed to come through in the Biden administration.

Regarding Trump vs Kamala, you can’t say who’s smarter unless you know them personally. Kamala struggles at freeballing speeches and in interviews. Trump is not articulate. Trump went to Wharton and became very successful. Kamala didn’t go to great academic institutions but has an impressive resume. Only people who have no biases and work with them can truly know. I honestly think both have average intelligence but also have high EQ.

 

[Valcazar]

Eddie asks a reasonable question.
Her "resume" is better than Obama's. They were each senator for only a few years, but she has AG experience in a state larger in population than Canada or Australia. And, she's been VP for almost 4 years so she has had an opportunity to watch how it works up close.
Clinton had more executive experience as a Governor. A bit more than GWB. But GWB was Gov of a much bigger state. And a border state.
In contrast, GHWB had congressional and executive experience (head of cia, UN ambassador, plus 8 years VP experience.
Reagan was a 2 term Governor of California.
Trump ran a small private company. (It was believed to be a lot bigger when he was elected, we've since learned it was like 25 people).
Being president is not a one person job. It's an administration. I look to how they make decisions, and who they surround themselves with. Then the policies.
Kamala had a rough start as VP. Was effective in her previous gigs. She seems to have learned from her previous experiences. She seems pretty disciplined so far. She has been involved in an effective presidency. (Yes, look at numbers, don't listen to pundits. GDP, unemployment, stock market all better, crime lowest in 50 years. USA had best inflation response in developed world and its now down to its 2%ish acceptable rate. Border under control now after a rough couple of years and GOP sabotaging their own plan. Look at the bi-partisan bills Biden got done despite fervent opposition).
Thus, being part of this administration should help her if she's elected. She's had access to good people who know what they're doing and know how government works. And, an admin with almost no scandals (like Obama. Trump like Nixon with indictments and convictions everywhere. Zero for Obama, same with Biden).
I think Peggy Noonan (conservative speechwriter for Reagan/Bush) said it best - although Harris' rallies have this Obama quality, the difference is Obama created a movement, whereas Harris was created by a movement. (Or something like that).
But, until you see them in the gig w 100% responsibility, you don't know.

That last line is key.

You have some proxies for guessing if someone would be good or effective in the role.
Those aren't 100% predictors, especially because effectiveness also depends on the compositions of the rest of government and unforeseen events in the world.

So looking at what we know - she comes off as obviously fit to be President.

Will she be a good one, a mediocre one, a great one, a terrible one?
We have no consistent way of telling.

 

[Valcazar]

If it was Vivek as the GOP nominee then I think the Dems would likely run Michelle Obama, in that case I think Michelle would win.

The Dems are not going to run Michelle Obama.
She's never expressed interest in running.
She's actually made it clear she really doesn't want to run so it isn't even like she just never thought about it.

That's not going to happen.

Now, to be more generous to the idea of the thread here - remember that the skills for campaigning are not the same skills as for being an effective president.
That's a bit of a problem with the system.

 

[shack]

So it’s close to what I thought after looking through these posts. Any assurance she can do the job is just fingers crossed and hoping.

So we have some hope that Harris can do a good job. But there is ZERO hope in that regard with trump. He's proven it. He's demonstrated it. He's shown it. He's already displayed how incompetent he is over a 4 year period.

This makes sense for a candidate who was well behind 7 or 8 of her democratic peers in 2020 voting and dropped out before the first primary.

Evidently the Dems had a lot more quality candidates than the repugs.

Why is the media forcing her down our throats.

Are you saying that the media is "forcing" people to vote a certain way. The concept is that voters look at all the info provided and vote how they want.

Why do you think that ALL of the media is saying to vote for Harris?

 

[Valcazar]

I will start this post by saying that I'm AMAZED that Kamala is the heir apparent to run against Trump. I thought for sure that the DEMS would have announced an open convention to elect a candidate to run against Trump and that candidate would not have been Kamala. Boy was I wrong.

That was what the media wanted, since it would be so exciting and good for ratings.
The GOP also desperately hoped for it, since it would produce endless coverage about how disunited the Democratic Party was.
It could even have really torn the party apart if there were two or three significant factions with roughly equal support.

And the reason I say that it would have not been Kamala was her terrible performance as Vice President and the fact that Biden doesn't particularly like her.

Why do you think Biden doesn't like her?

 

[mitchell76]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1824226755667956091

 

[mitchell76]

 

[Valcazar]

This is what's wrong with politics. Everyone is so caught up in Personalities that Policies don't even matter anymore.

Most of the American electorate votes on vibes.

 

[Leimonis]

Most of the American electorate votes on vibes.

And near half of American electorate don’t get bad vibes from a concept of being governed by a conman

 

[EddieBrock1500]

So we have hope that Harris can do a good job. But there is ZERO hope in that regard with trump. He's proven it. He's demonstrated it. He's shown it. He's already displayed how incompetent he is over a 4 year period.

This makes sense for a candidate who was well behind 7 or 8 of her democratic peers in 2020 voting and dropped out before the first primary.

Most voters don’t have time to look at anything in detail. They watch cnn, msnbc, abc news etc in the US to get a summary. They’re voting based off the sound bites, and not the full speeches or interviews. I grew up watching cnn due to my parents having it on every night. I had to make a conscious decision to unplug from it over the last few years after I started watching full interviews and then witnessing how they were splicing the narrative to come off the way they wanted it to.

Why does the media want Harris? The broader theory of the political economy of media suggests that media content is often influenced by the economic and political interests of those who control it. In this view, the content that is produced and the way it is framed may reflect the interests of powerful economic groups, including investors and advertisers, who have a stake in the network’s success. What these investors want doesn’t necessarily reflect what the people want. In a case like Obama I think it aligns. With someone like Harris, the media is dictating what people should want.

 

[mitchell76]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1824447101570261070

 

[RZG]

And near half of American electorate don’t get bad vibes from a concept of being governed by a conman

Breaking News...they are all corrupt self serving criminals. Nothing much will ever change, switch Harris for Joe, PP for Trudeau. It`s like the markets daily, win/ lose repeat.

 

[Leimonis]

Breaking News...they are all corrupt self serving criminals. Nothing much will ever change, switch Harris for Joe, PP for Trudeau. It`s like the markets daily, win/ lose repeat.

If you want to believe that prosecutor and felon are the same leave me out if it

 

[mitchell76]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1824225386269389091

 

[RZG]

If you want to believe that prosecutor and felon are the same leave me out if it

Hey,... Harris withheld evidence that kept a lot of black dudes in prison