To reference images from other websites within your posts, simply right-click (desktop), or hold your finger over (mobile devices), the image and select to copy the link. You can then copy-paste this link within your post. When viewing the post, it will be automatically hyperlinked directly to the image.
- Manlobbi
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy❤
No. of Recommendations: 1
Trump becoming a bigger favorite. Bet 120$ on Trump to win 100. Every time Harris does an edited softball interview, she falls further behind. DJT up 3.25 on heavy volume again. Harris can’t do more interviews, they hurt her, so they have to demonize Trump 24x7 the next three weeks. Do favorites always win? Obviously not. The DNC and team Harris are in deep poo poo.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Every time Harris does an edited softball interview, she falls further behind. DJT up 3.25 on heavy volume again.
There were a ton of state polls released today, all of which showed Trump leading (or tied) in PA, MI, WI, GA, NC, and AZ. That's probably what drove the betting markets to shift more favorably to Trump, and for his meme stock to react positively.
No. of Recommendations: 1
There were a ton of state polls released today, all of which showed Trump leading (or tied) in PA, MI, WI, GA, NC, and AZ.
Insanity.
You may not like Kamala, but voting for Trump is cutting your nose off to spite your face.
No. of Recommendations: 1
" There were a ton of state polls released today, all of which showed Trump leading (or tied) in PA, MI, WI, GA, NC, and AZ. That's probably what drove the betting markets to shift more favorably to Trump, and for his meme stock to react positively."
albaby, what can team Harris do to reverse the trump momentum? Obviously, she can't do any live interviews, and demonizing trump isn't working. Trump plus the senate could result in 7 conservative supreme court justices, it's getting very serious.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Insanity.
You may not like Kamala, but voting for Trump is cutting your nose off to spite your face.
A lot of voters prefer Trump's position (if not his ability to implement policy) on immigration, border controls, and trade. They also generally think he's better suited on most economic matters, largely because his Administration coincided with a period of solid GDP growth, job growth, low inflation, and low interest rates until the pandemic began. They generally like his "speak loudly and wave your stick around a lot" approach to foreign policy as well.
Joe Biden sowed the seeds for losing this election when he and his economic team threw in with "Team Transitory" back in 2021. Regardless of whether they were right on the macroeconomic aspects of inflation (and Krugman would argue they were), it was tone-deaf and politically poisonous for the Administration not to realize how much the voters: i) hated inflation; and ii) would blame the Administration for it. Rebranding the Build Back Better Act as the Inflation Reduction Act didn't do anything to undo that political self-wound - if anything, it only made sure that Greens would be disappointed in the Administration.
Sometimes you fire the coach, because you can't fire the players. Harris is in that spot right now.
No. of Recommendations: 3
albaby, what can team Harris do to reverse the trump momentum? Obviously, she can't do any live interviews, and demonizing trump isn't working. Trump plus the senate could result in 7 conservative supreme court justices, it's getting very serious.
She should do more live interviews.
Some segments of conservative media have convinced themselves that she's bad unscripted, but she's perfectly adequate at it. She just hasn't done it enough. The more you answer these types of questions, the better you can answer them. Plus, one of the negatives about Kamala among voters is that they feel they don't know where she stands. Ask a voter what Trump's top priority is, and they'd probably say tightening immigration and the border (and maybe getting tough on crime). What's Harris' top priority? I follow politics a bit more than the average person, and I don't really know what it would be - I know what her policies are, but not the main things that she prioritizes in a Harris presidency.
The other thing she could do is....just what she's doing. Keep emphasizing that Trump is a chaos muppet and not qualified to do the job of President, promise a Generic Democratic Platform, and hope to win the coin flip. She did an amazing job managing the baton handoff, but this was always a low-percentage play for the Democrats to win the Presidency. The fact that they're at 50/50 (or even 55/45) chances to win the election is more than they could have hoped for. The main benefit of the change was to free vulnerable House members and Senate candidates like Gallego and Alsobrooks from having to defend Biden as a candidate after the debate debacle - and that seems to have worked. So even having this good a shot to hold the Presidency is a better position they could ever have hoped for, and she might just want to hold on and just hope for rain in rural Pennsylvania.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Sometimes you fire the coach, because you can't fire the players. Harris is in that spot right now.
What mean you by that?
No. of Recommendations: 1
" She should do more live interviews."
IF Harris was effective in live interviews, she would be doing three a week, she isn't. Have you seen the transcript of the 60 minutes interview that was heavily edited? Btw, Harris is talking, make the rich pay their fair share, again. Of course, a competent Jounalist would respond, obama, biden, harris, have controlled the white house for 12 of the past 16 years, Dems haven't made a serious effort to tax their billionaire donors, right? Can trump go 3 weeks without additional major unforced errors? Stay tuned.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Can trump go 3 weeks without additional major unforced errors?
Why try something new? His unforced errors, firehose of lies and thinly veiled calls for violence seem to be working
No. of Recommendations: 2
What mean you by that?
Oh, it's a sports reference. Sometimes a team is having a terrible season, and the management feels like they need to make a significant change. So they fire the coach. They do that even if the reason the team is losing doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the coach. Sometimes the players don't perform, but it's the coach that gets fired, even though the losing record isn't attributable to anything the coach did or didn't do.
Anyway, the Presidency is like that in some respects. The President doesn't actually have a lot of direct control over how the economy performs, but voters care most about the economy in judging presidential performance. So the voters are really unhappy with the fact that the U.S. experienced some very high inflation, even though the President doesn't have a lot to do with creating (or fighting) inflation.
Biden certainly didn't help himself on that front, of course. But it's that kind of situation. The electorate is unhappy with what happened on Biden's watch, so they want to make a change (ie. fire the coach) because they can't affect the macroeconomic and longstanding regulatory frameworks that played a bigger role in the things they hate (ie. fire the players).
No. of Recommendations: 4
IF Harris was effective in live interviews, she would be doing three a week, she isn't. Have you seen the transcript of the 60 minutes interview that was heavily edited?
She's fine. Not great, but adequate enough that she shouldn't avoid them. She needs to communicate her priorities and her vision for her Presidency, and she's not going to be able to do that without doing more press.
(BTW, people rarely look good in transcripts - one of the parts of my job I hate the most is having to read transcripts of my presentations. Real people in real life don't talk in complete sentences with transitions and predicate clauses, so transcriptions of unprepared comments always read worse than prepared speeches).
Anyway, the Democrats haven't increased taxes on billionaires for the same reason that Republicans haven't done most of the things they've promised, even when the President is a Republican - we don't have a Parliamentary government. The President doesn't just get to decide what happens. Power is divided among the branches, power within the Congress is divided between the bicameral chambers, and power in the Senate is subject to the minority party veto due to the filibuster.
So the President gets blamed for not achieving priorities that they have no power to actually achieve. It's why Trump didn't repeal Obamacare or Build the Wall the way he wanted, and why the Democrats didn't pass voting rights reform or the DREAM act or ENDA or EFCA or any of a number of priorities that they campaign on but can't pass.
No. of Recommendations: 18
"The electorate is unhappy with what happened on Biden's watch, so they want to make a change (ie. fire the coach) because they can't affect the macroeconomic and longstanding regulatory frameworks that played a bigger role in the things they hate (ie. fire the players)."
Do you think the electorate that has the ability to remember all of the way back to 2020 is happy with how trump performed under pressure ???
I know you stay to the middle. And Im actually a moderate. But it blows me away when people
just let trump slide on his total ineptitude during covid. He was worse than pathetic, people died because of his bumbling incompetence.
And do you think trump had a hand in the inflation that occurred after covid ? I sure do.
Do you think the trump tax cuts, during a trumpian self professed "booming economy"
had anything to do with inflation?? I sure do.
trump was pathetic, I can't tolerate any of the " i like his policies" bullshit.
No. of Recommendations: 1
No. of Recommendations: 23
albaby1: I know what her policies are, but not the main things that she prioritizes in a Harris presidency.
Saw this tonight and it seems to address your concern:
"Look, I know Darth Vader belongs to the Dark Side and that he blew up a planet, but I just don't know enough about Luke Skywalker."
No. of Recommendations: 4
"Look, I know Darth Vader belongs to the Dark Side and that he blew up a planet, but I just don't know enough about Luke Skywalker."
If more than half the country thought of him as Darth Vader, then that would address the concern.
But they don’t. More than half the country doesn’t view him as a beyond the pale, “I’d vote for Jar Jar instead” kind of candidate. He’s polling at 48%, and is leading in nearly every swing state.
Which means that Harris might - just might - want to do something about one of the biggest concerns that voters express about her.
No. of Recommendations: 1
" Which means that Harris might - just might - want to do something about one of the biggest concerns that voters express about her."
good morning albaby, with all due respect, IF, Biden could have done real time interviews to prove he was alert, healthy, and fully engaged, HE, would still be the Dem nominee. Biden could no longer be protected by his wife, the msm, and the usual suspects. IF, IF, Harris could look good in real interviews, like the 60 minute interview, she would be doing three a week bud, that's just not her skill set, she can't do them and help herself or her party. So, they have gone with plan B, Obama will be promoting her in 27 states to try and get out his voters. The bettors are betting this plan will not work. Many msm stooges are still reporting Harris has the lead in several swing states. Regardless of who wins, half the country is going to be sick or half will not believe the outcome. What a country!
Question of the day Al? IF Joe had done the right thing a year ago and announced he would not seek reelection, and IF the Dem party had respected the competitive nomination process, do you believe Harris would have competed and won the nomination, and if not, can you name one Dem who would have won the right to represent the party who wouldn't have beat trump, easy? Thank you.
No. of Recommendations: 1
No. of Recommendations: 0
No. of Recommendations: 2
Wow, Albaby. Where do you look for all those polls? I only found 4.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Which means that Harris might - just might - want to do something about one of the biggest concerns that voters express about her.
I'm sure they're thinking about that. I wonder what's holding them back?
No. of Recommendations: 1
" Which means that Harris might - just might - want to do something about one of the biggest concerns that voters express about her.
I'm sure they're thinking about that. I wonder what's holding them back?"
Are you serious? Did you watch the 60 minutes interview, her appearance on the View, etc? Trump can't stop calling her names, he just can't. Harris can't pitch for the Dodgers, and she can't do live unscripted interviews, she can't. When you get deposed, does the lawyer ever reply, NON RESPONSIVE? HELLOOOOO, she can't, comprende, she can't do it? The Obama card is her only salvation, watch.
No. of Recommendations: 4
Al's is right about voters and inflation concerns. It is frustrating to me that none of
the blame for inflation is getting pinned on trump. Why the Harris team is not attacking
trump for his part in it is crazy.
trump's bungled mishandling of covid led to factories being shutdown, and people being tossed
out of work. This message should be hammered home. Dems should have been showing pictures of the makeshift morgues that were utilized to stack bodies, with the date and caption of who was Prez at the time. The vid of trump asking if perhaps something like bleach could be drank, or a strong sterilizing light be used to kil covid in the body, while trump was addressing the nation, this should be used in Dem attack ads. All of this stuff could be tied into a message about why inflation got rolling.
Now, in reality it didn't matter who was Prez, factories were gonna get shutdown, and
supplies and goods were gonna get scarce, and money was going to have to be injected into
the economy by the government. But who cares about reality,lol. trump weaves bizarre
fairy tale interpretations of recent history, and some people lap it up.
The alternate reality I hear from trump supporters is bizarre.
No. of Recommendations: 4
IF Joe had done the right thing a year ago and announced he would not seek reelection, and IF the Dem party had respected the competitive nomination process, do you believe Harris would have competed and won the nomination,
That's the most likely outcome. These things are never certain, of course, but nearly every Vice President that's sought their party's nomination for president has been successful in getting the nom. Nixon, Humphrey, Mondale, Bush, Gore, Biden. IIRC, the only VP that's sought the nomination that didn't get it was Quayle in 2000. The Vice Presidency may not be worth a bucket of warm piss as a job, but it's an incredibly strong position from which to run a campaign for the nomination - you have prominence, fundraising ability, access to every elected official in your party, and the ear of the President to serve as a carrot/cudgel for lining up support. In any nominating contest, the VP starts as the early leader, if s/he runs.
and if not, can you name one Dem who would have won the right to represent the party who wouldn't have beat trump, easy?
All of them. Every single one.
Harris' main problem isn't who she is. It's that voters are fairly unhappy with conditions in the country. Voters are livid about inflation and distraught about immigration and border policy. They blame Democrats for this. And Democratic voters are disappointed in how their "trifeca" control of the federal government (House, Senate, Presidency) during the first two years of the Biden Administration resulted in so few of their priorities getting enacted (hi, Joe Manchin!).
Most voters disliked the chaos and craziness of the Trump years, but they look back on a time of low inflation, low interest rates, low unemployment, steady (if not exceptional) GDP growth, and few foreign hot spots with positivity. The GOP has successfully raised the saliency of immigration and border control as an issue, and inflation was always a top voter concern. Every Democratic candidate would have run into the same major core issues that are giving Trump 46%+ of the vote.
No. of Recommendations: 2
albaby, I shared my response to you with my FB friends, other posts have been shared and remain, THAT post was removed. Any idea why?
I have no idea. I don't use FB at all, so I don't know why you're running into these types of problems. But it increasingly seems like they're specific to something that you're doing with your posts, rather than a concerted effort by FB to remove the content from the site. If they're letting NewsNation keep all these videos up on their page, there's no content-based reason why they would remove them from yours.
Maybe you're running afoul of the TOS in some random way by how you're linking/sharing these videos? Are there rules about linking/sharing to outside sites that maybe you're not following? Again, I don't know - I don't use the site at all, so I haven't the slightest idea what would trigger getting something pulled.
No. of Recommendations: 4
I'm sure they're thinking about that. I wonder what's holding them back?
I suspect two things:
1) She's rusty. Again, one of the negatives to the unprecedented late-in-campaign switch of the nominee. The VP isn't normally doing big half-hour interviews on the newsmagazine shows (not really part of their job), so she's hugely out of practice. It doesn't mean she's terrible at them, despite how conservative media portrays her performance - it just means that the campaign probably thinks that she does better in other fora, and so that's what they've done with her.
2) They thought they didn't need to. Up until very recently, Harris had a slight lead in most polls. That's an amazing turn around, and probably as good as the Democrats could possibly expect given voter attitudes about the state of the economy. So, "Don't talk your way out of a win" was probably high on their minds.
No. of Recommendations: 1
" and if not, can you name one Dem who would have won the right to represent the party who wouldn't have beat trump, easy?
All of them. Every single one."
albaby, I have a lot of respect for you BUT didn't Harris compete in 2020, how did that work out? Obama, Carville, Van Jones, Axelrod and most others in the party wanted Harris to compete with the others for the nomination, period. IF she won fair and square, great, she earned it. You think they are all stupid? Harris should be on Morning Joe, Maddow, Don Lemon, Cuomo, Smerconish, Raddatz, all of them to make her case, you think team DNC doesn't know that? You don't know any lawyers who aren't at their best in the courtroom? Perhaps they are great researchers etc? HARRIS can't do it bro, period, and they ALL know it. YOU are insulting them all if you honestly believe team DNC doesn't know Harris has to be out there making her case, NOT READING, we all know she can read a teleprompter. Biden can read too. She just doesn't have the verbal skills, to do live interviews.
BTW, IF Harris ran with Shapiro would PA be a swing state? WHY do you suppose THIS DEM party couldn't run Shapiro? Thank you.
No. of Recommendations: 2
I have a lot of respect for you BUT didn't Harris compete in 2020, how did that work out?
She wasn't Veep then. Being Veep is an enormously advantageous position to be in. Every elected Democrat in the country will take your call. Every donor, every fundraiser, every person of the slightest importance in the party will meet with you. You have a national platform that no other contender can match. You have the ear of the President, and possibly his endorsement (explicit or implicit). Etc.
Plus, the issue set in 2024 matches Harris' background better than 2020. That wasn't the year a former prosecutor was going to win the Democratic party nod, and Harris had no way to work around that. This election cycle (and especially in 2022-2023), the national mood had shifted away from "criminal justice reform" and back towards "law and order" - with Democrats fleeing from anything that sounded like Defund the Police.
To say nothing of the fact that a lot of eventual nominees had an unsuccessful run first. A lot of Presidential nominees lost their first race(s): Reagan, Bush, Hillary Clinton, McCain, Romney, Biden, etc. It's more common than someone winning the nomination on their first effort.
So yeah, in this counterfactual world where Biden declares he's not running again, Harris starts the race for the nomination as the favorite.
No. of Recommendations: 0
No. of Recommendations: 1
" So yeah, in this counterfactual world where Biden declares he's not running again, Harris starts the race for the nomination as the favorite."
STARTS as the favorite, I never disputed that. Would she win it, no way. In three weeks, you will admit that the entire Dem party isn't that stupid, plan B, aka, Obama, is the hail Mary. Let's see IF Harris goes on Morning Joe, the obvious next stop, IF, IF, they feel like they have to gamble before trump goes up 3 plus in the swing states.
Off to the park bud, have a grand day.
No. of Recommendations: 1
DJT traded 15 million shs in the first 15 minutes of trading up 2.75, UNreal. Whatever the news is, it's huge.
No. of Recommendations: 1
BTW, IF Harris ran with Shapiro would PA be a swing state? WHY do you suppose THIS DEM party couldn't run Shapiro?
Don't know. I don't know PA politics well enough to know whether Shapiro's got enough juice to shift the dynamic of the race. As you can probably tell from my posts, my view of the state of play is that Harris has an uphill climb not because of who she (or her VP candidate) is, but because a lot of voters on both the right and the left are disappointed with the state of the country and what the Biden Administration has delivered.
There's no reason that the DEM party couldn't run Shapiro - self-evidently, they did run Shapiro, since he's currently the governor of Pennsylvania. IMHO, I think Harris made her Veep choice based on vibes and biography, and she preferred the Midwestern football coach/military vet vibe to the Georgetown-educated East Coast lawyer vibe.
No. of Recommendations: 1
albaby, I shared my response to you with my FB friends, other posts have been shared and remain, THAT post was removed. Any idea why?
Relax. A friend of mine who is a Filipino engineer, artist, and historian is having the same problem, with nebulous ridiculous explanations. It seems to have lots of problems for a few. Troublemaker. :)
No. of Recommendations: 1
I suspect two things:
1) She's rusty
2) ..."Don't talk your way out of a win"... Sounds like if it ain't broken, don't fix it. Very wise.
No. of Recommendations: 4
STARTS as the favorite, I never disputed that. Would she win it, no way.
I think she would be the most likely to win it.
Harris was in a terrible position in 2020. Joe Biden had all her voters. As a former prosecutor, her only "lane" was the moderate/center of the party - Warren and Sanders had the left lane blocked. But Joe Biden had so much more pull on the non-progressive side of the party, in no small part because he was the sitting Veep. He had the 30% of the party that Harris needed locked in the entire time she was in the race (he led every poll before she dropped out). She couldn't get past Biden to the right, and when she tried to pivot to the left she found that Sanders/Warren had all the oxygen.
So when she starts as the favorite in 2024, who comes in and beats her? Someone running to her left probably can't win in 2024, when the party is moving away from hardcore progressive positions on immigration and crime due to voter dissatisfaction. And it's almost impossible to run to her right because of her advantages as the sitting Veep - there are no radical centrists, so centrist candidates tend to win on experience and existing relationships/political power.
Yeah, she's most likely to win it even if Biden drops out. The sitting Veep is usually the safe pick for the moderate/centrist wing of the party to rally behind, and 2024 was always going to be a cycle where the nominee comes from the moderate/centrist wing of the party.
No. of Recommendations: 0
Ok, so "Harris is in that spot right now" means that people will/are now blaming Harris (the "coach") for what they had been (and still are) blaming Biden for. And so Harris could be "fired" by losing the election.
I thought you might have been making a reference to how Biden got "fired" by fellow dems and was convinced/coerced to abandon his reelection campaign for the common good. And that we are now having buyers remorse about Harris, but it's too late to fire her before the election!
No. of Recommendations: 2
You have a national platform that no other contender can match.
Just a few current examples of this. When was the last time you saw a VP on national television talking about a disaster response? Or meeting separately from the Pres with a foreign head of state? And then giving their own separate presser before/after that meeting?
Not that I blame her at all for taking advantage of those opportunities. It's smart politics.
--Peter
No. of Recommendations: 3
Ok, so "Harris is in that spot right now" means that people will/are now blaming Harris (the "coach") for what they had been (and still are) blaming Biden for. And so Harris could be "fired" by losing the election.
Yep. High inflation was a global phenomenon experienced by most advanced capitalist economies coming out of the pandemic. The U.S. didn't experience anything unusual compared to other countries around the world. In fact, we did better than average. And there's no reason to conclude that Joe Biden - or his policies - caused the inflation we did have to occur. Sometimes your team loses simply because your players aren't as good as those of other teams - but the coach gets fired for the bad record, even if bad coaching didn't cause the bad record.
No. of Recommendations: 3
too complex.
trump has the highest floor and lowest ceiling of any candidate because of his base, gop amplification, and free mainstream media exposure.
never have i witnessed a candidate absolutely immune to any speech or action, regardless of how egregious or contradictory.
other than the HIGHLY significant biden cognition event, any competent Dem would be in the same position (or worse) than Harris regardless of timing or VP status.
how many MAGA on Shred'm have been convinced because of topical facts or any possible choice of a trump alternative? ZERO.
nope, the quality of the MAGA base defies independent thought nor separation from trump ; the economy\covid\disaster relief\immigration etc... never mattered and never will to a delusional grievance mob.another example of least useful MAGA chart :
https://www.independentvanguardadviser.com/content...
