Make Your Prediction Now! Who Will Biden's VP?

[BullBuchanan]

Just now, Joe in Winslow said:

 

Again, I'm shocked at you being intellectually honest.

 

Maybe read my posts with an open perspective sometime.

Anyway, I'm not voting for these trashbags. The Dems can win or lose without me. I refuse to be held responsible.

[njbuff]

Just because Harris has spent her life in the missionary position doesn't mean she is Mother Teresa.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Just now, BullBuchanan said:

Maybe read my posts with an open perspective sometime.

Anyway, I'm not voting for these trashbags. The Dems can win or lose without me. I refuse to be held responsible.

 

[Buffalo_Gal]

6 minutes ago, njbuff said:

This might be the worst Presidential ticket in history.

 

Maybe the political experts in here can come up with a worse pair than these two mopes?

Naww this is pretty bad. A corrupt, senile, racist and someone who used her er, feminine wiles to get to her position (no pun intended)?  Doesn't get much worse than that.

[njbuff]

2 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Naww this is pretty bad. A corrupt, senile, racist and someone who used her er, feminine wiles to get to her position (no pun intended)?  Doesn't get much worse than that.

 

I thought the Democratic Party wanted a clean black woman?

 

Harris is NONE of that.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

Just now, Buffalo_Gal said:

Naww this is pretty bad. A corrupt, senile, racist and someone who used her er, feminine wiles to get to her position (no pun intended)?  Doesn't get much worse than that.

 

 

 

....sorry girl, but ain't NO way Rowan & Martin's "Laugh In" could top this......I just cancelled the "Comedy Channel"...this is priceless.....

[Buffalo_Gal]

Just now, njbuff said:

 

I thought the Democratic Party wanted a clean black woman?

 

Harris is NONE of that.

 

Like I said earlier, only Rice would have been a worse "woman of color" pick. IMO, the Ds have conceded.
 

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Buffalo_Gal said:

 

Like I said earlier, only Rice would have been a worse "woman of color" pick. IMO, the Ds have conceded.
 

 

Yeah, Rice would have been worse without question. I was stunned at how much press she was getting in the final few weeks -- until I remembered why she was getting that -- (Durham). 

[Doc]

41 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

My opinion? The Ds have conceded the election.

Kamala brings nothing to the table. She is from a state Biden will win anyway, she does qualify for "ain't black," her ancestors are slave owners, she is married to a white guy, she was polling in forth place in California when running for president, her prosecutorial record is anti-black, women hate women who get where they are by sleeping their way to thee top, she had horrible plastic surgery (WHY!? she was attractive before that), she is unlikable ... out of all the women of color his team was considering, she is the second-worst (Rice was worst, IMO).

Should be interesting to see how closely my initial "gut response" correlates with what what will actually happen.

 

30 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

How did they pick her knowing this?  Or did they not vet her properly, figuring being the most accomplished and well-known of the bunch was good enough?  How do you get around this when it's revealed to everyone?

Edited August 11, 2020 by Doc

[Buffalo_Gal]

Just now, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Yeah, Rice would have been worse without question. I was stunned at how much press she was getting in the final few weeks -- until I remembered why she was getting that -- (Durham). 

Welp, Slow Joe has hung her out to dry with his Harris pick. The next few months could be "interesting."

 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

1 minute ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

 

Like I said earlier, only Rice would have been a worse "woman of color" pick. IMO, the Ds have conceded.
 

 

 

...I thought Maxine Waters for her all inclusive, oratorical skills eloquence.......especially at a time of need for national healing.............

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, Doc said:

 

 

How did they pick her knowing this?  Or did they not vet her properly, figuring being was the most accomplished and well-known of the bunch was good enough?  How do you get around this when it's revealed to everyone?

 

They're hoping (and probably will get) to get an assist from the media not to run that story. 

[dubs]

I’ve been saying for a month or so now that I kind of think the Dems actually want to lose because the long play is to continue to dismantle the country through chaos. They can’t do that if they win the presidency and they haven’t dismantled enough to get enough people to submit to their will. 
 

Their only real choice is to lose in Nov and use that as an excuse to continue what they’ve been doing for the last four years, create havoc. 
 

However, a second trump term means a totally different trump. Expect much more anarchy from the left and more false narrative pushing by the media for the next 4.5 years. 

[snafu]

13 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

The Dems are running two republicans against Trump. If the base shuts up and falls in line like I imagine they expect them to do, it'll likely be a landslide as they capture the Lincoln Project vote. I don't expect Biden to make it a year.

 

(1) the progressives won't fall in line for Harris.

(2)the Lincoln Project people are never-trumpers, who existed before the 2016 election.  Counting them out as supporters of trump is no loss whatsoever.

(3) biden should have chosen a progressive (Warren). Seems as though he figures he needs to stop bleeding African Americans more than lose the Bernie wing.  But then he picked an ex AG from a state he doesn't need who ran a ***** primary vs. a former cop from a state in play who doesn't have the baggage that Harris brings (Demings).

(4) all that said, he's still got a shot to beat Trump, and he just chose someone to be his successor that his own party clearly rejected. Bringing her back is like making Dems puke in their mouth and smile while doing it.

 

 

[Doc]

10 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

They're hoping (and probably will get) to get an assist from the media not to run that story. 

 

Won't matter.  It will be brought up on Twitter, Fox, at the debates.  You can't hide it.

[Buffalo_Gal]

9 minutes ago, dubs said:

However, a second trump term means a totally different trump. Expect much more anarchy from the left and more false narrative pushing by the media for the next 4.5 years. 

As long as the Rs hold at least the Senate, I agree completely. If he just has the WH, it may be a pen and a phone situation? But, if the Rs get back the House and hold the Senate, it will most likely be Trump-friendly, not Deep State peeps. In that case, I would not want to be on the other end of a man who feels revenge is a duty.
 

Edited August 11, 2020 by Buffalo_Gal

[BullBuchanan]

Just now, snafu said:

 

(1) the progressives won't fall in line for Harris.

(2)the Lincoln Project people are never-trumpers, who existed before the 2016 election.  Counting them out as supporters of trump is no loss whatsoever.

(3) biden should have chosen a progressive (Warren). Seems as though he figures he needs to stop bleeding African Americans more than lose the Bernie wing.  But then he picked an ex AG from a state he doesn't need who ran a ***** primary vs. a former cop from a state in play who doesn't have the baggage that Harris brings (Demings).

(4) all that said, he's still got a shot to beat Trump, and he just chose someone to be his successor that his own party clearly rejected. Bringing her back is like making Dems puke in their mouth and smile while doing it.

 

 

They don't need progressives to fall in line. Absolute best case they're only about 35% of the party and even then most of them are just voyeurs in progressive politics. Most of them will fall in line. The 10% or so that won't aren't needed to win Dem strongholds. I wouldn't be shocked if they win every battleground state by appealing to republicans who hate Trump, but in my book that's what Biden was for. They didn't need to pick a second conservative in Harris. They could have selected a progressive to appease the left, and hid them behind Biden and they would have had the same result, except for what happens after the election.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

4 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

(1) the progressives won't fall in line for Harris.

(2)the Lincoln Project people are never-trumpers, who existed before the 2016 election.  Counting them out as supporters of trump is no loss whatsoever.

(3) biden should have chosen a progressive (Warren). Seems as though he figures he needs to stop bleeding African Americans more than lose the Bernie wing.  But then he picked an ex AG from a state he doesn't need who ran a ***** primary vs. a former cop from a state in play who doesn't have the baggage that Harris brings (Demings).

(4) all that said, he's still got a shot to beat Trump, and he just chose someone to be his successor that his own party clearly rejected. Bringing her back is like making Dems puke in their mouth and smile while doing it.

 

 

 

 

...they will do what they are TOLD TO DO.......the "target list for non-supporting reprisals" is ALREADY drawn up....

[Jauronimo]

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

That tweet is from the same day as the fake assault.  Are you suggesting she was in on it or should have smelled a hoax before the first cursory reports hit the wire?  Weak.