Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Kamala Harris' time is up

Although somehow George W Bush managed to do just that against John Kerry.

Yeah. That was a bizarre one, a draft-dodger who managed to make a war veteran seem bad because he'd been captured.

(Bill Clinton also dodged the draft, but to give him credit, he also vehemently opposed anyone being drafted, unlike GW).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sue
Yeah. That was a bizarre one, a draft-dodger who managed to make a war veteran seem bad because he'd been captured.

(Bill Clinton also dodged the draft, but to give him credit, he also vehemently opposed anyone being drafted, unlike GW).
And not just a veteran, he won a purple heart and all that. So a war hero to Americans. Just all really weird.
 
And not just a veteran, he won a purple heart and all that. So a war hero to Americans. Just all really weird.

Yeah. I'm no in favour of seeing all soldiers as heroes, but Kerry definitely fit the profile for hero, and they managed to make him be... weak.

The whole Trump farago has made a lot of people forget just how fucking bad GW Bush was. He wasn't even all that different, but he's seen as some sort of elder statesman now.
 
Although somehow George W Bush managed to do just that against John Kerry.
It'll be interesting to see just how many of Corporal Vance's attacks manage to land and stick on Command Sergeant Major* Walz... So far it's been about the circumstances of his retirement from service to go into elected office... Vance's current attack line and the story behind it...

UK Army rank equivalent: Warrant Officer 1st class. Highest ranked NCO position in either army.
 
Yeah. I'm no in favour of seeing all soldiers as heroes, but Kerry definitely fit the profile for hero, and they managed to make him be... weak.

The whole Trump farago has made a lot of people forget just how fucking bad GW Bush was. He wasn't even all that different, but he's seen as some sort of elder statesman now.
Incredible, isn't it. At the time, believed it couldn't get worse than Dubya.

But there's hope now. A few weeks ago, was utterly convinced that Trump was set for another crack at the wheel.

He won't go quietly, but he might well be a loser. Again. And doesn't he just hate being one.
 
I always thought the Bush/Kerry thing was the biggest brassneck ever while being reluctantly admiring that they managed to pull it off. Still no idea how they managed that.
They used proxy groups to do the dirty work. Bush and other senior Republicans kept just enough distance to maintain plausible deniability.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sue
Is it the first time he's come out with the 'Republicans against Trump'?

I've no idea, TBF, but if so, better late than never, and TBH probably more damaging at this point in the campaign.
He’s been endorsing Democrats since 2022 at least, when he came out for Mark Kelly.

Fair enough, I was probably a little bit hasty/unfair in my rush to eye-roll. It was just mainly the notion that it's only recently become clear to some that trump is unfit for purpose - any purpose.
 
Yeah. I'm no in favour of seeing all soldiers as heroes, but Kerry definitely fit the profile for hero, and they managed to make him be... weak.

The whole Trump farago has made a lot of people forget just how fucking bad GW Bush was. He wasn't even all that different, but he's seen as some sort of elder statesman now.

What Bush did to McCain in 2000 (over his adopted daughter) hasn't been equalled since in terms of outright disgusting behaviour, even by Trump.
 
At the time, believed it couldn't get worse than Dubya.

he's the reason i got re-politicized. when the second iraq invasion happened, i said (on another forum) that lying was a sacrament for rightwing christians (who were gung-ho for the invasion, despite that one donald trump called it out).

and in the meantime, assad fanboys, trump, J6, coronavirus denialism, every one of them built on lies.
 
What Bush did to McCain in 2000 (over his adopted daughter) hasn't been equalled since in terms of outright disgusting behaviour, even by Trump.
I think that deserves a link for those who may not know the low that Bush and Rove felt happy to descend to in that campaign:

John McCain took the New Hampshire primary and was favored to win in South Carolina. Had he succeeded, he would likely have thwarted the presidential aspirations of George W. Bush and become the Republican nominee. But Bush strategist Karl Rove came to the rescue with a vicious smear tactic. Rove invented a uniquely injurious fiction for his operatives to circulate via a phony poll. Voters were asked, "Would you be more or less likely to vote for John McCain…if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?"

...Bridget McCain was a seriously ill baby in Mother Teresa's orphanage when Cindy McCain visited and decided to bring her back to the United States for medical treatment in 1991. John and Cindy adopted her not long after.

 
Last edited:
I think that deserves a link for those who may not know the low that Bush and Rove felt happy to descend to in that campaign:



Jesus. I vaguely remembered something, but not that it was that vile.
 
Jesus. I vaguely remembered something, but not that it was that vile.
Yeah, I mean I obviously don't share McCain's politics but he always came across as basically a decent man. And again, astonishing that GW Bush's side got away with calling him a coward because he ended up in POW camp when Bush dodged the draft. (A case of attack being the best form of defence but still, astonishing.)
 
bit waffley though dont you think?... she didnt actually say anything ifynwim...something about ideals was it? we believe in our country? we know the people, we see the people? they were coherent sentences though, which does make her stand out :D
It's the counter to MAGA, I guess, reclaiming patriotism. That does seem to be a big theme, and US candidates generally always seem to feel the need to talk about how special the USA is.

She has said something concrete regarding the right to join a union before, though. My guess is that she maybe mentioned that before the clip starts?

The language in the waffle is important, though. She's not afraid to use the word 'collective', for example. In reality, if she's elected, it won't mean a massive amount. Maybe slightly better terms for health care, maybe slightly better holiday entitlement. Making the US a bit more like Canada, essentially. But it is a very different kind of waffle from the Trumpian variety.

And all this could work. Casting the Dems as the party of freedom, the party that will keep government out of private affairs, is a pretty good trick.

ETA:

There is also some other context there. Shawn Fain is kind of the US equivalent of Mick Lynch. He's a relatively militant union leader. She's thanking him for his endorsement, which means something in itself. TBH Harris has surprised me thus far. She's not quite the vacuous Clinton-style (husband or wife) centrist that I had assumed her to be. Imagine Keir Starmer sharing a stage with Mick Lynch and thanking him for his endorsement!
 
Last edited:
It's the counter to MAGA, I guess, reclaiming patriotism. That does seem to be a big theme, and US candidates generally always seem to feel the need to talk about how special the USA is.

She has said something concrete regarding the right to join a union before, though. My guess is that she maybe mentioned that before the clip starts?

The language in the waffle is important, though. She's not afraid to use the word 'collective', for example. In reality, if she's elected, it won't mean a massive amount. Maybe slightly better terms for health care, maybe slightly better holiday entitlement. Making the US a bit more like Canada, essentially. But it is a very different kind of waffle from the Trumpian variety.

And all this could work. Casting the Dems as the party of freedom, the party that will keep government out of private affairs, is a pretty good trick.

ETA:

There is also some other context there. Shawn Fain is kind of the US equivalent of Mick Lynch. He's a relatively militant union leader. She's thanking him for his endorsement, which means something in itself. TBH Harris has surprised me thus far. She's not quite the vacuous Clinton-style (husband or wife) centrist that I had assumed her to be. Imagine Keir Starmer sharing a stage with Mick Lynch and thanking him for his endorsement!
I disagree with your characterisation of Clinton as vacuous, she's an extremely well-educated and competent lawyer and is quite astute and capable, politically. Ultimately and unfortunately, however, I suppose Clinton was arguably more Washington DC establishment, she was more 'inside the beltway' whereas Harris' background is California senate then veep, she seems more fresh and new and approachable and 'of the people' iyswim, with her folksy ways, her Converse and jeans, etc., much more approachable and warmer and more empathetic than the arguably political wonk/dorky Clinton who seemingly went through the motions making/baking cookies. Where that kind of thing seemed forced and fake with Clinton, you can imagine Harris getting stuck in and enjoying that.

Whereas Clinton's credentials were more easily questionable, like: 'So her husband was president, but how and why does that mean she's got the credentials/experience to stand for president?' No disrespect to Clinton intended, she apparently did some good work re health policy etc while her husband was in office, but she was/had always been more in her husband's shadow, whereas Harris is the one who's been the public figure in her marriage, so it's easier to visualise Harris in a leadership role rather than playing second fiddle to her husband.

Women shouldn't be judged on who and what their husband is (or their wife/partner), but the reality is that that happens, just like male politicians on the 'first lady' potential of their wives (or spouses).

Btw, I agree with you re her making a point about the government keeping out of private affairs, that will definitely play well with Republicans.
 
.... Maybe slightly better terms for health care, maybe slightly better holiday entitlement. Making the US a bit more like Canada, essentially.


Is that a good thing or a bad thing?



Harris went to high school in Montreal, so she saw first hand how things worked up here. Walz is a governor for a state border Canada. Ford is the premiere of Ontario.


Ontario Premier Doug Ford said Wednesday he’s “happy as punch” that Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz was chosen to be U.S. Vice-President Kamala Harris’ running mate for her presidential campaign.
70c8fc80

Ford said he and Walz had a productive meeting at Queen’s Park just two months before the governor was asked to join the Democratic ticket, a choice that was made official on Tuesday.

“I was happy as punch to see the governor get nominated,” Ford told reporters at an unrelated press conference in Mississauga.

“We shared a lot in common when we sat down, we tossed the football around a little bit in my office. … We’re going to work well together if he gets elected.”
 
Back
Top Bottom