ADVERTISEMENT

Kamala Harris got ahead the old fashioned way

UCFKnight85

GOL's Inner Circle
Gold Member
May 6, 2003
102,250
109,790
113
By sleeping with a man with power and getting him to bring her to the front of the line for promotions.

Where does this register on the "empowered feminist" rank? Is this good feminism or bad feminism? And doesn't the fact that an evil man is largely to thank for Senator Harris draw the ire of hardcore feminists? Surely!

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Sure-I-dated-Kamala-Harris-So-what-13562972.php

Between Harris here and Warren totally faking being a Native American to get ahead most of her life, I can't wait for the debates!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: chemmie
trump is going to coast to a victory.

I don't think so. I'm not sure he even runs again.

But I do know that Joe Biden will look like a rabid right winger on stage with these leftie extremists.
 
Gen Z is more liberal than the millennial generation. Women are abandoning the Republican party at lightning speed. Minorities already left y'all.

So the question is, how long can republicans run campaigns aimed at old white men?

The dem candidate in 2020 will not be a status quo candidate. It will be someone who is leading an anti wealth platform where the top .1% don't have as much wealth as the bottom 90% combined.

Trump is the perfect opponent for the anti silver spoon movement. Trump will be nut dragged in the debates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NinjaKnight
i think biden has a good shot to beat trump, im not sure about any of the others.

I hope they run some hard leftie who spends the entire campaign shrieking about identity politics, vilifying corporations and rich people, and wants to have national conversations about why being white is problematic. All of which are 100% likely at this point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFWayne
I hope they run some hard leftie who spends the entire campaign shrieking about identity politics, vilifying corporations and rich people, and wants to have national conversations about why being white is problematic. All of which are 100% likely at this point.
I hope so.
 
Yes, I’m sure that was it. You’re so smart 85. Maybe you should run for office.
you can read the guys comments for yourself. he admitted that he helped get her promoted twice because they were having an affair. as soon as she got power she turned on him. feminists generally look down on women that use their bodies to get ahead.
 
You'll be begging for a centrist like Biden when you see the platform we're actually running.
assuming there is not a massive downturn in the economy, biden is likely your best hope. i hope the dems run the farthest left wing candidate possible. it will assure trump another 4 years.
 
assuming there is not a massive downturn in the economy, biden is likely your best hope. i hope the dems run the farthest left wing candidate possible. it will assure trump another 4 years.
Dems don't want a centrist. I would vote for a sack of potatoes over Trump but you're not going to get the youth out to vote for Grandpa Joe. Since youths are the dems strongest base getting them motivated will be the most important step.

You want to motivate youth? Look at what they care about. Income inequality, student debt, healthcare.

That means:
Tax wealth at 2%, tax income over 10M at 70% and raise wages.
Plans to forgive student debt
Medicare for all

If a candidate isn't willing to go there then they won't have a chance.
 
Dems don't want a centrist. I would vote for a sack of potatoes over Trump but you're not going to get the youth out to vote for Grandpa Joe. Since youths are the dems strongest base getting them motivated will be the most important step.

You want to motivate youth? Look at what they care about. Income inequality, student debt, healthcare.

That means:
Tax wealth at 2%, tax income over 10M at 70% and raise wages.
Plans to forgive student debt
Medicare for all

If a candidate isn't willing to go there then they won't have a chance.
when has the youth vote ever been the dems or reps strongest base? youth vote turnout has always been pretty poor.
 
when has the youth vote ever been the dems or reps strongest base? youth vote turnout has always been pretty poor.
Which is why the youth turnout is so important.

It's like a 65-35 split for democrats for people 35.

It's a 75-25 split for women under 35.
 
Dems don't want a centrist. I would vote for a sack of potatoes over Trump but you're not going to get the youth out to vote for Grandpa Joe. Since youths are the dems strongest base getting them motivated will be the most important step.

You want to motivate youth? Look at what they care about. Income inequality, student debt, healthcare.

That means:
Tax wealth at 2%, tax income over 10M at 70% and raise wages.
Plans to forgive student debt
Medicare for all

If a candidate isn't willing to go there then they won't have a chance.

:joy:

DNC 2019: you aren't allowed in the club if you don't favor wrecking our health care system to install something that every study has proven to be unaffordable. Mandate forced loan forgiveness at the detriment of the company loaning. And installing a tax regime that last had favor in the 1950's, and a wealth tax that exceeds even what the Europeans and Scandinavians dare attempt.

The most hilarious thing is that the tax "idea" in your first bullet point was already scored by the WaPo. It would fund a whopping 2.5% of Medicare For All.

[roll]

I really can't wait for these Democrats to try to outdo eachother in explaining why every problem someone faces is the fault of a rich person, how they'll punitively confiscate their wealth, and how it STILL doesn't fund a goddamn thing they're pushing for.
 
you can read the guys comments for yourself. he admitted that he helped get her promoted twice because they were having an affair. as soon as she got power she turned on him. feminists generally look down on women that use their bodies to get ahead.

You continue to amaze me with your warped view of reality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NinjaKnight
Young people don't vote, especially young dems. In fact they do two things really well: bitch in the streets in protest and not showing up to vote.
30% of all eligible voters aged 18-29 voted in 2018 for a midterm.

Thats incredible for a midterm and in a presidential election year where they are shown some policy that actually impacts them they will show up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NinjaKnight
You continue to amaze me with your warped view of reality.
"Yes, we dated. It was more than 20 years ago. Yes, I may have influenced her career by appointing her to two state commissions when I was Assembly speaker.

And I certainly helped with her first race for district attorney in San Francisco. I have also helped the careers of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Gov. Gavin Newsom, Sen. Dianne Feinstein and a host of other politicians."

so should i take the old mayor at his word or not? please share your interpretation of his words.
 
If only she would have sodomized some children, then 85 would be totally cool with her.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NinjaKnight
Young people don't vote, especially young dems. In fact they do two things really well: bitch in the streets in protest and not showing up to vote.

FC is stunned to learn that young people with no jobs, no career, no family, and live mostly in bubbles find socialism to be totally awesome and stuff.
 
FC is stunned to learn that young people with no jobs, no career, no family, and live mostly in bubbles find socialism to be totally awesome and stuff.
Yeah, because they want paying careers that allow them to have families and build lives. The nerve of them.

You know how everyone has a "side hustle" now? That's a direct reaction to people not making enough in their main career to support the American dream. You think that many people WANT to sell oils and makeup and shit? No. They do it because they aren't being paid what they need to be.
 
Yeah, because they want paying careers that allow them to have families and build lives. The nerve of them.

You know how everyone has a "side hustle" now? That's a direct reaction to people not making enough in their main career to support the American dream. You think that many people WANT to sell oils and makeup and shit? No. They do it because they aren't being paid what they need to be.

I'm sorry if you're not as wildly successful as you insist on here, but your depiction of millennials as living like a Great Depression era schlep are hilariously wrong.

If they really wanted jobs then there's plenty waiting for them in this fantastic capitalist country that has a 3.7% unemployment rate. If socialism really is their preferred system, I am sure they can visit Cuba or Venezuela and find a sweet job where The People are working towards the common good.
 
I'm sorry if you're not as wildly successful as you insist on here, but your depiction of millennials as living like a Great Depression era schlep are hilariously wrong.

If they really wanted jobs then there's plenty waiting for them in this fantastic capitalist country that has a 3.7% unemployment rate. If socialism really is their preferred system, I am sure they can visit Cuba or Venezuela and find a sweet job where The People are working towards the common good.
I have compassion for those who haven't been as fortunate as me.
 
I have compassion for those who haven't been as fortunate as me.

What a worthless, self congratulatory statement. So vague yet so full of self entitled leftist back patting.

Let's say you make $50K a year, live frugally, and have plenty of cash in the bank. Your buddy makes $45K a year, spends like an idiot, and has little by way of savings. He's "less fortunate" than you by your leftie definition.

Are you prepared to blow up our economic system and throw around failed socialist ideas all so that this poor suffering guy gets that extra $5K to get even with you, pay off his debt, and "even" things out? Or would you support taking $5K off your earnings to even things out?

And what about the person making $60K? Are we dropping his too, or are you then going to mandate that you both get $10 and $15K bumps? And so on.
 
What a worthless, self congratulatory statement. So vague yet so full of self entitled leftist back patting.

Let's say you make $50K a year, live frugally, and have plenty of cash in the bank. Your buddy makes $45K a year, spends like an idiot, and has little by way of savings. He's "less fortunate" than you by your leftie definition.

Are you prepared to blow up our economic system and throw around failed socialist ideas all so that this poor suffering guy gets that extra $5K to get even with you, pay off his debt, and "even" things out? Or would you support taking $5K off your earnings to even things out?

And what about the person making $60K? Are we dropping his too, or are you then going to mandate that you both get $10 and $15K bumps? And so on.

A lot of people had to overcome a lot more than I had to. I am fortunate to have the opportunities that I have had. You think you would be the same man you are today if you were born to a single parent drug addict and lived in a neighborhood where crime was normalized?
 
A lot of people had to overcome a lot more than I had to. I am fortunate to have the opportunities that I have had. You think you would be the same man you are today if you were born to a single parent drug addict and lived in a neighborhood where crime was normalized?

That's not my point. And you using an extreme example is not a valid point either. There are clear cut areas where someone is TRULY less fortunate, such as a kid born into a crack addict's home. Yet the overwhelming majority of cases that you'd define as "someone less fortunate" is far less severe or apparent.

That's my entire point. You want to destroy our economy to usher in some bullshit utopian socialist paradise all because of the idea that we have entire segments of society that are "less fortunate" and need re-balancing by the government. That's only achieved via forced confiscation of wealth, dictating who does what jobs, and making tons and tons of arbitrary judgement calls on what is "less fortunate" and what is not.
 
That's not my point. And you using an extreme example is not a valid point either. There are clear cut areas where someone is TRULY less fortunate, such as a kid born into a crack addict's home. Yet the overwhelming majority of cases that you'd define as "someone less fortunate" is far less severe or apparent.

That's my entire point. You want to destroy our economy to usher in some bullshit utopian socialist paradise all because of the idea that we have entire segments of society that are "less fortunate" and need re-balancing by the government. That's only achieved via forced confiscation of wealth, dictating who does what jobs, and making tons and tons of arbitrary judgement calls on what is "less fortunate" and what is not.

Two questions that should hopefully make you think.

1. Do you believe black people are born inferior to white people and therefore cannot be as successful.

Hopefully you answer no to this because I don't think you're a racist.

2. If they aren't born at a disadvantage why do they face lower rates of success? Why are they underrepresented as CEOs and in boardrooms?

Because the system in the United States has built in disadvantages for many black people that most white people, like me, dont have to overcome. The entire way we prevent wealth from transferring has caused a lack of social mobility for people so if your family started off poor you are 10x as likely to stay poor and if you started rich you are 10x as likely to stay rich.

Why should I take the credit for my success when I could be a failure if born into different circumstances?

If you have another way of explaining away the massive disparity please share, I would love to hear it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NinjaKnight
Two questions that should hopefully make you think.

1. Do you believe black people are born inferior to white people and therefore cannot be as successful.

Hopefully you answer no to this because I don't think you're a racist.

2. If they aren't born at a disadvantage why do they face lower rates of success? Why are they underrepresented as CEOs and in boardrooms?

Because the system in the United States has built in disadvantages for many black people that most white people, like me, dont have to overcome. The entire way we prevent wealth from transferring has caused a lack of social mobility for people so if your family started off poor you are 10x as likely to stay poor and if you started rich you are 10x as likely to stay rich.

Why should I take the credit for my success when I could be a failure if born into different circumstances?

If you have another way of explaining away the massive disparity please share, I would love to hear it.

Watch the first 1:30.

 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFWayne
Two questions that should hopefully make you think.

1. Do you believe black people are born inferior to white people and therefore cannot be as successful.

Hopefully you answer no to this because I don't think you're a racist.

2. If they aren't born at a disadvantage why do they face lower rates of success? Why are they underrepresented as CEOs and in boardrooms?

Because the system in the United States has built in disadvantages for many black people that most white people, like me, dont have to overcome. The entire way we prevent wealth from transferring has caused a lack of social mobility for people so if your family started off poor you are 10x as likely to stay poor and if you started rich you are 10x as likely to stay rich.

Why should I take the credit for my success when I could be a failure if born into different circumstances?

If you have another way of explaining away the massive disparity please share, I would love to hear it.
no matter what color you are, if you do these 3 things you wont live in poverty:
  • complete at least a high school education
  • work full time
  • wait until age 21 and get married before having a baby.
 
Two questions that should hopefully make you think.

1. Do you believe black people are born inferior to white people and therefore cannot be as successful.

Hopefully you answer no to this because I don't think you're a racist.

2. If they aren't born at a disadvantage why do they face lower rates of success? Why are they underrepresented as CEOs and in boardrooms?

Because the system in the United States has built in disadvantages for many black people that most white people, like me, dont have to overcome. The entire way we prevent wealth from transferring has caused a lack of social mobility for people so if your family started off poor you are 10x as likely to stay poor and if you started rich you are 10x as likely to stay rich.

Why should I take the credit for my success when I could be a failure if born into different circumstances?

If you have another way of explaining away the massive disparity please share, I would love to hear it.

You make a good argument, but there's 1 critical flaw to it: black men arent the only group that is underrepresented in the board room. So are Irish, Chinese, Mexican, Slovakian, and German men. Do all of those groups suffer the same plight as black men?
 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFWayne
Dems don't want a centrist. I would vote for a sack of potatoes over Trump but you're not going to get the youth out to vote for Grandpa Joe. Since youths are the dems strongest base getting them motivated will be the most important step.

You want to motivate youth? Look at what they care about. Income inequality, student debt, healthcare.

That means:
Tax wealth at 2%, tax income over 10M at 70% and raise wages.
Plans to forgive student debt
Medicare for all

If a candidate isn't willing to go there then they won't have a chance.
Funny because one of the biggest reasons Obamacare died is because the youth didn’t want the insurance, the mandate or the need.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT