Harris for President Thread (1 Viewer)

[MT15]

We can use this for just general Harris talk - related to schedule, crowd sizes, interviews and such. Things that don’t fit in the economic thread or in the general election thread.

I just saw this: a packed house in Savannah, GA. Around 7-9k people came out in the rain and waited in line. Another 80k were watching it live online at one point - just on the campaign YouTube account. That’s a lot of enthusiasm, in a red part of GA.

 

[MT15]

I would submit that what Trump / Vance are doing to the US is a psychological attack.

 

[MT15]

This is an EC victory for Harris if it goes like this:

 

[MT15]

 

[MT15]

Harris is running a good, if not great, campaign. From getting Mark Cuban to be a surrogate for her on her economic policies to doing outreach to Haley voters to this:

 

[MT15]

Interview on her economic policies with Ruhle:

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

Interview on her economic policies with Ruhle:

Yes, more of this.

She had a great debate but she missed a great opportunity to hammer this home when the first question that was asked is if we are better off now than 4 years ago. She should have had an answer ready for that - because it's a resounding yes.

Remind the entire country that 4 years ago, our economy was shut down, we lost 6 million jobs, there were riots in the streets from BLM. Sure, did Donald Trump cause the BLM riots -- no, but he certainly didn't inspire calm and reasoned discourse. So, go ahead, hang that chaos on him as well. 4 years ago was doom and gloom -- we now have a growing economy. Inflation is under control. Record stock market. Wages growing faster than costs. Manufacturing increasing. We're starting chip manufacturing in the US.

She missed her opportunity in the debate, but it should be hammered home now. And if she gets another chance, she needs to bury him on it in another debate.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Tons and tons of permission giving and there's probably tons more to come. I think it will make a significant difference.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Harris is running a good, if not great, campaign. From getting Mark Cuban to be a surrogate for her on her economic policies to doing outreach to Haley voters to this:

Letting someone know you hear and care about them is the most meaningful and powerful way to make a connection.

 

[Taurus]

Tons and tons of permission giving and there's probably tons more to come. I think it will make a significant difference.

Yeah, seeing Team Haley refuse to lick Cheato's boots is shocking. Shocking but heartening.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Yeah, seeing Team Haley refuse to lick Cheato's boots is shocking. Shocking but heartening.

Haley could learn a lot from her supporters.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Interesting, and this is with Harris mentioning it a fraction of what Clinton did
====================


WASHINGTON (AP) — Americans are more likely to believe that being a woman will hurt Kamala Harris ' chances in the November election, compared to eight years ago when Hillary Clinton was running. And they are more likely to believe that Donald Trump ‘s gender will help him.

A new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research indicates a shift in attitudes among U.S. adults in the time between the candidacies of the first and second female major-party nominees.

The shift in attitudes is largely driven by Democrats — particularly Democratic men. About 3 in 10 Democratic men thought Clinton’s gender would hurt her “somewhat” or “a lot” prior to her loss to Trump. About half now say that about Harris.

“I would say this country doesn’t really have an outstanding track record of supporting female candidates,” said Julian Zeng, a 34-year-old copy editor and writer from California who is a Democrat.

Democratic women have also grown more likely to say being a woman could be a hurdle for a presidential candidate: About 4 in 10 Democratic women said Clinton’s gender would hurt her, and about half say that about Harris now. Republican men only shifted slightly, and Republican women’s views remained stable.……..

Americans are more likely to see Harris' gender as a hurdle than they were for Clinton: AP-NORC poll

Americans are more likely to believe that being a woman will hurt Kamala Harris’ chances in the November election, compared to eight years ago when Hillary Clinton was running.

apnews.com

 

[GrandAdmiral]

Interesting, and this is with Harris mentioning it a fraction of what Clinton did
====================


WASHINGTON (AP) — Americans are more likely to believe that being a woman will hurt Kamala Harris ' chances in the November election, compared to eight years ago when Hillary Clinton was running. And they are more likely to believe that Donald Trump ‘s gender will help him.

A new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research indicates a shift in attitudes among U.S. adults in the time between the candidacies of the first and second female major-party nominees.

The shift in attitudes is largely driven by Democrats — particularly Democratic men. About 3 in 10 Democratic men thought Clinton’s gender would hurt her “somewhat” or “a lot” prior to her loss to Trump. About half now say that about Harris.

“I would say this country doesn’t really have an outstanding track record of supporting female candidates,” said Julian Zeng, a 34-year-old copy editor and writer from California who is a Democrat.

Democratic women have also grown more likely to say being a woman could be a hurdle for a presidential candidate: About 4 in 10 Democratic women said Clinton’s gender would hurt her, and about half say that about Harris now. Republican men only shifted slightly, and Republican women’s views remained stable.……..

Americans are more likely to see Harris' gender as a hurdle than they were for Clinton: AP-NORC poll

Americans are more likely to believe that being a woman will hurt Kamala Harris’ chances in the November election, compared to eight years ago when Hillary Clinton was running.

apnews.com

I can guess one reason why...

 

[Booker]

Yes, more of this.

She had a great debate but she missed a great opportunity to hammer this home when the first question that was asked is if we are better off now than 4 years ago. She should have had an answer ready for that - because it's a resounding yes.

Remind the entire country that 4 years ago, our economy was shut down, we lost 6 million jobs, there were riots in the streets from BLM. Sure, did Donald Trump cause the BLM riots -- no, but he certainly didn't inspire calm and reasoned discourse. So, go ahead, hang that chaos on him as well. 4 years ago was doom and gloom -- we now have a growing economy. Inflation is under control. Record stock market. Wages growing faster than costs. Manufacturing increasing. We're starting chip manufacturing in the US.

She missed her opportunity in the debate, but it should be hammered home now. And if she gets another chance, she needs to bury him on it in another debate.

This all day. 2020 was easily the worst year I've lived through. After three years of self-inflicted chaos a real crisis hit, and Trump just made everything worse.