Bret Stephens may be coming around!

MONDAY, AUGUST 5, 2024

Also, the (latest) Manchurian candidate: We love to report good news at this site. With that in mind, we're happy to say that the New York Times' Bret Stephens may be moving toward voting for candidate Harris.

No, it isn't a done deal—and yes, it's only one vote! But here's what the gentleman tells Gail Collins at the start of this week's Conversation for the New York Times:

Kamala Harris Surprises Everyone

Bret Stephens: Hi, Gail. I have to make a confession: Kamala Harris had a much stronger start than I expected. She appears competent, in command and she is connecting to voters—everything she wasn’t when she ran for president five years ago. I gather you’re not surprised.

Gail Collins: Bret! Does that mean you’re going to vote for her? I was planning on torturing you until you joined the team.

Bret: I’m not there yet, though the rumored choice of Josh Shapiro, the Pennsylvania governor, as her running mate would go far to reassure me about a Harris administration... 

We agree! Harris has been a superb candidate to this point, though she still has a lot of explaining to do with regard to some past policy stances.

That said, she's only been at it for two weeks after President Biden's sudden departure, and she has a campaign to assemble. For that reason, the mandated caterwauling on Fox News programs about her avoidance of interviews strikes us as more of the standard unintelligent pap.

When the time comes, how well will she handle those issue pronouncements? That remains to be seen.

As for Stephens, he says he isn't sold yet. As this new Conversation continues, he explains why he'd be encouraged by the choice of Shapiro:

Bret: ...In this case, there would be the happy blending of a terrific candidate who happens to govern a must-win state. I also think Harris recognizes that she needs to temper the perception of her being a Bay Area progressive politician by choosing a governor with a reputation for centrism. It makes for a good contrast to Trump-Vance, where old-and-crazy chose to pair up with young-and-reckless.

Gail: Well, governmentally speaking, I’d be happiest with a vice-presidential candidate who was of the same progressive bent as Harris. But I’ve got to admit that the smartest strategy is to pick somebody who makes the ticket look balanced between the left and the center.

Bret: You just put my finger on why I’m still not sold on a Harris ticket, even if so far she has done everything right, politically, while Trump and Vance have done almost everything wrong. If those two keep it up, they’re gonna lose, even if the so-called fundamentals of the race probably favor the Republicans.

How about it? Could a Harris/Shapiro ticket defeat "Old-and-Crazy" plus "Young-and-Reckless?" That's Stephens' framing of the race, not ours. Other voters may see things that way.

For ourselves, we liked the look of Roy Cooper most of all, for reasons which aren't worth discussing. As for Candidate Young-and-Reckless, here's the inexcusable thing he said in Atlanta on Saturday evening during his brief introduction of Trump:

VANCE (8/3/24): Eight years ago, Donald Trump had everything—fame, fortune, family, friends. He gave up the easy life so we could get our country back.

He traded everything he had for unjust persecution—for slander and scorn from the fake news, all for this country, for you and me.

They couldn't beat him politically, so they tried to bankrupt him. They failed at that, so they tried to impeach him. 

They failed at that, so they tried to put him in prison. They even tried to kill him.

"They even tried to kill him?" That was an astonishing thing to say. 

When we saw him make that astounding remark, we thought of a famous old film. Surely, this reckless young man has been brainwashed somewhere, as in The Manchurian Candidate.

Surely, he's been brainwashed somewhere! We flashed on that thought in real time.


147 comments:


  1. "Kamala Harris had a much stronger start than I expected."

    We're all aware of the official narrative.

    You and your Democrat thought leaders, however, seem to have missed a minor event unfolding in the last couple of days: the economy appears to be in freefall. And that is usually considered to be a problem for the incumbent. Just sayin'.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The official right wing narrative is that Harris has been hiding her opinions from the public and press.

      Somerby has low expectations for black women, but at least he is saying something positive today, even if it is faint praise and depends as much on public reaction to her candidacy as anything she has done so far.

      You are aware, arent' you, that the incumbent is not running for reelection? The VP has nothing to do with managing the economy. Just sayin in case you are as stupid as you sound.

      Delete
    2. Right. Sorry, I should've known that Comma-la has nothing to do with the Biden administration. Yes, I am that stupid.

      Delete
    3. 12:18,
      Are you going to vote for the senile, old rapist, instead?

      Delete
    4. You calling Kamala "comma-la" is just as stupid as Cecelia calling anonymous commenters anonymice. This is gratuitous and annoying but it mainly makes you (and Cecelia) look stupid for being unable to get names straight (or for engaging in childish behavior).

      You are very stupid, based on your comments so far.

      The economy is not in free fall, nor has Biden done anything to cause the stock market to fall. It is falling because the Fed failed to act to lower interest rates. This is a stock market panic, not a shift in other economic indicators that tell us the strength of the economy. The decrease in the stock market is about 7%, which is not freefall, much less a predictor of recession. It is more like a glitch caused by cryptocurrency and tech company problems.

      Of course, the stock market fall has been magnified by the right and the media into a problem to pin on Biden and the Democrats.

      Delete
    5. 12;54,
      Of course Harris has something to do with the Biden administration.
      Did you think the people calling her a "DEI hire" were being serious? They 're (typically shitty excuses for Republican) comedians, who make (intelligence insulting) jokes for a living.

      Delete
    6. "You are very stupid, based on your comments so far."

      I'm taking it as a complement; coming from a soros-bot, you know.

      I didn't say anything about Biden doing something to cause the stock market to fall. That's your own theory. All I said was that it might be a problem for the incumbent. For Comma-la, that is.

      Delete
    7. I see. You mean the low information voters who aren't as smart as you are. Now I get where you were going.

      Delete
    8. Right, I get it now: only the low information voters will count an economic collapse as a negative for the incumbent administration.

      I wish I were as clever as you are. Alas, no chance of that.

      Delete
    9. No one believes Harris is a "DEI Hire". There are, however, millions of bigots who desperately want to.

      Delete
    10. If you say so, Sir, Mr. Soros.

      Delete
    11. LOL.
      Calling 1:28 "Mr. Soros" is hilarious, because Republicans just nominated a rapist to be their Presidential nominee for the third straight time.
      It's joke like 1:31's, that saved vaudeville.

      Delete
    12. First, stupid one, Kamala Harris is not the incumbent president running for reelection but is the incumbent VP running for a new job, president. She enacted Biden's policies as VP so she is not responsible for the economy (good as it is). How then would the economy be a problem for her? The incumbent now is Biden and it is not a problem for him because The Fed and Stock Market operate independent of the presidency. Warren Buffet is divesting much of his holding in Apple, which upset the tech portion of the market. Biden didn't do that, and neither did Harris. It is not a problem for either of them because the economic indicators remain strong and this is not likely to change that, so the stock market will bounce back.

      Your desire to tarnish the Democratic Party nominee is noted. But do ask your troll farm supervisor to teach you what the word incumbent means. Kanala Harris is not the incumbent but is the nominee for president, a candidate, running on the Democratic ticket. When she selects a VP to run with her, that person will not be an incumbent either, because they haven't held that job yet.

      Delete
    13. Yes Sir, Mr. Soros.

      As always, thank you for setting me straight. I now realize that this economic collapse will not affect Candidate Comma-la at all.

      Delete
    14. I don't think anyone is going to believe that George Soros is brainwashing Republican trolls in Eastern European troll farms. On the other hand, it seems likely that Peter Thiel has brainwashed Vance and that Elon Musk has his hooks into Trump. With Trump, no brainwashing is necessary -- just offer him a bunch of money and flatter him for taking it. He'll do anything you ask then.

      Delete
    15. You need a brain in order to be brainwashed.

      Delete
    16. The US economy is primarily driven by consumer demand/spending.

      I trade the stock market every weekday, the stock market is completely manipulated and controlled by the big players and has little correlation to the economy.

      Indeed, 70% of Apple sales are international. Tech stocks have been overvalued for a while, so a correction has been expected.

      One can make just as much money from stocks going down, as up.

      12:18 is ignorant, but also a troll, better to ignore the trolls, since their main goal is to shitpost and trigger a response.

      Delete
    17. Or agree with them to the point they cry, because you're agreeing with something they wrote which they never believed in the first place.
      To each their own.

      Delete
    18. So, the stock market? No more currency speculations, Mr. Soros? Good to know.

      And how does it fit with your daily bridge playing habit?

      Delete
    19. There is some value to responding to inaccuracies in troll statements because there may be other readers and lurkers who might otherwise believe the shit being posted by trolls.

      Now that the internet is being flooded with disinformation and deep fakes, the importance of defending the truth has become greater. An unrefuted point will stand and some innocent may believe it, without pushback against the garbage.

      Delete
    20. You're such a good decent person, Mr. Soros. Without you we would never be able to know the real god-honest truth.

      Delete
    21. 2:09 you make a decent point but trolls here generally make ridiculous claims that no one here believes, so here, there is no need to engage with them as it just perpetuates their existence and chokes out good faith discourse. Maybe offer edification without any direct personal response, but it does seem to be the case that if you ignore them, they are reduced to a whimper and eventually disappear.

      Delete
    22. Yes, I can see how this may also be a wise approach, Mr. Soros. But in the end, what should it be: tell the truth or ignore? Please enlighten.

      Delete
    23. I don’t thinking ignoring them works. They are reinforced by seeing their own words.

      Delete
    24. Anonymouse 1:08pm and her fellow mices go into spasms over the mispronunciation of Kamala’s name. Of course, that lecturing generates provocation which results in anonymices going into a frenzy and linking the ribbing to racism and cholera, or worse. Which then restarts the whole cycle.


      Delete
    25. I am an anonymous and I’ve had no such spasm. I think trolls hope for such a reaction but instead just get lectured on linguistics and courtesy.

      Delete
    26. Anonymouse 6:02pm, launching into a lecture on linguistics and courtesy when a blogboard commenter has intentionally mispronounced Harris’ name in order to provoke you is the very definition of triggered spasms. .

      Delete
    27. Are you intentionally saying “vote on “ instead of “vote for” too? I’ll bet none of us can pronounce your Russian name.

      Delete
    28. This is text. I can’t hear your mispronunciation.

      Delete
    29. Anonymouse 7:14pm, pronounce my Russian name? If you knew it the KGB would kill you.

      Delete
  2. "Surely, this reckless young man has been brainwashed somewhere, as in The Manchurian Candidate."

    The idea that Vance is not responsible for his statements because someone else put those ideas in his head (via brainwashing) is akin to Somerby's excuse for Trump, that he is crazy and thus not responsible for his statements either.

    These Republican men both OWN what they say. They are accountable for their deeds, including ones that get them in trouble with the law or cause them financial issues. No one forced Trump to rape E. Jean Carroll, resulting in the large court judgment against Trump for defaming her by saying she made up the rape. No one forced Trump to falsify his business records in order to commit fraud, long before he became a politician. No one forced Trump to pay Stormy Daniels hush money and then falsify his records to conceal that illicit campaign donation, for which he was convicted of 34 felonies. These men do these things of their own free will, including the stupid statements Vance made trying to absolve Trump of wrongdoing.

    Vance's statements are a lot like the ones Somerby makes when he tries to defend Trump here. No one is forcing Somerby to do that either. Somerby is no more brainwashed that any other MAGA idiot. These people believe wrong things for their own motives and their own gain. They OWN their views, just as Vance owns his campaign statements on behalf of Trump and Trump owns the consequences of his lawbreaking and bad behavior.

    Somerby should be ashamed to suggest brainwashing like this. It is as ridiculous as Vance's remarks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Somerby is intimating that Vance might be under Putin's Kompromat, like Trump and a good chunk of GOP Senators, and therefore Vance isn't making these statements under his own free will.

      Delete
    2. Wish Somerby would state his opinions more directly.

      Delete
    3. If you think Bob meant that Vance was literally brainwashed, you're an idiot.

      Delete
    4. If Somerby doesn't mean what he says, how are we to know what he actually does mean? He often likes to have it all ways at once.

      Delete
    5. Somerby Sheep demand he be read literally when it suits their agenda, and other times, not so much.

      When your “ideology” is so shallow - Somerby good, Somerby criticism bad, defend Somerby at all costs - it leads to poor thinking.

      Delete
    6. "If Somerby doesn't mean what he says, how are we to know what he actually does mean?

      So you're saying you think Bob thinks Vance was brainwashed? Seriously?

      If so, you're missing what I'd call a certain general awareness.

      Delete
    7. If he didn’t mean it, why did Somerby say it? Vance is another lost boy, to Somerby, like Tucker and Gutfeld and Trump. Somerby seems to think losing a parent in middle childhood is like being brainwashed. Developmental psychologists disagree.

      Delete
    8. "If he didn’t mean it, why did Somerby say it?"

      Because he tries to make his writing interesting and kind of funny. The audience he has in mind is able to see how far-fetched it is that a VP candidate has been brainwashed by a foreign power to do their bidding.

      I guess one way you could tell whether he meant it is: did he follow up on it with details of any kind? Did he use it in a futher discussion? Or was it more of a throw-away line?

      Delete
    9. It isn’t far-fetched. Your methods don’t work on Somerby.

      Delete
  3. anon 12:18, points for getting the ""'Democrat' thought leaders."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're upvoting Mao. Points deducted.

      Delete
    2. Mao is dead. Long live Mao.

      Delete
  4. But that's the thing! Vance wasn't brainwashed. He chooses to be this way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You and 12:45 make good points, but to be fair, there is no free will.

      Vance is primarily the product of the aggregate of all of his experiences, which include ones that left him wounded and unable to cope.

      If you want to learn more, read up on behavioral science, Dr Sapolsky’s recent books Behave and Determined are a good starting place, also check out the work done by Dr Samuel Bowles.

      Delete
    2. Anon @ 2:09: or Vance is a grifter with no concern for anything resembling a moral compass who will lie with impunity.

      Delete
    3. Vance grew up in an upper middle class family in Ohio, not in Kentucky. There are quite a few lies in Hillbilly Elegy. Sapolsky's work is with apes and is controversial. Settings in the nervous system may make it more difficult for people to control their behavior, but they are still treated in our society as if they are responsible for their actions. Determinism is not part of our national culture.

      Applying ideas beyond the limitations of the research supporting them is called overgeneralization. Sapolsky and others write books to advance their careers. The more public attention they attract, the better, so they often say controversial things and draw conclusions that are unsupported by their data.

      I think you should be more cautious about overapplying Sapolsky's ideas, especially to complex human behavior. It doesn't justify the kind of determinism you are suggesting here.

      Delete
    4. Garth, you are correct, but they are not mutually exclusive.

      If we fail to understand root causes, society will continue to be dominated by right wingers.

      Delete
    5. 2:23 you are misrepresenting Sapolsky’s work and stature to a degree, but his work does have certain limitations which is why I also recommend Dr Bowles as well, who is more focused on society. Both have produced a library of peer reviewed publications.

      Furthermore, your criticism here applies more on an individual level, not a societal scale involving systems and institutions.

      You may be perfectly fine with our current hierarchical society, but it’s not set in stone, particularly since it goes against our innate nature, which has been well established by behavioral science.

      Delete
    6. @2:09
      I'll put the Sapolsky books on my reading list. He's a good scientist and a good writer.

      Delete
    7. Yes, except that you can find any type of behavior by looking at different species and people are not apes. The differences in cognition undermine determinism.

      Delete
    8. She’s probably addicted to pills of booze or something.

      Delete
    9. There is no free will, so I can’t want to read Sapolsky.

      Delete
  5. What exactly is the problem here? What he said, in that quote, is perfectly obvious to everyone. Well, to everyone who ain't completely brainwashed, I suppose.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Unless he didn't write Hillbilly Elegy, Vance has imagination. Why should anyone be surprised about that? People are wondering why Trump picked him as VP, but it should be obvious that it is because he is so good at making up lies.

    It is possible that Somerby is projecting his own mental problems onto Vance, and that it was Somerby who was brainwashed and now he thinks everyone else was too.

    Kevin Drum did show recently (in his childlessness graphs by religion) that the freethinkers are in the Democratic party, not among Republicans.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Brainwashing? Come now, Bob. You know perfectly well that in the view of the NYT, Brett might as well be voting for Trump if he didn't declare his vote for the dazzling Harris.

    There wasn’t a soul on earth who didn’t know he was going to come to Jesus.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Brett Stephens can form his opinions on his own. He isn't a moron who believes ridiculous nonsense, like Biden cheated to win the 2020 Presidential election. Let's not confuse him with entire Republican Congressional delegation.

      Delete
    2. Anonymouse 1:15pm, Brett is a NYT employee in a cohort where not supporting Harris is akin to appeasing Hitler.

      Britt Stephens’ opinion is that hesitancy toward Harris is not worth his job.

      Delete
    3. Not even close. The NYT has lots of conservatives, especially writing editorials.

      Delete
    4. Name me a NYT employee who is not against Trump.

      Delete
    5. JD is in fact, based on his own words, actually appeasing "America's Hitler". You so silly.

      Delete
    6. Sorry to break it to you, Arty, but Vance is making fun of people like you.

      Delete
    7. Cecelia, name me a living former Republican VP who is not against Trump.

      Delete
    8. Anonymouse 6:40pm, why? Doesn’t that point make it utterly doubtful that Brett Stephens, for one nanosecond, harbored the notion that he wouldn’t vote on Harris?

      Delete
    9. Cecelia,
      Are you suggesting that Stephens IS as big a moron as the entire Republican Congressional delegation?
      If so, where's your proof?

      Delete
    10. What do you mean by vote on Harris? No one says that here in the US. You vote on a bill but you vote for a person. Do they say it your way in Russia?

      Delete
    11. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    12. Anonymouse 7:10pm, I’m saying that Stephens is savvy and knows the time of day.

      I’m saying that you anonymices are big morons, bigger than the entire Republican Congressional delegation.

      Delete
    13. Like the rest of the media, Stephens is savvy enough to drop his deep, deep concern about the advanced age of Presidential candidates, now that the only senior citizen running for President is the Republican.

      Delete
    14. Anonymouse 7:48pm, Stephens and the rest of the media.

      Puzzling, huh? Sorta like after Biden, that dog won’t hunt.

      Delete
    15. Of course the entire Republican Congressional delegation knows Joe Biden won the 2020 Presidential election fair and square.
      They're not morons.
      They're assholes who want to end the American democratic experiment because the populace is becoming more diverse.

      Delete
    16. Cecelia,
      That dog was never intended to hunt the Republican nominee.
      On the bright side, the Democratic Party stepped-up and gave the media what they wanted. Nice and hard, for a delightful change.
      The media is looking for their next opening. In the meantime she should run her campaign the way she wants, and not the way the gossip girls in the media want.

      Delete
    17. Anonymouse 8:08pm, , you mean well, but Harris should follow the instructions of people who are more experienced and knowledgeable than her in running her campaign. That automatically excludes the media.

      Delete
  8. The people who took down Biden may be feeling guilty about it and trying to make it up by supporting Harris.

    Shapiro is recognized as being the most conservative of the rumored VP choices. Those who view Harris as progressive are hoping to drag her to the center with her VP pick, making her acceptable to non-existent Democratic centrists, Republicans, and Hispanic voters, but they may also lose the youth and progressive voters if they shift too far right. I am unhappy with Harris reviving the issue of Israel with her pick and I don't see why we need to go on catering to Sinema and Manchin types now that they have left the party. These compromises create problems, in my opinion, without garnering enough new votes to be necessary. The Democratic base is sufficient to defeat Trump without shifting the entire party to the right.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed. Tack left, and when you're done tacking Left, tack Left some more.
      The more conservative folks who don't care to vote for a rapist to be President, will pull the lever for her regardless.

      Delete
    2. Agree, Shapiro would be a misstep. Walz, or possibly Beshear, are better choices.

      Walz seems to have Republicans number, in the sense that he has an ability to toy with them in a way that exposes them as creepy and clownish.

      Delete
    3. I would be fascinated to know exactly what policies of Harris are too liberal for the country. Name 'em. Ending abortion restrictions? Lowering health care costs? Taxing billionaires a fraction of their fair share? What?

      Delete
    4. Arty, I would be fascinated to see Harris espousing her positions personally via questions from an interviewer. I would like to see Harris and Trump debate.

      Delete
    5. The debate is set up. Trump and Biden on ABC. Biden dropped out, but Harris will be there.

      Delete
    6. Anonymouse 7:33pm, thank you for that info.

      Delete
  9. "Kamala Harris Surprises Everyone"

    Bret Stephens seems to believe that if he was surprised, so must others be. There are a lot of us who are unsurprised by her competence out of the gate. Stephens' surprise is kind of insulting because it tells us he didn't expect much. George W. Bush called that "the soft bigotry of low expectations." I don't expect much better from Stephens either.

    ReplyDelete
  10. An Indian American friend of mine said that their community is at best lukewarm towards Kamala. They think she is a dimwit, and find Kamala sleeping her way to the top repulsive. They are ashamed to point to Kamala as a role model for their daughters.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for posting such a clear example of brainwashing. It is inspiring that your Indian American friend has risen to the exalted position of spokesperson for his entire community.

      Too bad the things your friend has been told are not true. As someone said above, we need to cope when we are told lies by Republicans. For example, Harris did not "sleep her way to the top" but has been elected by the people to her various positions. It would be repulsive to think someone could be elected by sleeping with all of the voters -- who has that much energy? If Kamala Harris is a dimwit compared to other Indian Americans, we should be sending more of them to congress and the presidency, not fewer.

      Vivek Ramaswamy is doing his part to tarnish Harris, pretending that she ran as an Indian in CA but has switched to being black on the national stage. That is very odd because there are more Indian Americans in other states nationwide than in CA, so how would that strategy make any sense? In addition to San Diego, South Asian Indian Americans are concentrated in Houston, Boston, Chicago, Atlanta and New Jersey. So how would it make sense for her to present herself as just black during her speech in Atlanta? She has been saying she is biracial, which is true.

      Delete
    2. Many in the Indian community are dark-skinned in color, and most likely will lose their vote to GOP voter suppression, anyway.

      Delete
    3. A hillbilly friend of mine from the Appalachian hills of WV told me his whole extended family think Vance is as phony as a $3 bill.

      Delete
    4. @2:20 PM
      Yes, I know the guy: Cletus. He says Kamala is the real thing, exactly like his sister-wife Brandine. Same manners, same sharp mind. "Sharp as a tack", I believe his exact words were.

      Delete
    5. I hope he's reading this, maggot. sister-wife, huh.

      Delete
    6. What, no American TV at Soros' bot-farms in Albania? Sad.

      Delete
    7. Sister wife comes from Mormon extremist sects in the SW and Mexico, not from Appalachia.

      Delete
    8. Kamala always seems like she’s been drinking. Or high.

      Delete
    9. Just dimwitted, as 1:32 PM said. Empty-headed, California-style.

      Delete
    10. @4:10 So does Cecelia.

      Delete
    11. Kamala sleeping her way up is bad for the children, but convicted felon Trump banging a porn star while wife is home with a newborn, or Trump raping the ladies, or Trump bragging about assaulting women by grabbing them by the pussy is a real turn on to the young lady kids.

      Delete
    12. Anonymouse 5:55pm, Comma La and I hit the weed and booze together. She stocks the good stuff.

      Delete
    13. "Kamala always seems like she’s been drinking. Or high."

      I agree. She's a great candidate.

      Delete
  11. Harris has shown Stephens two types of “competence” — ability to gat votes, and ability to handle the job as President. I understand the former. The polls prove Harris’s ability to win over voters. But, I do not see how she demonstrated the latter.

    Accomplishments would be the best evidence. However, Harris can point to no particular accomplishment. On the contrary, she did not succeed in closing the border.

    A second way would be an unrehearsed interview or press conference where she demonstrated her mastery of some complex area, such as economics or foreign policy. To my knowledge we have not seen this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I should have said “unscripted” rather
      than “unrehearsed”

      Delete
    2. David, Harris has a lot of accomplishments. Most recently, she was part of the negotiations to obtain the release of Russia-held journalists and hostages. She met one-on-one with other nations to get them to release Russians to barter for the American prisoners. That is important and a considerable accomplishment.

      In response to the border czar nonsense, it has been pointed out that Kamala Harris did work closely with the nations sending immigrants to our border, to help them solve the problems causing their citizens to flee to America. Her success rate is impressive. The countries she worked with were originally 50%+ of those coming to the border and were reduced to 18% currently. That means she was able to help those donor countries stop their people from leaving.

      Republicans who claim she has few accomplishments largely don't know what she has been doing. The campaign will help remedy that problem. As has been frequently noted, the VP and the President do not have the authority to close the border. Biden has been trying to gain that authority from congress and via executive order. Blaming Harris for something she has had no control over is ridiculously unfair.

      Harris was selected as VP because of the mastery she showed on the Judiciary committee while a Senator. Her questioning was astute and she was able to keep witnesses to the point, drawing on her work as a prosecutor and as Attorney General of the State of CA (5th largest economy in the world).

      I doubt you have looked for any summary of her accomplishments and strengths -- you seem to be just relying on Republican anti-Harris propaganda. That's why your knowledge on this subject is so limited.

      Delete
    3. David,
      Your idea reminds me of when Trump ran for President with no political experience, and didn't have an unscripted press conference where he demonstrated his mastery of some complex area, such as economics or foreign policy, because he's a white male.

      Delete
    4. "She met one-on-one with other nations"

      This sounds peculiar, considering that she's been accused of sleeping her way up.

      Delete
    5. On the contrary, she did not succeed in closing the border.

      This is a perfect example of the kind of shitposting we have come to expect from dickhead in Cal.

      David, please tell us when the VP was tasked with "closing the border". Any documentation you can provide would be helpful.

      Delete
    6. @2:17 OK. Here's one from BBC
      Biden tasks Harris with tackling migrant influx on US-Mexico border
      US President Joe Biden has put Vice-President Kamala Harris in charge of controlling migration at the southern border following a big influx of new arrivals.

      Mr. Biden said he was giving her a "tough job" but that she was "the most qualified person to do it".


      As we know, migration over the Southern border continued to surge after the VP accepted this responsibility.

      Delete
    7. @DiC

      Article you just quoted:
      "She's the most qualified person to do it, to lead our efforts with Mexico and the Northern Triangle [Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador], and the countries that are going to need help in stemming the movement of so many folks - stemming the migration to our southern border".

      Migration from these countries is down markedly.

      Delete
    8. And now it is much lower.

      Delete
    9. Nope:

      https://www.verifythis.com/article/news/verify/kamala-harris/vice-president-harris-border-czar-claims-misleading-fact-check/536-1f49fa77-10b7-402b-aac5-acb9dd59018b

      Delete
    10. Link is https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56516332

      Delete
    11. Are you really that stupid, or just so fucking dishonest, David?

      Delete
    12. Try this one, DiC.

      "I look forward to engaging in diplomacy with government, with private sector, with civil society, and — and the leaders of each in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras to strengthen democracy and the rule of law, and ensure shared prosperity in the region.

      "We will collaborate with Mexico and other countries throughout the Western hemisphere. And as part of this effort, we expect that we will have collaborative relationships to accomplish the goals the President has and that we share."

      "Closing the border" is nowhere in there.

      Delete
    13. Donald Trump had 4 years to close the border AS PRESIDENT. He failed. It was his signature issue. But it is hard to get much of anything done when you spend nearly 20% of your time at golf resorts.

      Delete
    14. And who shut down the fucking bipartisan border legislation - this fucking year - you moran DiC. His name is not Harris. What in the ever loving fuck is wrong with you people?

      Delete
    15. 4:04 PM. Not mutually exclusive. The number of times this troll has been corrected by a simple 2 minute web search of his statements suggests that he is dishonest but there are a lot of mentally challenged and dishonest MAGAs out there.

      Delete
    16. David is not a moron. He was an actuary, for dog's sake.
      Like the huge majority of Right-wingers, David is an asshole who wants to end the American democratic experiment because the populace is becoming more diverse.
      He doesn't want his grandkids to have to compete on a level playing field with people David thinks are beneath them.

      Delete
    17. No, David is not a moron and after all the insults and harangues, he’s been proved right about the economy.

      Delete
    18. I'll take those receipts about David being proved right about the economy, any time you can gather them and post them, Cece.
      Thanks in advance.

      Delete
    19. Anonymouse 9:12pm, or you could merely read the news.

      Delete
    20. The stock market is not the economy.

      Delete
    21. So Cecelia has nothing.
      Knock me over with a feather.

      Delete
    22. Anonymouse 9:59pm, and goodness knows an economic slowdown couldn't hurt the market.

      Delete
    23. Oh I see. Biden is old and mentally impaired but DIC is old and routinely posts easily debunked misinformation but is mentally intact because he was once an actuary. For the past 3 years a downturn -recession- in the economy, then a soft landing, were predicted with no accuracy by many pundits. Did not happen in the timeframe they suggested. So to say “David was right about the economy” is to say nothing, unless a timeframe for an economic event was part of the prediction. And a recession is not ongoing based on a correction involving overpriced tech stocks, job reports missing expectations, and the Japanese raising interest rates. This is a correction at present that could possibly become a recession but is not one now and economists are not jumping on a bandwagon to declare one imminent.

      Delete
    24. Anonymouse 10:19pm, no, if saying that David was right about the economy “is to say nothing” then you wouldn’t have your feathers all ruffled and be babbling about there possibly being a recession in our future, but no economist is saying it’s imminent.

      Anonymices endlessly insulted David as though he was predicting that zebras would turn into crack pipes and it turns out that his trepidation vs your blinkered partisan balderdash was right on target.

      Delete
    25. The Fed raised interest rates to slow down the economy and give leverage back to employers which had been taken by employees.
      It worked. The latest jobs report shows that.
      On the other hand, David thought the Fed raised interest rates to slow inflation. Has that worked? Asking, because David has been here recently insisting inflation is still out of control.
      Per David's own complaints about inflation, the folks who said the Fed raised interest rates to give leverage back to employers were the ones who were correct.

      Delete
    26. Nice try Cecelia. I would take your word about babbling, ordinarily, since you have perfected the craft. But for this brief moment, I will take you seriously and ask exactly what you think you were referring to when you said that DIC got the economy right. Be specific, and for a template, see comment 10:40.

      Delete
    27. Goldman Sachs estimates the likelihood of a recession at 25%. So what exactly was David right about? In what time frame?

      Delete
  12. Bret Stephens isn't the only one coming around. Rawstory reports:

    "A powerful Georgia Republican on Monday urged GOP voters in his state to vote for Vice President Kamala Harris instead of his own party's nominee.

    Geoff Duncan, the state's former lieutenant governor, delivered a blow to Donald Trump's campaign days after the former president unleashed what the Washington Post described as a "fusillade of personal and sometimes false attacks" against Gov. Brian Kemp.

    The blow came in the form of an Atlanta Journal Constitution editorial urging Republicans to "purge Trumpism."

    "Our party revolves less around convictions and governing policies and more toward a cult of personality," writes Duncan.

    "At the very least, four years under Harris will provide the GOP time to put the pieces back together without Trump and hopefully give this lifelong Republican a chance to help rebuild the party I’ve always called home."

    Duncan slammed Trump for his repeated attacks on Kemp which he argued worked against the greater good of the Republican party.

    "Politics should be about attracting more voters, not fewer — to win an election," Duncan wrote. "But more importantly, to win the hearts and minds of a governing majority."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Trump is pissing off Republicans with his loyalty tests and they are losing their inhibitions about voting Democratic. That attack on Kemp was a big mistake.

      Delete
    2. Railing against a governor who has consistently won in a state Trump lost is a sure fire way to win votes. Brilliant move, Donny. Keep up the good work.

      Delete
  13. Cecelia and David will vote for Kamala.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I stick to giving Harris fashion tips. I’m a seamstress, I like that sort of thing. She’s a very attractive subject too.

      I will never vote on her.

      Delete
    2. You hate daughters of Indian and Caribbean immigrants.

      Delete
    3. Anonymouse 6:43pm, you hate dissent.

      Delete
    4. That depends on the dissent.

      Delete
    5. Many Republicans get dysentery from pulling allegations about VP Harris out of their asses.

      Delete
    6. Anonymices, I won’t take back my allegation that Kamala is an attractive person and you can’t make me.

      Delete
    7. She looks like something you would see in the reptile house at the zoo.

      Delete
    8. I've seen the woman who works at the reptile house at the San Diego Zoo.
      Pretty damn hot.
      I heard she was a model/ dancer before getting her Herpetology degree.
      She works with actual snakes, not metaphorical ones like JD Vance.

      Delete
    9. Kamala is a mammal, indeed a primate.

      Delete
    10. Sex between consenting adults is woke.

      Delete
  14. Google is a monopoly.

    https://jabberwocking.com/41583-2/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Someday, after your nap, we have to teach you the difference between allegations and convictions .then we can have milk and cookies.

      Delete
    2. While you're at it, teach that competition is the engine of Capitalism.

      Delete
  15. Advantage: Harris!

    https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2024/08/the-waters-around-you-have-grown

    ReplyDelete
  16. Brett Stephens still wants "assurances". Right, you are really torn between a convicted felon and sexual assaulter and rational people.

    ReplyDelete