Hey, there! Log in / Register

Pressley, Warren, Markey back Harris

US Rep Ayanna Pressley (D-7th) and US Sen. Elizabeth Warren pretty immediately endorsed Kamala Harris for president today:

Pressley tweeted:

Thank you for your dedicated service President Joe Biden.

And Kamala Harris, I’m all in, let’s go.

US Sen. Elizabeth Warren endorsed Harris as well:

She is a proven fighter who has been a national leader in safeguarding consumers and protecting access to abortion. As a former prosecutor, she can press a forceful case against allowing Donald Trump to regain the White House. We have many talented people in our party, but Vice President Harris is the person who was chosen by the voters to succeed Joe Biden if needed. She can unite our party, take on Donald Trump, and win in November.

US Sen. Ed Markey agreed:

Kamala Harris is battle-tested and ready to serve. She will galvanize voters and make history on Election Day. All in for Kamala.

Rep. Jake Auchincloss (D-4th) is ridin' with Harris as well.

Topics: 


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

"Vice President Harris is the person who was chosen by the voters to succeed Joe Biden if needed."

No she wasn't. Unlike Gubernatorial races in Massachusetts where the Lt. Gov is elected by the voters, voters in the U.S. do not get to elect VP candidates.

up
Voting closed 6

If you voted for the electors for Biden for President, you voted for the electors for Harris as Vice President.

That said, I’m hoping for an open nomination process. Whitmer 2024!

up
Voting closed 3

Can the Biden/Harris campaign transfer its cash on hand to Whitmer or whoever emerges from an open nominating convention? Will Biden/Harris transfer all their campaign cash to the new nominee? The answer better be an ironclad yes to both before opening up the process. 105 days is not enough time to start fundraising from scratch. And if I were the forced-out VP—after four years of service and a hard year on the campaign/fundraising trail—there is no way in hell I would give up my campaign money because I would be saving it for the 2028 Dem primary.

Harris has raised $30 million today since Joe announced his withdrawal. $30M. The small donors are with Harris. Any "Draft Whitmer" (or any similar campaign) can't approach those numbers.

Harris already has the field offices. Harris was a part of the Biden/Harris administration and has a legitimate claim to its accomplishments. Blue state governors do not have such claims. Even if the hypothetical Whitmer campaign retains all present Biden-Harris field offices and there's minimal staff turnover (Would this even be allowed by the FEC? Are Biden staffers cool with both their POTUS and VPOTUS candidates being forced out? Again, the answer better be an ironclad yes), a brand-new messaging strategy would need to be built from scratch; new logos, signs, merch need printing; and all campaign workers would need retraining—which would cost a boat load of money.

The Dems held a primary. Joe Biden defeated Dean Phillips. VP Harris is the inevitable POTUS nominee for a number of pragmatic and structural reasons.

(Not an anti-Whitmer post; she's great!)

up
Voting closed 8

Transfer to another candidate? No. Use to benefit another candidate? Of course.

"Money" is the 2nd stupidest reason to go with the flow in choosing the next President. The stupidest reason for choosing the next President is blatant racism and sexism, which is inarguably how Harris slid into this position in the first place.

Best to follow a somewhat Democratic process, hold a debate before the Convention, and allow delegates to choose the best candidate.

up
Voting closed 5

blatant racism and sexism, which is inarguably how Harris slid into this position in the first place.

STFU.

up
Voting closed 4

Biden *did* straight up say his running mate would be a woman. He didn't pick the best person, he picked the best woman.

I won't charge him with racism and sexism in doing so, but it's indisputable that he disqualified all male candidates off the bat.

up
Voting closed 3

Harris did not win her current position because of racism or sexism.

up
Voting closed 5

Biden chose Harris to pick up votes where he was soft. Who knows if Biden thought Harris was capable of replace him as President in extremis as Biden’s frequent and recently extravagant arrogance and narcissism may indicate that he thought it would never possibly come to that. If her core belief is only to get ahead then we’re in for muddled Presidency that lauds solipsism and America-bashing and that she will cash in on afterward as is the norm from the our caliber of Presidents we elect. Hopefully, if she wins the “open convention” she goes on to win in Nov and the unicorn goes off to pasture (after whatever is in store) and that Orangfinger is a one and done.

up
Voting closed 4

That certainly was quite the externalized internal monologue unsupported by facts.

up
Voting closed 8

My days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle.

Your argument is premised on the idea that it's not possible to find a woman who is as well qualified as a man. That's a hardly credible position to take considering there are 100 million women in the US who are over 35. Setting that aside, VP picks are almost always based on political calculation. Nobody uses your argument regarding the dozens of white men who've been picked. But not to worry, Harris will no doubt select the whitest, straightest man in America as her running mate.

up
Voting closed 3

My days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle.

I am stealing this. Also, nailed it.

up
Voting closed 4

It comes from the Firefly TV show, spoken by Mal Reynolds (Nathan Fillion), who is an icon of sorts to a lot of libertarian minded folks like Will. I thought he might appreciate my use of it in his regard.

up
Voting closed 5

Is Harris going to be an LBJ, a Truman, a Wilson maybe? Is she an Agnew, a Gerry, a Marshall or a Quayle?

My point is she needs to lead. She needs to be a leader and and the Harris the press is showing us in unimpressive. I’m not impressed by “GOT HYPE?” I will be Kamala Harris’s biggest cheerleader if she does something more that lecture and nod her head.

up
Voting closed 5

Did you even watch the speech she gave? She's a brilliant public speaker.

I'm trying to figure out what flavor of troll you are and failing.

up
Voting closed 5

comically bad at pretending to be a Democrat.

up
Voting closed 4

Didn't she already state she is NOT going to run against VP Harris?

up
Voting closed 4

It’s going to be Harris.

up
Voting closed 4

no open process or dumping Harris.

Expectations on Harris are low, but she will greatly outperform expectations with the right message, staff and running mate.

If she panders to the identity politicians she will lose. Can't repeat the mistakes of "Hillary!"
She, and everybody supporting the campaign should not rest on a "first woman president" mantra.

TINA

up
Voting closed 4

What were you trying to say?

up
Voting closed 3

Stop hoping for chaos that will be eagerly exploited by every media outlet from here to Bangalor.

Team Blue No Matter Who

We need to put MAGA to bed THEN we can sort through the ash and rubble.

up
Voting closed 4

Won't put MAGA to bed.

Only his electorate dying will do that.

up
Voting closed 9

The Democrats are in the position of defending Constantinople against the Turks. They have to win every battle they fight. If they lose one, it's game over.

The last eastern Roman emperor, Constantine XI, watching the Turks flooding into the city, supposedly said "the city has fallen and I am still alive!" before grabbing a sword and rushing into battle. He was never seen or heard from again, nor was his body ever found.

up
Voting closed 5

No.

Whitmer isn't running. She gets it.

up
Voting closed 5

Listen to Obama and have an open process for choosing the nominee. It might be Harris but whoever gets the nod will have a lot more public support if it's perceived they had to campaign instead of just being handed the nomination, even if it's only DNC delegates that get to vote.

Endorsing today accomplishes nothing.

up
Voting closed 3

With Biden out of the race, all of his delegates are free to vote for whomever they want. They do not need to be "released" and Biden cannot direct them to vote for a specific candidate.* Many of the other potential presidential contenders are supporting Harris and announcing that they will not seek the nomination. The seems to be a call for unity - united we stand, divided we fall.

* In the Democratic party, delegates are not bound to their candidate to begin with. They're instructed to vote “in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them.” That said, the candidates choose their delegates for their loyalty.

Here's a link to the info above. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/-democrats-biden-exit-har...

up
Voting closed 2

Every Democrat should be saying, "Harris is great and she'd make a great President but I'm going to wait and see who else is interested before endorsing."

Then wait a week or two and endorse the person leading in the polls provided they don't seem like a liability for other reasons.

It probably will still be Harris but at least it makes it seem less like a rigged system.

Sadly, that's not happening and it's too late at this point.

up
Voting closed 6

Ironically, the Democratic Party is not a democracy. It is not a government entity. It is a private institution.

Like corporations, many of the founders hated the idea of having political parties at all. They are enshrined in our system, but they are not the official system. There is no provision in the constitution for them. They make their own rules.

Easy to forget that the GOP and the Democratic Party aren't constrained by any laws to hold a plebiscite to change endorsed candidates.

up
Voting closed 2

Among the names floated as a possible VP pick, one of the news pundits this afternoon suggested former Labor Secretary Marty Walsh.

up
Voting closed 5

Mark Kelly will be floated and would make a terrific candidate.

Gulf war pilot, space shuttle astronaut, gun safety advocate. Spoke live to Glastonbury from space. All in.

up
Voting closed 6

Gulf war pilot, space shuttle astronaut, gun safety advocate. Spoke live to Glastonbury from space. All in.

I get the shiny, but where are the actual qualifications in that ad?

up
Voting closed 2

Sadly, where we are now, it’s not about qualifications for the job, it’s about ability to defeat Trump in the election. These two goals don’t necessarily align.

up
Voting closed 2

Joe Biden has been the most effective President of the United States in decades. He got more done in the first two years of his Presidency than Barack Obama did in eight years.

Yet Biden is not a viable candidate in 2024, not even against a convicted felon and habitual liar without a patriotic bone in his body.

up
Voting closed 4

Longer than Barack Obama when he was elected president

Plus you learn a lot of things rising to senior rank in the military, not to mention the technological education of being an astronaut.

up
Voting closed 7

Plus you learn a lot of things rising to senior rank in the military, not to mention the technological education of being an astronaut.

Okay...what things?

up
Voting closed 2

He would have the respect of the military beyond the power of the office. That could be critical if the trumpbots pull another bullshit coup attempt.

He would be able to reach other veterans on the fence and make it clear how they could lose everything they worked for if Trump is elected.

He's also from a swing state and knows how to navigate that scene - how to mobilize voters and move them away from the crazy like he moved them away from Scary Fake and her legions of Qbots.

up
Voting closed 2

Whoever's picked for VP needs to have strong foreign policy or economic chops. Maaaahty has neither.

up
Voting closed 3

State Rep. Chris Worrell and his brother, City Councilor Brian Worrell, said they will vote for Harris at the convention.

up
Voting closed 2

And anyone who criticized him was a hater, I don't trust their judgement or honesty.

up
Voting closed 5

They can still think Biden is fit for term 2, but faced with Biden's withdrawal—which was out of their control—they can credibly believe VP Harris is the best choice to defeat Trump.

Also, defending criticism of Biden was not denigrating VP Harris.

up
Voting closed 8

Did not denigrate VP Harris, It does speak to their honesty though. Just my opinion and I'm not here to convince anyone to change theirs.
All the stories started to come out after the debate on his decline and all those who knew and tried to hide it, before it was too obvious to keep denying it.

up
Voting closed 7

It does speak to their honesty though.

How, exactly? How were they dishonest? Show receipts.

up
Voting closed 6

sweepstakes about honesty, do you?

up
Voting closed 4

That should get a third-party nominee elected. But it won't, because the electorate is garbage.

up
Voting closed 2

...and the most prominent third-party candidate is a bit of a crackpot.

up
Voting closed 3

"Medicine is fake" over what the D's and the R's are offering.

I'm probably voting Oliver, but if I see something I don't like, I'll look into Cornel West, and if I see something I don't like, I'm writing in Chris Rock.

Seriously, how did that chump get cute and funny Cheryl Hines to marry him?

up
Voting closed 5

This progression of events has been so bad and left me so tired that I read your "I'm probably voting Oliver..." and all my tortured brain could come up with was "Oliver Cromwell?"

Admittedly, the entertainment prospects of daily reading John Costello reacting to Oliver Cromwell have a certain... macabre fascination.

up
Voting closed 2

Be careful what you wish for.

It was, after all, growing dysfunction in the Roman republic that led to the rise of Caesar and the consequent transformation of Rome into an empire.

And there is no doubt that Trump and the Republicans are agents of chaos. They're not here to build but to tear down.

up
Voting closed 5

Because that's an exceptionally stupid take.

I'm probably voting Oliver

Who?

up
Voting closed 3

How so, usually well-reasoned foil?

up
Voting closed 2

Normal people aren't up to speed on all the bit players in your little cult, usually againsty self-parody.

up
Voting closed 2

That I'm better than most everyone else on Googling ballot access and sample ballots before I go vote?

up
Voting closed 4

That I don't bother to keep up to speed with the candidates of crackpot parties?

For the record, I'm also unaware of which offices Shiva Ayyadurai is running in 2024. Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

up
Voting closed 3

With the candidates of crackpot parties, then I'm left wondering why you know anything about the GOP at all.

up
Voting closed 6

Reductive and tribal.

up
Voting closed 11

All Biden had to do was come into the debate and give a SOTU-like performance.

He failed to clear a pretty low bar, and failed quite spectacularly.

The thing is … Biden may well be fine. The thing about a president is it matters less exactly what words they say in what order and more what they do. But someone who is 82 and has been in a very stressful job for four years … yeah, they might not want to do another four. It probably shouldn't have taken Biden this long to figure it out.

up
Voting closed 4

Democrats in array

up
Voting closed 3

.

up
Voting closed 6

The only sitting VP to win a Presidential election recently was George H.W. Bush (1988). Before Bush, you have to go all the way back to Martin Van Buren (1838).

Al Gore lost in 2000. Hubert Humphrey lost in 1968. Richard Nixon lost in 1960. Even Bush would have lost in 1988 had Dukakis not run a truly execrable campaign.

Either Gavin Newsom or Gretchen Whitmer would be a far better choice than Harris.

This is shaping up to be a re-run of 1968, when Lyndon Johnson suddenly quit the race in favor of Humphrey. Even the calendar is identical.

This is the last summer of America as we've known it. Enjoy it while it lasts.

up
Voting closed 3

This is shaping up to be a re-run of 1968, when Lyndon Johnson suddenly quit the race in favor of Humphrey. Even the calendar is identical.

Incorrect.

Yes, there are some similarities to 1968.
However, LBJ made his announcement in late March. Also, the primary calendar started later back then than it does now.

up
Voting closed 1

1968: Multiple viable contenders after the primary process, brokered convention.

Humphrey severely hampered by association with Johnson’s Vietnam War.

Chaotic violence on the streets (and in the hall) during convention, drove voters to alleged “law and order” candidate.

2024: All signs indicate convention delegates are prepared to unite for Harris, whatever interim process is implemented.

Zero enthusiasm for non-registered democrat Joe Manchin.

Harris associated with incredibly impactful administration.

Roe, Bitches.

up
Voting closed 3

And, I don’t agree with Van Jones’s ‘68/‘24 comparison likening Gaza to Vietnam.

up
Voting closed 4

The actual calendar. July 22 is a Monday, just like it was in 1968.

Yes, LBJ quit in March. And primaries were not nearly as significant as they are today... except this year they aren't. Harris will get the nomination without winning a single primary, just like Humphrey in 1968.

In 1968, the Vietnam war divided Democrats against one another, just as the Gaza war is doing this year. There were protests on college campuses, just as there are today.

The only thing missing is Mayor Daley.

up
Voting closed 7

The actual calendar. July 22 is a Monday, just like it was in 1968.

So?

The sun rose in the east that day, too. Unlike the 22nd being a Monday, the continued consistent motion of the Earth relative to the Sun actually has some impact on the major Party tickets and the election (the destruction of most (human) life on Earth would negatively affect voter turnout).

up
Voting closed 3

Gaza divides the Socialist-Progressives from the Democrats.

up
Voting closed 6

al gore “lost”

up
Voting closed 3

No, Al Gore lost.
As did Trump in 2020.
No air quotes.

up
Voting closed 8

Where's the bit in the Constitution about how the Supremes can decide elections on a whim?

up
Voting closed 5

SCOUS: Stop the recount (Gore ahead) wait, (Gore ahead) wait, (Gore ahead) wait, (Bush ahead) NOW!

up
Voting closed 2

this need to demonstrate impartiality by drawing two obviously unrelated things as two sides of a coin.

up
Voting closed 6

Al Gore won in 2000 and had the election stolen from him in broad daylight by the Supreme Court.

up
Voting closed 7

Gore didn't actually lose the popular vote, though. Like he lost but there was a lot of interference in that mess.

up
Voting closed 3

Gore didn't actually lose the popular vote

That's like saying "We'd have won this baseball game if we were playing by football rules". There's no "winning" the popular vote because popular vote doesn't "win" you anything but a "you tried" star. However...Gore only "lost" the electoral college vote because of some truly shady behavior by the Supreme Court.

up
Voting closed 4

I for one am happy we don’t decide by the popular vote.

up
Voting closed 9

If the Supreme Court did not stop the recount.

up
Voting closed 3

...I believe that's pretty much what I just said.

up
Voting closed 3

Events are patterns until the pattern is broken. Every race has its own qualities.

Even if Trump wins, Carson Beach will be open next summer.

up
Voting closed 3

*That* beach will be open. It's in a Trump neighborhood.

up
Voting closed 8

And very easily proven wrong.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/upshot/2020-election-map.html

Biden grossly outpolled Trump in Wards 6 and 7

https://www.boston.gov/departments/elections/state-and-city-boston-elect...

Aren't you the guy who was going off about not giving Democrats money?

up
Voting closed 6

Trumpier relative to other Boston wards.

up
Voting closed 3

Just a brief list of reasons not to be a calm.

  • The republican party's candidate for president led an attempted coup of our federal government on January 6th, and is openly calling for mass arrests and deportations, purging the federal government of anyone he doesn't like, and using the justice department as his personal police force. This embrace of fascism by the republican leader has led to the open rise of nazism in the street of the USA, where brownshirt marches occur on a regular basis.
  • The republican supreme court has ignored language in the constitution and founders original intent to make the office of president a virtual king (if a republican is in power).
  • Republican judges are ignoring centuries of settled law to overturn laws they don't like such as Roe v. Wade, and republican officials are jailing women who have miscarriages and calling for arrests of women and doctors who participate in abortions across state lines.
  • Republican politicians, with the backing of their hired hands in the judiciary, are tearing down the wall between church and state everywhere they can.

Now, as your are obviously an older white man, this probably doesn't impact you directly yet, but telling everyone else not to worry their little heads is appallingly blinkered and tone deaf.

But yeah, Carson beach will probably be open next summer.

up
Voting closed 3

judges are ignoring centuries of settled law to overturn laws they don't like

And all these years, I've been told that conservatives positively abhor that sort of judicial activism.

up
Voting closed 2

Even if Trump wins, Carson Beach will be open next summer.

Site of the new Joe Moakley coal-fired Power Plant by 2026, if Trump has his way.

up
Voting closed 5

n is pretty small even looking at total number of presidential elections, looking at elections where the sitting VP ran for POTUS would be a very small sample size. And how many of those were after one term vs after 2 terms?

up
Voting closed 5

People are fleeing his state in droves.

Also, aren't people afraid that Trump will exercise his immunity, and make his second term a revenge tour? The major opponent for that is supposed to be a guy who survived a recall after getting his at best, dumb, and at worst, corrupt ass photographed out at dinner when everyone else was told they couldn't?

Call me weird, but I'd like for my American President to not conduct themselves with impunity.

up
Voting closed 4

The state's population recently fell from 39 million to 38.965 million, per the US Census Bureau. I wouldn't call 0.0009% of the country's most populous state even one drove.

But the point is moot: Newsom has already endorsed Harris.

up
Voting closed 5

1) Over what timespan?

2) What was the growth of the American population as a whole over that same timespan?

up
Voting closed 3

overall US population growth was 0.53%.

To put this in perspective, NY, LA, HI, IL and WV all lost a greater percentage of their population than CA, while OR and PA were not far behind. But they're all fractions of a percent, most under 0.3 percent.

up
Voting closed 9

How many peace out of the 50 states entirely, once a generation who turns 18 being fluent in at least two languages has the option to call it a day with the U.S.

If you speak only English, you're shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic when you change U.S. states.

up
Voting closed 3

Believing that other countries will welcome you for no reason other than your intrinsic wonderfulness is the epitome of American arrogance.

up
Voting closed 4

I know it's difficult to get into other countries, and that they really don't want my sorry U.S. ass. That's why I cited the two languages thing: Opens up your options.

up
Voting closed 7

Al Gore would have won if the governor of Florida and the Supreme Court had not interfered.

up
Voting closed 4

And the Republican Party.

up
Voting closed 1

When LBJ dropped out Bobby Kennedy was still alive. Sadly RFK gets killed, and that threw the nomination to HH.

up
Voting closed 4

Gore followed two Clinton terms, Humphrey the two JFK/LBJ terms, Nixon the two Ike terms.

I think there's a certain fatigue that comes after two terms like that which Harris isn't under and could change that calculation.

up
Voting closed 1

We've been on "pit and the pendulum" mode for many decades - or had been, at least.

After 20 years of FDR/Truman, it has gone: R 8 years, D 8 years, R 8 years, D 4 years, R 12 years, D 8 years, R 8 years, D 8 years. That gets us up through the Obama years. Mostly 8 years of back and forth, party out of power gets agitated enough (and/or swing voters tired of the in-power party) to swing back the other way.

Now... It has accelerated. Two single-term presidencies in a row? If 45 becomes 47, that'll be three (if his health doesn't crater). Heck - if Harris wins, she might be only a one-term.

up
Voting closed 4

Are you saying that something that happened in 1912 would have been relevant in 1968?

That's ridiculous.

up
Voting closed 6

You can't possibly be that ignorant.

up
Voting closed 5

In fact, I'm fully aware that there are a bunch of scared older men who would really like it to be 1968 again are grasping at straws and making pseudointellectual arguments to cover their insecurities.

I'm also fully aware that the under-30 voting population is both potentially large and more than 50% do not identify as white non-hispanic.

1968 was 56 years ago and America was a very different place.

up
Voting closed 2

Even Seth Moulton is all in. Statement this morning:

President Biden has shown us what statesmanship is all about: commanding great power with grace, and giving it up with courage. He’s handed the reins to the American most prepared to take them up: our historic Vice President.

Kamala Harris has the energy, the vision, and the courage to unite our party and beat Donald Trump. The American people said that they wanted new nominees on both sides of the aisle, but only the Democratic Party has delivered.

There are four months between now and the election, and that is plenty of time for Americans to see the dramatic contrast between Trump’s dark vision for a second term and the bright, optimistic, opportunity-filled future I know Kamala Harris will present.

up
Voting closed 5

Says she is Team Harris.

up
Voting closed 2

Katherine Clark

up
Voting closed 4

Yeah, my fellow Dems are “falling in line behind Harris,” because NPR, CNN, MSNBC, ABC are running interference by not covering the granular details of who she is and what she’s done outside of being held at arms length by Biden and kept in a box the whole length of her Vice Presidency.

up
Voting closed 3

and the like don't work when one searches for Kamala Harris to get a quick rundown of who she is and what she has accomplished.

up
Voting closed 7

There’s the media’s responsibility and our personal responsibility. I for one like them to be neutral and dispassionate.

up
Voting closed 3

dispassionate narrative about Harris that you're looking for on Fox News, NewsMax, One America Network, and other storied bastions of unbiased journalism.

up
Voting closed 5

The thing about cable news is: it’s all an infomercial.

up
Voting closed 7

of sinister narrative about Harris do you think the media (including search engines and AI) are hiding from us?

What news sources do you consider more trustworthy?

up
Voting closed 6

My search for background on Harris aren’t part of the public discourse/news. When the major news outlets start cheerleading for Harris, by only speaking about the excitement and historicity of a Harris Presidency and talking about who is “getting on board” instead of doing an expose on every aspect of who Harris is, the media and the power players in the establishment are effectively in control of the wind.

up
Voting closed 6

and search engines and AI are hiding something about Harris from us.

Do tell: what are the dark secrets you suspect or are privy to, and what sources of information do you trust?

Otherwise, you just sound like an empty-headed conspiracy theorist with no goods to show.

up
Voting closed 0

The media isn’t hiding anything, they’re goosing the narrative.

up
Voting closed 2

narratives? We goosing victims would love to know how you go gooseless.

up
Voting closed 2

The mainstream media, that place where professional journalists reach a large, audience of shared eyes and ears, that is where they should be reviewing Harris’s and her rivals’ records and not manipulating us with the bright, shiny horserace. Agency should be with We the People and not the Party bosses and their corporate paymasters. It is just as much a sin to assume the best about Harris as it is the worst.

up
Voting closed 2

The mainstream media, that place where professional journalists blah blah blah word salad buzzword bingo blah blah blah

Whaddya know. Once again, you're not answering the question.

You're an AI-driven trollbot. There's no other explanation.

up
Voting closed 3

What question? Consciousness may be an illusion, but I am carbon-based.

up
Voting closed 2

The question that was put to you, you disingenuous troll. It's right there.

up
Voting closed 2

I am proud to endorse Kamala Harris for President.

Kamala Harris is a proven leader who has delivered for the American people again and again. As President, she will grow our economy, reduce costs, create jobs, and make sure every woman has access to the health care she needs. She’ll lay the foundation for lower interest rates and prosperity, and she’ll support NATO and American leadership abroad. I also know she will deliver for Massachusetts and support growth, innovation and investment in our state.

Kamala Harris is the best person to make the case against Donald Trump. Trump is coming after our rights and our freedoms. And he will jack up costs on the middle class by gutting Social Security, Medicare, and the Affordable Care Act.

The future of our country as we know it is on the line. That’s why I am thrilled to support Kamala Harris as she works to earn the Democratic nomination and beat Donald Trump.

up
Voting closed 6

Maura Healey. I’m kinda rolling my eyes at anything my fellow Dems do, or say. My eyes are jaundiced by the corrupt Sackler settlement, appointing her de facto common law spouse to a lifetime on the court, Ma Leg. opposing DiZoglio’s push for transparency. Ma is about 25 on the list* for corruption especially if you exclude the opinion of local media.

*I found it somewhere, will look for source, but that should align with most folk’s view…no?

up
Voting closed 5

appointing her de facto common law spouse to a lifetime on the court,

I cannot find it. Where is this information?

up
Voting closed 4

I cannot find it. Where is this information?

Nowhere. Babbling bot is babbling.

up
Voting closed 1

Babbling 6-day old bot.

up
Voting closed 4

I think it was this:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/ranking-the-states-from-most-to-lea...

“The least corrupt state, according to local reporters, was Massachusetts, even though in terms of federal convictions per capita it ranked in the top 25.

Of course, this method, too, has its weaknesses. It’s a survey of impressions. Some reporters are better tied into the political scene than others.”

So, how corrupt is Ma and how ties in to the political scene are our reporters?

Things are very scene-y and exclusive here. The Lion’s Group bringing out the worst in our music scene.

up
Voting closed 6

You're the one who made the accusation, my dude. And the best you can do is "I think"?

up
Voting closed 1

So, you don’t believe Massachusetts ranks poorly viz corruption?

up
Voting closed 2

So, you don’t believe Massachusetts ranks poorly viz corruption?

So, you haven't stopped beating your wife yet, bot?

You made a very specific accusation, and when called on it, you fell back on a lot of dimwitted hallucinations. Now you're trying to play DARVO with irrelevant, intellectually dishonest assumptive questions. You've now done this several times in this post. You're full of shit.

up
Voting closed 2

You made a baseless claim about Maura Healey doing a specific act and were questioned on it.

You haven't supported the claim. Instead, you've cited a 9 year old article about public corruption across the country. The article is interesting and presents metrics that consider data related to public corruption but also describe the flaws in those same metrics. Harry Enten is a bright guy, really invested in data driven journalism, and I can't imagine he would condone drawing firm conclusions on today's current events based on his article from January of 2015.

up
Voting closed 3

I’m looking, but this is what I found along the way

https://www.masslive.com/police-fire/2021/09/this-is-what-public-corrupt...

up
Voting closed 3

I’m looking, but this is what I found along the way

Translation: I made a baseless accusation, and when called on it I could find nothing to back it up, but here's an old boot that I caught while I was off on that fishing expedition.

Clown.

up
Voting closed 5

I said “de facto” we’re all living through it and directly experiencing living in a state where a governor appointed a very close relation to a lifetime judicial appointment. That’s Trumpian!

up
Voting closed 2

I nominate Senator Mark Kelly to be the candidate for the 47th President of the United States of America.

up
Voting closed 3

make Senator Kelly reverse the endorsement he made of Harris yesterday and challenge her for the nomination?

Back here on Planet Earth, I think he'd make a solid Dem VP candidate.

up
Voting closed 4

This process is a farce. The media and party leaders are in lockstep, what kind of freedom do electors have to vote their conscience?

up
Voting closed 5

From “governing partner” to Heir. Successor. Coronation. Selection. “Pelosi and Obama withholding endorsements so it doesn’t “appear as a coronation.” We rightly talk about Trump’s deviation from Democratic norms, yet we in our avarice, entitlement and desperation we’re like the pot calling the kettle black in lacking self examination. Amidst all the racist, xenophobic and misogynistic filth cluttering the criticisms of the left are nuggets of truth that threaten to put a chink in armor of our self righteousness. Remember, Harris is not free of baggage and negatives. Harris’s rhetoric on Israel is even leas well-tempered than Biden’s appeasing of the antisemitic strain that fuels the engine of Progressivism.

up
Voting closed 1

Misogynoir

up
Voting closed 2

Is that a soup?

up
Voting closed 1

It means what you think it means, dear.

up
Voting closed 4

Natalie Portmanteau?

up
Voting closed 4

If not, then go fight your little opinion battles elsewhere. This ain't your business.

up
Voting closed 1

"How do you do, fellow kids?"

up
Voting closed 0

I am a Democrat. I first voted for William Jefferson Clinton and wonder what hath “Clintonian triangulation wrought. I voted for Gore-Lieberman and know we will always need paper ballots. I voted for Obama-Biden in a “Got Hope” mood and discovered a corporate shill. I put a clothespin on my nose and voted for (Hillary Rodham) Clinton-Kaine and saw how the DNC is full of shit. I vote for Sanders in the primaries, though I’m tired of the extortion and I’m seeing that the pandering to the anti-liberal (and antisemitic) Progressives brings to mind classical conservative arguments and warnings about the perils of a socialist future.

Most of all these dark times of the consolidation of media into a few great commercial monopolies, where economics is driving the polarization that took root with wedge issues, knowing they’re engaged in ‘The Selling of the President,’ and that ‘You Can Fool All of the People All of the Time.”

The Home Shopping Cable News Networks (NPR is stuck in this trap) can’t afford to alienate their audiences which perfectly and respectively overlap with the two major parties. There is no semblance of a firewall between commerce, opinion and news. I know we all must be on the bandwagon, but I’m concerned there can’t be frank discussions. Is there really a groundswell for Harris? It seems that the media that shares her audience stood shoulder to shoulder around her as the DNC desperately puffed and blew on the kindling as they were rubbing sticks together to kindle her peculiar candidacy.

I’m voting for Harris-Walz, but

up
Voting closed 2

I am a Democrat. I first voted for William Jefferson Clinton and wonder what hath “Clintonian triangulation wrought. I voted for Gore-Lieberman and know we will always need paper ballots. I voted for Obama-Biden in a “Got Hope” mood and discovered a corporate shill. I put a clothespin on my nose and voted for (Hillary Rodham) Clinton-Kaine and saw how the DNC is full of shit. I vote for Sanders in the primaries, though I’m tired of the extortion and I’m seeing that the pandering to the anti-liberal (and antisemitic) Progressives brings to mind classical conservative arguments and warnings about the perils of a socialist future.

Most of all these dark times of the consolidation of media into a few great commercial monopolies, where economics is driving the polarization that took root with wedge issues, knowing they’re engaged in ‘The Selling of the President,’ and that ‘You Can Fool All of the People All of the Time.”

The Home Shopping Cable News Networks (NPR is stuck in this trap) can’t afford to alienate their audiences which perfectly and respectively overlap with the two major parties. There is no semblance of a firewall between commerce, opinion and news. I know we all must be on the bandwagon, but I’m concerned there can’t be frank discussions. I’m voting for Harris-Walz, but Is there really a groundswell for Harris? It seems that the media that shares her audience stood shoulder to shoulder around her as the DNC desperately puffed and blew on the kindling as they were rubbing sticks together to kindle her peculiar candidacy.

up
Voting closed 4

Replicating comments with their little gnome hammers!

up
Voting closed 2

I'd say plenty.

up
Voting closed 4

Have their endorsements “dropped” as the kids say? Are they avoiding the optics of a coronation, or are they going to scuttle the Harris enterprise? This lifelong Democrat wants to know.

up
Voting closed 2

I got nothing against Kamala Harris being the nominee of my party, but this media circus process is all flash and no substance.

Is there any news footage of Kamala Harris the DA? I’ve only seen a two second clip. You would think we’d a seen it in 2019, 2000. Did she ever hold a news conference where she used cancelled words and phrases like “thug” and “super-predator?” Why aren’t we talking about Harris's position on American hostages in Gaza and the war in Gaza, where White House, which was already appeasing terrorist sympathizers in my party, making VP Harris “tone down” her anti-Israeli rhetoric? Why aren’t we highlighting indications of how she will handle the Russian crimestate and get our hostages back? The news should be going through all the potential nominees with a fine-toothed comb, but instead the corporate press making it a futile effort for anyone but Harris.

up
Voting closed 2

could do a little homework. None of the things you allegedly seek are hard to find with modern search tools.

Were you asking these questions four years ago when Harris was nominated as VP, someone who could be asked to step into the presidency at any moment? She has already been through a thorough vetting process. Anyone who has been paying attention knows exactly who she is. The notion that she's being snuck in under the radar without scrutiny is risible.

You're no lifelong Dem: your real goal here is obviously to undermine confidence in the candidate on Trump's behalf. You're about as subtle as a brick through a window.

up
Voting closed 5

I have never voted for a Republican. I’m not trying to undermine VP Harris (per se), but I am trying to express my opinion that this process is farcical.

up
Voting closed 4

I am trying to express my opinion that this process is farcica

Your comments are incoherent and filled with dogwhistles. Maybe practice your communication skills somewhere, like a notebook, where it won't be a public embarrassment.

up
Voting closed 7

It is what it is. My writing won’t soon get much better, so I’m going to have to put my ideas in this public forum warts and all.

up
Voting closed 7

My writing won’t soon get much better

Try harder. Go get a notebook and practice. This isn't your crit group.

up
Voting closed 3

Pages