A wine mom who never had biological kids. A prosecutor who barely prosecuted any cases. A politician who couldn't talk off the cuff. One tragedy after another. Imagine being Gavin - your in-laws donated to Trump and moved to Florida, your ex-wife Guilfoyle is engaged to Trump Jr., and your wife slept with Harvey Weinstein.
As a native San Franciscan, I'd actually like to know whether there's any tradition in the SF D.A.'s office of women trying felony cases as distinguished from having administrative roles created for them. A filipino girl I knew in 8th grade passed the bar and was hired into that office and ended up running what was known as the "John program." This was a series of scare-lectures that men arrested for prostitution had to sit through to have their cases diverted. Like Kamala, she was a good-looking caramel-colored gal. She was eventually laid off in a budget crunch.
Gavin's an ambitious good-looking guy who's well-positioned to be the Democrats' Token White Guy if that's what they need in 2028. Trump's term-limited, and if things don't go well for him, Gavin might take the Iron Throne...er, Oval Office. If he doesn't make it, well, he was governor of the largest state in a superpower. He's likely to get at least a line or two in the history books.
I wouldn't guess what she should or shouldn't do with her personal life as I don't know her, but she does seem perfect for some HR/administrative job where the requirements are more or less being a black belt at kissing up and kicking down and passionately regurgitating all the latest corporate-therapeutic jargon.
"Don't you ever let anybody take your power from you...." What exactly does this mean? Don't let anyone cut off my electricity? Tell me I don't know what I'm talking about? Censor me on Twitter? Erase me from the voter rolls?
Kamala does seem to have one great skill: she never speaks except in pure cliche, all her thoughts and language are as wooden as an Ikea chair and just as clumsily assembled. Whatever in the world she's best suited for, it has to require never getting anywhere near an original thought.
On Kamala's "cliche speak" and what it means (I don't think it's a "skill" so much as a reflection of a mental state most men will not easily understand or even view as possible for a non-child):
She should become president of Howard U., her alma mater, the top HBCU. Kamala would bring in huge donations from her rich friends. She's good at fundraising.
The new President of Howard is Ben Vinson III who has an academic background and will probably be more adapt at keeping Howard on a solid financial footing than Kamala would be. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Vinson_III
That does seem her main skill, besides being a reliable unthinking apparatchik, she does come from the land of the tech billionaires. I'm guessing that's also another reason why Biden picked her, along w her vagina of color, because she can haul in the loot.
Or she could stay in Brentwood, join SAG and star in a remake of "Return of the Jedi" as Princess Leia with Reid Hoffman as Jabba the Hut...a goldmine!🤣
From your first line I can tell you do not have a clue what HR is about. It is a blend of legal (labor law, employment law), finance (pension funds, 401(k) plans), Medical (healthcare plans, H&W,) Insurance (life insurance, STD, LTD,) as well as investigator and on an on. So no Harris would not be good at HR. Forty years of experience assures me I am correct.
Sadly that is the case in many companies. HR is viewed as overhead cost. With outsourcing HR the EE never has an advocate in the company to assist on issues, whether healthcare, STD, LTD, pension, etc. Obviously my time in HR colors my opinion. I view(ed) HR as an EE center and cost reduction center, eg benefit renewals if not managed can grow exponentially.
Yeah, we all remember Hillary getting drunk and disappearing, or Al Gore growing the beard. The whole world watches you get humiliated. And for an ambitious person like a politician, it's extra-rough.
Kamala's "cliche-speak" habit is because she's coasted through life using "magical thinking." She believes the cliches are incantations. She understands public-facing life to be a series of hoops that allow those who successfully jump through them to be rewarded.
Kamala has seen this magical-thinking belief of hers corroborated, for herself and others, again and again and again since she entered into consciousness of such things in the 1970s. And, she believed is applies especially (always, really) to her, to people like her. All she has to do is "a good enough job" reciting the incantations to get lesser people outside her world frame-of-reference to come around and continue rewarding her.
This is further reducible to the following:
Kamala is a solipsist, first. And probably a narcissist (a 'cliche' accusation these days, maybe). I wrote about this soon after she was crowned D-nominee:
Kamala's idea-lite (or idea-absent, principle-absent) solipsistic worldview easily fades into a belief of herself morally superior, and therefore she doesn't think through things. The criticism that she has "no ideas" are correct from non-solipsistic male frame-of-reference; the criticism is hard for someone like Kamala to even understand, and she thinks it's ogrish Mean White Men attacking her for no reason, really little demons out to undermine a (no-blasphemy-but-)godlike entity, namely, herself (that's the solipsism).
(1.) Full-blown cases of solipsistic individuals who somehow get inserted into public life -- This is a public menace, a bad sign of something wrong. Something, yes, is "wrong" with a system that produces such people and rewards them in serious ways.
(2.) Women are more solipsistic than men, on average.
If one agrees with both my preceding points (1 and 2 directly above), the rise of women in the political is ipso facto a dangerous thing. Not necessarily always-and-everywhere a bad thing, but a higher risk of producing people like this.
Our system has evolved to favor women in many respects (also a cliche point to make nowadays). This institutional feministic guiding principle serves as a multiplier of the danger. The people worried about the "feminization of society" have exactly this in mind. Kamala is the fruit of this project.
If you think about it, a male version of Kamala-as-Solipsistic-Narcissist is impossible to imagine going very far. Certainly not promoted up to nearly becoming U.S. president. (This applies also to a White version of Kamala, including even the most presentable of White-women: No way would such a person go very far, although a few can and do "slip through").
I don't know if she actually thinks that way, though I'm willing to bet it's a significant component of her actual thought processes. You'll note she could strategize her way to the VP spot pretty effectively, and had to be reasonably good at getting into other people's heads on her way up (both heads to start out).
You're being a tad uncharitable (never underestimate your enemy); telling people what they want to hear is a huge part of being a politician or bureaucrat. I don't think she's actually solipsistic so much as very skilled in finding ideological currents and running with them, which is a key skill for any party man or woman (or enby, if you're a Democrat). And yes, women are much better (on average) at figuring out what people want to hear and repeating it back to them.
I'd argue Bush Jr. was, if not a solipsist, the same sort of person who didn't really have any deep thoughts but was really good at figuring out what party elders and donors want to hear and connecting with a crowd (something Kamala had a little more trouble with). Of course, he had less personal discipline and had the advantage of being born the son of the last president. His lack of discipline and independence meant he got rolled by the neocons into launching unnecessary wars. We have a pretty good guess what President Kamala might have done, though mercifully that's not really relevant outside of a few potential alt-history novels at this point.
My comment there starting with: "Kamala 'may have never expected to get this far up in public life'..." Excerpt:
______________
is presented a situation in which she seems favored. Not only does she NOT question it, she EMBRACES it as a positive moral-good. She slips into irrational belief that any one or more artificial or unfair conditions that benefit her are natural and a positive moral-good. She then acts accordingly, and may even brag and boast of her moral-righteousness to others. She fundamentally comes to believe she is BETTER than males, than Whites (if nonwhite; or even if White, in certain highly-ideologized cases), and certainly-definitely-absolutely better that than that public-enemy class, "White-Christian Heterosexual Males." The latter class is overtly disfavored within the system. And she has come to think of this both natural and good (and by this point she is well into the territory of what some would call delusion). Magical thinking has gotten here there.
To me, that's Kamala. There are a lot of signs of this, that she's a victim in part of this particular female-pathology in the feminism era. A more-natural female-psychology would look up to men for leadership in at least certain areas (and recognize male strengths and potential-strengths); this magical-thinking phenomenon I refer to absolutely will not do that. (....)
I think they probably are pretty close. I agree she has a sense of caste and racial hierarchy; any aspirant for high office has to be pretty smart at intuiting the invisible structure of power.
Here's most of the rest of it, which I basically agree with:
"attitudes and behaviors and offhand comments by women who were overt beneficiaries of nonlevel-playing-field advantages and saying with pride that they deserve x, y, or z advantages because they are women, or nonwhite women especially, and the institution in question is hurting from having too many White-males. And the aura of belief that such a system is right and proper, morally virtuous, with no victims but only a positive-good; as if anti-White-Male-ism were the central religious teaching of a religion we all believe in and which she wants to show loyalty to (which is not far off from true). "
I think it's basically just an inversion of the old up-to-the-50s assumption that white Christian males (heterosexual would have been assumed at this point) were God's chosen. I literally think they just invert the pyramid that existed in the 50s and call it 'intersectionality', purposely ignoring the possibility that that old structure may have gone away so they can keep claiming oppression and keeping power. See, it's still not equal...so we need MORE affirmative action...
I doubt the old aristocracy anywhere doubted they were born to rule. Indeed, to do so would have been seen as weak. Woke creates a new aristocracy, so to speak, though it's showing much less impressive results than the old order.
The first 6 months or so of the Biden administration, I got the distinct impression that Kamala was backpedaling furiously from the idea of her ever being President someday. It seemed like she saw what the reality was and knew she was way over her head, she did not have the chops or ambition or drive to really do the job. And also kinda never really wanted it in the first place.
That dramatically raised my opinion of her.
We can't know what alternative life might have been for her. But she actually seems like a pretty nice person, certainly would be fun to hang out with. As a power-spouse, you are right she could be incredibly valuable. Even the dour and domineering LBJ needed lady Bird to cement friendships and alliances especially in the early days in TX politics. (And what are traditional sororities actually for, in a very major sense?)
It's very sad traditional female roles are not just discouraged but actually SCORNED today, especially for bright and talented young women. I know quite a few Wellesley alumnae (outstanding women, all, never met an alumna whom I would not marry and that includes Hillary). I remember one year in the '90's their commencement speaker was Barbara Bush W'39 (? year). The woman was First Lady and her son was President, she had a pretty fulfilling and successful life, without even considering the limited social possibilities for women of her time. Sure, that life is not the only model and it's certainly not for every woman, but she was belittled, scorned, dismissed, graduates were "insulted". Embarrassing.
Women are awful to other women when they don’t make the same choices as them. The friction between stay at home moms and “working” women is off the charts.
This is one of the things I never understood, being a man. I've never thought of criticizing a man for having kids or not having kids. Or even a woman, for that matter. What business is it of yours or mine?
Women have backed themselves into a corner, with no escape from what I see. If you aren’t burning the candle at both ends - holding down a job and raising kids- you aren’t doing everything you are capable of and you look like a slacker. This is the view of many. Women have imposed this on themselves- it isn’t men’s fault at all.
I don't know a lot about the current Mrs Newsom, but I have never seen evidence Kamala would make a good mother. Maybe she could handle it if she was able to farm out all the worst parts to a nanny, but even then I doubt it. There is a strong case she peaked at Sorority sister and it was going to be downhill from there in terms of good at what she was doing no matter what.
If she wanted a domestic life (which seems a lot more appealing to me than being president) she would have married younger. Instead she waited until she was 50.
You know, people judge politicians relative to other politicians because that's who they're around and competing against. But they're all much more ambitious and socially skilled than most people, in the same way the worst player at a lower-tier MLB team could totally make your office baseball game. She wanted power, but had to be content with what she got. Which, once the shame of losing in front of the world wears off, isn't too bad compared to the rest of the politicians in the world. Hey, you got to be VP and a presidential candidates, you're in the US history books. How many San Francisco DA's can say that?
It’s a common issue nowadays because we were all told to wait and focus on fun and career in our twenties; by the time we hit 35 most of the good men were taken and the others were Peter Pan types or bitter with children. It became exponentially more difficult after that. There’s a lot of this situation now, I hope young women see it and make different choices.
Well that's the other notably odd thing about her: she can't dress, probably because she's too imperious to have a style consultant who can get her in some tailored clothing.
Every smart person knows that Harris is not very smart. She has no ability to discuss and explain complex issues. I am simply amazed that the Democratic Party (my party) has ever supported her for political office at any level. She would have made a disastrous president. Trump, of course, is equally incompetent.
You're "amazed?" The Party platform is literally stand there-have tits-and-be black. It hasn't been the party of Patrick Moynihan or Adlai Stevenson in at least four decades.
Most politicians can't. There aren't a lot of Daniel Patrick Moynihans (or JD Vances) out there. Look at the way Blake Masters bombed. The intensely anti-intellectual nature of the American people means you have to hide that sort of thing pretty well--it's more about looking good on TV (this may change to YouTube), getting rich people to like you so you raise money. and then getting the people to like you in an election. It's more of a social alignment game than the sort of understanding-principles game commenters on conservative blogs like. Ike wasn't dumb, but he played dumb awful well.
Bush Jr. wasn't a deep thinker, and was kind of lazy. That's part of why he got rolled by the neocons, I think. But there are some definite similarities. Nobody sees them because they're opposite parties and it's totally heretical to think about it too much on either side.
The fact that someone at the DNC put this video out shows that Kamala was done dirty by her party; she sounds like Eddie Murphy doing an impression of his stepfather
Come on, you think she wants to spend her days arguing with the left-wing version of us finding something she said in 2024 that's offensive to lefties in 2034? Lady's going to run around headlining 'Women in X' events for the rest of her days, going for drinks and travelling and in general enjoying the life of a wealthy woman in the autumn of one of the world's great global empires.
A wine mom who never had biological kids. A prosecutor who barely prosecuted any cases. A politician who couldn't talk off the cuff. One tragedy after another. Imagine being Gavin - your in-laws donated to Trump and moved to Florida, your ex-wife Guilfoyle is engaged to Trump Jr., and your wife slept with Harvey Weinstein.
"Where's Dougie? He is the new model for masculinity. Fetch me my wine." - Kamala starring as Hitler in Downfall: https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/downfall-kamala-2024-election
As a native San Franciscan, I'd actually like to know whether there's any tradition in the SF D.A.'s office of women trying felony cases as distinguished from having administrative roles created for them. A filipino girl I knew in 8th grade passed the bar and was hired into that office and ended up running what was known as the "John program." This was a series of scare-lectures that men arrested for prostitution had to sit through to have their cases diverted. Like Kamala, she was a good-looking caramel-colored gal. She was eventually laid off in a budget crunch.
Gavin's an ambitious good-looking guy who's well-positioned to be the Democrats' Token White Guy if that's what they need in 2028. Trump's term-limited, and if things don't go well for him, Gavin might take the Iron Throne...er, Oval Office. If he doesn't make it, well, he was governor of the largest state in a superpower. He's likely to get at least a line or two in the history books.
Kamala looks like she aged 10 years
The bottle will do that
I wouldn't guess what she should or shouldn't do with her personal life as I don't know her, but she does seem perfect for some HR/administrative job where the requirements are more or less being a black belt at kissing up and kicking down and passionately regurgitating all the latest corporate-therapeutic jargon.
"Don't you ever let anybody take your power from you...." What exactly does this mean? Don't let anyone cut off my electricity? Tell me I don't know what I'm talking about? Censor me on Twitter? Erase me from the voter rolls?
Kamala does seem to have one great skill: she never speaks except in pure cliche, all her thoughts and language are as wooden as an Ikea chair and just as clumsily assembled. Whatever in the world she's best suited for, it has to require never getting anywhere near an original thought.
On Kamala's "cliche speak" and what it means (I don't think it's a "skill" so much as a reflection of a mental state most men will not easily understand or even view as possible for a non-child):
https://www.stevesailer.net/p/an-alternative-timeline-for-kamala/comment/79032832
She should become president of Howard U., her alma mater, the top HBCU. Kamala would bring in huge donations from her rich friends. She's good at fundraising.
What is the probability Kamala indeed does get appointed president of Howard University? In the 2020s?
The new President of Howard is Ben Vinson III who has an academic background and will probably be more adapt at keeping Howard on a solid financial footing than Kamala would be. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Vinson_III
That does seem her main skill, besides being a reliable unthinking apparatchik, she does come from the land of the tech billionaires. I'm guessing that's also another reason why Biden picked her, along w her vagina of color, because she can haul in the loot.
Or she could stay in Brentwood, join SAG and star in a remake of "Return of the Jedi" as Princess Leia with Reid Hoffman as Jabba the Hut...a goldmine!🤣
But is she good at running a household? She doesn’t seem like the domestic type to me.
She's even better at spending, amirite?
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5009393-kamala-harris-disqualified-by-campaign-overspending-mega-donor-john-morgan/
I couldn’t figure out what she meant either.
From your first line I can tell you do not have a clue what HR is about. It is a blend of legal (labor law, employment law), finance (pension funds, 401(k) plans), Medical (healthcare plans, H&W,) Insurance (life insurance, STD, LTD,) as well as investigator and on an on. So no Harris would not be good at HR. Forty years of experience assures me I am correct.
Last few places I worked (medium-sized Silicon Valley software companies) it seemed like almost all our HR was outsourced to "the cloud".
Sadly that is the case in many companies. HR is viewed as overhead cost. With outsourcing HR the EE never has an advocate in the company to assist on issues, whether healthcare, STD, LTD, pension, etc. Obviously my time in HR colors my opinion. I view(ed) HR as an EE center and cost reduction center, eg benefit renewals if not managed can grow exponentially.
She is clearly talking to herself. Running for the presidency and losing is a very traumatic life event.
Yeah, we all remember Hillary getting drunk and disappearing, or Al Gore growing the beard. The whole world watches you get humiliated. And for an ambitious person like a politician, it's extra-rough.
She's clearly a bad drunk or on pills
Kamala's "cliche-speak" habit is because she's coasted through life using "magical thinking." She believes the cliches are incantations. She understands public-facing life to be a series of hoops that allow those who successfully jump through them to be rewarded.
Kamala has seen this magical-thinking belief of hers corroborated, for herself and others, again and again and again since she entered into consciousness of such things in the 1970s. And, she believed is applies especially (always, really) to her, to people like her. All she has to do is "a good enough job" reciting the incantations to get lesser people outside her world frame-of-reference to come around and continue rewarding her.
This is further reducible to the following:
Kamala is a solipsist, first. And probably a narcissist (a 'cliche' accusation these days, maybe). I wrote about this soon after she was crowned D-nominee:
https://hailtoyou.wordpress.com/2024/08/04/kamala-harris-and-female-solipsistic-narcissism-in-the-political-in-21st-century-usa/
https://hailtoyou.wordpress.com/2024/07/22/the-democratic-party-as-apparatus-and-as-regime-party-a-reflection-on-how-power-works-in-the-usa-one-day-after-the-anti-biden-palace-coup-succeeds/
Kamala's idea-lite (or idea-absent, principle-absent) solipsistic worldview easily fades into a belief of herself morally superior, and therefore she doesn't think through things. The criticism that she has "no ideas" are correct from non-solipsistic male frame-of-reference; the criticism is hard for someone like Kamala to even understand, and she thinks it's ogrish Mean White Men attacking her for no reason, really little demons out to undermine a (no-blasphemy-but-)godlike entity, namely, herself (that's the solipsism).
(1.) Full-blown cases of solipsistic individuals who somehow get inserted into public life -- This is a public menace, a bad sign of something wrong. Something, yes, is "wrong" with a system that produces such people and rewards them in serious ways.
(2.) Women are more solipsistic than men, on average.
If one agrees with both my preceding points (1 and 2 directly above), the rise of women in the political is ipso facto a dangerous thing. Not necessarily always-and-everywhere a bad thing, but a higher risk of producing people like this.
Our system has evolved to favor women in many respects (also a cliche point to make nowadays). This institutional feministic guiding principle serves as a multiplier of the danger. The people worried about the "feminization of society" have exactly this in mind. Kamala is the fruit of this project.
If you think about it, a male version of Kamala-as-Solipsistic-Narcissist is impossible to imagine going very far. Certainly not promoted up to nearly becoming U.S. president. (This applies also to a White version of Kamala, including even the most presentable of White-women: No way would such a person go very far, although a few can and do "slip through").
I don't know if she actually thinks that way, though I'm willing to bet it's a significant component of her actual thought processes. You'll note she could strategize her way to the VP spot pretty effectively, and had to be reasonably good at getting into other people's heads on her way up (both heads to start out).
You're being a tad uncharitable (never underestimate your enemy); telling people what they want to hear is a huge part of being a politician or bureaucrat. I don't think she's actually solipsistic so much as very skilled in finding ideological currents and running with them, which is a key skill for any party man or woman (or enby, if you're a Democrat). And yes, women are much better (on average) at figuring out what people want to hear and repeating it back to them.
I'd argue Bush Jr. was, if not a solipsist, the same sort of person who didn't really have any deep thoughts but was really good at figuring out what party elders and donors want to hear and connecting with a crowd (something Kamala had a little more trouble with). Of course, he had less personal discipline and had the advantage of being born the son of the last president. His lack of discipline and independence meant he got rolled by the neocons into launching unnecessary wars. We have a pretty good guess what President Kamala might have done, though mercifully that's not really relevant outside of a few potential alt-history novels at this point.
I think our positions may be very close, AD.
There is a difference between tactical manipulation (or manipulativeness) and baseline outlook via psychological motivation and world-formation.
See also:
https://peakstupidity.com/index.php?post=3074
My comment there starting with: "Kamala 'may have never expected to get this far up in public life'..." Excerpt:
______________
is presented a situation in which she seems favored. Not only does she NOT question it, she EMBRACES it as a positive moral-good. She slips into irrational belief that any one or more artificial or unfair conditions that benefit her are natural and a positive moral-good. She then acts accordingly, and may even brag and boast of her moral-righteousness to others. She fundamentally comes to believe she is BETTER than males, than Whites (if nonwhite; or even if White, in certain highly-ideologized cases), and certainly-definitely-absolutely better that than that public-enemy class, "White-Christian Heterosexual Males." The latter class is overtly disfavored within the system. And she has come to think of this both natural and good (and by this point she is well into the territory of what some would call delusion). Magical thinking has gotten here there.
To me, that's Kamala. There are a lot of signs of this, that she's a victim in part of this particular female-pathology in the feminism era. A more-natural female-psychology would look up to men for leadership in at least certain areas (and recognize male strengths and potential-strengths); this magical-thinking phenomenon I refer to absolutely will not do that. (....)
___________
I think they probably are pretty close. I agree she has a sense of caste and racial hierarchy; any aspirant for high office has to be pretty smart at intuiting the invisible structure of power.
Here's most of the rest of it, which I basically agree with:
"attitudes and behaviors and offhand comments by women who were overt beneficiaries of nonlevel-playing-field advantages and saying with pride that they deserve x, y, or z advantages because they are women, or nonwhite women especially, and the institution in question is hurting from having too many White-males. And the aura of belief that such a system is right and proper, morally virtuous, with no victims but only a positive-good; as if anti-White-Male-ism were the central religious teaching of a religion we all believe in and which she wants to show loyalty to (which is not far off from true). "
I think it's basically just an inversion of the old up-to-the-50s assumption that white Christian males (heterosexual would have been assumed at this point) were God's chosen. I literally think they just invert the pyramid that existed in the 50s and call it 'intersectionality', purposely ignoring the possibility that that old structure may have gone away so they can keep claiming oppression and keeping power. See, it's still not equal...so we need MORE affirmative action...
I doubt the old aristocracy anywhere doubted they were born to rule. Indeed, to do so would have been seen as weak. Woke creates a new aristocracy, so to speak, though it's showing much less impressive results than the old order.
Steve, I totally agree with you on this one.
The first 6 months or so of the Biden administration, I got the distinct impression that Kamala was backpedaling furiously from the idea of her ever being President someday. It seemed like she saw what the reality was and knew she was way over her head, she did not have the chops or ambition or drive to really do the job. And also kinda never really wanted it in the first place.
That dramatically raised my opinion of her.
We can't know what alternative life might have been for her. But she actually seems like a pretty nice person, certainly would be fun to hang out with. As a power-spouse, you are right she could be incredibly valuable. Even the dour and domineering LBJ needed lady Bird to cement friendships and alliances especially in the early days in TX politics. (And what are traditional sororities actually for, in a very major sense?)
It's very sad traditional female roles are not just discouraged but actually SCORNED today, especially for bright and talented young women. I know quite a few Wellesley alumnae (outstanding women, all, never met an alumna whom I would not marry and that includes Hillary). I remember one year in the '90's their commencement speaker was Barbara Bush W'39 (? year). The woman was First Lady and her son was President, she had a pretty fulfilling and successful life, without even considering the limited social possibilities for women of her time. Sure, that life is not the only model and it's certainly not for every woman, but she was belittled, scorned, dismissed, graduates were "insulted". Embarrassing.
Women are awful to other women when they don’t make the same choices as them. The friction between stay at home moms and “working” women is off the charts.
This is one of the things I never understood, being a man. I've never thought of criticizing a man for having kids or not having kids. Or even a woman, for that matter. What business is it of yours or mine?
Women have backed themselves into a corner, with no escape from what I see. If you aren’t burning the candle at both ends - holding down a job and raising kids- you aren’t doing everything you are capable of and you look like a slacker. This is the view of many. Women have imposed this on themselves- it isn’t men’s fault at all.
My brother is like that after his psych meds kick in.
I don't know a lot about the current Mrs Newsom, but I have never seen evidence Kamala would make a good mother. Maybe she could handle it if she was able to farm out all the worst parts to a nanny, but even then I doubt it. There is a strong case she peaked at Sorority sister and it was going to be downhill from there in terms of good at what she was doing no matter what.
If she wanted a domestic life (which seems a lot more appealing to me than being president) she would have married younger. Instead she waited until she was 50.
You know, people judge politicians relative to other politicians because that's who they're around and competing against. But they're all much more ambitious and socially skilled than most people, in the same way the worst player at a lower-tier MLB team could totally make your office baseball game. She wanted power, but had to be content with what she got. Which, once the shame of losing in front of the world wears off, isn't too bad compared to the rest of the politicians in the world. Hey, you got to be VP and a presidential candidates, you're in the US history books. How many San Francisco DA's can say that?
It’s a common issue nowadays because we were all told to wait and focus on fun and career in our twenties; by the time we hit 35 most of the good men were taken and the others were Peter Pan types or bitter with children. It became exponentially more difficult after that. There’s a lot of this situation now, I hope young women see it and make different choices.
Don't wear brown in town
Well that's the other notably odd thing about her: she can't dress, probably because she's too imperious to have a style consultant who can get her in some tailored clothing.
I've never heard that locution "snob out on." Is that peculiar to the South?
I'm from the South and am not familiar with that expression.
Every smart person knows that Harris is not very smart. She has no ability to discuss and explain complex issues. I am simply amazed that the Democratic Party (my party) has ever supported her for political office at any level. She would have made a disastrous president. Trump, of course, is equally incompetent.
You're "amazed?" The Party platform is literally stand there-have tits-and-be black. It hasn't been the party of Patrick Moynihan or Adlai Stevenson in at least four decades.
Anti: The Clintons, and Obama couldn’t talk? Come on. She is uniquely inarticulate in recent times.
Most politicians can't. There aren't a lot of Daniel Patrick Moynihans (or JD Vances) out there. Look at the way Blake Masters bombed. The intensely anti-intellectual nature of the American people means you have to hide that sort of thing pretty well--it's more about looking good on TV (this may change to YouTube), getting rich people to like you so you raise money. and then getting the people to like you in an election. It's more of a social alignment game than the sort of understanding-principles game commenters on conservative blogs like. Ike wasn't dumb, but he played dumb awful well.
Bush Jr. wasn't a deep thinker, and was kind of lazy. That's part of why he got rolled by the neocons, I think. But there are some definite similarities. Nobody sees them because they're opposite parties and it's totally heretical to think about it too much on either side.
The fact that someone at the DNC put this video out shows that Kamala was done dirty by her party; she sounds like Eddie Murphy doing an impression of his stepfather
Or, she's just incredibly solipsistic and shallow, and makes poor decisions all on her own.
Come on, man! We all know where Ms. Harris is gonna end up -- where we all do. SUBSTACK!
Come on, you think she wants to spend her days arguing with the left-wing version of us finding something she said in 2024 that's offensive to lefties in 2034? Lady's going to run around headlining 'Women in X' events for the rest of her days, going for drinks and travelling and in general enjoying the life of a wealthy woman in the autumn of one of the world's great global empires.
Drunks gonna drunk.