Posted on 09/27/2024 5:25:39 AM PDT by Lockbox
How did Vice President Kamala Harris get to where she is?
She literally slept (being nice) with a married man to get in the political game!
This just begs the question. Why do women support Kamala?
Is this the method other women used to get ahead?
Do they want their daughters to also be forced to use this method to advance?
Do women what men to assume that they slept their way to the position they hold, since they support a candidate who used that method?
Since the libs paint Trump as a Nazi and all his supporters as Nazi supporters, it makes sense that since Kamala slept her way to the VP job, all her supporters also support and use that method.
Too late. Given over. Gone bad, not going back without true conviction.
No Real daddy.
...”you think this grabs the female voters then great, but I don’t think we will see that result.”
We’ll see when these illegals start grabbing them.
Yes, “Timshel”
I respect your opinion on this, ansel12, but to me, this has nothing to do with, no parallel with Clinton and Lewinsky, so I would agree that is not a worthwhile approach.
Lewinsky was just a pawn being taken advantage of by a powerful man, she wasn’t interested in getting into higher office. She was the political equivalent of a groupie. A sad affair, IMO. But she was a grown woman, and should have known the waters she was wading into.
I see Harris quite differently in this context. She absolutely knew the waters she was wading into.
Interesting reference there. I was ignorant of it, having never read “East of Eden” and I had to look it up. In light of my post just above, that is a difference, I think.
I will put East of Eden in my reading list.
Remember what matters, do the republican men help win female votes by focusing on this, or does it turn off female voters for republican men to keep harping on this, or is it a draw and mean that republican men are wasting valuable time on it when there are better appeals to the female voter, which still makes it a negative.
I don’t see much chance of this being a winning thing to keep harping on.
If you want to act out, yeah, but that will win exactly zero votes. It may even lose a few.
Hopefully, enough to ponder their group consequences,
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/sep/27/15000-killers-20000-sexual-assault-convicts-60000-/
i.e. “all in together” “I’m not like her”
Solipsism
Yes, Steinbeck, extremely relevant. No “victim”
Consequences. Boundaries. IDENTITY.
If someone:
And so on.
If someone is not offended by those things, but IS offended by someone who takes exception to a sleazy whore of a woman getting on her knees between the legs of a married man in order to advance her career, and having US pay for her to do that, well...
I just cannot care less about that person, their vote, or anything else about them.
They don't exist to me. See my tagline.
I am in no way going to pander to accomplices in the destruction of a country that has given so many of us the fruits of a fulfilling life that billions of people don't have, and I am not talking about a 65" flat panel television or a BMW.
....”Virtue, we think we learn, because we are told about it. But sin is our own designing.
John Steinbeck”, East of Eden
Consequences
Boundaries
Identity
Life-Death
Sowing-Reaping
Identity 💎
Pandering doesn’t fit here, no one is talking about embracing a position, it is about wasting time on a message that doesn’t work and replacing it with one that will work better.
Every campaign struggles to find the issues that interest the voters enough to persuade them to vote for them, and when a message doesn’t resonate they try a different one.
Every vote counts, and voting determines who is in office and who you are governed by, if you ignore how people vote then don’t be surprised by who wins the elections.
I think you're hopelessly naive about how she got where she is.
If you would read the thread you would know that is inaccurate.
You and I see this differently, and there is nothing more to be said on it.
I wonder if we are both talking about the political usefulness of it in getting us into the White House and winning the down ticket races and state elections and getting the next couple of Supreme Court appointments.
I've read the thread. You can classify it as a "real affair" all you like. Yes, she wasn't so skanky a la blewinsky that Willie Brown didn't want to be seen in public with her. But c'mon. We all know what her appeal to Willie Brown was - and what his appeal to her was. It had nothing to do with anything but what everybody thinks....that it was a slutty woman looking to sleep her way to the top and a powerful man taking the opportunity to bang a 20-something when he was in his 60s.
I would be careful in this dialog about who forces who.
And you talk about it as if it going to be cure, getting someone into office with the right alphabetical character in parenthesis after their their name. Some people think we should keep compromising on things to get those kinds of people into office.
We say all these things to each other, and to our candidates:
Don't talk about abortion. It is a losing issue.
Don't talk about homosexual or transgender issues.
Don't pick on corrupt politicians like Biden, it turns people off.
Don't talk about illegal immigration. It makes us sound harsh and they won't vote for us.
All so we can get "someone" into office. But we can't talk about that either, the corruption of the voting process. That makes us sound unreasonable and we'll drive people away.
Seems to me that is what got us to this point in time in the history of this country, the kicking of the can of societal problems down the four-year road, accepting that it is more important to get the right character in parenthesis after their name into office.
We think "We'll get it fixed this time." Yeah. We will, if they actually allow it, which they won't.
Did you notice they just threw the election primary system out the window and nobody said "boo" about it? You think that isn't a precedent? How long will it be before both parties dispense with the now Kabuki Dance of primary elections, and just choose our candidates who we will be allowed to vote for?
And while we discuss these genteel things, what shouldn't we say, and to whom, in order to avoid alienating them, our enemies, both foreign and domestic just lie outright with purpose, say they are for closing the border to precious "undecideds" while they have both hands firmly on the spigot to keep the border open, and have people like Marc Elias ensuring our election process is so corrupt with one hand while their other hand assures us the election will be a fair one.
And they have (and will} use the full power of the government to silence anyone who disagrees with them that elections are free and fair, all in the name of "protecting democracy".
Our government sounds more and more like a Communist Five-Year Plan with each passing election, continuing resolutions now the legislative and bugetary process combined.
Change is what is needed, not getting someone into the White House with the right character in parenthesis after their name.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.