Posted on 06/05/2025 4:24:13 AM PDT by PJ-Comix
On Sunday, Politico published a story titled "2 states, 1 tepid view of Kamala Harris and her political future." A much more accurate title of the story by Melanie Mason and Brakkton Booker would be "2 states, 2 tepid views of Kamala Harris and her political future."
Although Mason and Booker tossed cold water on the idea of Harris running for president again via the South Carolina primary they were also much less than enthusiastic about her running for governor of California. If they didn't quite toss cold water on that campaign they seemed to throw much less than even lukewarm water on it.
The very first paragraph of the story sure gives off strong "meh!" vibes over Harris' political future whether by the South Carolina or California route.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Kamala Harris- now of less stature and consequence than Dan Quayle.
That cartridge is spent and already ejected. Now firing blanks.
Foolishness. Why bother reposting it?
In politics there is red and blue. There are also “Demonrats” and “Rethuglicans”.
But the most important categorization in politics is “winners” and “losers”.
If you believe in elections (and, I mean, “believe” as in, yes, they actually exist) then there are no second chances for big losers.
HRC was never getting another shot. I don’t know a single committed Democrat who ever took that idea seriously. Kamala Harris is version 2.0 of the same thing. Have a beer with a Democrat, mention “a lot of people think Kamala deserves a second chance”, and watch them turn pale.
Until this last election it seemed that once someone got their party’s nomination but lost the general election they were considered over. Trump was an exception because of the common perception that he had not actually lost in 2020.
“Have a beer with a Democrat”???? That is clearly beyond reason!
IF ONLY she had the money and resources to run an effective campaign. They just need to have more fund raisers and celebrity endorsements.
Is Booker related to Cory?
She needs to pursue her “political future” in one of her three homes. Jamaica, India or Canaduh! We’ve got too many foreign freeloaders here already. She can take her Haitian dwarf and her books with her.
It’s gonna have to be a Bud Light.
She’s delusional if she thinks she can be president. So is pete b, gayle king, hillary, moooochelle and stacy abrams.
Kamala is too big of an empty headed doofus to ever have another chance politically. No one wants to listen to her cackle.
Kamala blew through 2 billion dollars and didn’t move the needle. Who is gonna fund her a second time?
“”Harris running for president again via the South Carolina primary they were also much less than enthusiastic about her running for governor of California””
We’d all like to see her “running”, wouldn’t we? Right out of the country!!
She’s a pig. She’s the only person who does not admit that fact.
You are reminding me of an incident I had with a relative after Kamala was chosen as the nominee by the Democrat Politboro.
I never discuss politics with him.
He brought it up with this legendary quote “everything is going to be ok now—we have Kamala”.
His stupidity is limitless—so I wonder if he learned his lesson.
She’s got a D after her name. California Governor material.
Seriously, the potential tor fraud dragging Kamala across the finish line was concerning, but how can anyone think that she ought to win, or was up to the job?
“Demonrats and Rethuglicans”.
I just threw both parties in a blender and came up with REPUGLICRATS.
Both parties are REPUGNANT!
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.