posted by gut

I think it will come down to the debates, as it seems Kamala is trying to hide behind a Hollywood-produced campaign.

If in the debates the old, awkward and fake Kamala shows up, Trump will win.  If she manages to be somewhat likeable or relatable, or more likely Trump does Trump, then she'll win.

Think how remarkable this all is.  3-4 months ago people were talking about replacing Kamala on the ticket because she was so unpopular.  And Biden was "brilliant behind closed doors".  Now Kamala slides into the top of the ticket without a single primary vote, ever, and has suddenly become a "historical & transformative" candidate.  The media is unbelievably corrupt.

Well, I think the media liked Kamala more than anyone else. She couldn't even really make it to Iowa. People still remember how Tulsi wiped the floor with her and she had no real explanation or defense other than saying she was proud of what she did - keeping peopled jailed after their release date because it would mess up the prison system work force and then keeping people in death row even after courts instructed her to release them. The far left are now laying into her now that they've somewhat satiated themselves on Walz. She's really pissed them off with her "I'm speaking!" moment. Not sure how good that was to do in Michigan. 

She is also going into the convention which is in Chicago, which also happens to have the largest population of Palestinians in the US. I'm interested in seeing if she will repeat that moment again. Because there will be protesters there and she should have a better response prepared by then.

posted by Ironman92

Democracy baby

Indeed!

Anybody else having problems with the site or is it my cell service again?

posted by CenterBHSFan

Anybody else having problems with the site or is it my cell service again?

Its in and out this am

posted by Laley23

Its in and out this am

Ok, thanks! Justin must be tinkering again.

News is spreading about Tulsi:

No taxes on tips. I support it, actually. I think it's a good start on giving tax breaks to the working poor. I would support that idea to the whole working class. Let Congress figure out how they can reconfigure their spending habits - because they've ceded their jobs to lobbyists and big donors for far too long. 

It's also interesting and funny for Kamala to adopt this idea, along with now saying she wants to be tough on the border. 

Taxes aren't tipped now, when paid in cash anyway!

posted by Laley23

Taxes aren't tipped now, when paid in cash anyway!

Well, even before the wide usage of credit/debit cards waitresses had to allocate 15% for taxes. And they could be audited through receipts. 

posted by Laley23

Taxes aren't tipped now, when paid in cash anyway!

Ehh it depends. When I was a bartender and server you could always get away with not claiming some cash tips but you always had to claim some.  A lot of places have different rules in place but I know the place I was at the longest required you to claim at least 10% of your sales as your tipped amount. Then if you were serving you paid payed 3% of sales to the bartender as their tip share. So really it just depends what percentage of your tips were cash and what percentage were credit cards. 

Now another downside to not claiming those tips was benefits like social  security and things like that which depend on your income. 

I also knew servers claimed everything because they were wanting to buy a house in the next couple years and needed to have their income high enough to get approved for loans. 

posted by CenterBHSFan

Nancy Pelosi out there spilling the beans! Saying she was never impressed by Biden's political operation.

For her to be that open about that right now (read as 'already') gives me reason to think that the Dems are just that confident to win. I'm confident that they will too.

Yeah, she went old school, pre 1970 to get Biden to step down. 

I don't think there was anything wrong or illegal about what the democrats did. I do agree the DNC played favorites in moving the primary locations and dates.

But, Biden was the incumbent President and rarely does an incumbent President get a primary challenge. We have to go back to 1980 and Ted Kennedy challenging Carter. Regan before that in 76 with Ford. 

Every other incumbent President has not been challenged seriously. Trump wasn't in 20 for example.

Also, there is nothing in the Constitution that says what the Dems did were wrong. Political parties have only recently been having primary elections.

Before that it was the party elites that chose the candidates. 

Pelosi also made her move before the DNC, before legally the party can adopt a nominee. So, she went old school like the dems did to Truman in 1952, to say, step down, you have no support.

Pelosi, like McConnell, in the Senate, is a ruthless political operative. She figured Biden had to step aside if they were to have any chance. 

I do think the debates will play a huge role as Kamala is just introducing herself to most of America.

I think it is a toss up still. All of the swing states are within the margin of error. Things could easily change in a month. Hell, just in three weeks, Trump was shot, had the great RNC, Biden dropped out, and Kamala assumed the role.

A lot can happen in another month that could change the race again. 

Kamala is probably the favorite to win, but it's likely only a slight one, probably just over 50% change of winning. Or, to put it in betting terms, probably-115 money line. 

posted by ptown_trojans_1

Yeah, she went old school, pre 1970 to get Biden to step down. 

I don't think there was anything wrong or illegal about what the democrats did. I do agree the DNC played favorites in moving the primary locations and dates.

But, Biden was the incumbent President and rarely does an incumbent President get a primary challenge. We have to go back to 1980 and Ted Kennedy challenging Carter. Regan before that in 76 with Ford. 

Every other incumbent President has not been challenged seriously. Trump wasn't in 20 for example.

Also, there is nothing in the Constitution that says what the Dems did were wrong. Political parties have only recently been having primary elections.

Before that it was the party elites that chose the candidates. 

Pelosi also made her move before the DNC, before legally the party can adopt a nominee. So, she went old school like the dems did to Truman in 1952, to say, step down, you have no support.

Pelosi, like McConnell, in the Senate, is a ruthless political operative. She figured Biden had to step aside if they were to have any chance. 

So you would agree with the idea that the Dems should stop belting out "save our democracy!", considering:

- your agreeing that they pick favorites by not letting a democratic process play out ie: Bernie 

- they have worked, and are working, to imprison and bankrupt their political opponents

- have coordinated a massive effort to remove a political opponents name from the ballot

posted by CenterBHSFan

So you would agree with the idea that the Dems should stop belting out "save our democracy!", considering:

- your agreeing that they pick favorites by not letting a democratic process play out ie: Bernie 

- they have worked, and are working, to imprison and bankrupt their political opponents

- have coordinated a massive effort to remove a political opponents name from the ballot

No, not at all. In fact, they went old school, but still within the confines of the primary process historically. 

I do agree that the DNC moving the calendar around from Iowa to South Carolina was a payback as Biden won South Carolina back in 20. But, the Iowa caucas was a disaster and they deserved to lose it. 

Bernie wasn't running this year, and Biden didn't have a real primary challenge, because he is the incumbent President, and they usually don't. As I said, only 2 recently have had real challenges, Carter in 80 and Ford in 76. 

But, what they are doing has been done before,  just not in the last 50 years. It's like what they did to Truman in 1952 as I said. 

I don't agree with your last two points as well.

It’s apparently not that difficult to determine if pictures/videos have been manipulated with AI, but that didn’t stop Trump from falsely saying it happened anyways.

Who is Regan?

posted by Ironman92

Who is Regan?

Ronald Reagan. Sorry, misspelling.

Reagan in 1976 nearly took the nomination away from Gerald Ford. It's the closest someone has came to knocking out an incumbent President in the primary. 

posted by friendfromlowry

It’s apparently not that difficult to determine if pictures/videos have been manipulated with AI, but that didn’t stop Trump from falsely saying it happened anyways.

I don't know about AI, but the Harris campaign briefly used an edited recording of a phone call between Trump and Walz. 

I listened to about 15 minutes of the Elon Musk and Trump interview and I think Trump has dentures. Because he was talking and sounded like he didn't have them in. I listened to them talking about the shooting and then had to stop because I loath hearing that lol!

@ptown, the Bernie reference I made was about what the Dems did in the 2016 primary.

The Dems have been mucking around for a while now.

posted by CenterBHSFan

@ptown, the Bernie reference I made was about what the Dems did in the 2016 primary.

The Dems have been mucking around for a while now.

Sure. Bernie supporters will claim that in 2016. But, the party rallied around Clinton and did not want a brokered convention. They did not want a replay of the Republicans in 76. 

It is just like the RNC in 2016 with Cruz. He did not fall in line and said to vote your conscience. 

I completely disagree with your whole premise as the parties are operating as they always have, both of them. 

Historically, this is how the two party system operates. 

posted by ptown_trojans_1

I don't agree with your last two points as well.

Why?

posted by ptown_trojans_1

Sure. Bernie supporters will claim that in 2016. But, the party rallied around Clinton and did not want a brokered convention. They did not want a replay of the Republicans in 76. 

If you recall this issue went to court, with the judge ruling that the DNC didn't have to follow its own charter.

So the party rallied around Clinton, AFTER they bent Bernie.

I'm not a Bernie fan and never would have voted for him. But there were a shit ton of people who would have. And he was beating Hillary. But it should have been the choice of the people, not the manipulators of the party. And the Dems really need to straighten up and put forward some good faith actions if they really want to buff out some of the tarnish. 

NY kicking RFKjr off the ballot because he doesn't have a real residency there, needed to have petitions, and that the bedroom he was renting there wasn't big enough to keep all the people he needed for his campaign.

Edit to add: it was Dems that brought the lawsuit.

https://apnews.com/article/kennedy-rfk-jr-ballot-new-york-residency-faaf0c8d7638cdfcdbe3c4eb7b542eef

posted by ptown_trojans_1

Agree with all of that. It is insanely popular now. It was during the Trump years too, which is why the Republicans could never kill it. 

I'd still say too the pros of NAFTA far outweigh the bad, given the growth of the US economy the last 30 years. 

It's not and never was 'insanely popular', unless you consider effectively forcing people into spending 2-3x more and accepting the related lies about keeping your doctors etc.. a good thing. 

The devastating effects of ill-conceived trade agreements, NAFTA among them, along with the predatory regulation/administrative state, are plain to see.  Turning back those idiotic policies and correcting our tax rates led to the beginning of the reshoring of manufacturing here during the Trump years.  Capital will always flow to where it is best treated.

posted by Laley23

Taxes aren't tipped now, when paid in cash anyway!

They absolutely are required by law when I waited tables.

No one did it though…..