Re: [OT] What's next for Kamala Harris?

On 11/15/2024 10:59 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

On Nov 15, 2024 at 7:28:53 PM PST, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

On 11/15/2024 8:32 PM, Rhino wrote:

  On 2024-11-15 8:11 PM, shawn wrote:

  Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

  On 2024-11-15 6:15 PM, shawn wrote:

  moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

  On 11/15/2024 5:00 PM, Rhino wrote:

  On 2024-11-15 4:07 PM, moviePig wrote:

  On 11/15/2024 3:59 PM, Rhino wrote:

 Has anyone heard anything about what Harris is going to be
 doing after January 20, 2025?
>
 She's going to be out of a job. I know her husband is a
 successful lawyer so I'm sure they're not going to be homeless
 but I can't see her retiring either. That would be too much
 like an admission of failure or irrelevance.
>
 One commentator raised the possibility of her running AGAIN in
 2028 but that seems improbable in the extreme. She'd need a
 makeover of a lifetime to make her a viable candidate or even
 just a likeable non-viable candidate.
>
 I've heard that both MSNBC and CNN are for sale - or at least
 implementing severe salary cutbacks - so that lessens her chance
 of getting a lucrative gig there as a host or co-host. Besides,
 those would be something of a step down in status from having
 been VP and a presidential candidate of a major party. But
 maybe she'd swallow her pride and take a gig at ABC, CBS or NBC.
>
 I'm going to be VERY surprised if she doesn't get a book deal
 of some kind for her memoirs. I'm going to be astonished if it
 sells a lot of copies.
>
 I'm thinking the ideal job for her would be to be the host of a
 series of educational videos for elementary school age children.
 She is a master of talking to everyone as if they are 4 years
 old but she couldn't possibly teach at any level because she
 can't think on her feet or adapt to changing situations, which
 are common in teaching, so giving her hosting duties where every
 word is scripted would seem right up her alley.
>
 Failing that, maybe her old McDonalds could give her some
 shifts?

>
  Part of the reason Harris lost is that she's not interesting
  enough to warrant even this sort of grave-dancing, much less
  a book or TV slot.

>
A bit of sour grapes? You guys chose her! Maybe you should pick
your next candidate with criteria other than skin colour and
gender....

>
'Sour grapes'?  I think the applicable vernacular is 'dead
horse'...

>
Given the situation I'm not sure who would have been a better
candidate. There wasn't time for the full on campaign that one
would normally have if an incumbent isn't running. So falling back
to the VP seems an obvious choice. It's not to do with her skin
color or gender but her position as being the closest to the
President.

>
 It's been well-established that the only reason she was the VP is her
 gender and skin colour: competence didn't figure into it all
 apparently.
>
 For the record, I feel strongly that she did NOT lose because of her
  gender and skin colour: not by a long shot. I think she might well

  won handily if she'd demonstrated any competence as VP, let alone

  Presidential candidate. But her unwillingness - or inability - to

  any of the questions put to her along with her inability to

  policies or even specify anything she would do different to Biden

  a LOT of people on her, people who would normally have voted for her
  party. Add in the ludicrous demonization of Trump as a fascist and

  embodiment of Hitler and you've got more than enough to turn off a

  of potential voters for the Democrats.

>
  The only calling Trump Hitler was J.D. Vance. So that should have
  turned off the Republicans if they really didn't want someone calling
  Trump Hitler or at least much like Hitler.

 
 Wow. Just wow.
 
 Have a look at this clip, especially starting at 3:45:
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AifTTFSQfqw [6 minutes]
 
 And yes, she said "fascist" as opposed to Hitler but if you ask the
 average American to list all the fascists they've learned about, I
 submit that the vast majority of them would list Hitler before
 Mussolini or Francisco Franco or any of the other fascists.
 
 Of course if you ask the average young person, especially a college
 student, you'll find that half the people alive today are fascists:
 they are like moviepig who admits he doesn't know what the word means
 but applies it to everyone he disagrees with.

>
You may recall me asking for your *preferred* broad name for a President
who attempts to overturn the election that deposed him.
>
Care to supply it now?

 
Re-elected.

>
Spoken like a True Republican.