That she has a good heart and he doesn't demonstrate having any heart at all didn't translate to a good debate performance. I found her cringe-worthy with gratuitous attacks on him out of context of what the subject was, which is his tactic, and no substantive information about how she would achieve any goals, like stopping wars, dealing with Israel slaughtering Palestinians while funding their onslaught, or how to fix economic inequality. All pablum in a world that needs inspiration to be our better selves where we transcend rugged individualism to care about each other as much as we care about ourselves.
I agree generally with your comment; especially the first and last sentences. However I give Ms Harris a bit more leeway than you. I know she still has to serve as a loyal VP while trying to become the President. She would turn off many would be voters if she were to try to already change this administration's policies and procedures. If she wins in November, whatever Mr Trump might say, then she can direct her transition team to get ready for what she wants to DO on January 20, 2025 and beyond.
Let’s keep in mind, however, that in a country that allowed a wide variety of parties that express a variety of social and class views of society, Kamala Harris would most likely be an enemy. A defender of capitalism and Imperial America. So I applaud the job VP Harris did last night, cutting Trump’s legs from under him (“eating their pets” indeed). She gave us all a bit more breathing space. But it’s still “turtles all the way down” and still a class war.
"Like everything in this horrid climate, we won last night but we also all lost. It was a spectacle, a headshakingly disgusting one, and the sooner we move into an era of substantive debate discussing what we need to do to fix the mess of the neoliberal status quo, decades of intentional inequality, and the looming threat of climate change - which was afforded a few minutes of scrambled non-conversation - the better."
This sums things up very well. Choosing between abdominal and mediocre is the landscape. Not that Kamala is mediocre. She's sharp. It's the tired ideas and the crazy ideas I am talking about. Two party nonsense.
That she has a good heart and he doesn't demonstrate having any heart at all didn't translate to a good debate performance. I found her cringe-worthy with gratuitous attacks on him out of context of what the subject was, which is his tactic, and no substantive information about how she would achieve any goals, like stopping wars, dealing with Israel slaughtering Palestinians while funding their onslaught, or how to fix economic inequality. All pablum in a world that needs inspiration to be our better selves where we transcend rugged individualism to care about each other as much as we care about ourselves.
I agree generally with your comment; especially the first and last sentences. However I give Ms Harris a bit more leeway than you. I know she still has to serve as a loyal VP while trying to become the President. She would turn off many would be voters if she were to try to already change this administration's policies and procedures. If she wins in November, whatever Mr Trump might say, then she can direct her transition team to get ready for what she wants to DO on January 20, 2025 and beyond.
Let’s keep in mind, however, that in a country that allowed a wide variety of parties that express a variety of social and class views of society, Kamala Harris would most likely be an enemy. A defender of capitalism and Imperial America. So I applaud the job VP Harris did last night, cutting Trump’s legs from under him (“eating their pets” indeed). She gave us all a bit more breathing space. But it’s still “turtles all the way down” and still a class war.
"Like everything in this horrid climate, we won last night but we also all lost. It was a spectacle, a headshakingly disgusting one, and the sooner we move into an era of substantive debate discussing what we need to do to fix the mess of the neoliberal status quo, decades of intentional inequality, and the looming threat of climate change - which was afforded a few minutes of scrambled non-conversation - the better."
This sums things up very well. Choosing between abdominal and mediocre is the landscape. Not that Kamala is mediocre. She's sharp. It's the tired ideas and the crazy ideas I am talking about. Two party nonsense.