Wow, what a terrific recap and gathering of what is what. I learned a thing or two, made some connections between then and now. what has changed and what has not. He has consistently done what he does, as he has just that one card - DISRUPTION - in his deck. She has many cards in her deck, one of which is steady focus, which will allow her to dismiss him by simply staying on task, which will also present her many factual and proven skills in governance. He has 34 felony counts, and she has 34 years of governing experience. Thank you for sharp analysis.
Not quite the judiciary, although spent a lot of time as part of the executive branch appearing there. It’s almost as good because litigation requires a clear view of the law is and the points on which that is uncertain and be able to argue that clearly.
Lots of advice. Probably quite good advice. But I must admit I have a fantasy that Harris should refuse to answer the first question she is asked and begin with this statement: Donald Trump is not fit to be president of the United States. And then outline the crimes, the lies, etc. After her opening attack, she could go on to use her answers to provide background and policy. In closing she could cite some of his lies and repeat that Trump is not fit for the presidency.
What I expect from Madam VP is to show the public and especially the lamestream media that she is more than qualified for the job and to show that tRUMP is a petulant little whiner and to get the moderators to fact check his lies the moment they come out of his mouth. If she shows anything like she did with those judcial hypocrites that now sit on the not-so-supreme court this should be a piece of cake.
I’m not sure we've ever actually had policy elections. I think political campaigns are inevitably more about feelings than facts, which is why our uniquely long Presidential campaigns do more harm than good IMHO. The vast majority of people don't have the time or the inclination to study and understand policy. So campaigns end up being about personalities, attack adds, sound bites and superficial stuff that draws the attention of voters. Policy making and implementation is something that professionals do mostly outside of the public eye. The public can see/feel the success or failure of policy outcomes. But even the reality of outcomes gets overtaken by the constant campaigning and spinning that it requires. Forever campaigns are good for media, bad for democracy.
Wow, what a terrific recap and gathering of what is what. I learned a thing or two, made some connections between then and now. what has changed and what has not. He has consistently done what he does, as he has just that one card - DISRUPTION - in his deck. She has many cards in her deck, one of which is steady focus, which will allow her to dismiss him by simply staying on task, which will also present her many factual and proven skills in governance. He has 34 felony counts, and she has 34 years of governing experience. Thank you for sharp analysis.
Not quite the judiciary, although spent a lot of time as part of the executive branch appearing there. It’s almost as good because litigation requires a clear view of the law is and the points on which that is uncertain and be able to argue that clearly.
Lots of advice. Probably quite good advice. But I must admit I have a fantasy that Harris should refuse to answer the first question she is asked and begin with this statement: Donald Trump is not fit to be president of the United States. And then outline the crimes, the lies, etc. After her opening attack, she could go on to use her answers to provide background and policy. In closing she could cite some of his lies and repeat that Trump is not fit for the presidency.
What I expect from Madam VP is to show the public and especially the lamestream media that she is more than qualified for the job and to show that tRUMP is a petulant little whiner and to get the moderators to fact check his lies the moment they come out of his mouth. If she shows anything like she did with those judcial hypocrites that now sit on the not-so-supreme court this should be a piece of cake.
I’m not sure we've ever actually had policy elections. I think political campaigns are inevitably more about feelings than facts, which is why our uniquely long Presidential campaigns do more harm than good IMHO. The vast majority of people don't have the time or the inclination to study and understand policy. So campaigns end up being about personalities, attack adds, sound bites and superficial stuff that draws the attention of voters. Policy making and implementation is something that professionals do mostly outside of the public eye. The public can see/feel the success or failure of policy outcomes. But even the reality of outcomes gets overtaken by the constant campaigning and spinning that it requires. Forever campaigns are good for media, bad for democracy.
I sure hope that Harris or her advisors read this article and take heed of what is said in it.