Poll Dem VP Pic: your choice?

[Derec]

If so, then it's no wonder you seem to be the only one who has heard of "Walz-pilled" and "coconut-pilled". You're probably the only regular poster who spends a lot of time there.

No, it is Democrats, specifically Millennial and Gen Z Democrats, who have been using these terms.
Maybe you are just not "with it" any more?

 

[Copernicus]

Unlike you, I don't know how "dead to rights" they had him, but I'm on record as saying that I think he was guilty of a DUI.

He blew significantly above the legal BAC limit.

OK. Again. I'm on record as believing that he was DUI. Regardless of how "dead to rights" they had him, the prosecutor and judge decided to drop that charge. He was lucky.

I think it fair to say that the Governor Walz of today is a very different man from the one who drank and drove in the mid-90s, so I won't judge him by the same standard that I would have back then.

That applies much more to somebody like Kav who was 17 at the time of the allegations against him. And yet the Dems wanted to crucify him over it, despite there not being actual evidence that he was guilty. That is hypocrisy - what a Democrat 30 years before at 31 does not define him, but what a Republican might have done 30 years earlier at 17 absolutely does.

So what? I was not discussing Kavanaugh. This is a deflection based on whataboutery. Address the topic under discussion.

That's all right wing claptrap. A panicked mayor urged him to send National Guard troops for help without specifying how many he wanted, where he wanted them to go, or what he expected them to do. So it took a while for the mayor to figure out that he needed to make a request with those details included. You don't just send in truckloads of soldiers with guns to put down a riot. It isn't just a battle between mobs, one side being better armed and trained than the other, to wade into the fray. You need to communicate a coherent need and have a plan of some kind.

National Guard commanders could have come up with a plan on the ground. Instead, the city was left to the rioters. They had occupied the so-called "George Floyd Square" for over a year. There were also barricades erected uptown over the justified killing of Winston Boogie Smith. The whole thing was a failure of both city and state leadership.

Well, I'm sure you have great confidence in your ability to have solved this problem, but Minnesota only had a guy with 24 years of experience in the Army and National Guard as the guy in charge of the state. He probably had a different perception of what he needed before sending troops off by the truckload to "come up with a plan on the ground". I've seen as many, if not more, action movies than you have, so I know how easy it is for troops on the ground to improvise and save the day. Just the same, I tend to agree with Donald Trump (at the time) that Walz did a superb job of managing the crisis from his end, Monday morning quarterbacks notwithstanding.

I'm not surprised at your lack of enthusiasm, given your history of posts, but I applaud your choice. With people like you joining in to oppose the lesser weevils, how can we lose?

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

Sorry, but I was being sarcastic. For someone who claims he isn't going to vote for the Trump/Vance ticket, I have to wonder--why not? You do nothing here but carry water for Republican talking points. You come off as someone who could be a commentator on Fox News. With people like you defending the Harris/Walz campaign, we'd get a landslide for Donald Trump.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

1) I care an awful lot more about a rape than about a DUI.

It wasn't even an allegation of rape. Attempted sexual assault in the first case and indecent exposure in the second.
Not that is any actual evidence for either.

2) Walz isn't denying what happened. Kavanaugh is.

People also deny accusations when they are innocent.

Compare the reactions to the accusations and that will show you the current character of the individuals. I think Walz will easily compare favorably against Kavanaugh in this regard.

Only one had actual evidence for his guilt, and it ain't Kav.

I had previously held the position that rapes reported long after the fact were inherently unable to be proven due to a lack of evidence. But Kavanaugh managed to convince me of his guilt.

 

[laughing dog]

I take this to mean you will continue in willfully and knowingly spread falsehoods?

No. I will, however, continue to willfully and knowingly refuse to split hairs.

Lol post 742 has you splitting a hair about Mr Burrell becoming a drug addict in prison.

And the “factoid” of Mr Ellison bring a Muslim was relevant because….?

 

[Derec]

Lol post 742 has you splitting a hair about Mr Burrell becoming a drug addict in prison.

That's not splitting hairs. Copernicus seemed to think that it is his prison stay that somehow was responsible for Myon Burrell dealing after he was released when in reality he was already an active member when he was arrested for Tyesha Edwards' murder. A big difference, and not hair splitting at all.

And the “factoid” of Mr Ellison bring a Muslim was relevant because….?

That's not a "factoid", that's a fact. And not just a Muslim, but one who was sympathetic toward the racist Nation of Islam.
It is relevant because Myon Burrell is a "jailhouse Muslim" - he converted in prison. It probably influenced how Ellison felt about releasing him despite the heinous crime he committed.

 

[Derec]

OK. Again. I'm on record as believing that he was DUI. Regardless of how "dead to rights" they had him, the prosecutor and judge decided to drop that charge. He was lucky.

Or maybe it is an example of the lack of seriousness that drunk driving was treated with in the 90s.
In any case, he drove drunk.

So what? I was not discussing Kavanaugh. This is a deflection based on whataboutery. Address the topic under discussion.

I brought up the Kav witch hunt to point out the hypocrisy.

The Walz DUI supposedly does not matter because it happened 30 years ago. But the allegation of attempted rape against Kav was deemed to matter a great deal even though
- if anything happened, it also happened 30 years ago
- Kav (17) was significantly younger than Walz (31)
- the allegation against Kav was uncorroborated, while against Walz there is evidence of his BAC of 0.128.

So if anything, it should be the Walz DUI that we should take seriously, not the accusations against Kav. And yet that is dismissed as irrelevant.

Well, I'm sure you have great confidence in your ability to have solved this problem, but Minnesota only had a guy with 24 years of experience in the Army and National Guard as the guy in charge of the state. He probably had a different perception of what he needed before sending troops off by the truckload to "come up with a plan on the ground".

The rioters had occupied so-called "George Floyd Square" for over a year. Surely "a guy with 24 years of experience in the Army and National Guard" should have been able to come up with a plan that would have prevented that. I do not think that Walz was incompetent to do something about it - had the square been occupied by right-wingers, they would have been cleared out with the quickness! No, Walz was derelict not because of inability, but because of unwillingness.

Just the same, I tend to agree with Donald Trump (at the time) that Walz did a superb job of managing the crisis from his end, Monday morning quarterbacks notwithstanding.

Well, mark me down as in disagreement with Trump. Billions of dollars in damage, creeps occupying a city block for over a year is not an outcome of a "superb job". And Minneapolis had other flareups - when Winston Boogie Smith was shot (justified) there were riots and occupation of an uptown neighborhood which led to the death of a protester/occupier. Then there was further rioting when a murder suspect committed suicide as the police sought to arrest him. The poor response to the initial George Floyd riots emboldened these later rioters.

Sorry, but I was being sarcastic. For someone who claims he isn't going to vote for the Trump/Vance ticket, I have to wonder--why not? You do nothing here but carry water for Republican talking points. You come off as someone who could be a commentator on Fox News. With people like you defending the Harris/Walz campaign, we'd get a landslide for Donald Trump.

BS. But just because I think Trump and Vance are the greater weevils does not mean I have to think that Harris and Walz are great. It certainly should not mean that I have to refrain from criticizing them in a thread about them such as this one.

 

[Derec]

I had previously held the position that rapes reported long after the fact were inherently unable to be proven due to a lack of evidence. But Kavanaugh managed to convince me of his guilt.

Surely you feel that way because of who nominated him. In reality, there was no corroboration for CBF's claims, and even her friend is skeptical that it ever happened.

 

[Derec]

Are you getting all these _____-pilled terms from the manosphere?
If so, then it's no wonder you seem to be the only one who has heard of "Walz-pilled" and "coconut-pilled". You're probably the only regular poster who spends a lot of time there.

No, it is Democrats, specifically Millennial and Gen Z Democrats, who have been using these terms.

Just one example, Arctish.
I Was a Kamala Harris Skeptic. Here’s How I Got Coconut-Pilled.

I guess Lydia Polgreen must be an honorary member of the "manosphere".

 

[Derec]

Walz really waltzed right into this one:

Walz once praised Muslim leader who shared antisemitic propaganda

The video features Walz, who was chosen last week to be Vice President Kamala Harris’ running mate, speaking at an event hosted by the Muslim American Society of Minnesota during his first gubernatorial campaign in 2018, according to the Examiner. In the video, Walz praises Imam Asad Zaman, executive director of the organization hosting the event, as a “master teacher” and briefly touches on their shared history.

“I would like to first of all say thank you to Imam. I am a teacher, so when I see a master teacher, I know it,” Walz says in the video. “Over the time we’ve spent together, one of the things I’ve had the privilege of is seeing the things in life through the eye of a master teacher to try and get the understanding, listening today to the stories and what it means.”

Walz’s appearance alongside the Muslim cleric, one of several in recent years, came after Zaman had shared a link in 2015 to a neo-Nazi propaganda film that portrayed Adolf Hitler in a positive light. Zaman had also shared a Hamas press release in 2016 mourning the death of a Bangladeshi Muslim politician, who was executed after being found guilty of war crimes.

In the wake of the October 7 attacks by Hamas inside Israel, Zaman has shared anti-Israel posts on social media. On October 7, he expressed solidarity with Palestinians “against Israeli attacks” while sharing a statement from the Muslim American Society of Minnesota condemning “Israel’s recent unprovoked attacks.” Earlier that day, Zaman shared a post arguing, “Palestine has the right to defend itself.”

Btw, if "Muslim American Society" rings a bell, it may be because of this video by their Philly chapter.

 

[Swammerdami]

What's really WEIRD is that the weirdest barely human batch of criminal/politicians since Vlad the Impaler and the Man With a Moustache have seized on the "You are Weird" meme to condemn their human "enemies." Well ... not so weird really. They always project from their own faults. They're criminal so accuse their "enemies" of being criminals, and so on.

I even clicked on a few of the "You are ignoring content by this member" warnings. Stupid comments of course, but not unexpectedly weird.

 

[laughing dog]

Lol post 742 has you splitting a hair about Mr Burrell becoming a drug addict in prison.

That's not splitting hairs. Copernicus seemed to think that it is his prison stay that somehow was responsible for Myon Burrell dealing after he was released when in reality he was already an active member when he was arrested for Tyesha Edwards' murder. A big difference, and not hair splitting at all.

Ignore the inderlying racist assumption in your analysis that black gang members are necessarily drug addicts or drug dealers, you are splitting hairs over splitting hairs!

That's not a "factoid", that's a fact. And not just a Muslim, but one who was sympathetic toward the racist Nation of Islam.
It is relevant because Myon Burrell is a "jailhouse Muslim" - he converted in prison. It probably influenced how Ellison felt about releasing him despite the heinous crime he committed.

Another example of bigoted “ post hoc, ergo prompter hoc”.

 

[laughing dog]

OK. Again. I'm on record as believing that he was DUI. Regardless of how "dead to rights" they had him, the prosecutor and judge decided to drop that charge. He was lucky.

Or maybe it is an example of the lack of seriousness that drunk driving was treated with in the 90s.
In any case, he drove drunk.

So what? I was not discussing Kavanaugh. This is a deflection based on whataboutery. Address the topic under discussion.

I brought up the Kav witch hunt to point out the hypocrisy.

The Walz DUI supposedly does not matter because it happened 30 years ago. But the allegation of attempted rape against Kav was deemed to matter a great deal even though
- if anything happened, it also happened 30 years ago
- Kav (17) was significantly younger than Walz (31)
- the allegation against Kav was uncorroborated, while against Walz there is evidence of his BAC of 0.128.

So if anything, it should be the Walz DUI that we should take seriously, not the accusations against Kav. And yet that is dismissed as irrelevant.

Well, I'm sure you have great confidence in your ability to have solved this problem, but Minnesota only had a guy with 24 years of experience in the Army and National Guard as the guy in charge of the state. He probably had a different perception of what he needed before sending troops off by the truckload to "come up with a plan on the ground".

The rioters had occupied so-called "George Floyd Square" for over a year. Surely "a guy with 24 years of experience in the Army and National Guard" should have been able to come up with a plan that would have prevented that. I do not think that Walz was incompetent to do something about it - had the square been occupied by right-wingers, they would have been cleared out with the quickness! No, Walz was derelict not because of inability, but because of unwillingness.

Just the same, I tend to agree with Donald Trump (at the time) that Walz did a superb job of managing the crisis from his end, Monday morning quarterbacks notwithstanding.

Well, mark me down as in disagreement with Trump. Billions of dollars in damage, creeps occupying a city block for over a year is not an outcome of a "superb job". And Minneapolis had other flareups - when Winston Boogie Smith was shot (justified) there were riots and occupation of an uptown neighborhood which led to the death of a protester/occupier. Then there was further rioting when a murder suspect committed suicide as the police sought to arrest him. The poor response to the initial George Floyd riots emboldened these later rioters.

Sorry, but I was being sarcastic. For someone who claims he isn't going to vote for the Trump/Vance ticket, I have to wonder--why not? You do nothing here but carry water for Republican talking points. You come off as someone who could be a commentator on Fox News. With people like you defending the Harris/Walz campaign, we'd get a landslide for Donald Trump.

BS. But just because I think Trump and Vance are the greater weevils does not mean I have to think that Harris and Walz are great. It certainly should not mean that I have to refrain from criticizing them in a thread about them such as this one.

There is a big difference between thinking anyone is not great and constantly criticizing them over very old actions that are not germane and sometimes using nasty smear tactics.

Whether you acknowledge or realize it, but your “critiques” read from the MAGAtard and Fox playbook.

 

[starwater]

OK. Again. I'm on record as believing that he was DUI. Regardless of how "dead to rights" they had him, the prosecutor and judge decided to drop that charge. He was lucky.

Or maybe it is an example of the lack of seriousness that drunk driving was treated with in the 90s.
In any case, he drove drunk.

So what? I was not discussing Kavanaugh. This is a deflection based on whataboutery. Address the topic under discussion.

I brought up the Kav witch hunt to point out the hypocrisy.

The Walz DUI supposedly does not matter because it happened 30 years ago. But the allegation of attempted rape against Kav was deemed to matter a great deal even though
- if anything happened, it also happened 30 years ago
- Kav (17) was significantly younger than Walz (31)
- the allegation against Kav was uncorroborated, while against Walz there is evidence of his BAC of 0.128.

So if anything, it should be the Walz DUI that we should take seriously, not the accusations against Kav. And yet that is dismissed as irrelevant.

Well, I'm sure you have great confidence in your ability to have solved this problem, but Minnesota only had a guy with 24 years of experience in the Army and National Guard as the guy in charge of the state. He probably had a different perception of what he needed before sending troops off by the truckload to "come up with a plan on the ground".

The rioters had occupied so-called "George Floyd Square" for over a year. Surely "a guy with 24 years of experience in the Army and National Guard" should have been able to come up with a plan that would have prevented that. I do not think that Walz was incompetent to do something about it - had the square been occupied by right-wingers, they would have been cleared out with the quickness! No, Walz was derelict not because of inability, but because of unwillingness.

Just the same, I tend to agree with Donald Trump (at the time) that Walz did a superb job of managing the crisis from his end, Monday morning quarterbacks notwithstanding.

Well, mark me down as in disagreement with Trump. Billions of dollars in damage, creeps occupying a city block for over a year is not an outcome of a "superb job". And Minneapolis had other flareups - when Winston Boogie Smith was shot (justified) there were riots and occupation of an uptown neighborhood which led to the death of a protester/occupier. Then there was further rioting when a murder suspect committed suicide as the police sought to arrest him. The poor response to the initial George Floyd riots emboldened these later rioters.

Sorry, but I was being sarcastic. For someone who claims he isn't going to vote for the Trump/Vance ticket, I have to wonder--why not? You do nothing here but carry water for Republican talking points. You come off as someone who could be a commentator on Fox News. With people like you defending the Harris/Walz campaign, we'd get a landslide for Donald Trump.

BS. But just because I think Trump and Vance are the greater weevils does not mean I have to think that Harris and Walz are great. It certainly should not mean that I have to refrain from criticizing them in a thread about them such as this one.

There is a big difference between thinking anyone is not great and constantly criticizing them over very old actions that are not germane and sometimes using nasty smear tactics.

Whether you acknowledge or realize it, but your “critiques” read from the MAGAtard and Fox playbook.

Walz drove drunk, admitted it, and said he had no excuse.
Kavanagh - deflected, denied, and lied about it. Uncollaborated??? Believe women. She told people about it at the time. So in my book that is collaborated. BIG SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE. Admitting you were wrong and owning up to it, is different than lying about it.

The George Floyd murder was a tragic stain on our democracy. The protestors shed light on a very significant problem. Whether it should have been handled differently? I'm sure the protestors would have a very different point of view.

Nitpicking and whataboutism seems to be a consistent with these threads from this poster.

 

[TomC]

Walz drove drunk, admitted it, and said he had no excuse.

And he offered his resignation to the school that employed him. The administration didn't think that the issue was important enough to accept it, so they didn't.

But I've gotta say,
The accusations against Kavanaugh always looked stupid to me. Some teenagers got drunk and behaved badly, then had very different recollections years later. BFD
Tom

 

[Copernicus]

OK. Again. I'm on record as believing that he was DUI. Regardless of how "dead to rights" they had him, the prosecutor and judge decided to drop that charge. He was lucky.

Or maybe it is an example of the lack of seriousness that drunk driving was treated with in the 90s. In any case, he drove drunk.

I'm satisfied with the way this decades-old incident turned out. But you think it has some bearing on his suitability for office in 2024. I think it was a past experience that put a blemish on his record and changed him for the better.

So what? I was not discussing Kavanaugh. This is a deflection based on whataboutery. Address the topic under discussion.

I brought up the Kav witch hunt to point out the hypocrisy...

Yes, ad hominem fallacies are often used to charge people with hypocrisy. What Kavanaugh did in his past has nothing to do with what Walz did in his. Nor does your comparison have the slightest bearing on whether we should take the Walz DUI seriously. Should we also say that those who failed to take the Kavanaugh charge seriously are now hypocrites for taking the Walz charge seriously? Who cares?

Well, I'm sure you have great confidence in your ability to have solved this problem, but Minnesota only had a guy with 24 years of experience in the Army and National Guard as the guy in charge of the state. He probably had a different perception of what he needed before sending troops off by the truckload to "come up with a plan on the ground".

The rioters had occupied so-called "George Floyd Square" for over a year. Surely "a guy with 24 years of experience in the Army and National Guard" should have been able to come up with a plan that would have prevented that. I do not think that Walz was incompetent to do something about it - had the square been occupied by right-wingers, they would have been cleared out with the quickness! No, Walz was derelict not because of inability, but because of unwillingness.

The governor is not responsible for operations on the ground. What the governor understood was that he couldn't just send in National Guard troops without a specific formal request from the mayor. This situation was unprecedented for Minnesota, and the process involved for communicating emergency needs was not a good one. A lot of changes were made in the aftermath, and that very same mayor, who had been highly critical of Walz's performance, now praises him and says that he acted as fast as he could under the circumstances. The mayor did send a formal request that got rejected by the bureaucracy in place (not the governor himself), but a proper request was sent and Walz moved quickly when he got it. At no point did he show unwillingness to quell the violence. That is your invention, based on the right wing sources of information that you seem to trust.

Just the same, I tend to agree with Donald Trump (at the time) that Walz did a superb job of managing the crisis from his end, Monday morning quarterbacks notwithstanding.

Well, mark me down as in disagreement with Trump. Billions of dollars in damage, creeps occupying a city block for over a year is not an outcome of a "superb job". And Minneapolis had other flareups - when Winston Boogie Smith was shot (justified) there were riots and occupation of an uptown neighborhood which led to the death of a protester/occupier. Then there was further rioting when a murder suspect committed suicide as the police sought to arrest him. The poor response to the initial George Floyd riots emboldened these later rioters.

OK, you've got your opinions all sorted on the matter, based on your deep knowledge of the information sources you used but don't bother to reference here. I know that race riots are something of a hobby for you, just based on seeing you in just about every thread that deals with that subject matter. From what I've seen, Walz gets high marks for his response in the face of an unprecedented largescale riot and poor communication between local and state authorities. If the same thing happened today, the response would be a lot quicker, thanks to lessons learned from that episode.

Sorry, but I was being sarcastic. For someone who claims he isn't going to vote for the Trump/Vance ticket, I have to wonder--why not? You do nothing here but carry water for Republican talking points. You come off as someone who could be a commentator on Fox News. With people like you defending the Harris/Walz campaign, we'd get a landslide for Donald Trump.

BS. But just because I think Trump and Vance are the greater weevils does not mean I have to think that Harris and Walz are great. It certainly should not mean that I have to refrain from criticizing them in a thread about them such as this one.

I wasn't saying that you should refrain from criticizing Harris and Walz. I was wondering why you seem more obsessed with criticizing the lesser weevils than the greater weevils. It's almost as if you kind of prefer the greater over the lesser.

 

[laughing dog]

OK. Again. I'm on record as believing that he was DUI. Regardless of how "dead to rights" they had him, the prosecutor and judge decided to drop that charge. He was lucky.

Or maybe it is an example of the lack of seriousness that drunk driving was treated with in the 90s. In any case, he drove drunk.

I'm satisfied with the way this decades-old incident turned out. But you think it has some bearing on his suitability for office in 2024. I think it was a past experience that put a blemish on his record and changed him for the better.

So what? I was not discussing Kavanaugh. This is a deflection based on whataboutery. Address the topic under discussion.

I brought up the Kav witch hunt to point out the hypocrisy...

Yes, ad hominem fallacies are often used to charge people with hypocrisy. What Kavanaugh did in his past has nothing to do with what Walz did in his. Nor does your comparison have the slightest bearing on whether we should take the Walz DUI seriously. Should we also say that those who failed to take the Kavanaugh charge seriously are now hypocrites for taking the Walz charge seriously? Who cares?

Well, I'm sure you have great confidence in your ability to have solved this problem, but Minnesota only had a guy with 24 years of experience in the Army and National Guard as the guy in charge of the state. He probably had a different perception of what he needed before sending troops off by the truckload to "come up with a plan on the ground".

The rioters had occupied so-called "George Floyd Square" for over a year. Surely "a guy with 24 years of experience in the Army and National Guard" should have been able to come up with a plan that would have prevented that. I do not think that Walz was incompetent to do something about it - had the square been occupied by right-wingers, they would have been cleared out with the quickness! No, Walz was derelict not because of inability, but because of unwillingness.

The governor is not responsible for operations on the ground. What the governor understood was that he couldn't just send in National Guard troops without a specific formal request from the mayor. This situation was unprecedented for Minnesota, and the process involved for communicating emergency needs was not a good one. A lot of changes were made in the aftermath, and that very same mayor, who had been highly critical of Walz's performance, now praises him and says that he acted as fast as he could under the circumstances. The mayor did send a formal request that got rejected by the bureaucracy in place (not the governor himself), but a proper request was sent and Walz moved quickly when he got it. At no point did he show unwillingness to quell the violence. That is your invention, based on the right wing sources of information that you seem to trust.

Facts, schmacks - what you don't get is that not enough #BLM protesters were not harmed nor arrested!!!

Just the same, I tend to agree with Donald Trump (at the time) that Walz did a superb job of managing the crisis from his end, Monday morning quarterbacks notwithstanding.

Well, mark me down as in disagreement with Trump. Billions of dollars in damage, creeps occupying a city block for over a year is not an outcome of a "superb job". And Minneapolis had other flareups - when Winston Boogie Smith was shot (justified) there were riots and occupation of an uptown neighborhood which led to the death of a protester/occupier. Then there was further rioting when a murder suspect committed suicide as the police sought to arrest him. The poor response to the initial George Floyd riots emboldened these later rioters.

OK, you've got your opinions all sorted on the matter, based on your deep knowledge of the information sources you used but don't bother to reference here. I know that race riots are something of a hobby for you, just based on seeing you in just about every thread that deals with that subject matter. From what I've seen, Walz gets high marks for his response in the face of an unprecedented largescale riot and poor communication between local and state authorities. If the same thing happened today, the response would be a lot quicker, thanks to lessons learned from that episode.

It is fascinating to see "Monday morning quarterback" criticisms from Derec who routinely rejects such criticisms on that basis when they are directed at police who kill unarmed civilians.

 

[Harry Bosch]

I heard on the radio that Harris really liked Kelly. He has an incredibly impressive background. However, I guess he is not a dynamic on the speech stump. Shapiro is very dynamic speaker. Walz is pretty good. The report said that the final three were Kelly, Walz and Shapiro. Final two were Walz and Shapiro. But Harris had a closer connection and gut feeling with Walz.

 

[ZiprHead]

I wasn't saying that you should refrain from criticizing Harris and Walz. I was wondering why you seem more obsessed with criticizing the lesser weevils than the greater weevils. It's almost as if you kind of prefer the greater over the lesser.

It's almost as if actions speak louder than words.

 

[Elixir]

I heard on the radio that Harris really liked Kelly. He has an incredibly impressive background. However, I guess he is not a dynamic on the speech stump. Shapiro is very dynamic speaker. Walz is pretty good. The report said that the final three were Kelly, Walz and Shapiro. Final two were Walz and Shapiro. But Harris had a closer connection and gut feeling with Walz.

Wouldnt you be inclined to call her gut feeling correct at this point? I was kinda leaning toward Shapiro because he would tear Cheato and/or Vance to shreds. But Walz’ populist conservo-liberalism is hard to beat, for the moment at hand. Certainly more important than my love of popcorn.

 

[Harry Bosch]

I heard on the radio that Harris really liked Kelly. He has an incredibly impressive background. However, I guess he is not a dynamic on the speech stump. Shapiro is very dynamic speaker. Walz is pretty good. The report said that the final three were Kelly, Walz and Shapiro. Final two were Walz and Shapiro. But Harris had a closer connection and gut feeling with Walz.

Wouldnt you be inclined to call her gut feeling correct at this point? I was kinda leaning toward Shapiro because he would tear Cheato and/or Vance to shreds. But Walz’ populist conservo-liberalism is hard to beat, for the moment at hand. Certainly more important than my love of popcorn.

Yes. Harris and Walz are doing very well. I'm excited. However, I'm sure that there will be some downs coming. There is a lot more bullshit swiftboating coming. If we lose Pennsylvania, there will be second guessing. But there is no doubt that he is adding to the ticket. It feels excellent right now!