Kamala Harris has a problem with men. Will misogyny cost her the election?

Honestly people seem to think insulting other posters is the way to win an point.

Nobody is saying the Electoral College is wrong because of Trump.

Those of you saying this have invented it as a way to pretend the issue of the Electoral College is just sour grapes.

Actually, some people have been politically aware for a long time, and a lot of people say the Electoral College is ANTI DEMOCRATIC.

The role of the President is NOT the same as those in both house who are the direct representatives, so there is NO need to weight the vote in the presidential election as voters already have representatives in both.

It such a whatabouterry arguement.

This is about making the President genuinely representative of a US wide vote by individual voters.

It should not be part of the party system. It should be apart from that.

So please stop with the weighting arguement and try and escape from the ding dont of party politics.

Can you not begin to grasp that in fact it might be better to have someone who is not tied to a Party.

So just to go through this for the zillionth time.

US citizens get to vote for those who they hope will represent them through the elections for Congress and the House of Representatives (NB the name of the last).

The President is not there as a respresentative.

The very last thing the vote should be is something manipulated by political parties, which political parties have done in the past century.

Why do you want to kowtow to such a blatant attempt to corrupt the concept of individuals directly voting in the idividual who should be above the distorting decision making of party politics.

Quote:

The power of the Executive Branch is vested in the President of the United States, who also acts as head of state and Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. The President is responsible for implementing and enforcing the laws written by Congress and, to that end, appoints the heads of the federal agencies, including the Cabinet. The Vice President is also part of the Executive Branch, ready to assume the Presidency should the need arise.

Note the word "executive" branch ie carrying out.

Note the responsibility for implement etc., written by Congress.

I am not saying this because I think it is ideal, but because these are the facts.

Do voters think the person they want to be President is qualified to effective carry out the decisions made by those they have directly elected to represent them in Congress etc..

Personally I find it scary that apparently that a complete novice could become Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces.

And appoint judges(?)

So all this endless twaddle about people needing to know the President will represent them, is not relevant. That is relevant in terms of the 2 Houses.

That's the question, isn't it.

Because the people who would most benefit from the loss of the electoral college would be the more numerous people living in large urban areas, much of California, Boston, New York.

No doubt those people would love to be able to elect a president every time, and not have to worry about those hicks in rural Arkansas or the Appalachians. Much better to have coastal lawyers decide rather than the poorest people in the country.

But as has been said more people voted for HC than trump. So that doesn't really stick.

The American Bar Association has criticized the Electoral College as “archaic” and “ambiguous” and its polling showed 69 percent of lawyers favored abolishing it in 1987.. . .Public opinion polls have shown Americans favored abolishing it by majorities of 58 percent in 1967; 81 percent in 1968; and 75 percent in 1981."

Your ellipsis conveniently excludes this part:

But surveys of political scientists have supported continuation of the Electoral College.

And it would be interesting to see the sample data from those in the public who have been surveyed, as to whether it equally represented those in rural areas. 71% favoured abolishing it in 1981, after Reagan was elected. Who was sampled and what was their location and political leaning?

I already said.
Misogyny.🤷‍♀️

That's a really misleading headline with the phrase 'having a problem with' meaming what it does in the UK. It makes it sound as if Harris is a misandrist. It's MEN that have a problem with HER.

Incapable of stringing a cogent adhock sentence together? I take it you did not hear her ground breaking ‘passage of time’ speech? That was some profound stuff right there!

The problem is that Harris is one of the biggest proponents of identity politics and is a complete shit show of a politician.
If the Democrats (party) had chosen Michelle Obama to run against Trump as many Democrats (voters) wanted then I strongly believe that things would be very different. Instead we have a woman who has admitted that she got her start as a politician by having sex with her boss, she's incapable of stringing a cogent adhock sentence together.

Two example of Trump's answers very recently:

Question: Are you willing to legislate on childcare?

Answer: “Well, I would do that, and we’re sitting down. You know, I was somebody — we had, Senator Marco Rubio, and my daughter Ivanka, was so impactful on that issue. It’s a very important issue.
"But I think when you talk about the kind of numbers that I’m talking about — that, because look, child care is child care, couldn’t — you know, there’s something — you have to have it in this country. You have to have it. But when you talk about those numbers, compared to the kind of numbers that I’m talking about by taxing foreign nations at levels that they’re not used to. But they’ll get used to it very quickly. And it’s not going to stop them from doing business with us. But they’ll have a very substantial tax when they send product into our country. Those numbers are so much bigger than any numbers that we’re talking about, including child care, that it’s going to take care. We’re going to have — I look forward to having no deficits within a fairly short period of time, coupled with the reductions that I told you about on waste and fraud and all of the other things that are going on in our country.
"Because I have to stay with child care. I want to stay with child care. But those numbers are small relative to the kind of economic numbers that I’m talking about, including growth, but growth also headed up by what the plan is that I just — that I just told you about. We’re going to be taking in trillions of dollars. And as much as child care is talked about as being expensive, it’s, relatively speaking, not very expensive compared to the kind of numbers will be taking in.
"We’re going to make this into an incredible country that can afford to take care of its people. And then we’ll worry about the rest of the world. Let’s help other people. But we’re going to take care of our country first. This is about America first. It’s about make America great again. We have to do it because right now, we’re a failing nation. So we’ll take care of it. Thank you. Very good question.

Question: “Should Google be broken up?”

“I just haven’t gotten over something the Justice Department did yesterday where Virginia cleaned up its voter rolls and got rid of thousands and thousands of bad votes, and the Justice Department sued them that they should be allowed to put those bad votes and illegal votes back in and let the people vote. So I haven’t gotten over that. A lot of people have seen that. They can’t even believe it,”

I can understand people saying that Harris sometimes skirts issues, but to say tha Harris is incoherent but Trump is "straight talking" is laughable. He can barely finish a thought, let alone a sentence.

The problem is that Harris is one of the biggest proponents of identity politics and is a complete shit show of a politician.
If the Democrats (party) had chosen Michelle Obama to run against Trump as many Democrats (voters) wanted then I strongly believe that things would be very different. Instead we have a woman who has admitted that she got her start as a politician by having sex with her boss, she's incapable of stringing a cogent adhock sentence together.

He's also very plain and straight talking and a lot of people like that. Kamala, on the otherhand, waffles a lot and has no obvious coherence. People want to feel confident in their leader and need to know what it is they stand for.

With Trump - people know what they are getting ( regardless of whether or not they appreciate his style and manner); with Kamala, the suspicion is that she doesn't even know what she'd do herself. She sounds flaky.

"men in particular need to know who the top dog is"
Putin 🙂

His values are clear. They believe he will deliver what he says. His political advisors are there to tell him how to do policy.

Kamala is vague and incoherent. Nothing to do with misogyny. She's just not a strong candidate. Men, in particular, need to know who the top dog is.

In Britain it looks likely that Kemi Badench will be the new Tory leader - even though she's both female and black. The difference betwen her and Kamala is that Kemi is strong and direct. People like that. Although it is true that some also do judge women by a different standard for having those qualities.

Patton Oswalt: “America is WAAAAAAAAY more sexist than it is racist. And it's pretty fucking racist.”

I'm not sure why you feel the need to make such personal comment?
I'm more interested in observing and understanding patterns and movements than I am in tribal loyalties. Understanding requires a degree of objectivity. When you gets too subjective and emotional you can fail to see what is in front of you.

Clearly a lot of Americans are also living in a parallel universe. And maybe what you are calling a parallel universe is just a different one to the one you inhabit?
This is what happens when everything becomes so polarised.

You really seem to be in a parallel universe. Trump was president for four years, He didn't deliver then, other than for his wealthy friends. His political advisors failed the last time, and most of them are out telling the voters that he's a danger to the country, including "his" generals. Remember his "I will repeal and replace Obama care on DAY ONE!? When recently asked about it, he said he as a "concept" of a plan, no real plan. After 8 years! If his base still believe that he'll deliver this time, then that's the reason why the MAGA movement is called a cult.

His values are clear. They believe he will deliver what he says. His political advisors are there to tell him how to do policy.

Kamala is vague and incoherent. Nothing to do with misogyny. She's just not a strong candidate. Men, in particular, need to know who the top dog is.

In Britain it looks likely that Kemi Badench will be the new Tory leader - even though she's both female and black. The difference betwen her and Kamala is that Kemi is strong and direct. People like that. Although it is true that some also do judge women by a different standard for having those qualities.

I wonder what version of Trump some of you have been watching. He spent 12 minutes rambling on about Arnold Palmer. And his penis.

but the republicans line up behind him when he says something outrageous, and deny he said what he said, or if he did it was joking (but somehow he is serious if voters like it). Or they don't know, maybe the Haitians are eating cats? How do we know?

He's absolutely incoherent, but his supporters believe he'll kick out immigrants and lower their taxes, so they're willing to pretend.

it's interesting how misogyny is in evidence right in this thread, criticising Kamala for "waffling" or policy when Trump is right there, incoherent and with the concept of a plan.

Two example of Trump's answers very recently:

Question: Are you willing to legislate on childcare?

Answer: “Well, I would do that, and we’re sitting down. You know, I was somebody — we had, Senator Marco Rubio, and my daughter Ivanka, was so impactful on that issue. It’s a very important issue.
"But I think when you talk about the kind of numbers that I’m talking about — that, because look, child care is child care, couldn’t — you know, there’s something — you have to have it in this country. You have to have it. But when you talk about those numbers, compared to the kind of numbers that I’m talking about by taxing foreign nations at levels that they’re not used to. But they’ll get used to it very quickly. And it’s not going to stop them from doing business with us. But they’ll have a very substantial tax when they send product into our country. Those numbers are so much bigger than any numbers that we’re talking about, including child care, that it’s going to take care. We’re going to have — I look forward to having no deficits within a fairly short period of time, coupled with the reductions that I told you about on waste and fraud and all of the other things that are going on in our country.
"Because I have to stay with child care. I want to stay with child care. But those numbers are small relative to the kind of economic numbers that I’m talking about, including growth, but growth also headed up by what the plan is that I just — that I just told you about. We’re going to be taking in trillions of dollars. And as much as child care is talked about as being expensive, it’s, relatively speaking, not very expensive compared to the kind of numbers will be taking in.
"We’re going to make this into an incredible country that can afford to take care of its people. And then we’ll worry about the rest of the world. Let’s help other people. But we’re going to take care of our country first. This is about America first. It’s about make America great again. We have to do it because right now, we’re a failing nation. So we’ll take care of it. Thank you. Very good question.

Question: “Should Google be broken up?”

“I just haven’t gotten over something the Justice Department did yesterday where Virginia cleaned up its voter rolls and got rid of thousands and thousands of bad votes, and the Justice Department sued them that they should be allowed to put those bad votes and illegal votes back in and let the people vote. So I haven’t gotten over that. A lot of people have seen that. They can’t even believe it,”

I can understand people saying that Harris sometimes skirts issues, but to say tha Harris is incoherent but Trump is "straight talking" is laughable. He can barely finish a thought, let alone a sentence.