Skip to main content

@winetarelli posted:

Obviously, the preferred term is "sex worker", but I don't think the word "prostitute" is inherently sexist.  

But I do think the suggestion that no woman who has ever married a man exclusively for money (in 2020 USD) wound up with more than Melania did vastly overestimates Trump's net worth.

She definitely ended up with more than she bargained for!

@winetarelli posted:

Obviously, the preferred term is "sex worker", but I don't think the word "prostitute" is inherently sexist.  

But I do think the suggestion that no woman who has ever married a man exclusively for money (in 2020 USD) wound up with more than Melania did vastly overestimates Trump's net worth.

I have no problem with his choice of the word. Prostitute is simply an accurate job description. It's the suggestion that, without any proof, she married him only for his money.

If you read open comments on things like Yahoo you'll find people saying that the disgusting Kayleigh Mcenany or kellyanne Conway must have slept their way to their positions. Doesn't matter who says these things, they are sexist.

Last edited by The Old Man
@The Old Man posted:

I have no problem with his choice of the word. Prostitute is simply an accurate job description. It's the suggestion that, without any proof, she married him only for his money.

If you read open comments on things like Yahoo you'll find people saying that the disgusting Kayleigh Mcenany or kellyanne Conway must have slept their way to their positions. Doesn't matter who says these things, they are sexist.

The position that she married him for reasons other than his money (and other tangible benefits) is a far far more damning premise than that the move was purely transactional. As you say, a job is a job; but the suggestion that Melania actually loves and respects the guy is defamatory. 

I don’t read Yahoo! Comments. The specific type of comment you refer to: “[Female] must have slept her way to this position of power [in the context of non sex-related work],” is one of belittling a woman’s talent. That’s not cool, but it has no bearing on Melania.  Her primary displayed talent since her mediocre modeling career was in re-negotiating her pre-nup after Trump won the election.

I knew what you meant. 

Last edited by winetarelli
@winetarelli posted:

I don’t read Yahoo! Comments.

They have temporary suspended them because of the flames of racism, bigotry and sexism in our country were on full display there. They're currently running surveys to see if people still wants a comment section after every article. Of note, the LA Times no longer allows its readers to comment on things anymore except the trivial like the Emmy nominees. They no longer allow comments on current events and politics. Everything gets too ugly.

@The Old Man posted:

The last MSNBC poll asking about Harris' as vice-president pick, she was ranked 32% favorable and 34% unfavorable. Sounds about right.

Yeah.  I personally would have preferred Rice or Duckworth.  (Or Whitmer, if white was a possibility.). But, it is what it is.  She is generally fierce and she will be able to play the role of "attack dog" in the campaign allowing Biden to "stay above the fray and be Presidential" in a way other options might not have.  Also, while she will be unlikely ever to receive my vote in a Presidential primary, she really is fully capable of assuming the role on a moment's notice should that become necessary.

It also says something positive about Biden's character that he picked the one person who really went after him in the primary as his running mate.

Last edited by winetarelli
@The Old Man posted:

Oh she'll be fine. I just remember what a terrible job she did with Kavanaugh asking him that he had to be sure of what he was answering. She was implying she had some goods on him and then she never brought up again. Very poor form.

Biden won’t run IMO in 2024 and Harris will start running in 2022 and become an obvious distraction. 

She was dreadful as a candidate and her blunders on health care were embarrassing. She was in above her pay grade. 

@wine+art posted:

Biden won’t run IMO in 2024 and Harris will start running in 2022 and become an obvious distraction. 

She was dreadful as a candidate and her blunders on health care were embarrassing. She was in above her pay grade. 

I imagine the next person I vote for in a Presidential primary will probably be Buttigieg or Sherrod Brown, though if Yang got his shit together, learned how to campaign, and spent some time in government, he would get a real look.  In the meantime, though, all that really matters is getting the orange dumpster fire out of office and delivering a Democratic Senate so his damage can begin to be undone.  2024 can't really be on our minds right now.

As a lifelong CA and SF Bay Area resident, I can attest there are a decent number of folks who aren’t in the Harris camp.  When her well-known Democratic power broker “mentor” (ahem, they dated) Willie Brown stated recently he’d recommend she decline the VP nom and ascend to the Attorney General role instead if/when Biden wins, then you know there are some areas in her time as San Francisco District Attorney and California Attorney General that will be ripe for attacks by the GOP.  

If she were from the Midwest and not CA, she’d be viewed as a net positive for the battles in the swing states.  At this point, Dems can only hope it’s a break-even proposition with her as VP.

She lacks progressive bonafides, which will make folks in the Sanders and Warren wings of the Democratic party less than happy.  

Hopefully, she doesn’t become a lightning rod or have any “gotcha” moments for the Biden campaign.  

Also, CA Gov Gavin Newsom’s speech during the DNC convention could really propel him to frontrunner status for 2024 Dem primaries.  You know the suburban white ladies will fall all over themselves when he hits the stage.........

Last edited by ProSys

Keep in mind that those who have studied these things say that the VP pick makes almost no difference at all to the actual end result. Quayle didn't cost Bush the first the election, nor did Cheney cost Bush the first.  Each had more negatives than Kamala I think.  Palin was terrible but the real nuttiness came out after the election.  

@bman posted:

Keep in mind that those who have studied these things say that the VP pick makes almost no difference at all to the actual end result. Quayle didn't cost Bush the first the election, nor did Cheney cost Bush the first.  Each had more negatives than Kamala I think.  Palin was terrible but the real nuttiness came out after the election.  

How in the hell could you post this and not mention’ the world is flat and science denier’  the supper fluffer, Mike Pence? 🤣🤔😉... also, Cheney was the president, thank you very much!

Last edited by wine+art
@bman posted:

Keep in mind that those who have studied these things say that the VP pick makes almost no difference at all to the actual end result. Quayle didn't cost Bush the first the election, nor did Cheney cost Bush the first.  Each had more negatives than Kamala I think.  Palin was terrible but the real nuttiness came out after the election.  

We are in a different age nowadays, where everything meaningful is recorded and disseminated far and wide via social media (for better and worse).  The spotlight is far brighter, and magnified considerably.  

As long as she’s been vetted and forthcoming on everything in her history, and is ready to respond well to her variety of shortcomings, Kamala Harris should be fine and not provide any reason for the far majority of voters to consider someone other than Biden.

@ProSys posted:

At this point, Dems can only hope it’s a break-even proposition with her as VP.

She lacks progressive bonafides, which will make folks in the Sanders and Warren wings of the Democratic party less than happy. 

She's a positive because she is a Black woman. (Yes, she is also qualified.) Biden was not solid with the "African American community " as they say. This guarantees all those bBlack moms and their daughters will be making sure to get out to vote. As I've been saying all along there was no way he was not going to pick a Black woman.

As for Gavin Newsom in the future, certainly he'd  better than the awful mayor of LA who thought he was going to become the governor, Antonio Villaraigosa or the other mayor waiting in the wings, Eric Garcetti known locally as "Mayor Yoga Pants." But in general I would say fat chance.

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×