ADVERTISEMENT

So...Harris/Walz tonight

JD’s Twitter game is getting better.

Pretty stupid strategy to attack Harris in this way. It might play to his Hillbilly friends, but it's likely to increase the turnout of women voters supporting Harris. Kind of the same stupid strategy of Trump posting obscene messages on X. His base will eat it up. The majority of voters will react negatively.
 
She’s just a god awful speaker. I think she desperately wants to appear smart and an intellectual and she’s just not. Watch Clinton answer a question. Obama. Direct. Responsive. What’s funny is if you watch her outside of something formal where she’s just talking she does so much better. Likable etc. I think she’s just trying to be something she’s not
Clinton was direct and lied every time he opened his mouth. Not a fan. And his "I didn't inhale" nonsense, which should have been a non-issue, was a coy way for no one to ask about the batches of Jim from Taxi pot brownies he ate at Oxford
 
  • Haha
Reactions: mcmurtry66
Clinton was direct and lied every time he opened his mouth. Not a fan. And his "I didn't inhale" nonsense, which should have been a non-issue, was a coy way for no one to ask about the batches of Jim from Taxi pot brownies he ate at Oxford
One of the best episodes of all time. But he was direct. The mealy-mouthed way Harris answers is awful.
 
It is pretty weak. But what if she sounds good? Trump is an absolute disaster any more when out in public. I think if she sounds good, or even decent, we're going to see some epic meltdown stuff from The Donzo.
You and the rest of the liberals will gloat like a proud parent when their child first walks. The rest of us will maintain she is weak, dumb, and has terrible policies.
 
Last edited:
What happens if she does a good job, and is impressive tonight?

It seems like everyone is expecting her to struggle. I'm sure the immediate questions will be that she won't have been alone. And that's valid to an extent.

I actually was pretty impressed with her interview immediately after the Trump/Biden debate. Whoever the CNN interviewer was, can't remember, actually was fairly tough on her trying to get her to acknowledge Biden's crap performance. She handled that interview, that could not have been comfortable, and obviously could not have been prepared for...very well.

We'll see I guess. But I wouldn't surprised if she comes away more impressive than not. And if so, it'll be interesting to see what that does to the Trump campaign, how they handle the debates, etc...

I'm talking composure, ability to articulate positions, etc... Obviously the content isn't going to resonate with a lot of people. Me included, for the most part.
It was pre-taped and edited by CNN. Of course she will come off as competent
 
  • Like
Reactions: GeorgeStrait IU
They can’t make her look good.
Let’s try that again. Take 37. Time. Time is something that can’t be measured. It can. In hours and minutes. And even years. But not really. So at the time I was asked about my positions. It was a different time. Not this time. And by that I don’t mean now. But back in time. Do you understand? Cuz it’s deep HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. You feelin me???? HAHAHAHAHAHA I KNOW YOU ARE HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. So that’s what I’m sayin. About my positions.
 
Let’s try that again. Take 37. Time. Time is something that can’t be measured. It can. In hours and minutes. And even years. But not really. So at the time I was asked about my positions. It was a different time. Not this time. And by that I don’t mean now. But back in time. Do you understand? Cuz it’s deep HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. You feelin me???? HAHAHAHAHAHA I KNOW YOU ARE HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. So that’s what I’m sayin. About my positions.

I didn't watch, but I reckon by the time they got done editing it, it would go something like this...
th_coffee.gif



 
Nope. Not worth watching. But she did well with her delivery
Serious point: I got to the point she talked about the cost of living crisis, and her ideas for fixing it are wrong, but simply the fact that she acknowledged that it exists is a huge deal. Biden seemed intent on ignoring it. She's gaining a lot of ground simply by recognizing the problem.

EDIT: I have previously drawn a comparison between our election and the UK election this year, where the Tories got decimated largely because of the cost of living crisis. And one of the things they did wrong was basically ignore that the crisis existed. Owning up to that may not be enough, but it is a necessary first step.
 
Serious point: I got to the point she talked about the cost of living crisis, and her ideas for fixing it are wrong, but simply the fact that she acknowledged that it exists is a huge deal. Biden seemed intent on ignoring it. She's gaining a lot of ground simply by recognizing the problem.

EDIT: I have previously drawn a comparison between our election and the UK election this year, where the Tories got decimated largely because of the cost of living crisis. And one of the things they did wrong was basically ignore that the crisis existed. Owning up to that may not be enough, but it is a necessary first step.

Did she advocate for price /rent controls?
 
Serious point: I got to the point she talked about the cost of living crisis, and her ideas for fixing it are wrong, but simply the fact that she acknowledged that it exists is a huge deal. Biden seemed intent on ignoring it. She's gaining a lot of ground simply by recognizing the problem.

EDIT: I have previously drawn a comparison between our election and the UK election this year, where the Tories got decimated largely because of the cost of living crisis. And one of the things they did wrong was basically ignore that the crisis existed. Owning up to that may not be enough, but it is a necessary first step.

Thank you for much more efficiently and much more concisely making a point that I've been trying to make while begging all political parties to spell out to me pretty much my entire life.

That being 'acknowledge a blatent, common cause of stress for all of us and better yet, communicate a creative and effective humanistic solution that will make our nation even greater than it currently is'.

Identity legitimate barriers along with the solution.

To your point, one of my biggest issues with the Republican apparatus and campaigns was the resistance to even acknowledge what I feel are big issues....so you don't win me over and as I don't take the right wing apparatus seriously.

That could be easily and greatly welcomed by me if it changed, but I have my doubts as it's easier to create narratives vs create effective solutions that has a purpose to remove barriers and benefit everyone.

The line being as much as some despise the left, the left's goal is to help and benefit everyone including those that hate the left.

An example being the infrastructure bill addresses issues in every state ...not just states that are blue. Hell it's to the point that Republican congresspeople are getting dragged for bragging about an infrastructure project in their district that they voted against.

Pete Stuber from northern Minnesota got called out for bragging about a project even though he voted against it.

I think Boebert has also done the same amount a handful of others for this example.

*****
2024
U.S. Rep. Pete Stauber drew criticism from across the aisle Monday for touting federal funding for a local bridge replacement, despite his 2021 vote against the federal infrastructure bill that supports such projects.

Gov. Tim Walz on Monday announced $1 billion in federal funding from the U.S. Department of Transportation has been secured to replace the Blatnik Bridge between Duluth and Superior, Wisconsin.

Stauber, whose Eighth congressional district includes Duluth, took to social media Monday morning to make an announcement of his own, writing on X: "This is a HUGE win for #MN08 and I was proud to advocate for these funds."

A press release from Stauber's office states the Congressman has "consistently advocated for these funds, sending several letters to the Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg and President Joe Biden."

However, Stauber joined the majority of House Republicans in voting against the bipartisan infrastructure bill in November 2021.
****
 
Last edited:
She didn't get that detailed, but she said she'd do something about "price gouging," so, you know, take that for what it's worth. :rolleyes:
Doing something about price gouging is not close to price/rent controls! Kroger just recently admitted that they raised the price of eggs and milk above the inflationary cost - that is price gouging.
 
Doing something about price gouging is not close to price/rent controls! Kroger just recently admitted that they raised the price of eggs and milk above the inflationary cost - that is price gouging.

What are you talking about? Her proposal, which she is walking back on because moderate Dems facepalmed at her stupid idea, is literally to use the FTC and state AGs to enforce profit limitations.

Harris’ proposal would set rules for corporations so they don’t exploit consumers to run up excessive corporate profits on food and groceries. As part of the proposal, the FTC and state attorneys general would also be given authority to investigate and impose harsh penalties on corporations who break those rules.

That is the government arbitrarily determining price vs. the market, at various points.

Also, did you read the Kroger detail? I don't necessarily believe the interpretation is accurate.

“On milk and eggs, retail inflation has been significantly higher than cost inflation,” Groff wrote.

So Kroger may be adding some margin on top of costs, but I read that as cost inflation is the cost of the underlying eggs, not all changes in labor, overhead, etc. which would also be included.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcmurtry66
Doing something about price gouging is not close to price/rent controls! Kroger just recently admitted that they raised the price of eggs and milk above the inflationary cost - that is price gouging.
That’s a price increase. Not gouging. She’s stuck on gouging bc it was her admin that spiked the cheese bc of her excessive free cheese
 
That’s a price increase. Not gouging. She’s stuck on gouging bc it was her admin that spiked the cheese bc of her excessive free cheese
Actually in this case Bailey has a point. Kroger increased some prices beyond what was necessary simply because they could. That's gouging, and it's largely a result of lack of competition.

The house I grew up in was less than ten minutes from three different grocery stores. All three of them are Kroger now. That's a serious problem.
 
Actually in this case Bailey has a point. Kroger increased some prices beyond what was necessary simply because they could. That's gouging, and it's largely a result of lack of competition.

The house I grew up in was less than ten minutes from three different grocery stores. All three of them are Kroger now. That's a serious problem.
Steep price increases don’t always equal gouging. There is no emergent situation etc. they are taking advantage of like a hurricane. As for the amount states have stats that define what’s typically permissible
 
Actually in this case Bailey has a point. Kroger increased some prices beyond what was necessary simply because they could. That's gouging, and it's largely a result of lack of competition.

The house I grew up in was less than ten minutes from three different grocery stores. All three of them are Kroger now. That's a serious problem.
If you go inside one of the stores their is 4000 options for potato chips. All owned by 2-3 companies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iu60 and IU_Hickory
Steep price increases don’t always equal gouging. There is no emergent situation etc. they are taking advantage of like a hurricane. As for the amount states have stats that define what’s typically permissible
They were taking advantage of inflation itself. It's brilliant. Everything costs them 10% more overnight, so they raise the price 15%. Hide the gouging inside the inflation. What are you going to do about it? Drive 45 minutes to shop somewhere else?
 
Actually in this case Bailey has a point. Kroger increased some prices beyond what was necessary simply because they could. That's gouging, and it's largely a result of lack of competition.

The house I grew up in was less than ten minutes from three different grocery stores. All three of them are Kroger now. That's a serious problem.

You cannot legally define "gouging". It's subjective. You may think Kroger is egregious. I may look at their 1-2% net income margins and think there is no way they are "gouging" anyone.
 
They were taking advantage of inflation itself. It's brilliant. Everything costs them 10% more overnight, so they raise the price 15%. Hide the gouging inside the inflation. What are you going to do about it? Drive 45 minutes to shop somewhere else?

Everything you have bought in the past 2-2.5 years has that dynamic embedded. It's not unique to food. Kroger's forklift and trucks certainly include those.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jet812
Actually in this case Bailey has a point. Kroger increased some prices beyond what was necessary simply because they could. That's gouging, and it's largely a result of lack of competition.

The house I grew up in was less than ten minutes from three different grocery stores. All three of them are Kroger now. That's a serious problem.
I don't know Goat, the margins are 1-2% and cost of food as a percentage of household spending has decreased the past several decades. Also, there is more competition than people realize. Within 15 minutes of my house there is Kroger, Meijier, Aldi, Wal-Mart, Target, Costco, Dollar General and Whole Foods.
 
Last edited:
I don't know Goat, the margins are 1-2% and the cost of food as a percentage of household spending has decreased the past several decades. Also, there is more competition than people realize. Within 15 minutes of my house there is Kroger, Meijier, Aldi, Wal-Mart, Target, Costco, Dollar General and Whole Foods.
Dierbergs, straubs, Whole Foods, schnucks, fancy dollar general, target, Walmart, sams club, Costco within 5 minutes of mine. And three specialty wine shops and a total wine
 
  • Like
Reactions: snarlcakes
I don't know Goat, the margins are 1-2% and the cost of food as a percentage of household spending has decreased the past several decades. Also, there is more competition than people realize. Within 15 minutes of my house there is Kroger, Meijier, Aldi, Wal-Mart, Target, Costco, Dollar General and Whole Foods.
Look, I'm not jumping on the price gouging train. I'm just saying Bailey wasn't entirely off base, and I personally think the problem is grocery chain consolidation.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT