Politics and effects on children

[rogpodge]

https://x.com/Breaking911/status/1839368007677534718

Interesting study reported on CNN.

[Legend]

This doesn’t surprise me at all. In general terms, republicans view Dems as dumb, Dems view republicans as evil, scary, horrifying, etc.

it carries over to kids.

____________________________________________________________
Sic transit gloria mundi (so shut up and get back to work)

[rogpodge]

https://x.com/kcemenike/status/1839369079268008300

From the same segment. Also, I think people who make decisions based on emotions tend to pass those emotions on to their children. Fear is the most powerful emotion. Listen carefully to Gavin Newsom when he tries to convince you of anything. It’s all to make you feel afraid.

[Mick1]

If you get a chance, take a look at Peggy Noonan’s article from last week. Title is “Kamala Harris is an Artless Dodger.” Subtitle is “She evades every question of substance, leaving voters a choice between Awful and Empty.”

https://archive.ph/ob2rI

She gets a few tough questions in the MSNBC interview, and Noonan quotes her responses in full. They are, in short, nonresponsive. Noonan poses the question we all ask ourselves, which is “Why does KH dodge from clarity? Why doesn’t she want the public to understand her thinking?”

And Noonan shares her three guesses:

1. She’s not interested in policy.
2. She’ll figure it out later. Sentiment unites, while specificity divides.
3. She doesn’t want you to understand how progressive she is.

I’m going to add two more:

1. Because she’s not that bright, or let’s be charitable and say she’s not a deep thinker. Not saying she’s not a good prosecutor, but the few economic policies she cited were…whew. And she clearly doesn’t want to answer questions about immigration and why too much is bad. Double plus ungood. Which leads to the second one…
2. Because she can’t take criticism and is even more thin-skinned than Bad Man Orange. If you watch her reactions to the criticisms, her face looks just like Dan Quayle’s in his debate with Bentsen when the moderator asked what he would do if he were President. Answer is the same for both candidates: they don’t know. And her thin-skinned attitude is, shall we say, not uncommon among prosecutors. I know one prosecutor, he’s been an Asst DA for eight years (Stanford guy). I asked if he was ever worried or concerned that he’d potentially sent someone innocent to prison. He was very confident. “Never.”

Anyway, bottom line for Noonan: If the choice is between Awful and Empty, you have to go with Awful. Because Empty means trouble. We need a rudder, and she offers a national gamble based on insufficient information, an unpredictable regime, perhaps an extreme one. On the other hand, the republic didn’t fall in the four years that Awful was President. Institutions held, Constitution is still secure.

And while I’m ranting, eight more thoughts:

1. 90 people quit working for her. That says something.
2. She’s running as the “candidate of change” and blaming Trump, when Democrats have had the White House for three of the last four presidential terms.
3. She flip-flopped on no fewer than 13 separate Progressive stances and she flip-flopped, as Bernie Sanders says “she has to say those things to get elected.”
4. She did her formative political years in Berkeley/SF/California.
5. No one voted for her.
6. She’s been voted the worst Vice President.
7. She was named the “Most Leftist Senator” by GovTrack
8. Her choice of VP is a hollow joke.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 6 months ago by Mick1.

Audaces fortuna iuvat

[rogpodge]

https://x.com/CollinRugg/status/1839388791246832092

Huh.

[Author]

Posts