It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dems' rising star meets with Clinton inner circle in Hamptons

page: 2
19
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2017 @ 10:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Perfectenemy

As president for sure but she is too young currently.

It benefits us all in my opinion if the parties can have stronger people. The gestures of reaching of the aisle for bills is important so thank gooddness for tulsi and rand types. I don't agree with all their positions and I shouldon't have to respect them. Or Booker and Paul with criminal justice reform. It shouldn't be a rarity with fringe politicians.




posted on Jul, 16 2017 @ 10:12 AM
link   
Kamala Harris will never be elected POTUS. Book it.



posted on Jul, 16 2017 @ 10:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: UnBreakable
Kamala Harris will never be elected POTUS. Book it.


I concur at least not with Clinton attached to her name in any shape or form. Hillary is pure Kryptonite at this point.



posted on Jul, 16 2017 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: luthier

I agree. A true liberal would look at the situation as it has arisen over the last period of time and realize that they are no longer in touch with the ever evolving landscape of social issues. A true liberal would then step down and allow those new and most times younger people to flow to the top and give it a more connected approach.

This idea that those old liberals like Pelosi and Feinstien and Shummer are not doing that even though they know that their very faces are hated by a large large segment of the population. They somehow think that just because they were successful twenty and thirty years ago that that same approach will work now. It will not. But they do not step down. Why? Because they are not liberal, they are conservatives. They seek to maintain their ''established order''. That is conservative not liberal.



posted on Jul, 16 2017 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: icanteven

Sometimes, a "yes" or "no" is a gotcha, but if you follow politics and the press you should know this. If you ever participated in any level of competitive debate, you also know this. Because boiling a complex answer down to "yes" or "no" is a way to oversimplify such that if you can make your opponent do it, then you can cut them off after that answer and frame it either way to make them look bad.

Because sometimes "yes" is wrong and so is "no."



posted on Jul, 16 2017 @ 11:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: icanteven

Sometimes, a "yes" or "no" is a gotcha, but if you follow politics and the press you should know this. If you ever participated in any level of competitive debate, you also know this. Because boiling a complex answer down to "yes" or "no" is a way to oversimplify such that if you can make your opponent do it, then you can cut them off after that answer and frame it either way to make them look bad.

Because sometimes "yes" is wrong and so is "no."


A hearing is not a debate. Sessions didn't want to answer the question. And I can't say that I blame him. He knew he was outsmarted.



posted on Jul, 16 2017 @ 11:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: icanteven

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: icanteven

Sometimes, a "yes" or "no" is a gotcha, but if you follow politics and the press you should know this. If you ever participated in any level of competitive debate, you also know this. Because boiling a complex answer down to "yes" or "no" is a way to oversimplify such that if you can make your opponent do it, then you can cut them off after that answer and frame it either way to make them look bad.

Because sometimes "yes" is wrong and so is "no."


A hearing is not a debate. Sessions didn't want to answer the question. And I can't say that I blame him. He knew he was outsmarted.


Did you even watch the hearing? Harris was a rambling disaster. It was cringe worthy. They cut her off because she was making very little sense and CONSTANTLY interrupting and not letting an answer.

Also, ketsuko is right. If you let an opponent, and that is exactly what she was in this hearing, get you into a yes or no answer over a complex issue, you already lost.
edit on am77201717America/Chicago16p11am by annoyedpharmacist because: (no reason given)

edit on pm77201717America/Chicago16p12pm by annoyedpharmacist because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2017 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko
That is absolutely hilarious. I love it. "Bernied." It's a verb now.



posted on Jul, 16 2017 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: annoyedpharmacist

You mean by asking him to state what law or guideline he was using to justify not answering the question?

Can you point to a statement that made no sense or are you just using a script from the gop?

I would consider some of it grand standing bit there was no incoherent statement and she was asking a legit question. She was cutting off a man doing everything possible to not answer the questions.



posted on Jul, 16 2017 @ 01:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: icanteven

Sometimes, a "yes" or "no" is a gotcha, but if you follow politics and the press you should know this. If you ever participated in any level of competitive debate, you also know this. Because boiling a complex answer down to "yes" or "no" is a way to oversimplify such that if you can make your opponent do it, then you can cut them off after that answer and frame it either way to make them look bad.

Because sometimes "yes" is wrong and so is "no."


Jeff sessions was very obviously dodgiing the questing. Which doesn't matter anyway public hearings are basically beauty pageants.

Harris asked him to state the guidelines he has for doing this...

How do you folks think this is crazy?

Jeepers. Now her fund raising and possible reason for doing it could be suspect but there was no hysteria and Sessions was pretty much lying and being vague so it was even more justified.
edit on 16-7-2017 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2017 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: UnBreakable
Kamala Harris will never be elected POTUS. Book it.


She was caught in a money scheme involving Maxine Waters!

Oh man, Maxine of all people, can't she do better than that?



posted on Jul, 16 2017 @ 03:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
a reply to: luthier

Tulsi Gabbard should run as independent and distance herself from both parties.



Yep. Tulsi Gabbard will be your first female POTUS.



posted on Jul, 16 2017 @ 07:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
a reply to: luthier

Tulsi Gabbard should run as independent and distance herself from both parties.



Yep. Tulsi Gabbard will be your first female POTUS.


Yep something the GOP is dreaming of, to fracture the DNC so they can win easily. It is amazing their propaganda arm is so ingrained in conspiracy circles now.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 10:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: annoyedpharmacist

originally posted by: icanteven

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: icanteven

Sometimes, a "yes" or "no" is a gotcha, but if you follow politics and the press you should know this. If you ever participated in any level of competitive debate, you also know this. Because boiling a complex answer down to "yes" or "no" is a way to oversimplify such that if you can make your opponent do it, then you can cut them off after that answer and frame it either way to make them look bad.

Because sometimes "yes" is wrong and so is "no."


A hearing is not a debate. Sessions didn't want to answer the question. And I can't say that I blame him. He knew he was outsmarted.


Did you even watch the hearing? Harris was a rambling disaster. It was cringe worthy. They cut her off because she was making very little sense and CONSTANTLY interrupting and not letting an answer.

Also, ketsuko is right. If you let an opponent, and that is exactly what she was in this hearing, get you into a yes or no answer over a complex issue, you already lost.


BEHOLD..yet another GIFT from Democrats to Republicans..

""Senator Kamala Harris’ meetings with Clinton’s donors signal that they are rallying behind her as the 2020 Democratic presidential nominee.

Harris has emerged as a leading figure in the Trump Resistance; Politico reported that the hearings regarding Trump’s connections to Russia have enabled the Democratic Party to frame her as Trump’s most aggressive critic. In response to one of the hearings she was involved in, she launched the slogan “courage not courtesy.”

However, despite this catchy slogan, Harris has historically lacked the courage to hold her donors accountable when they have broken the law.""

www.msn.com...



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1   >>

log in

join