Harris: “Because of the Inflation Reduction Act … we are dropping trillions of dollars on streets of America right now.”
The account for economic research institute "Just Facts" replied to Harris’ clip: "IN FACT, the root cause of inflation is the federal government dropping trillions of dollars on the streets of America. In the words of former Fed Chair Ben Bernanke, ‘increasing the number of U.S. dollars in circulation’ reduces the ‘value of a dollar.’"
dang this is a long quote, the reason Newsom isn't running for one is because Joe won't hang it up. Two is because he doesn't want to take on Harris and that is the plan. Big Mike OB won't run unless it's a free ride, so pronoun is out. All this may change if these debates actually happen, rumors already going around about pulling the plug on joe but his life mission right now is to pardon his crackhead son and he doesn't even have the public in his peripheral blindness.
The only reason why a debate is on the table is because the polls are bad for Brandon, and 100k showed up on the beach of wildwood. Was the Boss there? nope just DJT who is hated to no end just 45 minutes north in Frantic city.....which is where everyone stayed btw...you think 100k stays in wildwood in off season 
Throw some more shit on the wall to see what sticks.... btw I am not a republican 
I am an American, against communism, against socialism
progressives need to form their own party, trying to hide behind an already established party line. At least grow some balls like RFK jr and run on a 3rd party because his family won't let him push Brandon corn pop out.
Even the Canadians know Joe has no A game, he's just another hoser
It is still amazing that Harris does not realize how things that are said can be taken so wrong, even if well-intended. This is a large part of why so many folks were disillusioned with her. She needs to learn to freestyle communicate more effectively.
Harris started so well:
"Lots of people who still have a home who are under evacuation order, I know you want to get back home, but this is a time to be patient," she said. "There is still so much work that firefighters, police officers, FEMA, and others are doing that is about search and rescue. The work that still needs to be done to ensure the safety around utility lines — this work is still very much in progress."
Then veered into the ditch, again:
"It’s critically important that, to the extent you can find anything that gives you an ability to be patient in this extremely dangerous and unprecedented crisis, that you do."
Various comments:
"It’s terrifying to think how Kamala would have treated the American people if this is how she treats her home state supporters."
"No thoughts just word salad," American Family Association senior policy adviser Jenna Ellis
"We really dodged a bullet!" New Jersey Assemblyman John Azzariti
"Those of you fleeing the fire, the most critical thing for you to pack is your patience."
"Such sage advice from a gifted communicator,"
"What she's trying to express here with this confusing word salad is that it's super important for LA residents to be patient with the bungling incompetence & appalling stupidity of CA Democrats & not to link the ongoing disaster to their woke, civilization-destroying policies," Deb Heine of American Greatness
@Raiders22
I understood what she meant with the second phrase, it makes sense to me in context. If you take a few lines out of context it can seem like something completely different than when it the proper context.
What she said made total sense, when I read your complaint/commentary bolded part I got it and it was not that difficult.
@wallstreetcappers
Yes. But as I have been saying all along. She has to be better at articulating her point and understanding how it will be perceived by her audience.
This is just a subset, or example, of her inability to speak off the cuff -- or even to be able to 'read the room'.
She is not a dummy and should be able to do this.
A LOT of people would have liked to vote for her. But she could not do these two simple things to convince them.
The bigger issue is that she has NOT improved.
@Raiders22
Its funny you fault her for how she comes across verbally, in this case I completely got it without needing to watch any further clip or research a thing and that is because I know context around the situation so with her own style she is communicating and her communication was clear and understood even from your slighted approach. It is funny because she is not the worst orator or communicator, we have experienced many politicians who are unique. I find that guy in PA to be odd and strange, but many like his style and while it might come off as different it is not used to judge him. I found Christie to be odd in his approach, brash and a bit obtuse to understanding other people but to those who know him and are from there its like any other person you might run into. I found Bush Lite to be horrible at oratory, he was brutal at communication and came off as clumsy and out of touch many times and yet he got a pass most of the time and people did not judge him.
Harris communicates just fine, just like Palin communicates just fine...both are unique and not like a newscaster but that does not mean she is lacking or should be faulted. Ive seen you guys and many in the ultra conservative media try and soil her for those unique qualities she has and I found it to be hollow and weak to try and find fault in that way. Harris was and is a great politician and a decent person. The way she has communicated with this situation is just fine I dont get the need to try and be critical at all but especially now.
@wallstreetcappers
Which guy in PA? Fetterman?
Sure, absolutely a lot of folk's style and delivery are bad.
But a politician should be able to at least 'freestyle' somewhat -- she simply cannot.
Yes, Christie for sure has the brash Yankee approach. Trump has some of that as well. He has at least tried to tone it down a tad.
But that is very off-putting in some areas of the country.
No way Harris communicates just fine. That is part of the reason I think they 'disallowed' her to go out and be 'unscripted' on podcasts and such.
Even the strategist (after the prompter failed) said the only two folks he had ever been around that could still do the speech without it were Bill Clinton and Palin.
So, Palin was fine with her delivery. But her tone and accent may have been off-putting to some.
But Harris does not exhibit any of those good traits and never has.
It is the lack of knowledge on the topics that bleeds through.
I always tell folks when they go to give a speech that one of the three most important things is to know the material or subject. That way you appear comfortable. Harris never seems comfortable. that is why she is always giggling, head-nodding, and saying 'right?'.
It is one of the main fears a lot of people have and can be difficult to overcome. I do not think she has that problem.
I just do not think she is informed enough.
So, when you start off with a script or prepared section and then try to add to it -- that is where some folks have a problem. I think that is her secondary problem.
Most folks can be taught how to handle this to an extent. She did much better in the debate, for example.
She stuck to her talking points and rarely tried to free-style. No matter what the question was, she touched on it and then swerved it back to her prepared talking points. That is what works for her.
If she sticks to what works and becomes more informed on the issues -- it will help her freestyling. Because, as a politician, you have to have a certain amount of that. Otherwise, it all seems 'forced' and as if you are winging it.
She seems to think that volume equals quality when it comes to speaking. I don't think she's an idiot but she can come off that way, purely due to her lack of economy with words. She just never sounds "sharp". Her attempts at profundity end up making her look silly. She would be better off in a "behind the scenes" role if she wants to remain in politics.
@Raiders22
Notice that I did not fault or be critical of those others nor of people like Dan Quayle or Ross Perot etc but you did to Harris. I think Harris is a great speaker and she communicates just fine in fact better than most. I'd take a Harris speech over a Trump or a Vance speech any minute of the day. I think a few of you are so partisan that you seek out opportunity to find fault and minimize others who are of a different political perspective.
I find Trump to be an awful speaker, he does not prepare and thinks his off the cuff approach is folksy and endearing, I find it useless and lacking much value of any kind. I have never felt that Harris was off in her speaking abilities no more than another say news reporter who gets thrown a question and has to improvise where sometimes it might be less than canned speech quality but the message is communicated. At least Harris does not pontificate about eating cats and dogs or peeking at Arnold Palmer in the locker room.
Your side likes to take shots at people and in this case Harris when there is little reason for doing so and it is not like she is an outlier, next week we will have another four years of the WORST speaker this country has ever been forced to endure and you want to complain about Harris over and over?
and you WILL complain about Trump "over and over".
@UNIMAN
So how is this different than the list I made? Why do you and Mugg and others target Harris when there are so many other similar and worse examples out there? I do not find her speeches or communications lacking but unlike you and several others here I am not looking to find reasons to insult and put her down. The repeated need to attack Harris who is a great politician, decent person and extremely respectful at the end here is just off to me. People who want to target and debase can always find ways to do so even when the subject and target are not at all what several of you are describing.
@wallstreetcappers
Notice that I did not fault or be critical of those others nor of people like Dan Quayle or Ross Perot etc but you did to Harris.
Absolutely, I am critical of her and fault her. For not knowing the subject, not being prepared, and not 'reading the room'.
That is why her public speaking is so bad.
That is why she was not 'allowed' to go out and freestyle on a variety of topics and a multitude of outlets.
There is not disputing that you have to be critical of someone's 'reason(s)' for not being good at something.
@wallstreetcappers
I think Harris is a great speaker and she communicates just fine in fact better than most
Again -- it is not her ability to 'read' a prepared speech. That is NOT the issue.
The problem is off the cuff stuff or her ability to freestyle -- because she simply does not have a grasp of the topic(s).
I pointed out how well prepared she was at the debate. Her preppers did a good job with her for that.
@wallstreetcappers
I think a few of you are so partisan that you seek out opportunity to find fault and minimize others who are of a different political perspective.
For sue that is part of it. That is why you always bring Trump into every single discussion.
But, an honest assessment allows that Bill Clinton was a good speaker. I have always said that and did above.
You have to be able to take out your partisanship to just assess someone's speaking/discussion ability.
@Raiders22
You obviously take issue with her it has been multiple times you have tried to debase her but you are not the worst here in making digs towards her. I look at the person and their qualities not just how they handle curve balls from time to time. There are few humans who can be outstanding all of the time or even most of the time at impromptu deliver. This for sure is yet another one of the subjective categories, I am not looking to nit pick and find fault with a decent respectful person like Harris.
@wallstreetcappers
you want to complain about Harris over and over?
Not complaining -- laughing at.
It is astounding that her handlers could not do better with her most obvious weakness.
Just like you would fire a QB coach that cannot get a hitch out of the QB's throwing motion -- she should have fired all of her handlers early on and got better coaching. Any decent speaking coach could have helped her lack of technique. Any strategist could have helped her with topic knowledge. I suspect she had a new person(s) prep her for the debate.
@wallstreetcappers
You obviously take issue with her
Of course I do. But I also take issue with her not being able to do a decent speech and handle questions on various topics with knowledge.
SO -- both things are true; I have issue with her politics AND I critique her inability to speak.
Laughing at...well that is poor of you but hey that is your choice to try and put down a decent woman. Her technique is fine to me and flawed to you I just do not make the conclusions your side does and not sure the value in doing so at any point.
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
