USA Midterms....

[albion]

My link was self incriminatingly humouring its clientele..

Meanwhile (from 2022 I think)
'The 2025 Presidential Transition Project builds off Heritage’s longstanding “Mandate for Leadership,” which has been highly influential for presidential administrations since the Reagan administration. Most recently, the Trump administration relied heavily on Heritage’s “Mandate” for policy guidance, embracing nearly two-thirds of Heritage’s proposals within just one year in office. '

https://www.heritage.org/press/heri...ransition-project-hiring-paul-dans-direct-new

 

[albion]

Back then they never quite knew Trump would gut and own the Republican party. Trump would have been fully aware of it, his right hand man in operating inners coups running it. Dans is his man in waiting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Dans
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alison...trump-criticism-but-project-will-stay-active/

 

[Bazzer]

Back then they never quite knew Trump would gut and own the Republican party. Trump would have been fully aware of it, his right hand man in operating inners coups running it. Dans is his man in waiting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Dans
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alison...trump-criticism-but-project-will-stay-active/

Trump's denials are like almost everything he utters; lies.
Quite apart from the secret filming evidence, there are connections between Trump and many of those involved in project 2025 and Heritage. For example Steve Bannon (of building the wall infamy) currently stewing in prison, Kevin Roberts who is buddy of Vance, with Vance writing the foreword of Roberts' book "Burning Down Washington to Save America" and Trump's advisor Steven Millar who is also the founder of America First Legal.

 

[Bazzer]

Various outlets reported RFK tried to secure a post in any Harris administration, in return for his support. Having been rebuffed, he now very publicly now joins Trump.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy5ekxlwzgo

He left the Democrats because "it had become the party of war, censorship, corruption, big pharma, big tech and big money." Of course none of this applies to Trump's MAGA Republican party.

 

[AndyRM]

Various outlets reported RFK tried to secure a post in any Harris administration, in return for his support. Having been rebuffed, he now very publicly now joins Trump.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy5ekxlwzgo

He left the Democrats because "it had become the party of war, censorship, corruption, big pharma, big tech and big money." Of course none of this applies to Trump's MAGA Republican party.

That's a bigger deal than the Democrats are saying there. He might have been a fringe player since Harris got the nod, but the Trump campaign with ruthlessly exploit his name. I expect there will probably be some crass references to JFK's assassination and Trump's survival along the way.

 

[Rusty Nails]

Kamal Harris is being accused of being detail-free about her aims and policies in this campaign.

Different circumstances given that she is part of the existing regime, but the tactic worked well for Starmer.

 

[AuroraSaab]

If I was Harris I'd have spent the last 4 years getting on top of my brief and learning everything I could about every aspect of policy. She seems to have done none of that. I think Harris thought Biden was good for the nomination and didn't really have ambition to be president so was just enjoying the VP ride. It's no wonder she's falling short now, because she hasn't put the work in. I've never heard her speak authoritatively on or about anything.

 

[Rusty Nails]

If I was Harris I'd have spent the last 4 years getting on top of my brief and learning everything I could about every aspect of policy. She seems to have done none of that. I think Harris thought Biden was good for the nomination and didn't really have ambition to be president so was just enjoying the VP ride. It's no wonder she's falling short now, because she hasn't put the work in. I've never heard her speak authoritatively on or about anything.

Who says she's falling short? The polls show her doing better than Biden was a couple of months ago, and it will be the final result that shows if she has fallen short.

This is US politics and speaking authoritatively is not exactly a strength of Trump...or Vance, unless you count shouting loudly, exaggerating and belittling opponents as speaking authoritatively.

Does anyone outside the US ever really hear much about what VPs are saying other than in the run-up to an election. The only thing that matters is from here on in.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Who says she's falling short? The polls show her doing better than Biden was a couple of months ago, and it will be the final result that shows if she has fallen short.

That's unsurprising because she's an improvement on a candidate nobody had any confidence in, including his own team.

This is US politics and speaking authoritatively is not exactly a strength of Trump...or Vance, unless you count shouting loudly, exaggerating and belittling opponents as speaking authoritatively.

The fact that these are the candidates on offer is an indication of the paucity that the US system generates. If Harris wins it will be because people didn't want Trump again. If Trump wins it will be because people didn't want the Democrats again.

If the Democrats win it won't be because Harris has shown herself to be a competent politician. Biden put her in charge of the border for example and apart from trying to get companies to invest in South America - which is so long term as to have an effects that will take decades to materialise - she seems to have done nothing.

I think we'll see some reneging on Democrat policy on immigration and a pretence of tough talking on border control between now and the election to try to gain ground on an issue she should have been on top of 3 years ago.

It's not unlike the UK election really. The wider public seem fed up with politicians in general, with nothing new on offer and a vote being for the least worst.

 

[Bazzer]

If the Democrats win it won't be because Harris has shown herself to be a competent politician. Biden put her in charge of the border for example and apart from trying to get companies to invest in South America - which is so long term as to have an effects that will take decades to materialise - she seems to have done nothing.

I think we'll see some reneging on Democrat policy on immigration and a pretence of tough talking on border control between now and the election to try to gain ground on an issue she should have been on top of 3 years ago.

Your comment about Harris being in charge of the border, suggests she had responsibility for preventing immigration at the Southern US border. Which is the spin Trump and his media allies put on her role.
You may know differently, but so far as I was aware, Biden did not give her this responsibility. Rather, she was tasked with trying to improve opportunities in certain countries with a view to encouraging potential migrants to stay at home. Geo political circumstances conspired against her.
It is also telling that when the Democrats succeeded in gaining cross party support, which included some very conservative Republicans, for what was to be a stringent immigration bill, Trump used his MAGA ring kissers, to kill the bill.
For all his shouting about immigration levels and claims of immigrants raping and murdering Americans and taking black jobs, Trump has no wish to stop immigration except through Draconian measures.

 

[Rusty Nails]

That's unsurprising because she's an improvement on a candidate nobody had any confidence in, including his own team.

The fact that these are the candidates on offer is an indication of the paucity that the US system generates. If Harris wins it will be because people didn't want Trump again. If Trump wins it will be because people didn't want the Democrats again.

If the Democrats win it won't be because Harris has shown herself to be a competent politician. Biden put her in charge of the border for example and apart from trying to get companies to invest in South America - which is so long term as to have an effects that will take decades to materialise - she seems to have done nothing.

I think we'll see some reneging on Democrat policy on immigration and a pretence of tough talking on border control between now and the election to try to gain ground on an issue she should have been on top of 3 years ago.

It's not unlike the UK election really. The wider public seem fed up with politicians in general, with nothing new on offer and a vote being for the least worst.

You are taking the Republican Party line at face value. Harris was never ”in charge of the border”. She has been doing what she was asked to do by Biden…a diplomatic role.

From an article in the Washington Post:

“Two months into his presidency, Joe Biden confronted a political crisis: The number of migrants illegally crossing the southern border into the United States was soaring. So he asked Vice President Kamala Harris to lead the administration’s diplomatic efforts to reduce problems at the border.
That assignment included working with three Central American countries — El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras — to improve living conditions and lower the odds that migrants would leave those countries for reasons including poverty, gang violence and corruption.
But Republicans quickly seized on the apparent diplomatic opportunity for Harris, referring to her as the country’s “border czar” responsible for all issues related to the U.S.-Mexico line. Now, more than three years later, her role is a potential political liability as she runs for president as the Democratic nominee and polls show voters broadly disapprove of the Biden administration’s handling of the border.
Harris, in fact, has never been in charge of the border. The Department of Homeland Security manages migration. Her immigration role for the Biden administration has included boosting U.S. aid to Central America, traveling to the region and discouraging potential migrants from making the dangerous journey to the United States.”

 

[albion]

That's a bigger deal than the Democrats are saying there. He might have been a fringe player since Harris got the nod, but the Trump campaign with ruthlessly exploit his name. I expect there will probably be some crass references to JFK's assassination and Trump's survival along the way.

Considering RFKs main donor is also Trumps main donor, the reaching out to Democrats was a ruse wisely avoided.
If he was taking votes from the Democrats I very much doubt there would have been the need for any withdrawal.

One has to assume he is/was simply grifting for cash.

 

[Bazzer]

As RFK jnr switches to Trump, some of Nikki Haley's supporters encourage switching to Harris in order to stop Trump.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/8/23/2265407/-HV4H-Haley-Voters-For-Harris
They have even started their own PAC
https://www.haleyvotersforharris.org/

 

[AndyRM]

If Project 2025 doesn't work out I've found the solution:

 

[AuroraSaab]

You are taking the Republican Party line at face value. Harris was never ”in charge of the border”. She has been doing what she was asked to do by Biden…a diplomatic role.

That's what pro Dem news outlets are spinning it as now - 'Harris hasn't failed because it wasn't her job anyway' - when she was tasked with dealing with southern border immigration both long term and 'in country' in Biden's own announcement of her role.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing...president-harris-in-a-meeting-on-immigration/

There's no reason to suppose Trump would have done any better of course.