Why are Americans so bloody stupid?

[Immanuel Can]

The sad thing is a LOT of very well-informed people knew Trump was not a good choice.

But what did the Dems put up against him? Nothing but a woman who got zero votes in the one Democratic primary in which she competed, and who they then installed by fiat, and who had the IQ of a handful of Kleenex and the personality of a buzz saw.

Any idea why they chose so badly?

[Gary Childress]

Well, if he's not the mastermind behind the attempt to make him "king," then who do they think is? I'm open to contrary theories, if you've got one.

That’s changing the subject.

I'm on the same subject: who do these Democrats think is the mastermind of the "king" thing?

If there is a "mastermind," as you seem to suggest there needs to be, then I'd say the owners and content managers of Fox News would be high on the suspect list. There's also the Heritage Foundation and its associates, which created some sort of plan or "project" for 2025. Fox essentially provided the media backing, and Heritage might have given the intellectual assistance--if one wishes to trace links to find who is responsible. It's probably more likely that a bunch of forces came together at an unfortunate time, and now we have a horribly (and unabashedly) corrupt man in office.

[Immanuel Can]

That’s changing the subject.

I'm on the same subject: who do these Democrats think is the mastermind of the "king" thing?

If there is a "mastermind," as you seem to suggest there needs to be,

Well, somebody has to be behind that alleged "plot." Who do you think that is? Who's the obvious choice?

...then I'd say the owners and content managers of Fox News would be high on the suspect list. There's also the Heritage Foundation and its associates, which created some sort of plan or "project" for 2025. Fox essentially provided the media backing, and Heritage might have given the intellectual assistance--if one wishes to trace links to find who is responsible. It's probably more likely that a bunch of forces came together at an unfortunate time, and now we have a horribly (and unabashedly) corrupt man in office.

Oh. So it was a kind of accident, was it? It just kind of came together? A conspiracy, maybe? Or just an inexplicable coming together of factors? So there's nothing to learn there?

What about Kamala? Whose idea did you think it was to crown her the Dem candidate, and why did they skip the primary completely? How did they get enough power among the Dems to arrange that? And why did they pick a candidate so bad she not only gave Trump no competition, but lost every swing state?

What on earth do you think the Dems were thinking? Or did they just miscalculate grandly? But then, why would they even want her?

[Gary Childress]

The sad thing is a LOT of very well-informed people knew Trump was not a good choice.

But what did the Dems put up against him? Nothing but a woman who got zero votes in the one Democratic primary in which she competed, and who they then installed by fiat, and who had the IQ of a handful of Kleenex and the personality of a buzz saw.

Any idea why they chose so badly?

I'm not sure Harris would have been worse than Trump. All indicators seemed to point to Trump being a more overtly corrupt man than Harris. And the majority of political polls at the time didn't predict a Trump win, but more of a neck-and-neck race. Neither Trump nor Harris was ideal, far from it, but with Trump, the public seems to have made the bigger mistake. Trump being the bigger mistake was in line with Noam Chomsky's assessment at the time.

[Gary Childress]

I'm on the same subject: who do these Democrats think is the mastermind of the "king" thing?

If there is a "mastermind," as you seem to suggest there needs to be,

Well, somebody has to be behind that alleged "plot." Who do you think that is? Who's the obvious choice?

...then I'd say the owners and content managers of Fox News would be high on the suspect list. There's also the Heritage Foundation and its associates, which created some sort of plan or "project" for 2025. Fox essentially provided the media backing, and Heritage might have given the intellectual assistance--if one wishes to trace links to find who is responsible. It's probably more likely that a bunch of forces came together at an unfortunate time, and now we have a horribly (and unabashedly) corrupt man in office.

Oh. So it was a kind of accident, was it? It just kind of came together? A conspiracy, maybe? Or just an inexplicable coming together of factors? So there's nothing to learn there?

What about Kamala? Whose idea did you think it was to crown her the Dem candidate, and why did they skip the primary completely? How did they get enough power among the Dems to arrange that? And why did they pick a candidate so bad she not only gave Trump no competition, but lost every swing state?

What on earth do you think the Dems were thinking? Or did they just miscalculate grandly? But then, why would they even want her?

Biden overwhelmingly won the 2024 DNC primary. Harris was his running mate. Biden then dropped out of the race and gave his support to Harris, there was no way to do another primary. So Harris more or less got the DNC nomination in her lap.

[phyllo]

Harris could use the funds which had been raised for a Biden-Harris ticket. A different candidate would not be able to do that.

[Gary Childress]

Harris could use the funds which had been raised for a Biden-Harris ticket. A different candidate would not be able to do that.

In the end, money and people who have a lot of it win elections. Of course, Trump had a lot of money, just from his personal investments alone, to get him a lot of publicity. The Democrats might have had more (I don't know), but Biden and Harris had to get most of it from corporate PACs and stuff. That's what I admired about Sanders' campaign in 2016 is that he refused donations from corporate PACs (Political Action Committees). He received some money from Labor Union PACs and other reputable PACs, but none from Corporations in 2016.

[sarcasm]But, alas, Sanders is a dirty, rotten "socialist," so we're all fortunate that Trump won in 2016 instead. [/sarcasm]

[Immanuel Can]

What about Kamala? Whose idea did you think it was to crown her the Dem candidate, and why did they skip the primary completely? How did they get enough power among the Dems to arrange that? And why did they pick a candidate so bad she not only gave Trump no competition, but lost every swing state?

What on earth do you think the Dems were thinking? Or did they just miscalculate grandly? But then, why would they even want her?

Biden overwhelmingly won the 2024 DNC primary.

Yes, he did. And Kamala, who ran against him, got no votes at all.

Harris was his running mate.

She wasn't, initially. She was his opponent. He installed her himself, again without a single vote. A strange move on his part, because she wasn't nice to him in the primary, at all, and said awful things about his character. But somehow, he was convinced to pick her...?

...there was no way to do another primary.

Sure, there was. They just didn't do one. In fact, normal procedure for choosing a candidate requires one. They just didn't go with normal procedure.

Now, the key question: why did they choose somebody so utterly incompetent and unsuitable? Why choose somebody that no Democrat would even nominate? They must have had many better possibilities. (The Dems are not all like Kamala, fortunately for them.) But they clearly chose badly, and obviously, very badly; because she lost in a record-level defeat to Donald Trump.

Why didn't they choose better? Your guess?

[Gary Childress]

...there was no way to do another primary.

Sure, there was. They just didn't do one. In fact, normal procedure for choosing a candidate requires one. They just didn't go with normal procedure.

Now, the key question: why did they choose somebody so utterly incompetent and unsuitable? Why choose somebody that no Democrat would even nominate? They must have had many better possibilities. (The Dems are not all like Kamala, fortunately for them.) But they clearly chose badly, and obviously, very badly; because she lost in a record-level defeat to Donald Trump.

Why didn't they choose better? Your guess?

That is either a lie or you are misinformed; I suspect the latter. Go look it up. Biden dropped out after his last debate with Trump, which he is widely believed to have "lost". There was no time to organize another full primary, so they simply polled the DNC primary candidates for who to replace Biden, and since Biden endorsed Harris when he dropped out, the DNC primary candidates nominated Harris of their own vote. It was an exceptional situation, and there is no US law that requires a party to hold another primary if their candidate drops out and they need to select another. Political parties are private associations that have their own rules and regulations to follow under such circumstances, and there was no such rule for the DNC.

[Immanuel Can]

...there was no way to do another primary.

Sure, there was. They just didn't do one. In fact, normal procedure for choosing a candidate requires one. They just didn't go with normal procedure.

Now, the key question: why did they choose somebody so utterly incompetent and unsuitable? Why choose somebody that no Democrat would even nominate? They must have had many better possibilities. (The Dems are not all like Kamala, fortunately for them.) But they clearly chose badly, and obviously, very badly; because she lost in a record-level defeat to Donald Trump.

Why didn't they choose better? Your guess?

That is either a lie or you are misinformed; I suspect the latter. Go look it up.

I don't need to. I know I'm right.

She was in a primary in 2019, and dropped out on Dec. 3. During that campaign, she accused him of association with Democrat segregationist senators Talmadge and Eastland in the 1970s and 1980s to oppose federally mandated busing to integrate public schools. Then she said that she wasn't saying Joe Biden was a racist...while mentioning his friendship with racists. Interesting. Then she also accused him of being guilty of allegations, in April 2019, when multiple women came forward to allege that Biden had touched or kissed them in ways that made them uncomfortable in public or semi-public settings, Harris told reporters, "I believe them," regarding their accounts. (Washington Post)

So she wasn't originally a Biden fan. And he had good reasons to mistrust her. However, he picked her as running mate without any voting process. Biden was forced out because (as Democrats including even his wife are now confessing) Biden was mentally incompetent and would never be able to win another campaign. I guess they planned badly; because then they said they had no time for a primary. But they did. However, let's play along with the excuse: they still didn't have to choose somebody nobody liked, and who had no skills, and no credibility, and was pretty obviously going to give their opposition a better chance to win.

So again, the key question: why did the Dems make such a horrible mistake as selecting her? Why didn't they put up some credible alternative?

[Dubious]

Trump is a Lame Duck, and he does not care about making decisions for Legacy.

You forgot to add lame brain to lame duck, the former, among a host of other things, being responsible for the latter.

[Dubious]

Walker seems deranged.

Not any more deranged than insisting that evolution is all wrong since there had to be an original mating couple called Adam and Eve somewhere in paradise before they blew it. A cultist brain is a perversion of a normally functioning human brain. The quality control agency in brain creation has it seems, allowed for more defective instances to emerge in the assembly line.

[Gary Childress]

Sure, there was. They just didn't do one. In fact, normal procedure for choosing a candidate requires one. They just didn't go with normal procedure.

Now, the key question: why did they choose somebody so utterly incompetent and unsuitable? Why choose somebody that no Democrat would even nominate? They must have had many better possibilities. (The Dems are not all like Kamala, fortunately for them.) But they clearly chose badly, and obviously, very badly; because she lost in a record-level defeat to Donald Trump.

Why didn't they choose better? Your guess?

That is either a lie or you are misinformed; I suspect the latter. Go look it up.

I don't need to. I know I'm right.

She was in a primary in 2019, and dropped out on Dec. 3. During that campaign, she accused him of association with Democrat segregationist senators Talmadge and Eastland in the 1970s and 1980s to oppose federally mandated busing to integrate public schools. Then she said that she wasn't saying Joe Biden was a racist...while mentioning his friendship with racists. Interesting. Then she also accused him of being guilty of allegations, in April 2019, when multiple women came forward to allege that Biden had touched or kissed them in ways that made them uncomfortable in public or semi-public settings, Harris told reporters, "I believe them," regarding their accounts. (Washington Post)

So she wasn't originally a Biden fan. And he had good reasons to mistrust her. However, he picked her as running mate without any voting process. Biden was forced out because (as Democrats including even his wife are now confessing) Biden was mentally incompetent and would never be able to win another campaign. I guess they planned badly; because then they said they had no time for a primary. But they did. However, let's play along with the excuse: they still didn't have to choose somebody nobody liked, and who had no skills, and no credibility, and was pretty obviously going to give their opposition a better chance to win.

So again, the key question: why did the Dems make such a horrible mistake as selecting her? Why didn't they put up some credible alternative?

There was no way to know ahead of time that Harris wouldn't win. Most polls at the time were showing her about even with Trump. You're trying to make it out like it was a big scandal. It happened pretty much as it would have happened had something like that occurred among Republicans. They don't have a rule to hold a new primary if the candidate who won drops out, either. As usual, you're more upset at Democrats than Republicans. The Democrats botched it, but they probably didn't botch it any worse than the Republicans would have.

[phyllo]

Biden should have recognized his limitations and not run for a second term. Too much ego.

[Immanuel Can]

There was no way to know ahead of time that Harris wouldn't win.

Well, it was pretty obvious to the impartial observer.

In any case, if Trump got in, the Dems have themselves to blame for at least a great part of it. They could have put up somebody much smoother, more informed, less annoying, more skilled in debate and interviews, somebody who knew what policy was, with a better record...and smarter...way smarter.

But some unbelievable arrogance must have informed that decision. That it was bound to be a disaster was right before their eyes.