Harris mocks Trump- I told you so

[Vince44 205]

https://www.foxnews.com/media/kamala-harris-says-i-told-you-so-while-slamming-president-trumps-second-term-latest-public-appearance

Former Vice President Kamala Harris had her "I told ya so" moment at a speech in California Thursday.

We're seeing people stay quiet. We are seeing organizations stay quiet. We are seeing those who are capitulating to clearly unconstitutional threats. And these are the things we are witnessing. Each day in the last few months in our country. And it understandably creates a great sense of fear. Because you know there were many things we knew would happen," Harris said at the Leading Women Defined Summit in Dana Point, California.

"I’m not here to say I told you so," Harris said, breaking into laughter with the audience. "I swear, I wasn’t going to say that."

Harris’ comments were the first time she took a victory lap of sorts after her crushing defeat in the presidential election.

Several of Trump's initiatives are tied up in the courts and stocks plunged this week as his tariffs rocked global markets.

[Strike 5,174]

I'm sure Trump is really upset by the loser's comments.  What is Hitlery saying about him these days?

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,819]

Imagine how pathetic you are if you have to reference loser Kamala Harris to prove a fake point.

Go back to your mom's basement, you dumb mother f*****.

[jbycho 557]

Liberals are so focked in the head. 

[The Real timschochet 6,372]

Kamala was right all along, and so were her supporters. We knew what was best for America, you guys did not. That is now apparent to everyone. Too late now though. 

[iam90sbaby 2,465]

3 hours ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Imagine how pathetic you are if you have to reference loser Kamala Harris to prove a fake point.

Go back to your mom's basement, you dumb mother f*****.

Vince44 might even be further down the spectrum than Tim 

[seafoam1 2,794]

18 minutes ago, iam90sbaby said:

Vince44 might even be further down the spectrum than Tim 

That's difficult to achieve. If those two were able to have a child together the kid would end up being a real life version of this guy:

 

[peenie 1,896]

I believe her exact words were I’m NOT here to tell you, I told you so. 

[iam90sbaby 2,465]

7 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

That's difficult to achieve. If those two were able to have a child together the kid would end up being a real life version of this guy:

 

I used to think Vince was ShoNuff, he’s a bumbling knuckle dragging retard 

[seafoam1 2,794]

1 minute ago, iam90sbaby said:

I used to think Vince was ShoNuff, he’s a bumbling knuckle dragging retard 

timmy is worse because he posts the same stupid crap, only much more often. 

[Tree of Knowledge 1,684]

Imagine claiming to be a straight man and looking at yourself in the mirror after voting for Kamala.  Sad.  

[BunnysBastatrds 2,298]

7 hours ago, Strike said:

I'm sure Trump is really upset by the loser's comments.  What is Hitlery saying about him these days?

 I have cankles and I bake cookies 

[Voltaire 5,168]

Should she chose, she's invited to run again for California governor in two years or president in four.

California voters have already gone in for her multiple times and have proven that they will elect anybody with a D next to their name.  They must like the results they are getting from the Ds. Meanwhile, it'd be racist/sexist for national Democrats to nominate somebody other than her for president.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,819]

6 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

Kamala was right all along, and so were her supporters. We knew what was best for America, you guys did not. That is now apparent to everyone. Too late now though.

 No she wasn't and no they weren't. That's you making something up to make yourself feel better.

You see, with liberals like yourself, it's important that you play the victim and show everyone how much of a victim you are. It doesn't matter if you're lying. It's all about looks. 

The fact that you have to reference loser Kamala Harris makes you an even bigger loser. And her supporters.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,819]

27 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Should she chose, she's invited to run again for California governor in two years or president in four.

California voters have already gone in for her multiple times and have proven that they will elect anybody with a D next to their name.  They must like the results they are getting from the Ds. Meanwhile, it'd be racist/sexist for national Democrats to nominate somebody other than her for president.

The Democrat party is also known as the Borg.

[jerryskids 6,534]

7 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

Kamala was right all along, and so were her supporters. We knew what was best for America, you guys did not. That is now apparent to everyone. Too late now though. 

Which non-existent policy position was she right about?  Paying for trans surgeries for inmates?  Grocery Czar?  

[HotRod 69]

Trump won Harris lost.

The loser should hold her "I told you so"'s for crying out loud.

[Strike 5,174]

Kamala literally went on TV and said she wouldn't do anything differently than Biden.  The voters rejected that platform overwhelmingly. 

[The Real timschochet 6,372]

49 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Which non-existent policy position was she right about?  Paying for trans surgeries for inmates?  Grocery Czar?  

Opposing Trump’s tariffs plan. 
 

I could, if I wanted, give you a long list of other items, but I will stop here because it’s enough. It’s defining. I said so at the time. 

[SaintsInDome2006 363]

11 hours ago, Vince44 said:

"I’m not here to say I told you so," Harris said, breaking into laughter with the audience. "I swear, I wasn’t going to say that."

One of Harris’ worst flaws as a politician was this tendency to break into laughter at the most inappropriate times. Argue that we’re faced with dire threats - self imposed economic collapse, autocracy, allegiance with dictatorships, foreign influence in the Oval Office - & then break into laughter & petty schadenfreude. The tone calls for an FDR, JFK or Reagan, or a Thatcher, but this is not that.

[The Real timschochet 6,372]

20 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

One of Harris’ worst flaws as a politician was this tendency to break into laughter at the most inappropriate times. Argue that we’re faced with dire threats - self imposed economic collapse, autocracy, allegiance with dictatorships, foreign influence in the Oval Office - & then break into laughter & petty schadenfreude. The tone calls for an FDR, JFK or Reagan, or a Thatcher, but this is not that.

This is a legitimate critique. It shouldn’t matter, but in our communication age of course it does. Abraham Lincoln was infamous for telling coarse jokes at the most unfortunate times- for that and many other reasons (such as his whiny voice by all accounts) he would have NO chance of being elected in the modern age. 

I’m looking at Corey Booker as a potential candidate next time around. Always liked him and he’s raised his status considerably. 

[jerryskids 6,534]

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

Opposing Trump’s tariffs plan. 
 

I could, if I wanted, give you a long list of other items, but I will stop here because it’s enough. It’s defining. I said so at the time. 

Oh really?

Quote

During Tuesday night’s presidential debate, Trump reiterated his commitment to his plan, in which a 10% tariff would be imposed on all imported goods and a 60% one on goods imported from China. 

“Other countries are going to finally, after 75 years, pay us back for all that we’ve done for the world, and the tariff will be substantial,” Trump, the GOP nominee, said, adding his proposed across-the-board 10% tariff would raise “hundreds of billions of dollars.”

Harris, the Democratic nominee, responded that tariffs are effectively a “sales tax” on American households. 

In fact, the Biden administration recently imposed its own set of tariffs, while extending ones first levied during the Trump administration. Harris has not explicitly stated whether she would extend them, but on her campaign website, she said she would continue to “support American leadership in semiconductors, clean energy, AI, and other cutting edge industries of the future," while addressing “unfair trade practices from China or any competitor that undermines American workers.” 

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy/tariffs-vs-tax-breaks-how-trump-harris-proposals-compare-rcna170881

As usual she spoke out of her ass and "told us so" a whole lot of nothing.  

[The Real timschochet 6,372]

1 minute ago, jerryskids said:

Oh really?

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy/tariffs-vs-tax-breaks-how-trump-harris-proposals-compare-rcna170881

As usual she spoke out of her ass and "told us so" a whole lot of nothing.  

Yes oh really. Once again you make the error, as so many people do, of conflating Trump’s current across the board tariffs (which you also swore he would never do) with his previous, limited tariffs. They’re not in the least comparable. 
 

Maybe Kamala would have kept the previous tariffs against China in place, as Biden did. Maybe she would have gotten rid of them. She was ambivalent about it. But we know for sure she would have never imposed across the board tariffs around the world and she spoke out very clearly against Trump’s plan: 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna172627

[Drizzay 698]

I forgot she even existed.

[jerryskids 6,534]

3 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Yes oh really. Once again you make the error, as so many people do, of conflating Trump’s current across the board tariffs (which you also swore he would never do) with his previous, limited tariffs. They’re not in the least comparable. 
 

Maybe Kamala would have kept the previous tariffs against China in place, as Biden did. Maybe she would have gotten rid of them. She was ambivalent about it. But we know for sure she would have never imposed across the board tariffs around the world and she spoke out very clearly against Trump’s plan: 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna172627

Like I said, she had no policies.  Thanks for agreeing with me.   

[The Real timschochet 6,372]

Just now, jerryskids said:

Like I said, she had no policies.  Thanks for agreeing with me.   

Well I don’t. But again, it doesn’t matter. Even if you’re right, we have one President who has chosen a disastrous path for this country and one candidate who would not have chosen that path. By default, with every other consideration put aside, that makes the candidate who would not have chosen that path preferable to the guy who did. And this is not a new argument for me; I made it long before the election. 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,819]

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

Well I don’t. But again, it doesn’t matter. Even if you’re right, we have one President who has chosen a disastrous path for this country and one candidate who would not have chosen that path. By default, with every other consideration put aside, that makes the candidate who would not have chosen that path preferable to the guy who did. And this is not a new argument for me; I made it long before the election. 

Chuck Schumer, Nancy pelosi and Bernie Sanders, among others, all advocated for tarrifs within the last 20 years. 

You can actually search for it on YouTube and watch all of the videos. Every single one of them wanted tariffs in place to protect us businesses..

[seafoam1 2,794]

7 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Chuck Schumer, Nancy pelosi and Bernie Sanders, among others, all advocated for tarrifs within the last 20 years. 

You can actually search for it on YouTube and watch all of the videos. Every single one of them wanted tariffs in place to protect us businesses..

None of those a-holes ever did anything to actually help this country. They ran it into the ground for personal gain. 

[The Real timschochet 6,372]

20 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Chuck Schumer, Nancy pelosi and Bernie Sanders, among others, all advocated for tarrifs within the last 20 years. 

You can actually search for it on YouTube and watch all of the videos. Every single one of them wanted tariffs in place to protect us businesses..

Just stop with this. None of them ever advocated for across the board tariffs on all countries. It’s nonsense. Nobody has ever advocated for that in modern times. Stop trying to compare what Trump just did to anyone else. You’re being deliberately dishonest. 

[seafoam1 2,794]

10 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Just stop with this. None of them ever advocated for across the board tariffs on all countries. It’s nonsense. Nobody has ever advocated for that in modern times. Stop trying to compare what Trump just did to anyone else. You’re being deliberately dishonest. 

How about you just stop with your blowhole takes on everything. You are the absolute least intelligent person that posts on this board. And that's saying something with the likes of your fellow liberals dimwits that screech the same crap you do on a daily basis. 

You are wrong yet again timmy. 

[WhiteWonder 2,673]

13 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

Kamala was right all along, and so were her supporters. We knew what was best for America, you guys did not. That is now apparent to everyone. Too late now though. 

What are you basing “Kamala was right all along” on? Market immediate reactions to tariffs? So are you the type of person who thinks we should never suffer in the short term for the benefit of the long term? Did you say the same thing about Biden policies (whatever they actually were) when they caused short term hurt?

out of curiosity are you the kind of person who claimed Trump was a threat to democracy but then voted for someone who never went through our democratic process to become your nominee? 
 

out of curiosity are you someone who shrugged off the slumping stock market from mid 2021? Not Biden’s fault… probably claimed it was Trumps and then when it rebounded in 2023, claimed it was Biden… even though most educated adults know the market always winds up going up. 
 

because aside from the market over the last month or so, what else is there for libs to cry about? 

[The Real timschochet 6,372]

5 minutes ago, WhiteWonder said:

What are you basing “Kamala was right all along” on? Market immediate reactions to tariffs? So are you the type of person who thinks we should never suffer in the short term for the benefit of the long term? Did you say the same thing about Biden policies (whatever they actually were) when they caused short term hurt?

out of curiosity are you the kind of person who claimed Trump was a threat to democracy but then voted for someone who never went through our democratic process to become your nominee? 
 

out of curiosity are you someone who shrugged off the slumping stock market from mid 2021? Not Biden’s fault… probably claimed it was Trumps and then when it rebounded in 2023, claimed it was Biden… even though most educated adults know the market always winds up going up. 
 

because aside from the market over the last month or so, what else is there for libs to cry about? 

Lots of questions. I will try to answer you: 

1. Kamala specifically warned us what would happen with these tariffs. She wasn’t the only one and her arguments were certainly not original. But she was right. 
2. As a principle I am fine with short term pain for long term gain. However I dispute the fact that these tariffs will bring us long term gain. In this instance it’s short term pain for long term pain. I don’t see an upside. 
3. Sometimes. I was pretty critical of Biden prolonging Trump’s previous tariffs. Overall I supported his economic policies. But it’s dumb of you to try and catch me in a double standard because even if I was guilty of that so what? It still wouldn’t make me wrong in this instance. If you believe these tariffs are a good thing then make your case rather than attack my consistency. 
4. Yes Trump was a threat to democracy IMO. No the selection of Kamala as nominee was not a threat to democracy IMO. Neither of these issues have relevancy to the tariffs (well the first one might.) 

5. I typically always shrug off the stock market no matter who is President. This is the first exception I can recall because the cause and effect is so direct. Never seen a case like that before. 
 

6. Plenty. From my standpoint almost every aspect of Trump’s first few months have been a disaster. But nothing as bad as these tariffs. 

[seafoam1 2,794]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

Lots of questions. I will try to answer you: 

1. Kamala specifically warned us what would happen with these tariffs. She wasn’t the only one and her arguments were certainly not original. But she was right. 
2. As a principle I am fine with short term pain for long term gain. However I dispute the fact that these tariffs will bring us long term gain. In this instance it’s short term pain for long term pain. I don’t see an upside. 
3. Sometimes. I was pretty critical of Biden prolonging Trump’s previous tariffs. Overall I supported his economic policies. But it’s dumb of you to try and catch me in a double standard because even if I was guilty of that so what? It still wouldn’t make me wrong in this instance. If you believe these tariffs are a good thing then make your case rather than attack my consistency. 
4. Yes Trump was a threat to democracy IMO. No the selection of Kamala as nominee was not a threat to democracy IMO. Neither of these issues have relevancy to the tariffs (well the first one might.) 

5. I typically always shrug off the stock market no matter who is President. This is the first exception I can recall because the cause and effect is so direct. Never seen a case like that before. 
 

6. Plenty. From my standpoint almost every aspect of Trump’s first few months have been a disaster. But nothing as bad as these tariffs. 

If you should ever become smart, then maybe give it another try...

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,819]

4 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

Just stop with this. None of them ever advocated for across the board tariffs on all countries. It’s nonsense. Nobody has ever advocated for that in modern times. Stop trying to compare what Trump just did to anyone else. You’re being deliberately dishonest. 

Incorrect.  Did you even watch the videos?  Or were you told to just come in here and deny it?

[The Real timschochet 6,372]

6 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Incorrect.  Did you even watch the videos?  Or were you told to just come in here and deny it?

No Ive watched them all. Please show me where in those videos they propose world wide across the board tariffs on all nations. 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,819]

11 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

No Ive watched them all. Please show me where in those videos they propose world wide across the board tariffs on all nations. 

Excuses are like a$$holes, Tim. Everybody has one.  I love how you try and qualify "world wide across the board" to try and eliminate your side from the conversation.  Sorry, but they wanted them previously, but now that Trump actually did what they previously wanted, they're crying wolf once again.

Nancy, Chuck, Bernie and many others on your side were for tariffs long before Trump put them in place.  Own it.

[jbycho 557]

1 minute ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Excuses are like a$$holes, Tim. Everybody has one.  I love how you try and qualify "world wide across the board" to try and eliminate your side from the conversation.  Sorry, but they wanted them previously, but now that Trump actually did what they previously wanted, they're crying wolf once again.

Tim guy doesn't:t have an ahole. The shlt just builds up in him until he has to spew it all out through posts on this website.