>  MP> Oh yeah.  Because he was the incumbent, there was not much fanfair about
>  MP> it but they did have one.  Some guy I had not heard of finished a distant
>  MP> second but, IIRC, with more votes than Kamala had when she ran in 2020

> So it sounds to me like the elite were trying to be fair with Kamala since she
> had been so loyal to them this whole time. She's a parasite that they can trus
> to maintain all the Biden side hussles (and more.)

> It should serve as a warning to us all that out of all Democrats, we should
> trust Kamala the least. Anyone but her, when/if there's a choice. Because they
> tried like crazy to install her. We need to remember this if they try that
> puppet out again in 2028.

Honestly, at that point, I think she was the only one they had left.  My
understanding is that all of the campaign money raised by the Biden/Harris
campaign could legally only go to Harris, since she was on the ticket that
raised it.

If that is true, trying out anyone else would have meant that whoever it
was would have to start over financially.  At that late stage in the game,
that would have been game over.

Biden endorsing her was also something that made it almost impossible to go
with anyone else.  I honestly wonder if he didn't do that out of spite for
the party pulling him out of the race.

The mistake they made that they had time to correct was going with Biden to
begin with.  I don't buy that they didn't know he was in decline.  They
just hoped they could keep him going enough until he could get elected again.

Once they made that mistake, they didn't have time to correct it later.


 * SLMR 2.1a * Go softly....it's dark out there
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux