__________
Two years ago, the FBI raided Donald Trump's home to retrieve government records he had refused to return, including hundreds containing classified information.

Yet, national security and foreign policy [implications and dangers] (Iran, North Korea, Russia, Russia, Russia) - the issues where the President actually has the most power and Executive branch apparatus, mostly unencumbered by Congress - weren't visible at all on Harris campaign's agenda... neither were Trump's numerous business failures and utter incompetence (except for making billions selling worthless DJT stocks before bankruptcies), and that Trump and family profited far more from politics and Presidency than he ever did as a "businessman," to counter and blunt his "[Great Businessman] will fix it" / "He made trains run on time" bulls**t...

Outside of "talking to the choir" issues, no dots connected between foreign policy and danger of criminality and recklessness in governance and post-governing ... and implications of someone having a "get out of jail free card" handed out by SCOTUS potentially acting in his own interest instead of country's.

If you have to ask "Why is THIS GUY even close?" it means that what you've been doing isn't working and it's time to find out why and change course, not keep telling people that the NUMBERS look good and they are "ignorant/stupid/deplorable" and should just wait until our "medicine" starts working... any day/week/month now - "you'll see it in the next BLS and BEA reports!"

She never even tried to have a Sister Souljah moment. She ran a nearly substance-free ("I am not Trump" / "I am pro-unions" / "I am against price-gougers") national campaign the way that may work in California, against marketeer who [bought and] sold value-free things his entire life.

Outside of snowflakes - like Washington Post and LA Times editors having hissy-fits about endorsements - people in general, even those who don't like their jobs, do not hate the "rich people" who sign or make it possible (often at a lo$$ for owners, like WaPo's -$77m in 2024 alone) to get their paycheck. They also understand, unlike Whoopi, that "cracking down on price-gouging" and "the rich paying their fair share" are phony "solutions" to their problems. "Bernies / Robin Hoods" are not going to win majority.

Most people generally don't "hate on the rich" and see a hypocrisy when Dem candidates are endorsed, surrounded by and pal around with the glam "rich and famous," including billionaires - talk about "happy happy joy joy" campaign "not listening/hearing, not seeing, not speaking" about real issues for most people... while Trump was trolling them at MickeyD's.

There is only so long that a party can keep selecting crappy candidates (who have to pander to the far left/right in primaries) and then switch course in general because majority of people keep rejecting either/both, when they are unhappy.

We had a choice between two (three?) "failing-up" candidates, who kept being rewarded for/despite their failures, one as politician, another as businessman and politician: