We don't need a slick politician we need someone who will attract the rustbelt voters and keep trumpers from freaking out.

A Jewish VP is unlikely to do this.

Pennsylvania is by far the most important swing state for Democrats to hold on their quest for 270. If the Dems lose PA, Trump is going to win the EC, it's truly that simple.

Shapiro is the most popular politician in that key rustbelt state, though his unquestioned support for Israel is a real problem with many in the Democratic coalition. However, as we see over and over again, Shapiro can likely blunt much of his deserved criticism by taking the nuanced position of supporting Israel and condemning Hamas' atrocities while still decrying the death and destruction being wrought upon millions of Gazans caught in a middle they have no way of escaping.

At least for me, I don't view this as a binary choice. There are multiple wrongs being perpetrated upon both Israelis and Gazans which neither group of non-combatants deserve.

What I posted is straight from NBC sport

Exactly! NBC operating in the frame created by the GOP. The facts are given by the participants, not the reporters. No one has challenged a single document on this topic published by the US Government. And idiots like you didn't even know nor understand what exactly VP Harris was charged with doing, nor the actual long term goals of the effort.

All you regurgitate like a sick puppy is the spin. You can't even correctly comprehend what you post yourself.

Biden said during an immigration meeting at the White House that he had asked Harris to lead the administration's efforts with Mexico and the Northern Triangle - El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, countries that will "need help stemming the movement of so many folks, stemming the migration to our southern border."

#129

See post 93. Educate yourself because you'll never be exposed to the documented truth on the sites you frequent. They're allergic to the truth, as are you evidently based on your ignorance of what the Root Strategy actually achieved and is still achieving by addressing the issues causing people to flee their countries in the first place.

Right wingers simply cannot continence that by addressing corrupt governments, by placing US immigration offices in foreign countries, by supporting the cessation of gang and criminal violence, by creating resources for women and children where they live will help stop many from fleeing their homes and trekking thousands of miles, finally landing upon our borders as refugees and immigrants under extreme duress.

Harris failed the entire scope of border problems, so regardless of what Biden tasked her with, nothing within the realm of root causes of border security was realized. So she failed. Plain and simple.

So much lying. I guess they can't help it.

This entire topic is representative of the lack of intellectual depth and understanding exhibited daily by Trump and his supporters.

If a complicated problem isn't solved during a single news cycle, those addressing the problem have failed, even though the same people now complaining were unable to solve the problem when they were in charge and left things demonstrably worse for those succeeding them.

It's silly to focus on trying to rewrite the past and not on the terrible performance of Kamala. It doesn't matter what she was called so why erase that part of history? How did she perform?

False framing. First and foremost, Kamala did not perform "terribly" in her role. Her role was not to immediately fix the flow of border traffic, it was to find a long term solution for immigration through the "root cause" strategy articulated in detail in this thread's article.

Ignorant righties, like yourself, keep viewing the crisis as something Kamala alone was tasked to repair unilaterally, which was never her charge. But in no reality was the work Harris did in any way a failure.

Jason Marczak, vice president and senior director of the Atlantic Council's Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center, said it's unrealistic to expect quicker progress from the root-causes effort, as Harris herself warned when she took on the task. "The factors leading up to the migration from these three countries, they didn't start last year, two years ago, five or even 10 years ago -- they go back decades," Marczak said.

There's also the inherent difficulty of trying to work on root causes in countries where the government is not a particularly helpful partner, because of corruption, incompetence or both.

If it's too early to assess the effects of the root-causes strategy, it's not too early to see where Harris' efforts have made a mark, several advocates and analysts said.

Cecilia Muoz, a veteran political leader in the Latino political community, cited the establishment of "safe mobility centers" in Central and South America, starting in Guatemala, so that potential migrants can seek permission to enter the U.S. without making the treacherous, smuggler-led journey to the Mexico border.

"Setting up migration offices that involve multiple countries and multiple international organizations is an enormously complex exercise," said Muoz, who worked on immigration while serving as a domestic policy adviser in the Obama White House. "It is tremendously important to have a principal of the vice president's caliber leading the charge, engaging with heads of state, and managing the collaboration between the many federal agencies in the United States who need to be involved in that process."

That kind of high-level negotiation also helped secure more than $5 billion in regional investment from multinational companies like Apple and Starbucks, Muoz and some of the other analysts said. And while Harris' speech and the NBC interview got the most public scrutiny during her 2021 Guatemala trip, what some regional experts noticed was the vice president's itinerary there -- and how it reflected the expertise, if not the experience, she brought to the job.

"She made sure that she wasn't just meeting with the corrupt administration there," Marshall Fitz, managing director of immigration at the Emerson Collective, said of her trip. "She was also meeting directly with Indigenous women, engaging them, making sure she heard them and saw them. One of her niches is women's empowerment generally, and her understanding of migration is very much rooted in an understanding that if you've going to solve these migration challenges, women are going to be a big part of that because they're the backbones of these families."

Participants include Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and former congresswoman Gabby Giffords -- a gun violence prevention advocate whose husband, Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, is said to be on Harris' shortlist for vice president.

Harris' husband, second gentleman Doug Emhoff, is also hitting the trail. Emhoff will appear at the Wausau Festival and lead a door-knocking event for Harris and Democrats in Stevens Point, Wisc.

The campaign has not said where Harris will be over the weekend. Harris' campaign said it would continue to target Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona and Nevada and emphasize reaching out to young voters, Black voters, and Latino voters.

Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey and Nevada Sen. Jacky Rosen, two senators who are up for reelection this cycle, will be among those also making the case for Harris. Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair Gary Peters of Michigan will also be on the trail.

Democratic House members participating in the effort include Florida Rep. Maxwell Frost, Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal and Michigan Reps. Debbie Dingell and Hillary Scholten, a frontline Democrat in a swing district.

Harris is also utilizing major reproductive rights backers such as Planned Parenthood President & CEO Alexis McGill Johnson on the trail this weekend.

Curmudgeons like Carville can only react from what they've already seen occur in the past. There has been a shift in joy and momentum which needs to be ridden as far as it will take this campaign towards success on Election Day. You don't tell a candidate to tamper down the emotions and energy of its supporters as a campaign changes its leadership. You ride the wave for as long as it lasts while always being prepared to create your own momentum and fervor if the organic wave inevitably ends. One thing you don't do is tell all the excited people motivated by your candidacy to temper their positive energy and drive, ever.

Her resume prior to being VP was pretty thin.

Yeah, she only won 5 different elections, four in California: Two times for San Francisco District Attorney leading that office; one which was for State Attorney General (- where she helmed the largest justice department this side of DC and the DOJ -); another for US Senator and her last election as Vice President of the United States.

Real thin resume, eh?

Now do Trump and Vance.

#2

'Rewriting' means facts, evidence, and expert analysis that undermines the right wing-created narrative.

Democrats gave us the never ending stream of free roaming criminals. from illegal immigrant rapists to the scum that rob, shop lift and pillage and that shoot and kill.

More Robson projection I see. Regardless, one thing the Democrats don't do is nominate nor place into government service the types with questionable characters mentioned above like Trump or all those convicted who were once in his business and/or political circles:

As the full meeting transcript makes clear, he was simply tapping Harris to work with foreign governments, businesses and local organizations on the "root causes" of migration from the "Northern Triangle" countries of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.

"She was not in charge of what happened at the U.S.-Mexico border. She was not a border czar," Theresa Cardinal Brown, director of immigration policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center, told HuffPost.

That doesn't mean Harris can - or should - avoid questions about Biden administration immigration policy. She has been a voice in the room. And given the positions she took before becoming vice president, it's entirely possible she would have taken a similar approach to the border had she, not Biden, been the ultimate decision maker.

A Harris win would keep a proponent of reform legislation in the White House, though her ability to deliver it would obviously depend on her negotiating skills and which party controls Congress. In the meantime, it's safe to assume Harris would likely use her executive authority over border enforcement by trying - as Biden did - to find some sort of middle path that blends tighter border controls with new methods for processing migrants. And she'd probably keep paying attention to root causes, in Central America and maybe beyond.

Such an approach certainly wouldn't solve the problems associated with immigration in a single year, or even a single presidential term. But considering immigration's complexity, and what's actually feasible as policy and politics today, Harris could make a credible case there's no better alternative.

But whenever talking about immigration, everyone should remember this:

For most Democrats and at least some Republicans, the best policy response would be legislation simultaneously increasing security and increasing the capacity for processing migrants trying to enter legally -- and, in some fashion, dealing with the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants already in the U.S.

Twice in the last decade, Congress has come close to passing such legislation on a bipartisan basis. Both times, anti-immigration Republicans killed it.