Kamala Harris

[Tango854 278]

Given the fact that Joseph Biden has announced the suspension of his campaign and with his full endorsement of her for the upcoming DNC, I feel like she deserves her own thread now.

[DDI 105]

Good call, she may only have 30 years of life left!

[Tango854 278]

2 minutes ago, DDI said:

Good call, she may only have 30 years of life left!

Rishi Sunak was born in 1980 and he has 50 years of life left at worst.

[TQR 14,387]

Kamala Harris was the Attorney General of California, has been a Senator for 8 years and appears to be replacing an old fossil who scared everyone.

Sir Keir Starmer was the Director of Public Prosecutions, has been an MP for 10 years and replaced an old fossil who scared everyone.
 

Just some interesting parallels there.

[jimbean1121 238]

just found out she is pushing 60 she looks good for her age

[Slackhurst Broadcasting 374]

Will she really be allowed to take the presidential nomination? Her brains aren't much better than Joe's.

[jimbean1121 238]

9 minutes ago, Slackhurst Broadcasting said:

Will she really be allowed to take the presidential nomination? Her brains aren't much better than Joe's.

shes just as sharp, if not more so, than jd vance

[En Passant 3,741]

2 hours ago, Tango854 said:

Rishi Sunak was born in 1980 and he has 50 years of life left at worst.

 

Yeah well, that thread and this one should be in extra-curricular. And a few others as well I expect.

At least if this section is for people under consideration for dead-pooling purposes. It's an admin call.

[Commtech Sio Bibble 2,028]

I agree with En Passant, I hate threads like these, in my opinion they should either be in extra curricular or be merged into the political rantings one because there are never updates about health or death in any of them. Older figures like Trump and Biden are fine but even those I think should be moved to extra-curricular and a second thread just to discuss their health should be created. The Liz Truss thread, for example, is one I haven't clicked on in ages because I don't care about what she's saying or done that is not related to her dying.

[Ulitzer95 12,586]

16 minutes ago, Commtech Sio Bibble said:

I agree with En Passant, I hate threads like these, in my opinion they should either be in extra curricular or be merged into the political rantings one because there are never updates about health or death in any of them. Older figures like Trump and Biden are fine but even those I think should be moved to extra-curricular and a second thread just to discuss their health should be created. The Liz Truss thread, for example, is one I haven't clicked on in ages because I don't care about what she's saying or done that is not related to her dying.

Amen. If it was up to me the Truss, Sunak and Starmer threads would be closed down.

 

Trump, Biden and Johnson threads can stay cos the the first 2 are elderly and the latter is a fat twat.

[Father Brown 209]

Agree with all three posts above.

 

Perhaps there could be an offshoot of Political Frailty for health updates on world leaders and deputies who don't quite deserve having their own thread yet? (No frequent updates/healthy/young/etc)

Not my call either, just throwing an idea out there.

[TQR 14,387]

Well, stop press, Ulitzer has said something completely agreeable. The PM’s thread was made because a bike rode into his car. Truss and Sunak’s threads were made because they were given a position of power. Now Kamala Harris has a thread and she’s not even the fucking president yet. And all four of these people are healthy (well, maybe not mentally with Truss).

 

The discussion in these threads can be fun or interesting but this section is technically for DL/deadpooling consideration, not general discussion. The extra-curricular section is grand, people. It’s a nicer place than this, in fact.

[YoungWillz 21,037]

Well, needless to say, I disagree.

 

Leaders have always had a place in the main Forum, as very possible assassination targets. The election has passed and most of the UK figures are now relegated and like the Gordon Brown thread, will fade into time. They are important enough to be noted when they go. And who knows when something might pop up?

 

I think most on the site reserve their vitriol for the Political Ranting thread, only when they become unbearable or have a specific misstep do we have a record of their misdeeds on their own thread. Calling something up from the bin of the ranting thread is much more difficult.

 

It's soon, it's raw, folk still seem to think that May, Johnson, Truss etc actually matter any more. Johnson's thread went fairly quiet after he was booted out and much the same will happen to these folk.

 

And who knows when cancer, early onset dementia or a helicopter joyride accident may occur. Let these threads be a testament to their idiocy and something to read when they are dead. People won't believe these people were elected to the highest office.

 

I do think Kamala's thread is a bit early, given she's not President yet. Or might not even be so.

 

Anyhow, tuppenceworth.

[dimreaper 697]

Personally, I feel politician related threads should not be created until after they have left office, unless they are elderly, or have known health ailments.

[CaptainChorizo 1,977]

39 minutes ago, dimreaper said:

Personally, I feel politician related threads should not be created until after they have left office, unless they are elderly, or have known health ailments.

 

On the other hand Trump,Obama and Bush had multiple people attempt to Assasinate them .   Death of a Us President is a realistic possibility,even if we started electing 35 yo Yoga Instructors who came from families where people frequently reached Centenarian level. .

[dimreaper 697]

2 minutes ago, CaptainChorizo said:

 

On the other hand Trump,Obama and Bush had multiple people attempt to Assasinate them .   Death of a Us President is a realistic possibility,even if we started electing 35 yo Yoga Instructors who came from families where people frequently reached Centenarian level. .

 

I feel assassinations fall under what i'd classify as wild card hits. Yes they happen, as we saw last week, but the thing is, we're never going to get advanced warning of them. Putting elected leaders on a deathlist because of the possibility of assassination is such a gamble, it will 99 times out of 100 result in a wasted pick. Not to mention, placing government leaders on a deathlist could result in increased scrutiny from government security and intelligence agencies, who might think we're egging on political violence to secure deathpool points. I think the one exception would be leaders like Zelenskyy, where assassination is an everyday threat.

[En Passant 3,741]

8 hours ago, YoungWillz said:

Well, needless to say, I disagree.

 

Leaders have always had a place in the main Forum, as very possible assassination targets. The election has passed and most of the UK figures are now relegated and like the Gordon Brown thread, will fade into time. They are important enough to be noted when they go. And who knows when something might pop up?

 

I think most on the site reserve their vitriol for the Political Ranting thread, only when they become unbearable or have a specific misstep do we have a record of their misdeeds on their own thread. Calling something up from the bin of the ranting thread is much more difficult.

 

It's soon, it's raw, folk still seem to think that May, Johnson, Truss etc actually matter any more. Johnson's thread went fairly quiet after he was booted out and much the same will happen to these folk.

 

And who knows when cancer, early onset dementia or a helicopter joyride accident may occur. Let these threads be a testament to their idiocy and something to read when they are dead. People won't believe these people were elected to the highest office.

 

I do think Kamala's thread is a bit early, given she's not President yet. Or might not even be so.

 

Anyhow, tuppenceworth.

 

I see your point here, it just grates that some people seem to think creating a new thread is some kind of target for which there will be a prize in due course. Not saying this one in particular, it's just the latest.

Assassination doesn't really cut it for 'serious danger of dying' to me to be honest, despite the Trump attempt (and he was on here anyway for age of leader) nobody was ever on 'the list' for it, but clearly your mileage varies on that.

 

Oddly enough it actually doesn't matter to me where they are created since I mostly just use 'unread posts' so I largely have no idea which section a thread is in anyway.

It's more the principle of the thing, if someone has little chance of dying surely that's peripheral to the main subject matter of this forum?

[YoungWillz 21,037]

59 minutes ago, En Passant said:

 

I see your point here, it just grates that some people seem to think creating a new thread is some kind of target for which there will be a prize in due course. Not saying this one in particular, it's just the latest.

Assassination doesn't really cut it for 'serious danger of dying' to me to be honest, despite the Trump attempt (and he was on here anyway for age of leader) nobody was ever on 'the list' for it, but clearly your mileage varies on that.

 

Oddly enough it actually doesn't matter to me where they are created since I mostly just use 'unread posts' so I largely have no idea which section a thread is in anyway.

It's more the principle of the thing, if someone has little chance of dying surely that's peripheral to the main subject matter of this forum?

Well, the discussion about these threads reminds me very much of the Sir Creep moaning about Dustin Diamond's thread. And Diamond's dead.

 

Unlike the election of UK/US leaders, this Forum isn't a democracy. 

 

Over 9 years here and I'm still a newbie I guess. But I think there have been loads of threads historically created for all sorts of people (Michael Barrymore to name but one) where there is an interest in discussion besides death.

 

Dividing and ruling is for real politics, not here imo. And I reckon the mods have a pretty good handle on deleting unnecessary threads these days.

[Bibliogryphon 9,572]

If I had been in control from the very beginning the only people who would have individual threads were people who have actually made the list

[En Passant 3,741]

4 minutes ago, YoungWillz said:

Dustin Diamond

 

Who?

 

5 minutes ago, YoungWillz said:

Over 9 years here and I'm still a newbie I guess

 

Yeah, Noob

 

6 minutes ago, YoungWillz said:

But I think there have been loads of threads historically created for all sorts of people (Michael Barrymore to name but one) where there is an interest in discussion besides death.

 

Oh I don't actually care, I'm just a blabbermouth with an opinion.

Either somebody is a 'prospect' for deadpooling, or they're not, and if people use it as a resource at all it'd be helpful if people who aren't a prospect are filed elsewhere than those who are?

For me though? I'm just adding my quota of hot air.

[gcreptile 10,967]

The biggest crime of this thread is the description of Harris as "former prosecutor" in the sub-headline. She's the vice president, and a trailblazer at that.

It doesn't even work as an insult because her tough stances on crime during that period give her a more moderate image that will be hard to attack.

[msc 18,439]

18 minutes ago, YoungWillz said:

Well, the discussion about these threads reminds me very much of the Sir Creep moaning about Dustin Diamond's thread. And Diamond's dead.

 

Unlike the election of UK/US leaders, this Forum isn't a democracy. 

 

Over 9 years here and I'm still a newbie I guess. But I think there have been loads of threads historically created for all sorts of people (Michael Barrymore to name but one) where there is an interest in discussion besides death.

 

Dividing and ruling is for real politics, not here imo. And I reckon the mods have a pretty good handle on deleting unnecessary threads these days.

My view is useful threads live on and crap threads tend to sink down to page 60, forgotten.

[Ulitzer95 12,586]

2 hours ago, msc said:

My view is useful threads live on and crap threads tend to sink down to page 60, forgotten.

That’s an awful take. 
 

Off topic discussion in the main section is the worst it’s ever been in the 16 years I’ve been on here. A thread getting bumped constantly because people are having off topic rants and posting boomer grade memes and spam doesn’t justify its existence. 
 

We’re almost 2 pages into Kamala Harris and not a single mention of her health. There likely never will be as she could realistically outlive these forums and many of its members.
 

Before you know it there will be threads for Angela Rayner, J D Vance, and whoever Kamala’s VP pick will be. It’s exceptionally tedious and boring at this stage and I think it drives ppl away at worst or at least distracts ppl from discussing actual deadpooling at best.

[Charlotte's Controller 195]

2 hours ago, YoungWillz said:

Well, the discussion about these threads reminds me very much of the Sir Creep moaning about Dustin Diamond's thread. And Diamond's dead.

 

Unlike the election of UK/US leaders, this Forum isn't a democracy. 

 

Over 9 years here and I'm still a newbie I guess. But I think there have been loads of threads historically created for all sorts of people (Michael Barrymore to name but one) where there is an interest in discussion besides death.

 

Dividing and ruling is for real politics, not here imo. And I reckon the mods have a pretty good handle on deleting unnecessary threads these days.

It may not be a democracy but tends to be better moderated than the US/UK political systems where generally only the bigger piles of crap tend to rise to the top of the cesspool of candidates. Money is the major factor in politics in which liars use power to influence and get access to benefits. If there is enough legitimate interest it should be on the forum.

[Deadboy999 176]

It's the whore's turn 2024 baby!