In an interview with NBC News’ Hallie Jackson, the vice president said her campaign has the "resources and the expertise" to handle a challenge from Trump.
That’s not what I heard. “We’ve got two weeks to go, and I’m very much grounded in the present. We will deal with election night and the days after as they come, and we have the resources and the expertise and the focus on that as well”
She’s saying they have a bunch of capable people who’ll figure it out on the fly.
That’s called improvising. Improvising is exactly the opposite of a plan. It’s what you do when you have no plan.
If you look at Harris’ history of how she runs her staff, that’s just not what she does. She tends to over prepare to the point of exhaustion. This is sometimes portrayed in the press as “Harris is hard on her staff”, but then you look at the details and it’s more that she expects a lot out of them.
Of course she doesn’t go into details in an interview. It would both bore people watching, and there’s no reason to give the plan away at this point.
I know I don’t see this stuff like most people do. Platitudes and vague substance-less rhetoric does nothing for me… That’s not true. It annoys me.
She wouldn’t need to go into details. She could have simply said “Yes of course. There are several possibilities we’ve discussed and have contingencies for. I think we’re well prepared for his inevitable shenanigans.” That would have been a solid confidence inspiring answer. But instead, she tries to dodge the question, focusing on the present. I assume because she’s not aware of any plan and doesn’t want to say that. Then hearing herself, realizes it’s a bad answer to focus on the now without looking ahead; So she tries to find a way to say something that sounds like being prepared. And finally caps it off talking about how bad Trump is again.
I think so many people are so used to vacuous bullshit from politicians, they’ve started judging it by different standards than they would use in normal real world conversations.
Imagine you asked a coworker a question, and got a response like hers. I’d hope your bullshit alarm would be blaring.
It’s also called being ready for anything. It’s what you do when you aren’t entirely sure what the idiot on the other side is going to do.
The world’s best swordsman isn’t afraid of the second best swordsman. He’s afraid of the world’s worst swordsman, cause he can never be sure what the idiot will do.
No it’s not.
Being ready for anything is having a plan for anything.
When you can’t know what your opponent might do, you can’t plan. That’s exactly why the best swordsman is afraid of the worst. He’s forced to go without a plan.
Being ready for anything doesn’t mean planing for everything, that’s impossible. They’ve likely planned for the obvious. They also have the resources ready to go to adapt to an unexpected situation.
A swordsman is t ready to block every conceivable blow. They, instead, prepare to react. If it’s a known attack, they can fall back on a planned move. If it’s abnormal they can react by improvising, using the skills they already have.
Oh, and the swordsman’s issue isn’t the lack of plan, improvisation is a key skill. The issue of the inability to read the opponent. It throws their instincts out. E.g. an attack looks like a faint, since it would leave the attack open to a lethal counter, even if it connected. An expert would never use that. A beginner might.
I mean, they probably don’t have a contingency prepared for the event of an alien invasion happening at Devil’s Tower…
But it would be silly to assume they don’t have people keeping an eye on the twits and truthers and whatever other places the MAGAts are congregating to discuss their treasonous plans.
How can anyone be ready for anything if this is the definition.
Being prepared for anything is about having the skills and tools to solve any problem, any time. On the fly.
A good general isn’t one who relies on his plan surviving contact with the enemy, it is the one who knows it won’t and is able to respond appropriately and timely.
That’s not what I heard.
“We’ve got two weeks to go, and I’m very much grounded in the present. We will deal with election night and the days after as they come, and we have the resources and the expertise and the focus on that as well”
She’s saying they have a bunch of capable people who’ll figure it out on the fly.
That’s called improvising. Improvising is exactly the opposite of a plan. It’s what you do when you have no plan.
If you look at Harris’ history of how she runs her staff, that’s just not what she does. She tends to over prepare to the point of exhaustion. This is sometimes portrayed in the press as “Harris is hard on her staff”, but then you look at the details and it’s more that she expects a lot out of them.
Of course she doesn’t go into details in an interview. It would both bore people watching, and there’s no reason to give the plan away at this point.
I know I don’t see this stuff like most people do. Platitudes and vague substance-less rhetoric does nothing for me… That’s not true. It annoys me.
She wouldn’t need to go into details. She could have simply said “Yes of course. There are several possibilities we’ve discussed and have contingencies for. I think we’re well prepared for his inevitable shenanigans.” That would have been a solid confidence inspiring answer. But instead, she tries to dodge the question, focusing on the present. I assume because she’s not aware of any plan and doesn’t want to say that. Then hearing herself, realizes it’s a bad answer to focus on the now without looking ahead; So she tries to find a way to say something that sounds like being prepared. And finally caps it off talking about how bad Trump is again.
I think so many people are so used to vacuous bullshit from politicians, they’ve started judging it by different standards than they would use in normal real world conversations. Imagine you asked a coworker a question, and got a response like hers. I’d hope your bullshit alarm would be blaring.
Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face - Mike Tyson (I think that’s how he said it)
It’s also called being ready for anything. It’s what you do when you aren’t entirely sure what the idiot on the other side is going to do.
The world’s best swordsman isn’t afraid of the second best swordsman. He’s afraid of the world’s worst swordsman, cause he can never be sure what the idiot will do.
Same principle.
No it’s not.
Being ready for anything is having a plan for anything.
When you can’t know what your opponent might do, you can’t plan. That’s exactly why the best swordsman is afraid of the worst. He’s forced to go without a plan.
Being ready for anything doesn’t mean planing for everything, that’s impossible. They’ve likely planned for the obvious. They also have the resources ready to go to adapt to an unexpected situation.
A swordsman is t ready to block every conceivable blow. They, instead, prepare to react. If it’s a known attack, they can fall back on a planned move. If it’s abnormal they can react by improvising, using the skills they already have.
Oh, and the swordsman’s issue isn’t the lack of plan, improvisation is a key skill. The issue of the inability to read the opponent. It throws their instincts out. E.g. an attack looks like a faint, since it would leave the attack open to a lethal counter, even if it connected. An expert would never use that. A beginner might.
Just as impossible as being ready for everything.
I mean, they probably don’t have a contingency prepared for the event of an alien invasion happening at Devil’s Tower…
But it would be silly to assume they don’t have people keeping an eye on the twits and truthers and whatever other places the MAGAts are congregating to discuss their treasonous plans.
How can anyone be ready for anything if this is the definition.
Being prepared for anything is about having the skills and tools to solve any problem, any time. On the fly.
A good general isn’t one who relies on his plan surviving contact with the enemy, it is the one who knows it won’t and is able to respond appropriately and timely.
You can’t be ready for anything.