Kamala Harris Election Campaign

[johnny karate]

I recommend actually listening to them both. Hearing what they themselves actually say, and how they say it in context, provides a very different perspective than how they're "reported" by both new and social media. It also gives you a much more comprehensive sense of how much absolute propaganda is in play these days.

Harris is far less arrogant and much less of a salesman when they speak... but Harris often doesn't actually communicate anything meaningful with their words. There's a whole lot of words that add up to no answer at all. At the end of the day, both of them have lately been far more focused on trying to paint the other as the devil than on trying to win over voters with solid policy arguments. The frightening thing is that Trump has actually spent more time during their campaign directly addressing issues and policy questions - even if we disagree with their views, they are being communicated in a way that's understandable. Harris is less icky and dislikeable... but lacks content.

I would love for you or anyone who liked your post to lay out the issues and policy questions Trump has addressed. Please use direct quotes from Trump.

Bold prediction: I will get no response to this request.

 

[plague311]

I would love for you or anyone who liked your post to lay out the issues and policy questions Trump has addressed. Please use direct quotes from Trump.

Bold prediction: I will get no response to this request.

I was going to say the same thing but given the recent....issues with certain members lying, refusing to back up their sources, and not admitting when they're wrong, I'm going to also bet you will not see a reply.

I understood the claims about Harris at first, she really didn't address actual policy, but she's addressed the economy, Puerto Rico, the border, etc. multiple times now. It's been in the news multiple cycles so if Emily's Cat is still making that claim then she either a) doesn't read the news b) doesn't read\watch Kamala's interviews\rallies or c) just doesn't care and wants to rationalize voting for Trump. There aren't other explanations.

Edited by jimbob: 

Rule 12 violation removed

 

[Emily's Cat]

There's a wide gulf between what the left and right are allowed to say about each other. The right has always been the more sensitive party.

I think there's a nuance involved here that gets overlooked, and that is a pretty fundamental aspect of the divisions in the country right now. The right absolutely insults the Democratic Party and Democratic politicians. They've done so for a long time, often in very unpleasant terms. More recently, within the last few elections, the left has begun to insult Voters who vote for Republicans. That might not seem like much to some of you, but it's a pretty important difference.

It's fine, for example, to say "The Cowboys Suck!!!!" or even to say "Dallas Sucks!!!!" when you're all riled up about a football game. It's a bit more below the belt to say "Cowboys fans suck!!!!".

 

[plague311]

I think there's a nuance involved here that gets overlooked, and that is a pretty fundamental aspect of the divisions in the country right now. The right absolutely insults the Democratic Party and Democratic politicians. They've done so for a long time, often in very unpleasant terms. More recently, within the last few elections, the left has begun to insult Voters who vote for Republicans. That might not seem like much to some of you, but it's a pretty important difference.

It's fine, for example, to say "The Cowboys Suck!!!!" or even to say "Dallas Sucks!!!!" when you're all riled up about a football game. It's a bit more below the belt to say "Cowboys fans suck!!!!".

Cowboys fans don't vote for the ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ players lol. Voters for Trump are making a conscious decision to vote for a rapist. This analogy is terrible.

 

[Emily's Cat]

BTW I don't thinkk any broup of goverment employees fears Trump 2.0 as people in the higher positions n the military. Thye think he plans for mass deployment of regular Military forces in big cities, is a terrible idea Thye know there is going be a huge backlash when
it goes south, and that Donnie will then basically hang them out to dry.

That would be an unconstitutional order, regardless of whether it's the president issuing it. Any president who attempts to order military action against us citizens will be ignored.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Can you up with an intelligent reason for viewing Trump as the lesser of two evils?

For a lot of people, it's not about Trump. It's not about the personality, it's about the policies and the party.

There are a lot of people who hate Trump as a person, hate their rhetoric and their windbaggery and their slimy salesman approach to everything. But they still generally prefer a Republican policy position to a Democrat policy position.

The same is true in the other direction. My in-law was secret service during Bill Clinton's administration, and they absolutely hated Hillary. Per their experience, Hillary Clinton was a nasty, condescending, highly demanding person who was almost impossible to get along with and who treated staff like dog ◊◊◊◊. For whatever reason, that same in-law actually thought Trump was pretty cool as a businessperson. But they voted for Hillary because they preferred Democrat policies in general to Republican policies. And as much as they disliked Hillary, voting for Donald would have meany supporting POLICIES that they did not approve of.

 

[johnny karate]

I was going to say the same thing but given the recent....issues with certain members lying, refusing to back up their sources, and not admitting when they're wrong, I'm going to also bet you will not see a reply.

I understood the claims about Harris at first, she really didn't address actual policy, but she's addressed the economy, Puerto Rico, the border, etc. multiple times now. It's been in the news multiple cycles so if Emily's Cat is still making that claim then she either a) doesn't read the news b) doesn't read\watch Kamala's interviews\rallies or c) just doesn't care and wants to rationalize voting for Trump. There aren't other explanations.

Then again, Emily's Cat isn't good at sourcing her arguments (Ukraine handing Russia their ass, the long derail where she repeated right-wing bull ****, etc.) so I just see her claim here as more of the same.

I'd have more respect for someone if they would just come out and say they support Trump instead of insulting our collective intelligence with ridiculous lies.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I think it is hard to vote for somebody whose policies you disagree with even if the person represening your views it a disgusting dangerous person.

Spot on

 

[johnny karate]

I think there's a nuance involved here that gets overlooked, and that is a pretty fundamental aspect of the divisions in the country right now. The right absolutely insults the Democratic Party and Democratic politicians. They've done so for a long time, often in very unpleasant terms. More recently, within the last few elections, the left has begun to insult Voters who vote for Republicans. That might not seem like much to some of you, but it's a pretty important difference.

It's fine, for example, to say "The Cowboys Suck!!!!" or even to say "Dallas Sucks!!!!" when you're all riled up about a football game. It's a bit more below the belt to say "Cowboys fans suck!!!!".

How about "Cowboy fans are eating your pets" or "Dallas is a city of garbage"? What does your keen sense of nuance tell you about those statements?

 

[plague311]

Spot on

"I know he sexually assaults people, I know he's a convicted felon, I know he absolutely can't go 2 seconds without insulting someone, but...like...I super like his policies" has to be one of the ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ dumbest excuses to vote for someone I've ever heard. That's downright pathetic.

The one thing Trump does do is gets people to show who they really are inside. Someone who will stand by their morals or not.

 

[johnny karate]

For a lot of people, it's not about Trump. It's not about the personality, it's about the policies and the party.

There are a lot of people who hate Trump as a person, hate their rhetoric and their windbaggery and their slimy salesman approach to everything. But they still generally prefer a Republican policy position to a Democrat policy position.

What are these policy positions you speak of? What is the current platform of the Republican party? Please be detailed in your response, citing actual GOP sources.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

That would be an unconstitutional order, regardless of whether it's the president issuing it. Any president who attempts to order military action against us citizens will be ignored.

Kent State?

 

[johnny karate]

This is a real offer: I will donate $100 to a charity of their choice if anyone claiming Trump is better on policy can cite one of those polices and a) explain in detail the net benefit of that policy and b) use only his words or official campaign materials as a source.

I don't want to see any Trumpsplaining. I want to see you quote Trump's statements on said policy and then defend his exact words.

And again, details please. "We need to close the border" isn't a policy position, it's a slogan. You would need to provide details on how the policy of closing the border would be carried out and why it's a net benefit, as Trump or his campaign has explained it.

Once you've met all those requirements, you can provide a link to your charity of choice and I will provide a receipt for the $100 donation.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

It's maybe a little unfair to require anyone to use Trumps own words. How can they explain policy without using sentences?

 

[Donal]

What are these policy positions you speak of? What is the current platform of the Republican party? Please be detailed in your response, citing actual GOP sources.

He has his Agenda 47 posted on his campaign site. Not an 80+ page position paper with cites and footnotes, like Harris'. Rather, it is a bunch of short videos of him riffing. Most of it is just a dumber way of restating Project 2025 talking points. All of it is grievances. He doesn't articulate how he will accomplish any of his promises.

 

[The Don]

He has his Agenda 47 posted on his campaign site. Not an 80+ page position paper with cites and footnotes, like Harris'. Rather, it is a bunch of short videos of him riffing. Most of it is just a dumber way of restating Project 2025 talking points. All of it is grievances. He doesn't articulate how he will accomplish any of his promises.

Many (most?) people don't want policies, they want slogans. They want five word answers to difficult problems. Actual delivery isn't an issue because they don't pay attention and the slogans can be recycled indefinitely.

Failures to deliver can be blamed on others.

 

[Donal]

True that, most folks think all the world's problems can be resolved in a bumper sticker or tweet.

 

[I Am The Scum]

I think there's a nuance involved here that gets overlooked, and that is a pretty fundamental aspect of the divisions in the country right now. The right absolutely insults the Democratic Party and Democratic politicians. They've done so for a long time, often in very unpleasant terms. More recently, within the last few elections, the left has begun to insult Voters who vote for Republicans. That might not seem like much to some of you, but it's a pretty important difference.

It's fine, for example, to say "The Cowboys Suck!!!!" or even to say "Dallas Sucks!!!!" when you're all riled up about a football game. It's a bit more below the belt to say "Cowboys fans suck!!!!".

Trump and other Republicans insult left-leaning cities all the time. They refer to rural areas as "real America" (implying the other areas are "fake"). It isn't a controversy because Democrats don't whine about it.

 

[Paul2]

Kent State?

The Kent State shootings were not done by the U.S. armed forces, they were done by the National Guard, and were called in by the Ohio governor, which, in itself, is constitutional. *How* they responded to the protests - by killing students - is still open to criticism.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

It's maybe a little unfair to require anyone to use Trumps own words. How can they explain policy without using sentences?

Get out the crayons and sharpies and draw pretty pictures. Maybe Donald could even sit down and join, if you can tear him from the hamberders and TV shows for two seconds.