Kamala Harris Election Campaign

[Andy_Ross]

Arnie is a Republican.
He thinks that the moral thing to do is vote Democrat this time.

 

[johnny karate]

Arnie is a Republican.
He thinks that the moral thing to do is vote Democrat this time.

Yes, along with many, many other Republicans.

 

[The Don]

Yes, along with many, many other Republicans.

...but sadly not enough, or more accurately not enough in the right states.

The vast majority of Republicans (and undecided voters who IMO are Trump supporters who aren't willing to say so in public) will vote for President Trump and he's likely to win the electoral college.

 

[plague311]

...but sadly not enough, or more accurately not enough in the right states.

How do you know this? The votes haven't even been counted yet. Weren't you the same one that predicted the Tories could still win in the UK despite a lot of information saying the opposite?

The vast majority of Republicans (and undecided voters who IMO are Trump supporters who aren't willing to say so in public) will vote for President Trump and he's likely to win the electoral college.

That's because you're a pessimist in pretty much every discussion from the war in Ukraine, to the UK elections and now the US elections.

Then when you're wrong you trot back to the "Hey, I'm happy I was wrong! This is really what I wanted!"

So you'll have to forgive me if I consider your comments to be pretty much bull ◊◊◊◊.

 

[Reformed Offlian]

If the Democrat in an election was an incoherent gibbering lunatic saying wildly dangerous things about what they’ll do once in office and the worst thing I could say about the Republican was that I didn’t agree with all of their policies, I would vote for the Republican in a heartbeat.

But what if the Democrat is a dangerous, radical leftist extremist(tm) whose ideas are wrong for America?

 

[The Don]

How do you know this? The votes haven't even been counted yet. Weren't you the same one that predicted the Tories could still win in the UK despite a lot of information saying the opposite?

That's because you're a pessimist in pretty much every discussion from the war in Ukraine, to the UK elections and now the US elections.

Then when you're wrong you trot back to the "Hey, I'm happy I was wrong! This is really what I wanted!"

So you'll have to forgive me if I consider your comments to be pretty much bull ****.

As far as I can tell, the Presidential race is neck and neck in the key battleground states - or at least that's what the polls are saying and if anything the polls have underestimated President Trump's support in the past.

That means that tens of millions of people are voting for a convicted conman and rapist who seems to be in accelerating cognitive decline and who is promising an authoritarian regime - so forgive me if I think that not enough so called moderate Republicans aren't choosing to support the candidate who isn't any of those things.

It also doesn't matter whether California Republicans aren't supporting Trump, it's the ones in the swing states that are crucial.

Perhaps you have some special insight which allows you to be confident of a VP Harris victory, but from this side of the pond it looks uncomfortably like a toss up.

 

[plague311]

As far as I can tell, the Presidential race is neck and neck in the key battleground states - or at least that's what the polls are saying and if anything the polls have underestimated President Trump's support in the past.

That means that tens of millions of people are voting for a convicted conman and rapist who seems to be in accelerating cognitive decline and who is promising an authoritarian regime - so forgive me if I think that not enough so called moderate Republicans aren't choosing to support the candidate who isn't any of those things.

It also doesn't matter whether California Republicans aren't supporting Trump, it's the ones in the swing states that are crucial.

Perhaps you have some special insight which allows you to be confident of a VP Harris victory, but from this side of the pond it looks uncomfortably like a toss up.

I don't have any special insight, and your tune changed pretty quick in this follow up. You never said "toss up" or anything similar. You said not enough Republicans are voting and Trump will "likely" win the electoral college when in fact you have no idea.

Like I said, you do this in everything and then when you get called out you do this exact same thing. Now it's humming and hawing about it being a toss up.

 

[thaiboxerken]

We’re watching someone in real time out themselves as a Trump supporter.

Sadly, they probably thought they had us fooled. The "I'm not a Trump supporter, but...." schtick doesn't hold water in this forum. How many of these "not Trump supporters" are in the forum? Too many, and they all think they are cleverly tricking us.

 

[dirtywick]

idk, it's like they're trying to convince themselves they're not a trump supporter but. i just don't think their hearts are in it anymore.

i once heard a trump supporter would eat a turd if they thought a libtard had to smell their breath. well, the turd's not so tasty, is it?

 

[Emily's Cat]

And that's the ******* pathetic part right there, that your values and morals as a Republican don't say "vote for who is best" they say "vote for Republicans no matter what". That actually explains a lot Emily's Cat, and you're finally coming around to admitting what you've been denying this whole time. You aren't a centrist, you're a Republican no matter who and that's your moral makeup.

I'm not a republican, so your made-up imagined inference says ◊◊◊◊-all about me. You know jack ◊◊◊◊ about my values and morals, you insist on just inventing ◊◊◊◊ in your own head and assuming that you somehow have magical ESP. You don't so please knock it the ◊◊◊◊ off.

And you've completely ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ missed the entire point here, yet again.

If the Dems ended up with a candidate that you detested as a person, but the dem party as a whole - and that individual - largely supported things like increased educational spending, universal health care, universal basic income, wealth and inheritance taxes, reparations for past injustices, self-id for transgender people and participation of trans people as their gender in athletics, etc. would your personal dislike of that individual be sufficient to convince you to vote for a party that supports a strictly biological definition of sex in Title IX, recission of ACA and refusal to consider any socialized medicine, marriage strictly limited to a male-female pairing, significant reduction in the size of government and a rollback of regulations, reduced taxes on corporations and the wealthy?

 

[Emily's Cat]

My views on 3rd party voting are that they are just a different way of supporting Trump, yes.

Have you actually looked at the 3rd party patterns? It seems to contradict your assumption. For example, in 2016 there was a significantly higher portion of votes for a 3rd party than in prior years, AND a higher turnout for Dem voters. Right now, it's going in more or less the same direction - current polling shows ~4.4% for someone other than Trump or Harris. You believe that those 4.4% ought to vote for Harris, because that would make you happy - my current hypothesis is that many of those are independents who lean right, but cannot bring themselves to vote for Trump - which is a fair description of myself. Harris and the democratic party hold some positions that I have extremely strong disagreements with, and I will not vote for a Dem president with those particular issues on the line. They don't matter to you, I already know your views on those issues... but they matter a lot to me. At the same time, however, I can't stomach Trump at all. I don't share your view that Trump would end up being a dictator and destroying the country - I think we're all more resilient than that. But I cannot and will not vote for Trump. So I voted for local and congressional positions and the various bills on the table this year, and wrote in Mickey Mouse.

If it were someone other than Trump right now, with the issues that are important to me personally, I'd very likely vote Republican. But I can't vote for Harris with those particular issues on the table, and I won't vote for Trump.

 

[Emily's Cat]

That you view the Dem party as in opposition to all your values says everything anyone needs to know about your values.

Learn to read. They're not in opposition to all of MY values; they're in opposition to all of the values of a REPUBLICAN.

At this point in time, Dems are in opposition to a few key values and issues that I hold dear, but are much more in line with many others.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I'm not a republican, so your made-up imagined inference says fudge-all about me. You know jack **** about my values and morals, you insist on just inventing **** in your own head and assuming that you somehow have magical ESP. You don't so please knock it the fudge off.

Forum software has gotten more creative. Instead of asterisks, it has decided to kindergarten my post.

I support this move, but I think we should also replace ◊◊◊◊ with poop, it will be a lot funnier that way.

 

[plague311]

I'm not a republican, so your made-up imagined inference says fudge-all about me. You know jack **** about my values and morals, you insist on just inventing **** in your own head and assuming that you somehow have magical ESP. You don't so please knock it the fudge off.

Sure you're not, you just go on a multi-post rant about why you can't vote for Dems, and would totally vote for Republicans if it weren't for Trump, but you're not a Republican. Seriously, how ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ stupid do you think we are? Every single time you post it's from a right-wing standpoint. Every time. Never fails.

And you've completely ******* missed the entire point here, yet again.

If the Dems ended up with a candidate that you detested as a person, but the dem party as a whole - and that individual - largely supported things like increased educational spending, universal health care, universal basic income, wealth and inheritance taxes, reparations for past injustices, self-id for transgender people and participation of trans people as their gender in athletics, etc. would your personal dislike of that individual be sufficient to convince you to vote for a party that supports a strictly biological definition of sex in Title IX, recission of ACA and refusal to consider any socialized medicine, marriage strictly limited to a male-female pairing, significant reduction in the size of government and a rollback of regulations, reduced taxes on corporations and the wealthy?

◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ ◊◊◊◊ your stupid ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ trans bull ◊◊◊◊. God ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ damn I'm sick of you and your ilk's crying about it. Take it to the ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ thread it's made for.

You're posing a ridiculous hypothetical, so I don't even feel the need to address it. There would never be a person that supports and works for all of those things you listed on the left but would still insult and act like Trump, and break the law ad nauseum, and treat women the way Trump does. That's a purely right-wing problem. The way Trump acts is because he has no compassion, he has no sympathy and everything he does is centered around himself.

I'm not a one issue voter like trans-crybaby's are, I can\have voted for the right when those people are reasonable. It's called "being an adult".

 

[Fast Eddie B]

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.

Maybe not definitive, but Copilot tells me...

Is the National Guard part of the United States Armed Forces?

Yes, the National Guard is part of the United States Armed Forces. It serves both state and federal functions. When under state control, governors can call upon the National Guard for emergencies like natural disasters. But under federal activation, the President can deploy them for national missions, often alongside regular military forces.

Quite the dual role, huh? What sparked your interest in the National Guard?

 

[Tero]

The women married to Trumpsters are not going to register as Democrat. That the husband would find out. So that is the shift this time. Teump has not gained any women since 2020. He has not tried. His statements about "taking care of women" are directed at the toxic male voter.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Hearing the Maga media talk about the Harris ads about voting is gross. They are equating voting against their husband's wishes to having affairs or worse. They actually believe women should obey their husbands, to simply amplify their husband's vote.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Every single time you post it's from a right-wing standpoint.

Sure, sure. Tax-funded comprehensive education through post-secondary school, including trade schools, is totally a republican position. As is the position of having all doctors, hospitals, and the entire delivery of care in the US be run by the government - absolutely a right wing talking point. And legalized marijuana and psychedelics, yep, totally republican. And females being eligible for the draft. And revising the criminal justice system so that those who have repaid their debt to society get full reinstatement of all rights once the sentence is served, and prisoners should be allowed to vote because they're still citizens. Yep, I'm just full to the brim of right wing views.

You make this mistake over and over. You err in thinking that "not progressive" is the same as "right wing".

 

[Olmstead]

I'm not a republican, so your made-up imagined inference says fudge-all about me. You know jack **** about my values and morals, you insist on just inventing **** in your own head and assuming that you somehow have magical ESP. You don't so please knock it the fudge off.

And you've completely ******* missed the entire point here, yet again.

If the Dems ended up with a candidate that you detested as a person, but the dem party as a whole - and that individual - largely supported things like increased educational spending, universal health care, universal basic income, wealth and inheritance taxes, reparations for past injustices, self-id for transgender people and participation of trans people as their gender in athletics, etc. would your personal dislike of that individual be sufficient to convince you to vote for a party that supports a strictly biological definition of sex in Title IX, recission of ACA and refusal to consider any socialized medicine, marriage strictly limited to a male-female pairing, significant reduction in the size of government and a rollback of regulations, reduced taxes on corporations and the wealthy?

Case in point, the Democratic party and its policies are far too "woke" to hitch its fortunes to a criminal scam artist who puts hate front and center. It's why all such individuals congregate somewhere else. Perhaps some self-reflection on the Republican party and its policies is in order. It's exactly what I would do if the roles were reversed.

 

[dirtywick]

when nazis show up to the rallies it's all defend to the death their right to say it. but give one trans kid a tampon

you're right though, and it's not just one criminal scam artist. they all seem to be that. oh, so you agree with a dumb, greedy, racist, lying scam artists policies but never talk about them? let's hear all about the coming in two weeks healthcare plan of the guy talking about how bloody it's going to be when we round up the immigrants