USA 2024 US Presidential Election: Trump vs Harris (pt II)

[burge13]

About 50,000 people watch Sky News, guys.

49,750 of them hate Sky News but accuse everyone they don't like of watching it

 

[burge13]

It is very much this I suspect.

As bad as Donald is (and he is), the core question that still hasn't been answered by the Dems is how they will get those voters back that are disillusioned with them so much they will vote for a theoretically un-electable candidate.

Her messaging is just dumb as rocks. "I represent change" has been said 100x but they're the ones in office?!

Now she says she knows how to fix the border crisis, OK do it now then, you are the one in charge

It really isn't that difficult to see how a clown like Trump has become popular.

 

[Romeoh1]

Unions? He busted the rail workers strike.

Funny how every time there's a Democrat in the White House, by golly they really want to pass some progressive legislation but gosh darn it they just can't get it through (even when they have the numbers).

Biden fought for nothing.

He’s actually done a good job.

 

[EagleMan87]

Unions? He busted the rail workers strike.

Funny how every time there's a Democrat in the White House, by golly they really want to pass some progressive legislation but gosh darn it they just can't get it through (even when they have the numbers).

Biden fought for nothing.

Righto then. Has any US president fought for any anything in the past 50 years, in your opinion?

 

[Farmer2Goggin]

Just like 9/11 - claimed to have "lost many friends and went to many funerals" ...........totally false of course.
Needs to insert himself into anything topical , me me me me me.....pathetic insecure POS

 

[GreyCrow]

Trump was in charge for 4 out of the last 16 years.

Smokescreen. You said it was a Biden/Harris referendum. If Trump was a 1st time candidate you might have a point

Democrats 12 of 16 At the moment, a lot of people are factoring it all together and saying they're fed up with Democrats.

They can say that but as can people say they are fed up with a Trump presidency

 

[pjcrows]

The only relevant "exposure" of Harris is: is she better or worse than Trump?

The developing theme of "I've always known she's bad, now others are starting to see it" is ridiculous.

It's whether she's worse than Trump, because people who vote have to vote for one of them. Which of them would you vote for if you were a US citizen?

US citizens can vote for Harris, Trump, Third Party (depending on who is balloted in your state).or not vote at all (which is actually the majority).

I'd most likely vote Third Party or not at all at this election.

 

[Crankyhawk]

The only relevant "exposure" of Harris is: is she better or worse than Trump?

The developing theme of "I've always known she's bad, now others are starting to see it" is ridiculous.

It's whether she's worse than Trump, because people who vote have to vote for one of them. Which of them would you vote for if you were a US citizen?

They also have the option to note vote at all, which is a factor often forgotten by us in Australia (we have to vote for someone). So it can be about enthusing your supporters and making the other side disenchanted

 

[pjcrows]

Righto then. Has any US president fought for any anything in the past 50 years, in your opinion?

The 80s correlates pretty well with when the US started going down the shitter and every decade since then has been spiralling, so not really.

 

[pjcrows]

Smokescreen. You said it was a Biden/Harris referendum. If Trump was a 1st time candidate you might have a point

They can say that but as can people say they are fed up with a Trump presidency

Smokescreen? 1/4 vs 3/4. Which one is bigger?

Of course people can say theyre fed up with Trump. Where did I say they can't?

FMD can anyone here differentiate between a prediction of an outcome and a personal desire? Jesus.

 

[EagleMan87]

The 80s correlates pretty well with when the US started going down the shitter and every decade since then has been spiralling, so not really.

I'd say everything that's gone to shit since FDR had its genesis when re-construction failed after the Civil War, but fair enough.

I will say though; being too cynical can be just as bad as being too naive.

 

[GreyCrow]

Of course they can. Where did I say they can't?

By not even mentioning or minimising - 12 out of 16 blah blah blah - Trumps role in the last 8 years

FMD can anyone here differentiate between a prediction of an outcome and a personal desire? Jesus.

No it was a statement

 

[pjcrows]

I'd say everything that's gone to shit since FDR started when re-construction failed after the Civil War, but fair enough.

The 50s and 60s in the US, economically, not too many better places to live.

 

[pjcrows]

By not even mentioning or minimising - 12 out of 16 blah blah blah - Trumps role in the last 8 years

No it was a statement

I said a lot of people are looking at the last 16 years and blaming the Democrats more than they're blaming Trump. I'm not saying Trump is good. He's not good.

 

[EagleMan87]

The 50s and 60s in the US, economically, not too many better places to live.

If you were a straight, white male, then sure.

 

[pjcrows]

If you were a straight, white male, then sure.

I said economically.

Nowhere near it on civil rights.

 

[spinynorman]

This is a perfect example of the problem.

I didn't attack or insult you in any form.
I gave clear explanations as to what and why you may be viewed unfairly.

And you respond with this.

Be honest, what do you think I should take away from this, with the assumption that I'm being completely honest and good faith?

I don’t think many long term posters in this thread gets interrogated as much for their posts as I do and gives as much in response. It isn’t a personal lack of response, I’ve just been doing it all day and need a break. I made my first post in this part of the forum in a few weeks and immediately got jumped on for it. It’s tiring.

Yes, she went from being not good enough because of the bad-dem-controlled aspect.
Where people similar to you would have argued that the Dem machine stopped her to support the unwinnable Biden.

She didn't change. She wasn't dishonest. The representations of her were.
Not an exposure of her.

So what you're pointing out is that she hasn't changed, but the media narrative has.

But it 100% comes across as you calling her deceitful and untrustworthy. 'flip flop'. Rather than her being a victim of the system you are so adamantly against.

I have no idea how you got that I was saying she’s deceitful and untrustworthy from that. I said she’s coming across as affable and pleasant - that’s a good thing for a politician.

Whatever faults she’s having with her campaign, she’s doing better than Biden would’ve if they’d stuck with him. He wasn’t up to it. Ideally he would’ve ruled out a second term a year earlier and there would’ve been a contested primary to replace him, in which I’m sure I’d have preferred to Kamala, but at the time he dropped out she was the only real alternative option and a better one than him.

That's not true.

This is a blatant lie, spread by Fox News type areas.

Trump struggles with policy and substance. Harris has given clear and blatant policy, reasons and outcomes.




You've lied here.
Unless you're using clippettes of her pausing or slow-mo etc.

The biggest problem with debating Vance or Trump, is trying to put across policy and substance against blatant lies and dishonesty.





So here is a perfect example of you appearing to be pro-Trump, anti-Harris.
Can you understand this perspective??

You’ve not really countered with anything here besides say I’m a liar. Do you think her answer about Iran being the US’ greatest adversary was a good one?

I’ve literally not mentioned Trump in this post, but am replying to your question about her being exposed.

 

[EagleMan87]

I said economically.

Nowhere near it on civil rights.

You can't separate the two: things weren't good economically for minorities and women back then.

 

[spinynorman]

Smokescreen. You said it was a Biden/Harris referendum. If Trump was a 1st time candidate you might have a point

They can say that but as can people say they are fed up with a Trump presidency

I thought Harris’ initial “We’re not going back” slogan was strong. It said “Are you sick of the past ten years? Let’s move on”. That and calling Trump/Vance weird really had the Republicans on the run.

There was an article that the senior advisors said they were being too negative and had to drop it. This was a calamitous mistake, I think.

 

[bourbons]

Would any of those people support public healthcare, paid family leave or a significant reduction in military spending?

They might, but would never publicly acknowledge they did (thinking more of your Rubin/Pool type of influencers here).

Completely audience captured, they know what side of their bread is buttered.

 

[spinynorman]

Trump has turned his focus onto an enemy we can all unite against.

 

[CM86]

I'd most likely vote Third Party or not at all at this election.

Why?

Considering you're more left than Harris, and your opposition to Harris clearly means opposition to Trump policy.

But add to that Trump and his backer's desire to overturn democracy.
Why would you not use your single vote to oppose Trump?

Because you're doing exactly what the far right would like the 'left' to do, which is to not impact the votes FOR Trump.
So can you explain why you'd be helpful to their system, without ignoring the actual threat of Trump vs the lackluster outcomes from the Dems?

 

[pjcrows]

You can't separate the two: things weren't good economically for minorities and women back then.

Fair point.

 

[CM86]

Trump has turned his focus onto an enemy we can all unite against.

 

[CM86]

I said economically.

Nowhere near it on civil rights.

This is an insane post. Please stop and read back for 20 seconds and consider your 'left wing' perspective...