General Election 2024 Harris vs Trump (5 Viewers)

[SamAndreas]

Today it begins, Kamala has reached the point that she's the Democratic Party nominee:

There's video from today. this link has video from her first public appearance since Biden endorsed her:

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/07/22/live-updates-harris-democrats-biden-drops-out-trump-campaign.html

She spent yesterday on the telephone for most of the day. I read that yesterday that she called the party leaders in all 50 states. That would take me three days.

She's renamed her YouTube channel, that's the where to go for video: https://www.youtube.com/@kamalaharris

This is her video on her channel from two hours ago:



To play it, start it, and then move it up to 5:47. This was one of those live videos which don't start at zero.

I've named this thread General Election 2024 Harris vs Trump

Trump needs an introduction post as well, a MAGA suporter ought to write it: @Farb, @SaintForLife , @Others, calling for someone to please introduce your GOP candidate for this 2024 general election thread.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Think I already posted something along these lines but.. I find this all to be fairly stressful (sure I'm not alone there). Can't hardly do the day-to-day stuff anymore because it's all just.. too forking much man. Like for real, too much.

I think she may very well win but I have no confidence in it beyond a 50-50 proposition.. some strange mix of me just wanting this shirt to be over one way or another (hint to myself: doesn't really end here, but nice thought) and also being shocked that this election is already here.

Here's to.. something good.

You're definitely not alone. It's another log on top of a bunch of logs already on the camel's back. It takes a lot of energy to keep the camel's back from breaking. I'm encouraged by the voting turnout data so far, but I won't rest easy unless and until Harris is the certified winner by Congress. There will still be issues, but nothing like if Trump wins.

 

[LA - L.A.]

She says it better than I do:

My damn pride makes me state that I wrote basically the same thing in my posts above before I read this post. No claim to being the first or only person to think it. Just need everyone to know that I'm not plagiarizing. My thoughts obviously weren't unique, but they were original.

 

[LA - L.A.]

So, the TLDR version of this is that you were disappointed in her performance because she wasn't perfect!

Yeah, that's spot on. Set to music it sounds like this:

 

[LA - L.A.]

I think he is more like Victor Orban or Putin, which is awful, but not Hitler.

What standards and/or metrics did you use to come to this opinion?

...I also don’t think anyone would go as far as Hitler.

Hitler is not the worst and he's not as unique as you think. You're being biased by a combination of recency and ethnocentrism. Farther back in history, there are people who murdered less people but larger percentages of the population. If they would have had millions of people to murder, there's no doubt they would have. More recently you have this:

"Who was the biggest mass murderer in the history of the world? Most people probably assume that the answer is Adolf Hitler, architect of the Holocaust. Others might guess Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, who may indeed have managed to kill even more innocent people than Hitler did, many of them as part of a terror famine that likely took more lives than the Holocaust. But both Hitler and Stalin were outdone by Mao Zedong. From 1958 to 1962, his Great Leap Forward policy led to the deaths of up to 45 million people—easily making it the biggest episode of mass murder ever recorded."​

America has two mass murder events in our history and human history has at least one mass murder event per decade. One of the first steps toward mass murder is not talking about the possibility of mass murder, which is exactly what you are advocating. Germany makes everyone remember and talk about the Holocaust, so they never forget it's possible to happen again.

It's a lot more likely that Trump would commit mass murder than you allow yourself to believe. Most Germans thought of Hitler, before he seized power, the same way you think of Trump. Most Russians thought of Stalin, before he seized power, the same way you think of Trump. Most Chinese thought of Mao, before he seized power, the same way you think of Trump.

We are in "fool me four times, then I'm a forking idiot" territory with Trump.

I don't think anyone's going to come into my house to kill me while I sleep, but I still lock the damned door before going to bed. Don't you?

Remembering the biggest mass murder in the history of the world

Chinese peasants suffering from the effects of the Great Leap Forward. Who was the biggest mass murderer in the history of the world? Most people probably

reason.com

 

[superchuck500]

I agree with everything you said, but I think it is still too extreme to call him Hitler. He is definitely a fascist. He is dangerous and might go as far as Hitler, but I’m not convinced. I think he is more like Victor Orban or Putin, which is awful, but not Hitler. I actually think he’s a worse person than either of them, but I also don’t think anyone would go as far as Hitler.

Agree that saying he’s Hitler isn’t accurate. But saying he says things like Hitler, has ideas that are similar to ideas had before he converted his government to the Third Reich, and that he seems to have a history of desiring certain aspects of what he thinks Hitler “had” as leader are all accurate.

I agree it shouldn’t be used as a cheap insult - but it’s absolutely fair to connect those dots. These aren’t trivial similarities.

 

[Lapaz]

So, the TLDR version of this is that you were disappointed in her performance because she wasn't perfect!

No I wasn’t disappointed because she wasn’t perfect. I was disappointed because her performance was bad. I was disappointed that she still hasn’t formulated good answers to the questions she has been repeatedly asked. She keeps making the same mistakes that are causing some people to choose Trump or remain undecided. If she would answer the questions more forthrightly, I think she would win over more voters. I think she is being advised poorly if she is being advised to evade answering. I know lots of politicians do it, but I think she is doing it too much. I think she will be a much better president than she is a candidate, but she is being judged by voters now, and should change her tactics if her approach keeps her stuck. I think her evasiveness is hurting her more than anything else. Even Trump’s extremely dangerous policies and plans are not moving the needle.

 

[Lapaz]

What standards and/or metrics did you use to come to this opinion?


Hitler is not the worst and he's not as unique as you think. You're being biased by a combination of recency and ethnocentrism. Farther back in history, there are people who murdered less people but larger percentages of the population. If they would have had millions of people to murder, there's no doubt they would have. More recently you have this:

"Who was the biggest mass murderer in the history of the world? Most people probably assume that the answer is Adolf Hitler, architect of the Holocaust. Others might guess Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, who may indeed have managed to kill even more innocent people than Hitler did, many of them as part of a terror famine that likely took more lives than the Holocaust. But both Hitler and Stalin were outdone by Mao Zedong. From 1958 to 1962, his Great Leap Forward policy led to the deaths of up to 45 million people—easily making it the biggest episode of mass murder ever recorded."​

America has two mass murder events in our history and human history has at least one mass murder event per decade. One of the first steps toward mass murder is not talking about the possibility of mass murder, which is exactly what you are advocating. Germany makes everyone remember and talk about the Holocaust, so they never forget it's possible to happen again.

It's a lot more likely that Trump would commit mass murder than you allow yourself to believe. Most Germans thought of Hitler, before he seized power, the same way you think of Trump. Most Russians thought of Stalin, before he seized power, the same way you think of Trump. Most Chinese thought of Mao, before he seized power, the same way you think of Trump.

We are in "fool me four times, then I'm a forking idiot" territory with Trump.

I don't think anyone's going to come into my house to kill me while I sleep, but I still lock the damned door before going to bed. Don't you?

Remembering the biggest mass murder in the history of the world

Chinese peasants suffering from the effects of the Great Leap Forward. Who was the biggest mass murderer in the history of the world? Most people probably

reason.com

I doubt most Russians or Chinese thought of their leader like I think of Trump. If they had, they wouldn’t have supported them and would’ve actively worked to prevent them from taking office. I also realize there have been a few others like Stalin that are as bad, and arguably some worse, so I agree that it is wrong to say no one would go as far. I should’ve said that it is extremely rare for anyone to go that far. There have been thousands of heads of state throughout history, and many have committed atrocities, but few rose to Hitler’s level. Trump is awful, but certainly no one knows if he would go as far as Hitler. It’s appropriate to call him a fascist due to his rhetoric, plans and those he admires, but calling him Hitler loses people. He is more about power, staying out of prison, and manipulating people, but I don’t think he is a true believer like Hitler. Trump is dangerous, dumb, unread, wacko, immoral, and many other bad adjectives, but I think he is mostly acting to keep his supporters.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

No I wasn’t disappointed because she wasn’t perfect. I was disappointed because her performance was bad. I was disappointed that she still hasn’t formulated good answers to the questions she has been repeatedly asked. She keeps making the same mistakes that are causing some people to choose Trump or remain undecided. If she would answer the questions more forthrightly, I think she would win over more voters. I think she is being advised poorly if she is being advised to evade answering. I know lots of politicians do it, but I think she is doing it too much. I think she will be a much better president than she is a candidate, but she is being judged by voters now, and should change her tactics if her approach keeps her stuck. I think her evasiveness is hurting her more than anything else. Even Trump’s extremely dangerous policies and plans are not moving the needle.

I get what you're saying, and I also wish she would more aggressively tout the administrations successes and remind people of the chaos of Trump's presidency and how bad the economy was when they took over.

"Yes, inflation is bad, but remember we took over an economy that had lost 6 million jobs, and our first priority was getting people back to work. Our entire supply chain was wrecked and had to be rebuilt. We were succesful in not only rebuilding the lost jobs, but adding jobs at a faster rate than Trump ever did. Especially in manufacturing jobs. Unfortunately inflation was a part of that rebuilding effort, and once we got the economy stable we immediately started attacking that along with the Fed, and now inflation is back to 2%, wages are growing faster than inflation. The job isn't done because overall wages have still not caught up - and this is why it's dangerous to switch policies to Trump's .. and so on."

 

[LA - L.A.]

I doubt most Russians or Chinese thought of their leader like I think of Trump.

You doubt a lot of things that are historically true. People like Trump, Hitler, Stalin and Mao only ever get a chance to do what they do because most people don't think they would do what they say they are going to do which they actually end up doing. Trump's already done in his first term a whole bunch of things people swore Trump would never do. Jan 6th ring a bell for starters?

I should’ve said that it is extremely rare for anyone to go that far. There have been thousands of heads of state throughout history, and many have committed atrocities, but few rose to Hitler’s level.

You're odds making is fatally flawed. It's not what percentage of heads of state commit mass murder.

The accurate odds making is what percentage of power seekers who tell us the atrocities they will commit if given power, go on to actually commit those atrocities when given power. That percentage my friend is close to 100%. Trump will round up over 10 million people if given power and he will send them into camps were millions of them will be actively and passively murdered.

 

[superchuck500]

No I wasn’t disappointed because she wasn’t perfect. I was disappointed because her performance was bad. I was disappointed that she still hasn’t formulated good answers to the questions she has been repeatedly asked. She keeps making the same mistakes that are causing some people to choose Trump or remain undecided. If she would answer the questions more forthrightly, I think she would win over more voters. I think she is being advised poorly if she is being advised to evade answering. I know lots of politicians do it, but I think she is doing it too much. I think she will be a much better president than she is a candidate, but she is being judged by voters now, and should change her tactics if her approach keeps her stuck. I think her evasiveness is hurting her more than anything else. Even Trump’s extremely dangerous policies and plans are not moving the needle.

I don’t think you’re wrong that she does come across as evasive at times when answering questions - but the double standard here is wild.

The best conclusion I have for it is that everyone has just gotten desensitized to Trump’s style of persistent evasion and mush-mouthed responses that morph into Trump-speak. It’s a known commodity and he gets a full pass as just being Trump.

But when someone who is obviously far more organized and responsive in her typical style and delivery appears evasive, it stands out in people’s minds.

It’s crazy. Jon Stewart often talks about how insane this is.

 

[LA - L.A.]

I get what you're saying, and I also wish she would more aggressively tout the administrations successes and remind people of the chaos of Trump's presidency and how bad the economy was when they took over.

"Yes, inflation is bad, but remember we took over an economy that had lost 6 million jobs, and our first priority was getting people back to work. Our entire supply chain was wrecked and had to be rebuilt. We were succesful in not only rebuilding the lost jobs, but adding jobs at a faster rate than Trump ever did. Especially in manufacturing jobs. Unfortunately inflation was a part of that rebuilding effort, and once we got the economy stable we immediately started attacking that along with the Fed, and now inflation is back to 2%, wages are growing faster than inflation. The job isn't done because overall wages have still not caught up - and this is why it's dangerous to switch policies to Trump's .. and so on."

I think too many people overlook the fact that when Harris answers a question, she's not speaking just to them. Not all of us want to hear Harris give the same answer to the same question. Harris has to try to appeal to everyone with her answers which means most of the time people will think her answer was good enough, because it's not exactly what they want to hear her say.

Sure she might sway a few more voters if she answers the way someone thinks she should, but she will also repel some voters as well. I think very few voters would choose to vote for Trump, because they think Harris is too evasive.

If you really think about it, it's absurd. If a voter is being that observant and rational how in the world are they going to decide that Trump is less evasive and more forthright than Harris? If a voter values forthrightness and honesty highly in their choice of president, then how in the hell are they going to choose Trump over Harris? They wouldn't. Anyone that thinks, "Harris evaded too many questions for my taste, so I'm voting for Trump," is not someone that was ever going to vote for Harris. They are looking for excuses to vote for Trump and nothing Harris can say or do is going to keep them from voting for Trump.

Harris could spend the time to answer questions in detail and it might be more satisfying of an answer to some, but to others it would be too "long winded" and they'd stop listening part of the way through it. We all think a little differently and have our own preferences. Most people don't resonate with drawn out explanations. Slogans, mottoes, chants and rallying cries have been a part of human history for a very long time for a reason.

Based on Harris's increasing popularity and approval, I'd say she's giving answers that the majority of people approve of. She'll never get everyone's full approval on any answer she gives. It's an impossible goal and I don't think she's trying to chase it, nor should she.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

She's evasive because she knows anything she says will be chopped up, taken out of context, and used as meat for the uninformed masses. Most people won't ever see her talk, they see clips played on Tik Tok with commentary or memes.

It doesn't benefit her at this point to get specific on policy and the like because it isn't going to change anything at this point. It can only hurt, not help. This is a campaign about him, not a campaign about her. If she were running against almost anyone else she'd be ten points behind right now. Running against Trump is all about motivating the people that despise him and see him as a threat to show up. Any other approach is spitting in the wind.

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

No I wasn’t disappointed because she wasn’t perfect. I was disappointed because her performance was bad. I was disappointed that she still hasn’t formulated good answers to the questions she has been repeatedly asked. She keeps making the same mistakes that are causing some people to choose Trump or remain undecided. If she would answer the questions more forthrightly, I think she would win over more voters. I think she is being advised poorly if she is being advised to evade answering. I know lots of politicians do it, but I think she is doing it too much. I think she will be a much better president than she is a candidate, but she is being judged by voters now, and should change her tactics if her approach keeps her stuck. I think her evasiveness is hurting her more than anything else. Even Trump’s extremely dangerous policies and plans are not moving the needle.

its crazy to me that someone would think, 'she did a bad job at answering questions so i think i'll lean towards Trump because he answers the questions'
2 things. 1- they were already gonna go with Trump anyway, or 2- they need mental help.. there isn't one partisan person in this country that can say with a straight face that Trump answwers questions he is asked any more than any other politician. honestly, i don't think a Trump supporter could say it with a straight face.

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

She's evasive because she knows anything she says will be chopped up, taken out of context, and used as meat for the uninformed masses. Most people won't ever see her talk, they see clips played on Tik Tok with commentary or memes.

It doesn't benefit her at this point to get specific on policy and the like because it isn't going to change anything at this point. It can only hurt, not help. This is a campaign about him, not a campaign about her. If she were running against almost anyone else she'd be ten points behind right now. Running against Trump is all about motivating the people that despise him and see him as a threat to show up. Any other approach is spitting in the wind.

my favorite is the clips they like to play of her saying 'how dare you say Merry Christmas'.. i straight up call them a liar, and they get mad..lol because they know they took a small clip and do not want to see the rest because it makes them look ignorant..

 

[coldseat]

Think I already posted something along these lines but.. I find this all to be fairly stressful (sure I'm not alone there). Can't hardly do the day-to-day stuff anymore because it's all just.. too forking much man. Like for real, too much.

I think she may very well win but I have no confidence in it beyond a 50-50 proposition.. some strange mix of me just wanting this shirt to be over one way or another (hint to myself: doesn't really end here, but nice thought) and also being shocked that this election is already here.

Here's to.. something good.

I'm not really sure why, but I'm not stressed at all about this election. I feel pretty certain that Harris will win, but outside of doing my part and getting me and my family to the polls to vote, I don't really feel much trepidation. I say that fully acknowledging that Trump can very well win and that I may be wrong. I'm also not the least bit naive about the danger Trump poses in a second term.

I think Harris has run a really good campaign. Maybe the best I've ever seen given the compressed time frame, which had the possibility of either hurting and helping her. But I think she's done enough to convince enough voters.

I also just think that after two elections with Trump, I've resigned myself to the fact that I have no control over what will happen. I think very logically and I've come to the conclusion that the American voting public absolutely does not. If it did, Trump would not be anywhere close to running for president, but here we are. The portion of the American public voting logically and on policy have long ago made their decision and are voting for Harris. The rest are just voting on feels and fears. She obviously loses a good portion of that vote to Trump because all he pushes are fears, but I think making people's fears about a second Trump presidency front and center will work to her advantage as well as doing all of the media and podcast to increase the good feelings about her. Ultimately, people like Harris a lot more than they like Trump.

 

[faceman]

I'm not really sure why, but I'm not stressed at all about this election. I feel pretty certain that Harris will win, but outside of doing my part and getting me and my family to the polls to vote, I don't really feel much trepidation. I say that fully acknowledging that Trump can very well win and that I may be wrong. I'm also not the least bit naive about the danger Trump poses in a second term.

I think Harris has run a really good campaign. Maybe the best I've ever seen given the compressed time frame, which had the possibility of either hurting and helping her. But I think she's done enough to convince enough voters.

I also just think that after two elections with Trump, I've resigned myself to the fact that I have no control over what will happen. I think very logically and I've come to the conclusion that the American voting public absolutely does not. If it did, Trump would not be anywhere close to running for president, but here we are. The portion of the American public voting logically and on policy have long ago made their decision and are voting for Harris. The rest are just voting on feels and fears. She obviously loses a good portion of that vote to Trump because all he pushes are fears, but I think making people's fears about a second Trump presidency front and center will work to her advantage as well as doing all of the media and podcast to increase the good feelings about her. Ultimately, people like Harris a lot more than they like Trump.

Agreed many more people like Harris than Trump. The problem is it will come down to 7 or possibly 3 states where it really matters.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

my favorite is the clips they like to play of her saying 'how dare you say Merry Christmas'.. i straight up call them a liar, and they get mad..lol because they know they took a small clip and do not want to see the rest because it makes them look ignorant..

They took the clip of her replying to hecklers screaming "liar" and claimed they were saying "Jesus is King". She told them they were at the wrong rally and the right ran with the idea that's how she responds to "Jesus is King".

The country is fundamentally broken and it's no longer about good answers, it's about answers that can't be used as misinformation. She's actually really disciplined about not giving them much ammo.

 

[efil4]

I don’t think you’re wrong that she does come across as evasive at times when answering questions - but the double standard here is wild.

The best conclusion I have for it is that everyone has just gotten desensitized to Trump’s style of persistent evasion and mush-mouthed responses that morph into Trump-speak. It’s a known commodity and he gets a full pass as just being Trump.

But when someone who is obviously far more organized and responsive in her typical style and delivery appears evasive, it stands out in people’s minds.

It’s crazy. Jon Stewart often talks about how insane this is.

I caught a clip of Jake Tapper saying basically same, post Town Hall.

That the two candidates operate in different universes when it comes to talking policy and the pundits. ( and their respective Party )

On one hand, Harris gets eviscerated for not having "specifics", yet Trump has "concepts" and its written off as you said, "Trump speak"

He went on to say, Harris holds a Town Hall and Democrats are texting " i wish she would have said X or been more specific about Y"

Trump holds a Town Hall, and Republicans hit the airwaves to "interpret and tamp down" his rhetoric.

its absolutely insane

reminds me of the SNL Dukakis skit...