General Election 2024 Harris vs Trump (7 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.

 

[SamAndreas]

I’m familiar with 1930’s Germany. There is no comparison to today. Jews in Germany had been living there for hundreds of years. They weren’t streaming across the border into Germany. They were already assimilated. So your comparison ignores the problem created when undocumented migrants ignore our border laws and come into this country illegally. The Jews were breaking no laws.

You also ignore the fact that the Biden administration all but invited these folks to cross over. I actually read his build back better policy on his website. There was nothing having to do with border enforcement or integrity in that document. He was warned that this would cause a flood of migrants. Repeatedly and he ignore those warning and did what he wanted. His policy is straining social safety nets in just about every state and is costing billions of dollars. It is not and never has been a wise, well thought out, well executed policy. You can’t ignore the first three years and the fact his policy exacerbated the problem causing two the three times more border crossing than any of his predecessors. He sat on his arse for three years and ignored it. He was responsible and Harris was responsible. She said herself in her FOX interview that the incumbent is responsible for what happens on their watch. So by her own see definition, her administration is accountable. As it should be.

Joe, the lion's share of those undocumented migrants are Native Americans. They've been here for 5,000 to 10,000 years for crying out loud.

They have the right to travel on this continent.

 

[SamAndreas]

I thought we were talking about deportation of illegal immigrants. My bad. Cause if we were talking about deporting illegal immigrants then their legal status is relevant in my view. Nobody is talking about deporting legal immigrants or all members of a specific ethnic or racial group.

Further nobody is claiming that Biden created illegal immigration nor that Trump completely solved the problem. I didn’t make that claim. But Trump didn’t make it worse. Biden did. Much worse. Two to three times worse than any of his predecessors. And if you don’t known that it is putting a strain on our hospitals and schools housing and law enforcement then you aren’t really plugged into current events. It’s not a made up issue. Ask any mayor in any major city if it’s straining their resources. Ask any school superintendent.

"They're eating the dogs, they're eating the cats."

They are legal immigrants for crying out loud. Have assimilated for the most part.



Joe,,, Republicans, especially that convicted criminal, and that JD Vance have been bad. They went there, they said that.

 

[SamAndreas]

I won’t debate with you that Trump isn’t fit for the job. We agree on that. I don’t want a hat or a watch or sneakers with his name on them. I wouldn’t want my kids getting Huckabee’s propaganda book nor would I want Trumps coffee table book in my house. Hawking all that crap is below the office. I’m not a big fan of his business style nor how he manages and deals with his staff. No reputable school in this country teaches Trump Management. He is an arse. Major league arse and he’s proud of it. But he’s not the second coming of Hitler and he is not a threat to Democracy in my view. So all the ads and the claims to the contrary were wasted on much of the country because they didn’t buy into the premise.

I wasn’t gonna vote for Harris anyway but I wasn’t given a reason to vote for her. Much of the air space was taken with “Vote for her cause he is a Hitler or a threat to Democracy”. If one doesn’t buy into that rhetoric there has to be something else to motivate people to vote for her. It wasn’t there IMV.

You knew that I liked her. That's been my position for years, I've always liked her. That's a good reason to vote for her, "I like her."

When you said above you weren't given a reason to vote for her, you completely ignored me. I gave you a reason to vote for her.

I like her. Uh Huh!

 

[SamAndreas]

That would take a constitutional amendment and there isn’t the requisite support for such a thing. So it isn’t a serious conversation.

They're eating the DOGs, they're eating the CATs.

 

[SamAndreas]

So you are unaware of all the migrants getting free housing and debit cards in NYC and other cities? Really? Haven’t heard about all the migrant camps in LA, Chicago, San Francisco, Baltimore, Washington DC. etc? Just about every major city and state is affected but you haven’t heard? Wow. All I can say.

I mean I guess that’s possible cause you say it was no different in previous andministrations and I can’t remember for the life of me free housing and debit cards in either the Trump or Obama or Bush administrations.

I guess we both need to get out more.

I'm aware that most of them are Native Americans.

 

[Bayouboy]

I’ve read quite a bit on that time in history and IMO it isn’t a valid comparison. But I’m tired of arguing the point. Think what you want.

It's hard to take out the atrocities Hitler committed in his final years when people compare Trump to Hitler. While Trump is a total Peice of work (IMO), he does not come close to 1940's Hitler. So I get when Trump supporters or even neutral folks scoff at the comparison of the two men. But if you really researched Hitler's rise to power in Germany in the early 1930's, how can you not see the parallels? Asking this honestly. I've done a ton of reading myself and I can't get over just how similar the two men are (Early 1930's Hitler and his quest for power and today's DJT).

 

[superchuck500]

We’re still on the same path I argued back in 2017.

There is no enforcement mechanism for anything the court orders if the branch of government charged with enforcement ignores the order.

Indeed - And my position remains that full-blown constitutional crisis is still a very serious thing that will prompt a choice to be made by people who have sworn an oath to the Constitution: do I choose the Constitution or do I choose Trump.

The Supreme Court is going to choose the Constitution so that part will be clear, making the question unambiguous.

 

[superchuck500]

I wasn’t gonna vote for Harris anyway but I wasn’t given a reason to vote for her. Much of the air space was taken with “Vote for her cause he is a Hitler or a threat to Democracy”. If one doesn’t buy into that rhetoric there has to be something else to motivate people to vote for her. It wasn’t there IMV.

I’ve seen this sentiment elsewhere and it just doesn’t hold up to the historical record - you’re clearly making arbitrary, bias-confirming choices here.

You have suggested that the economy was the key issue - so did you just ignore that multiple economic institutions including the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (a nonpartisan think tank) and Goldman Sachs (a major investment bank) provided highly detailed analysis of why Harris’s policies were substantially better for the economy than Trump’s, especially for low to middle income families? Did you ignore the reports from the Peterson Institute, Moody’s, and a letter signed by 16 Novel laureate economists that Trump’s policies will increase inflation? Or the numerous institutional reports about how Trump’s policies will blow up the deficit by a multiplying factor over Harris’s?

She talked about these policies, a lot. She talked about solutions like new small business tax credits and homeownership plans based on stimulating new housing. She dominated him on policy in the one debate they had.

I’m just curious how this can be a common sentiment (that she didn’t give a reason to vote for her) when it is so contrary to the record on what happened. It would be one thing if there was a similarly persuasive body of analysis that favored Trump’s policies but apart from an obviously partisan source here and there, there just wasn’t.

The only logical explanation is that you saw what you wanted to see and chose to ignore meaningful substance about the very same things you claim motivated you.

That’s fine, it’s human nature but the record is still the record and it will remain obvious when people who look for these sorts of pseudo-explanations to defend what was basically predisposition and confirmation-bias. OR this talk about the economy as the key factor is all just fluff and the real motivation was cultural: we’re going to stop giving our country to immigrants, homos, and non-Christians, and we’re willing to just Trust in Trump on the rest of it. (Not saying that’s you, specifically, just speaking more generally about this sentiment).

 

[Poppy]

I find this interesting b/c I thought her economic policies were vastly superior as well. Do you disagree with that, or was it that you did not hear about the differences? I knew about the differences, so I'm curious to see what kind of messaging gets through and which ones don't.

The problem was. you had to go looking for reasons to vote for her. Because the evidence around everyone, told you to steer clear. I truly think most don't like Trump, but they are confident in him as a leader. You may not like him or his style, but he's gonna lead. She exhibited 0 leadership qualities. Say what you want about Hillary, she's a no nonsense birch, and had leadership qualities. Opposite of Kamala. The "he's a nazi", "he's a threat democracy" all of the talking points have run their course. And that was so obvious this election.

 

[TampaJoe]

Joe, the lion's share of those undocumented migrants are Native Americans. They've been here for 5,000 to 10,000 years for crying out loud.

They have the right to travel on this continent.

I’m not sure I agree that all these folks are undocumented Native Americans. We have border laws.

 

[Optimus Prime]

I’ve seen this sentiment elsewhere and it just doesn’t hold up to the historical record - you’re clearly making arbitrary, bias-confirming choices here.

You have suggested that the economy was the key issue - so did you just ignore that multiple economic institutions including the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (a nonpartisan think tank) and Goldman Sachs (a major investment bank) provided highly detailed analysis of why Harris’s policies were substantially better for the economy than Trump’s, especially for low to middle income families? Did you ignore the reports from the Peterson Institute, Moody’s, and a letter signed by 16 Novel laureate economists that Trump’s policies will increase inflation? Or the numerous institutional reports about how Trump’s policies will blow up the deficit by a multiplying factor over Harris’s?

She talked about these policies, a lot. She talked about solutions like new small business tax credits and homeownership plans based on stimulating new housing. She dominated him on policy in the one debate they had.

I’m just curious how this can be a common sentiment (that she didn’t give a reason to vote for her) when it is so contrary to the record on what happened. It would be one thing if there was a similarly persuasive body of analysis that favored Trump’s policies but apart from an obviously partisan source here and there, there just wasn’t.

The only logical explanation is that you saw what you wanted to see and chose to ignore meaningful substance about the very same things you claim motivated you.

That’s fine, it’s human nature but the record is still the record and it will remain obvious when people who look for these sorts of pseudo-explanations to defend what was basically predisposition and confirmation-bias. OR this talk about the economy as the key factor is all just fluff and the real motivation was cultural: we’re going to stop giving our country to immigrants, homos, and non-Christians, and we’re willing to just Trust in Trump on the rest of it. (Not saying that’s you, specifically, just speaking more generally about this sentiment).

I think it falls into 3 categories

1. People didn’t know that

2. People didn’t believe that

3. People didn’t care about that

I think the third group is bigger than we think

People don’t want to say they didn’t vote her because she was a ‘she’, or because she was black, or because they hate all the ‘woke’ stuff, or because they have never and will never vote for any Democrat under any circumstances so they instead say ‘it was the economy’

 

[RobF]

Indeed - And my position remains that full-blown constitutional crisis is still a very serious thing that will prompt a choice to be made by people who have sworn an oath to the Constitution: do I choose the Constitution or do I choose Trump.

The Supreme Court is going to choose the Constitution so that part will be clear, making the question unambiguous.

I don't think the Supreme Court would overtly choose not to enforce the Constitution. But I do think there's question there of just how convoluted, twisted, or even nonsensical a reading of the Constitution they would make in order to support the agenda represented by Trump.

The extent to which that's possible depends on the subject, but language being what it is, it's usually possible to find a way to read something as saying something other than what it clearly means.

For the 22nd amendment, for example, that's very clear. But even then I think it's technically possible to read it as allowing a third term where the candidate isn't elected to the position directly. I think the amendment itself only refers to being "elected to the office". On the face of it, the 12th amendment would then prevent a two-term President running for Vice President, for example, ("no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States"), but then that wouldn't apply to a two-term President if the stance taken is that they are eligible to the office, they're just not eligible to be elected to the office, which opens up all kinds of spurious reasoning which could, at a stretch, allow someone to de facto run for a third term.

I'm not saying that as something the Supreme Court would do by the way, just as an example of how these things can be warped. I think/hope it'd be entirely moot, because I don't think Trump is going to get to that even if he wants to (I think one of many things like his age, health, infighting finally boiling over, etc., will catch up with him)

 

[USTruth]

Oh my goodness, this is outstanding.

100% of Democratic Governors, 87% of Democratic Senators, 87% of Democratic Representatives, have publically made public statements in support of Harris.

This paragraph is nice:

"Mr. Obama adopted an identical stance four years ago when Mr. Biden’s aides pressured him to endorse early in the Democratic primaries before Senator Bernie Sanders dropped out. (Mr. Obama’s favored phrase back then was “I don’t want to thumb the scale.”) Endorsing too early now would also be a political mistake — fueling criticism that Ms. Harris’s nomination, should it come, was a coronation rather than the best possible consensus under rushed circumstances, they said."

Wise advice.

Many Elected Democrats Quickly Endorsed Kamala Harris. See Who Did.

Every Democratic governor and a majority of Democrats in Congress supported Ms. Harris’s candidacy in the days after President Biden withdrew from the presidential race.

www.nytimes.com

"Menendez has not commented." Please allow him to not comment, forever. Please.

I'm a semi-famous whistleblower for elections and voting machines (I've had two letters published in the NY Times, and one in the New Scientist.) I haven't stated it publicly (at least clearly) on my website yet, but I believe Donald Trump is the anti-Christ, and he can affect the way people think--and the way machines work.

More to the point of the message from SamAndreas--how do you explain the high approval ratings you posted for Democratic elected officials supporting Harris, compared to low approval/votes from the public? I posit Trump used supernatural influence. HE DID NOT WIN THE ELECTION FAIRLY--I'M CERTAIN. Before you laugh (or faint) check out my site...post snippets and comments here on World Politics Board, as I don't run a comments or discussion group.

Daniel Spillane, Seattle, WA -- central.intelligence@witness.watch
Established whistleblower
www.witness.watch

 

[Dragon]

Supstitute Vance for Trump and you would have a 3rd term using those arguments. Giving the speculations on whether Trump will even be able to complete 4 years that would be a valid consideration.

 

[TampaJoe]

It's hard to take out the atrocities Hitler committed in his final years when people compare Trump to Hitler. While Trump is a total Peice of work (IMO), he does not come close to 1940's Hitler. So I get when Trump supporters or even neutral folks scoff at the comparison of the two men. But if you really researched Hitler's rise to power in Germany in the early 1930's, how can you not see the parallels? Asking this honestly. I've done a ton of reading myself and I can't get over just how similar the two men are (Early 1930's Hitler and his quest for power and today's DJT).

Himmler once said that if you dehumanize something, you can kill it. The folks who support abortion rights use the same rhetoric to support their argument for abortion rights. The same argument was used as it related to slaves in the 1800’s.

if you support abortion rights, how does that comparison make you feel. I know people who are prochoice and I would never equate their position and their rhetoric to Nazism or Slavery. It is a false equivalency.

So there is more to this than just words. This isn’t 1930’s Germany. We aren’t Germans. We have a Constitution and a set of laws that so far has with stood the test of time including a civil war. We have fought together and saved the world from dictators and facist multiple times.

Republicans are not facists or Nazis. You can draw all the comparisons you want and ignore the broader context of the times in which we live. Up to you. But I will continue to deny the comparison as the ultimate false equivalency.

 

[Dragon]

Himmler once said that if you dehumanize something, you can kill it. The folks who support abortion rights use the same rhetoric to support their argument for abortion rights. The same argument was used as it related to slaves in the 1800’s.

if you support abortion rights, how does that comparison make you feel. I know people who are prochoice and I would never equate their position and their rhetoric to Nazism or Slavery. It is a false equivalency.

So there is more to this than just words. This isn’t 1930’s Germany. We aren’t Germans. We have a Constitution and a set of laws that so far has with stood the test of time including a civil war. We have fought together and saved the world from dictators and facist multiple times.

Republicans are not facists or Nazis. You can draw all the comparisons you want and ignore the broader context of the times in which we live. Up to you. But I will continue to deny the comparison as the ultimate false equivalency.

How do you explain the numerous connections between Trump and ultra-white power movements, some of which were even represented at the Republican convention? Additionally, at least one of Trump’s secretary-elects has been reported to have a Nazi-associated tattoo. Many of Trump’s policies bear striking similarities to those implemented by the Nazis during their early rise to power in 1933, such as spreading falsehoods and fostering hatred against specific demographic groups. It has also been reported, with multiple confirmations, that Trump kept Hitler’s Mein Kampf by his bedside. How do you address these deeply concerning associations and behaviors?

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

The problem was. you had to go looking for reasons to vote for her. Because the evidence around everyone, told you to steer clear. I truly think most don't like Trump, but they are confident in him as a leader. You may not like him or his style, but he's gonna lead. She exhibited 0 leadership qualities. Say what you want about Hillary, she's a no nonsense birch, and had leadership qualities. Opposite of Kamala. The "he's a nazi", "he's a threat democracy" all of the talking points have run their course. And that was so obvious this election.

How did you come to the conclusion that Trump has leadership qualities and Harris does not? Could you walk me through it?

For example, I remember watching Harris' speech on the ellipse and thinking Trump could not give a speech like this.

I'm generally too cynical to feel inspired by any particular politician, so walk me through Trump's leadership? I just see him scowling and whining all the time.

 

[TampaJoe]

I’ve seen this sentiment elsewhere and it just doesn’t hold up to the historical record - you’re clearly making arbitrary, bias-confirming choices here.

You have suggested that the economy was the key issue - so did you just ignore that multiple economic institutions including the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (a nonpartisan think tank) and Goldman Sachs (a major investment bank) provided highly detailed analysis of why Harris’s policies were substantially better for the economy than Trump’s, especially for low to middle income families? Did you ignore the reports from the Peterson Institute, Moody’s, and a letter signed by 16 Novel laureate economists that Trump’s policies will increase inflation? Or the numerous institutional reports about how Trump’s policies will blow up the deficit by a multiplying factor over Harris’s?

She talked about these policies, a lot. She talked about solutions like new small business tax credits and homeownership plans based on stimulating new housing. She dominated him on policy in the one debate they had.

I’m just curious how this can be a common sentiment (that she didn’t give a reason to vote for her) when it is so contrary to the record on what happened. It would be one thing if there was a similarly persuasive body of analysis that favored Trump’s policies but apart from an obviously partisan source here and there, there just wasn’t.

The only logical explanation is that you saw what you wanted to see and chose to ignore meaningful substance about the very same things you claim motivated you.

That’s fine, it’s human nature but the record is still the record and it will remain obvious when people who look for these sorts of pseudo-explanations to defend what was basically predisposition and confirmation-bias. OR this talk about the economy as the key factor is all just fluff and the real motivation was cultural: we’re going to stop giving our country to immigrants, homos, and non-Christians, and we’re willing to just Trust in Trump on the rest of it. (Not saying that’s you, specifically, just speaking more generally about this sentiment).

First off I did not vote for Trump. So comparing her to him doesn’t do anything to convince me to vote for her. Making a case against him doesn’t mean she is fit to be POTUS.

You can pull out all the charts and graphs and all the letters and testimonials but people didn’t feel better off. People didn’t feel safer. They go to the store and fill up at the pump every week. That’s their reality. Harris reversed many of her previous positions in order to run for office. She was unable to convince the voters those reversals were the real deal. She was unable to convince the voters that she had shifted her thinking. I don’t know who’s to blame for that. It doesnt matter. The voters decided.

So I’m sad for my friend Sam who was and is a big Harris supporter. I’m sad we don’t have a better President elect. But we are where we are.
Trump and the GOP are now in the drivers seat. They should be held to account for their successes and failures for the next four years.