Election 2024 — Page 30

I don’t think it’s even worth arguing whether trump is a Nazi or not - the point is about 50% of the US are about to vote for him. The strategy of calling him a Nazi doesn’t work. If Trump is everything then he is nothing. Another misstep on the democratic party and supporters to not be more careful to use extreme language when it’s most needed and most effective. Similarly all the legal cases - the focus should have been on the things that really matter, such as any crimes around election interference.


Someone somewhere decided it was a good idea to do trump in for cooking the books and paying off a stripper. Well now it looks like the legal system has been weaponised and I assume many people no longer believe in what has been waged against trump, even if there is some importance to some of it. It’s lost in the noise.

Combine this with Trump policies that actually resonate with voters right now and the democrats may not have a winning hand - you know I never thought in my life I’d see Kamala Harris on CNN actually showing support for ‘the wall’ and challenging only because Trump didn’t build enough of it or get Mexico to pay - and even say when Anderson Cooper asked if she supports the wall that she is open to good ideas wherever and she wants to protect the border.

The Democrats need to do better on policy, their leader and their strategy to defeat the competition if they want to succeed. For a person that is as bad as Trump is it shouldn’t be this hard for them to succeed. They have failed and failed big time, and they have let you down. Don’t get angry at Trump or Trump supporters because of the failings of your own party. The democrats need to do better. They have to learn and evolve.

Updated On: 10/30/24 at 01:28 PM

ACL2006 said: "So if #45 wants to end the comparison to Hitler, why can't he tell his base to stop adding the Nazi flags to the MAGA flags at his rallies? They're at all of his rallies and his knows this. Maybe if his rallies weren't littered with them and Confederate flags, the connection between him and Hitler would go away.

https://x.com/MichaelCohen212/status/1851425978012291184?t=GzY79Nd-sNCIx3voyh0K9A&s=19"



Fake news, again. The picture is not at his rally. You're not helping the problem with your credibility.

Pauly3 said: "ACL2006 said: "So if #45 wants to end the comparison to Hitler, why can't he tell his base to stop adding the Nazi flags to the MAGA flags at his rallies? They're at all of his rallies and his knows this. Maybe if his rallies weren't littered with them and Confederate flags, the connection between him and Hitler would go away.

https://x.com/MichaelCohen212/status/1851425978012291184?t=GzY79Nd-sNCIx3voyh0K9A&s=19"



Fake news, again. The picture is not at his rally. You're not helping the problem with your credibility."

It was at a boat rally. And yet you keep pushing away the fact the Nazi flags and MAGA flags are tied together. This site sucks at getting pictures to post, but do yourself a favor and Google the two together and there's plenty of photos that show up. You seem to keep pushing away the fact the him and Neo-Nazis are tied together.

ACL, you INCORRECTLY stated those pictures were at HIS rally. That scene was some sort of get together not directly associated with Trump. It was not HIS rally. That some ass-hats showed up with Nazi flags reflects poorly only on them. Fundamentally, no different than the antics of Antifa ass-hats reflect poorly only on them. Despite what you believe, Trump has condemned white-supremacy. You can asset that he didn't, but repeated assertions (as powerful as they can be) do not trump actual evidence that proves Trump condemned white-supremacy.

Jay, you're simply wrong and apply a standard that is absurd on its face.

ACL2006 said: "Keep drinking that MAGA cool-aid, Pauly. Once again, you're in disbelief that there's never been Nazi flags at any of his rallies, refuse to acknowledge the Proud Boys and are comparing Nazis and Antifa when there's no proof of Antifa connected to Harris."

You continue to push what you perceive as actual, when you've offered nothing other than your ill-conceived perceptions.

"Nazi flags at any of his rallies"? What does "at" mean to you? Trump schedules a rally at a specific venue, and some ass-hats show up outside the venue and fly their Nazi flags. Yes, "at" the site but outside can be considered reasonable usage of the word "at. But there is a clear distinction you fail to clarify. If they are flying those flags inside the venue, well then, you will have something. But I see no evidence of even a single Nazi flag being flown inside a Trump rally. "Get togethers" where there is no security or management don't count.

Regarding Proud Boys, being unfamiliar with them is not the same as refusing to acknowledge them. But let's say they are exactly who you think they are. There is no direct relationship between them and Trump, no different than the fake relationship you'd like Trump to have with Nazi ass-hats. You and Jay ridiculously assign some sort of direct relationship when "attention" is only one-way. Do you see children being guilty by association because of pedophiles in the same way? I know, absurd. But it seems to require using an absurd analogy to show you that you're quasi-guilty by association rationale is ridiculous.

Antifa clearly opposes Republicans and supports Democrats. "Harris is guilty by association" is what "you all" would say if you were consistent. Nice try though.

""You all" MAGAs actually think he's a good, Christian man while pointing out what a terrible person he is."

Stop telling people what they think. You're terrible at it.

"You all" never learn. "You all" can't help but distort, pervert and mangle the opposition's side of the argument. Notice I don't have to mangle your arguments in order to attack your arguments?

In this context, "you all" means everyone here. Because NO ONE is addressing Kamala's talk here.

Yes, I've heard the phrase, "actions speak louder than words". And Trump's actions show he is an ally to the people of Israel. THAT contradicts the idea Trump wants anything to do with Nazi's. And he doesn't court support from Nazi's or any other white-supremacist group.

When asked whether he would condemn white supremacy and tell the Proud Boys to stand down, he said "sure" and "stand down" BEFORE saying "stand by". The context plus Trump's near constant clumsy speech would leave an unbiased person with the opinion Trump answered the question sufficiently, and that the "stand by" comment was indeed clumsy. We can't know whether it was clumsy or not. I think it was, you don't. So what? The difference is that I provided some additional and relevant detail that you conveniently left out. That seems to be a theme amongst your side of the aisle, at least amongst the crowd commenting here.

Trump's comments on immigrants have never been about immigrants generically. He references the bad apples and does a horrible job of making that clear. He does what "you all" do and expresses over-the-top sentiment. But what he does not do is disparage immigrants generically, which is what "you all" attempt to convey. Difference is, sloppy or clumsy isn't the reason "you all" go over the top. Or maybe it is? Don't know, don't care.

In that video, he was talking about a very problematic cross-section, not generically referring to all immigrants. Feel free to keep trying to turn your perception into reality. If he's so obviously racist and hates immigrants generically, it shouldn't take too long to find credible evidence, no?

He doesn’t hate immigrants, he has married two. His own mother was one. He just doesn’t give a sh!t about them one way or the other. He will happily throw 16 million people under the bus if it means picking up a few votes. If illegal immigrants could vote, he would suddenly switch to loving them. The man has no convictions, no policies, no ideas, nada. His ONLY goal is self-preservation.

Yes, this is my perception, which is different to your perception. Our own judgement is really all we have to go on when deciding who to vote for.

P.S. The “Poisoning blood” line is obviously a pre-planned racist dogwhistle. He repeats it too often for it to be spontaneous word salad.

There is no doubt Trump's tough stance and his rhetoric on immigration is to get votes. I don't believe (and why anyone does is beyond me) that he will actually hunt down and force-ably remove millions of illegal immigrants. People who believe he will want it both ways; that he is both incompetent and will somehow be successful in deporting millions. I think with some who are supporting him closely, such as Kennedy and Gabbard - who would likely take prominent roles in his administration, I think there is reason for optimism a 2nd Trump administration will be the opposite of what his detractors think will happen. Perhaps I'm overly optimistic.

Honestly, I don't know what a 2nd Trump administration will look like - and I would be lying if I said I wasn't concerned that Trump could go off the rails. I don't believe he did in his 1st administration (until the end when he believed he was screwed in the election). Regardless, I'm more concerned with a Harris administration. But if Harris wins, I won't lose my mind and call for her impeachment at every turn. Even though I have grown to seriously dislike her as a candidate (I used to think she was likeable, but that was when my perception was that she was competent), but if she wins the election she will be my President and I hope she does well and proves me wrong.

I had an interesting, I don't, maybe an epiphany last night. I was watching a political discussion between a few Democrats and a couple of Republicans, and one Democrat in particular was fair. Unusually fair, I thought. I thought to myself, "we need more of THIS". I also watched a town hall last night where multiple personalities participated, and a political consultant who I had seen participate on many shows in the past - but whom I had never developed much of an opinion about, spoke eloquently and even emotionally, and his comments also hit me. I went to bed last night and woke this morning still thinking about those conversations.

I'm not likely to change significantly and stop pushing back on what I think is too often expressed nonsense. But as we are about to learn the outcome of this election, I am preparing to accept the outcome regardless of who wins. I hadn't previously thought about what happens if Harris wins. I just knew I didn't want that outcome. Another guy, in the town hall discussion, a guy who is said to have correctly predicted every Presidential election outcome since Reagan's 2nd term, based on "13 keys" - none of which were about policy (I think), made his prediction for this election. He predicts Harris will win. My first reaction, getting caught up in the success this guy has had in successfully predicting the previous 10 elections, was "oh no"! But having heard the previous two I mentioned, I made my peace with it. My wish, perhaps a pipe dream, is that many many more will deal with this election similarly, regardless of the outcome.

I don't know a lot about Kennedy other than rumblings about his anti-vaccine stance, being I have not paid much attention to him before recently. I also recall mumblings about his chemicals in the water claim. I don't recall that he believed it to some sort of certainty - but rather he suggested it as something to be studied given something about frogs and their changing sex based on certain chemicals. Regardless, I recall it being nonsense. Certainly, not much of a defense I would agree with you on that. Since his run for President and subsequent support for Trump, I have listened to him speak though and have found him to be reasonable (small sample sizes). If he truly believes chemicals in water are turning people gay, then that will be a significant indication he presents as reasonable but is anything but. So no, I do not share any such belief.

Being we are all concerned with the election outcome - as well as so completely divided, it seems reasonable to consider taking a step back and begin compromising if only in small ways. I have no idea how we become less divided in any other way. Hate, certainly has proven ineffective.

The worst case scenario with #45 is that he goes completely off the wall and lashes out at anyone that opposes him, causing the economy to dive into a recession and causes WW3. He could also completely disappear due to his declining health and do almost nothing.

Worst case with Harris is she does nothing on immigration and remains quiet on Israel-Palestine. Harris also needs to be prepared for a potential war if things don't calm down overseas. Those two will bite her big time in 2028 if she does nothing.The economy is slowly getting better and she'll need to keep that as one of her top priorities, too. Harris needs to also focus on getting housing more affordable. This is something neither candidate seems to mention much of.

"Then there are posters like "South Florida" who resorts to juvenile nicknames of anybody who dares not to be a supporter of Harris", too funny, I thought Dumbplicans liked nicknames. Sorry.