Kamala Harris

[Tugay One Cup]

Referring to Trump's behaviour, I assume (hope!)?

I think it just gets subsumed into the Trump odiousness, but certainly should be considered in the choice.

It does come up as a major factor from some posters.

It's more a response to the comments I've been reading from people who seem adamant that they're two sides of the same coin.

Some people are so driven to make it all about left vs right and their desire to stay between and above both.

And it's all a bit pathetic.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Fucking love the way she went into that lunatic’s personal space the other night and forced the spineless **** to shake her hand.

He must have hated that.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

It's more a response to the comments I've been reading from people who seem adamant that they're two sides of the same coin.

Some people are so driven to make it all about left vs right and their desire to stay between and above both.

And it's all a bit pathetic.

Pretty much. Trump is a wrong 'un, and a danger in a wide range of ways. Women's rights, climate, Ukraine, Project 2025, Musk, potentially Taiwan... without thinking hard.

Harris will doubtless be a danger in a narrow range of ways, but so will anyone - it's just perspective of which ways. Some will be common to Trump, like the insoluble Israel/Gaza/Palestine issue.

I don't think there's anyone who doesn't recognise that. It's a binary choice, and opinions are given on that basis.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Fucking love the way she went into that lunatic’s personal space the other night and forced the spineless **** to shake her hand.

He must have hated that.

it was funny. It seemed obvious that she expected to meet him in the centre at the front, and then pivoted to go to him.

I thought introducing herself by name was pretty respectful too - crazy that they hadn't met, surely she was a senator when Trump was cheeseburgering the White House? There's only 100 of them, it can't be that difficult to meet all of them.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Pretty much. Trump is a wrong 'un, and a danger in a wide range of ways. Women's rights, climate, Ukraine, Project 2025, Musk, potentially Taiwan... without thinking hard.

Harris will doubtless be a danger in a narrow range of ways, but so will anyone - it's just perspective of which ways. Some will be common to Trump, like the insoluble Israel/Gaza/Palestine issue.

I don't think there's anyone who doesn't recognise that. It's a binary choice, and opinions are given on that basis.

There are plenty who don’t recognise that, but they demonstrate truly appalling judgement and appropriate weight should thereby be given to their opinions. It’s simply not worth the emotional energy of engaging because they are incapable of objective thought on the matter, or anything else most likely.

The evidence for his mendacity is overwhelming and can only not be apparent to the foolish, the naive and the wilfully blind.

Harris will doubtless have many flaws, but whatever they are, I’d take my chances.

 

[Bigga]

You’ve not responded to my questions, I note; doing the same side steps that you ridicule Kamala Harris for, and offering up the personal insults, which is a Trump playbook (you don’t criticise him, as it’s too obvious to criticise him as everyone else does).

How ironic.

"Ironic" in that your questions have been answered in other posts.

I don't have to keep repeating myself for Dids people as dumb as rocks.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

There are plenty who don’t recognise that, but they demonstrate truly appalling judgement and appropriate weight should thereby be given to their opinions. It’s simply not worth the emotional energy of engaging because they are incapable of objective thought on the matter, or anything else most likely.

The evidence for his mendacity is overwhelming and can only not be apparent to the foolish, the naive and the wilfully blind.

Harris will doubtless have many flaws, but whatever they are, I’d take my chances.

Better than my generalisation. Some I just won't engage with.

As you say, I'll take Harris over Trump and hope. Without Congress in the same hands, it'll be difficult to change much.

 

[Tugay One Cup]

It’s simply not worth the emotional energy of engaging because they are incapable of objective thought on the matter, or anything else most likely.

Excellent advice and something I clearly needed reminding of.

 

[TinFoilHat]

Fucking love the way she went into that lunatic’s personal space the other night and forced the spineless **** to shake her hand.

He must have hated that.

A boss move.

He was seething. Being a germaphobe he had to stand there for over an hour without being able to sanitise his hand.

 

[KS55]

You're an idiot.

If she was so 'talented' in debate, she'd have direct replies to his accusations. She sidestepped them! Try objective listening.

Nope. In this type of debate it’s best not to get sidetracked into the minutiae of the outgoing presidents policy. It might not be ‘objective’ but it is smart.