Yep. Betsy DeVos stepped down on Jan 6th, but was wormed her way back into the Trump orbit.
2024 U.S. Elections | Trump v Harris
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
Yep. Betsy DeVos stepped down on Jan 6th, but was wormed her way back into the Trump orbit.
I think it is quite shameless to deny half of the population basic rights about their own body, condemn a quarter of the population to dog-whistle racism and all future generations to a planet which doesn't care about accelerating climate change, just because you are a single-issue voter and that comes from affinity to a small group of people in global scales halfway across the world for mostly religious reasons.
And that's without even considering that it is a very complicated issue from a very complicated part of the world.
That's easy when you miss and twist the point to fit your agenda. But you do you.
I think he is a better interviewer than Harris, especially with more “confrontational” questions. And I also think he’s also a better communicator now than he was in the 2020 primary where he came across as a goof (along with a few others)
To be fair, they did get Trump becoming president right in the same episode.
Option A = 45,000 killed.
Option B = 450,000 killed.
Which option is preferable?
That's "shameless" to you? It's simple math. The lower the number of dead people, the better. There is no Option C, either A or B will win the day, so you have to pick one of them.
There is not option. deaths will not change because Israel is calling the shots and is given as many weapons as needed. Trump can't be president for many other reasons, but in Gaza will be no different and that is why the democrats are lying to the muslim voters when they say it will be a difference
Can anyone explain to me why 50% of Americans would vote trump but it seems like less than 5% on here would. Is it an American mentality? Are there people who'd vote for Trump on this website who aren't participating in the thread? Would most Europeans not go near Trump? Genuinely curious
This is called a strawman argument. You create a point that doesn't exist (not in Onenil's post, at least) and then attack it. The doubling down is good, too. But the fact remains that Onenil didn't try to absolve anyone, they were only saying that both Biden/Harris and Trump being terrible (or disgusting, to satisfy Dumbo) for the Israel/Palestine situation doesn't mean that they're both equally terrible (or disgusting). Are you suggesting that's not true?
(And since you seem to need that sort of comment, I'll make clear that I'm not denying that Israel is enacting a genocide in Gaza.)
Yes, I can see the irony, but I'm simply not interested. To me, it's overshadowed into complete obscurity by the fact that you're arguing about who should and shouldn't express homophobic stereotypes.
I suppose this might be satisfying when talking to these people: 'dude, have you ever looked at yourself?!' But they're not here and probably no-one here agrees with them.
Because internet is fake.
This is a Manchester United forum which means the Americans on here have to be European football fans and that demographic in America is white, male, educated, and liberal. If this were a UFC forum, it would be a different conversation.
Nope. When did i say "who should be expressing homophobic stereotypes" ?
My point was that these guys are framing what they consider to be manly in a very old fashioned, stereotypical way. A way that neither fit into. That is the irony.
Good news for Harris
Replace it with 'when it does or doesn't make sense', then. And I do see the irony, but I still don't think it's valuable. Also because it's not an argument that they will care about; othering isn't about consistent, cohesive worldviews, it's just what you and your own group agree to.
It comes down to the same underlying reason why 'racialized populations' is such an appropriate term (more then 'visible minorities' or any such term): it's all an othering of one group by another (usually dominant) group. That's how Irish and Italian immigrants got to be considered 'non-white' in the US a century ago, even if the white people saying that were obviously no whiter than the average Irish person. But there would have been no use pointing that out to them.
Anyway, I know I'm being a bore that's not even letting you make fun of the idiots saying these things. And ultimately I'm sure we agree. So I'll leave it here.
Last edited:
Poll in the Netherlands:
Harris 68%
Trump 11%
Undecided/Don't know 21 %
Source: Ipsos
wont WI follow MI and more or less PA as well?
Historically yes, but who knows.
Again, numbers pulled straight from own ass.
New Poll...
Michigan is the most left-leaning rust belt state so it's not inconceivable that she takes it but loses WI and PA. It hasn't happened in a while though.
Still a good sign that she's looking strong there because if she wasn't it would mean that she definitely loses the other two as well.
All strawmen, since none of that was proposed.
However valid those concerns are they are not reasons to distort or misrepresent the US complicity in the Palestine genocide. Hence, shameless.
Europeans might feel the worst consequences of a Trump presidency, with him weakening NATO and casting doubts over article 5 while forcing Ukraine into a fragile ‘peace’ on Russia’s terms. The US are not directly threatened by Russia and don’t feel the same urgency. Europeans, on the other hand, probably care less about the cost of living for ordinary Americans, which is the number one issue in the election and one Trump has managed to convince many Americans he will solve. It makes sense he would be more unpopular with Europeans.
Except those things are are nowhere near as bad as enabling genocide. I mean come on. "Except for the part where the Dems enabled genocide, Trump's record on Palestine and Israel is much worse."
The main reason to think it won't be any worse under Trump is that Israel have so far conducted the genocide at whatever pace they please. If anything has at all restrained them, it's been international pressure that the US has failed to endorse. But nothing has slowed it and similarly, Trump won't accelerate it. Its already happening at their desired pace.
I didnt know JD Vance was goint to be on Rogan today. You can be sure though he made up some stories for the occasion....
Do you not understand the question, though? Is it really as difficult as you pretend?
If Option A is 45,000, and Option B is 45,001 -- doesn't that still make Option A preferable? Put in any number you like for Option A, and if the number in Option B is higher, that makes Option A preferable. In case you thought I was claiming to predict the actual number of dead instead of trying to, you know, illustrate a point.
Yikes aren't they a decent pollster?
Very, very confused about your reply.
So you're saying Trump won't be enabling genocide?
Yet, he will allow it to continue at Israel's pace? Extrapolate the current death toll over the next 4 years and we have anywhere from 200 to 400k dead. You are fine with it continuing, as long as the pace doesn't accelerate? I would rather have a US President that may give us a chance of stopping the war / genocide.
And who is to say the pace may not pick up? We know Trump told Bibi to "finish the job" and he said that "Biden had been holding Israel back". What if Trump is right on that and from the conversations he has had with Bibi (which we know took place recently) Bibi has said that he is being held back by Biden? We know Trump blurts out information he shouldn't all the time.
You also ignore Kushner suggesting he would like to get his hands on the beachfront real estate..
https://apnews.com/article/jared-ku...ont-property-901895eeafee867e69d0c4582a4deb47
And Miriam Adelson asking Trump to Annex the West Bank.
I guess you must want more of this...
.. as this is what you will get under Trump. He loves having his name slapped on building project so all Bibi has to do is flatter him with these promises and all of a sudden we see Trump Gaza Golf Resort and Condos, where the Trump Org gets a kick back.
At least with Harris, there is a chance of a change of direction. She was not President for the last four years - a fact that many wish to negate. The VP serves the President, she doesn't get to set policy. We know Biden is far more pro-Israel than most in the Democrat party and she will have a fresh four year term where she doesn't have to worry about losing votes. Anything seen as being Anti-Israel all of a sudden becomes Anti Semitic, which is not going to win you an election in 5 days time.
We have a binary choice. Which administration gives the Palestinians a chance of a better future? I agree with Mehdi Hasan on this one - its Harris.