Cowardly Trump Backing Out of Debating Harris

[uncle bernard]

 

1 hour ago, mspart said:

True, and when it gets too burdensome, those people are voted out and a correction takes place.   That is the way it works.   I assume you have no problem with that since that is democracy.  We are facing that today with the Presidential race.   Remove current regime (Kamala represents the current regime) or try something that worked better before.  That is the choice we have.   That is democracy. 

mspart

Right, but the funny thing is that government support for the poor will never go away, even if the Republicans sweep to power in all three branches. They wouldn't dare do what they say they want to do because they know it would be a disaster. These programs exist for a reason.

The purpose of the debate is to trick people like you into thinking you're overtaxed because the single mother down the street gets 6 cents of your paycheck every month to buy groceries and not the multi-billion dollar corporations who get huge tax cuts, subsidies, and evade taxes through loopholes that aren't available to us.

[red viking]

2 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

 

Right, but the funny thing is that government support for the poor will never go away, even if the Republicans sweep to power in all three branches. They wouldn't dare do what they say they want to do because they know it would be a disaster. These programs exist for a reason.

The purpose of the debate is to trick people like you into thinking you're overtaxed because the single mother down the street gets 6 cents of your paycheck every month to buy groceries and not the multi-billion dollar corporations who get huge tax cuts, subsidies, and evade taxes through loopholes that aren't available to us.

Spot on!!! 

[headshuck]

I suppose it’s only 6 cents per forgiven student loan?

[Scouts Honor]

9 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

Take 2 seconds and think about how this works in practice.

Person A: makes $75k/year with no dependents

Person B: makes $25k/year with 2 kids

Equality: both person A and B must receive food stamps even though person A doesn't need it. It wouldn't be "equal" if only person B gets it.

Equity: Person B gets food stamps because they need foodstamps. It helps them compete fairly in the market by having their basic needs met. Person B does not get food stamps because they don't need them. It's not equal, but it's equitable. Both people have their needs met.

so you are saying Kamala is running on a program that is half a century old..

and dem voters think this is new?

I was told dems are smart

[Scouts Honor]

9 hours ago, red viking said:

How can Kamala defund the police? What a dumb statement. Police are almost all funded by local governments and Kamala is running for President so has almost zero control over that. 

now do fed support of schools

[Scouts Honor]

9 hours ago, red viking said:

It's the same old record playing over and over. ALL Democrats are communist extremists. 

you are catching on!

lol

[Scouts Honor]

9 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

No, she said some people need more (this means not the same) amount of support than others. Look at the example I posted above.

Person A doesn't get support because they make $75k

Person B does because they're a single parent making poverty wages. However, with their basic needs met, they now have the opportunity to work their way out of poverty.

Final result: Person A still has far more resources than Person B even though Person B got more government support. What they share is that their basic needs are met, allowing them to compete effectively on the open market.

rob peter to pay paul

[Scouts Honor]

the only thing that's equal... is we all get 24 hours

[Scouts Honor]

9 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

The goal isn't for everybody to make the exact same amount of money. It's for people to make *enough* money to live a decent life in the richest country in the world.

 

 

im glad you said this..

enough money

Kamala's new ad today on tv

i want a country where one job is enough to make ends meet.. or something to that effect

 

um kamala... you have been in power 3 years... why isn't?

also

i was told bidenomics is awesome

[Scouts Honor]

9 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

Okay, so what policy is she supporting that would make sure everybody in this country makes the same amount of money?

The "place" she's referring to is the starting line she refers to in the previous sentence.

the one that makes everyone equally poor 

[Scouts Honor]

8 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Teachers don't work?

um...

have we already forgotten 2020-21...

parents were like

omg.. im so glad we have teachers.. i just can't deal with this

[Scouts Honor]

8 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

Because when you live in public you consent to paying taxes to the government, elected by the people, who then decides what to do with the money. You don't get individual veto power over your tax dollars.

which is why the people have been begging the GOVT to get their spending under control

we don't have a revenue problem.

we have a spending problem

i can show you the receipts if you like

[Scouts Honor]

8 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

Right and then they piss and moan when the government does the same thing as those charities except they do it way better and don't skim 80% off the top.

 

lol.. way better and dont skim

for decades newsome has been 'trying' to cure homelessness..

24$ million disappears... still homeless

the big guy gets 10% etc.. etc.. etc...

[Scouts Honor]

7 hours ago, red viking said:

Funny how the U.S. has one of the, if not the highest, incarceration rates in the world. Meanwhile, we are also one of the most violent. 

all those white supremacists in jail

[Scouts Honor]

 

[Scouts Honor]

 

[Scouts Honor]

 

[Scouts Honor]

 

[ionel]

1 hour ago, Scouts Honor said:

 

Media:

Edited August 1 by ionel

[billyhoyle]

3 hours ago, Scouts Honor said:

 

KSM was originally charged in 2008 when Obama took office. Bush had held him without trial since his capture in 2003. His trial still hasn't even started yet. So that means between 2008 and 2024, including all 4 years of Trump's presidency, they couldn't bring KSM to trial. 

That seems ridiculous on its face, but it is a consequence of how complicated the case is both in terms of national security (what he might say publicly in trial, what CIA might have to reveal as part of the trial, what precedent it sets for the ability to hold detainees without trial in the future) and from a legal standpoint since he is the single most notorious person to undergo waterboarding. 

Given how complicated this case is, it would likely take many more years to be able to actually get him to face trial, and once he was found guilty and sentenced to death (which he 100% would be), it would then be decades before his appeals were exhausted. In a normal death penalty case it takes decades, but this case has so many avenues for appeals, I can't imagine it would be possible to ever have a death sentence carried out. 

[jross]

21 hours ago, jross said:

Donald and Kamala will say the things that liberals and conservatives want to hear.  You will hear what you want to hear and dismiss unconsciously what you do not.  The media will spin their spin. You will soak up this media and harden your existing bias.

Their attacks on each other do not matter.

Policy matters.

1. Do you support ensuring everyone has the same outcomes?  (Kamala does)
2. Do you support making all illegal aliens as American citizens? (Kamala does)
3. Do you support elections that includes non citizen voting?  (Kamala does)
4. Do you support freedom to choose abortion for the entire duration of the pregnancy? (Kamala does)
5. Do you support defunding police?  (Kamala does)
6. Do you support foreign interference in other's affairs -- war, etc.?  (Kamala does)
7. Do you support higher taxes to increase subsidies for loan forgiveness and higher benefit payout for illegal aliens and citizens?  (Kamala does)
8. Do you support teaching critical race theory in schools?  (Kamala does)
9. Do you support censoring speech?  (Kamala does)
10. Do you support banning guns?  (Kamala does)
11. Do you support biological males beating up females in boxing?  (Kamala does)

It doesn't matter that Kamala couldn't win a debate against her Democratic peers in 2020.  It doesn't matter that Kamala was a DEI VP selection and is now a DEI potential president nominee.  The rumors of how she gained early career opportunities do not matter.  Her cackling annoying laugh is what it is.  She cannot communicate clearly without a projector...  She hasn't accomplished her VP assignments...  None of this matters.  What matters is that her policies are anti American and bad for current citizens.

It doesn't matter that Trump is an asshole, etc. etc..  Trump policies are better.

Yes, that is one way to interpret this.

1. Do you support ensuring everyone has the same outcomes?  (Kamala does)

This vides explains how we should treat people as unequal so they get the same outcomes

2. Do you support making all illegal aliens as American citizens? (Kamala does)

Kamala supports an eight-year path to citizenship for the ~11 million people living in the U.S. without legal status.

3. Do you support elections that includes non citizen voting?  (Kamala does)

Isidewith.com says "yes" for Kamala.  Looking into the reference, the quote does not directly support that her answer is yes.  This raises doubt to how isidewith picks answers.  It is possible that additional thought is from an inferrment of being anti Voter ID, pro immigration rights, along with the general Democrat responses of 'yes.'

https://www.isidewith.com/candidates/kamala-harris/policies/electoral/right-of-foreigners-to-vote

4. Do you support freedom to choose abortion for the entire duration of the pregnancy? (Kamala does)

She refuses to answer the question about viability.

She does not support bills that define viability. 

https://justfacts.votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/120012/kamala-harris/2/abortion

For example, Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/3275

Other Democrats like RFK JR have been more clear with their late term support.  Has done some backtracking but here it is.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofgEsYMapcA&t=226s

 

5. Do you support defunding police?  (Kamala does)

 

 

6. Do you support foreign interference in other's affairs -- war, etc.?  (Kamala does)

"The United States will support Ukraine for as long as it takes."
"Given the immense scale of suffering in Gaza, there must be an immediate cease-fire for at least the next six weeks."

RFK JR  on Kamala's track record.

Quote

Kamala Harris is a party of war,” he said. “She’s a war hawk. The Democrat party [sic] was always the peace party. Kamala Harris is a war hawk on Ukraine, she’s a war hawk on China. I think that we should be figuring out ways to coexist with the rest of the world as best we can.”

 

7. Do you support higher taxes to increase subsidies for loan forgiveness and higher benefit payout for illegal aliens and citizens?  (Kamala does)

Quote

In the U.S. Senate, Kamala Harris will fight for comprehensive immigration reform that creates a fair pathway to citizenship. She believes that everyone should have access to public education, public health, and public safety regardless of their immigration status.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160223203700/https://kamalaharris.org/issues/immigration/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamminsky/2024/07/25/kamala-harris-touts-student-loan-forgiveness-for-5-million-borrowers-warns-of-threats-to-programs/

https://taxfoundation.org/blog/kamala-harris-tax-proposals-2024/

8. Do you support teaching critical race theory in schools?  (Kamala does)

https://apnews.com/article/kamala-harris-florida-desantis-education-9ccbeac59d1f8289e1d8c9bccbff85a9

9. Do you support censoring speech?  (Kamala does)

Isidewith did not have a reference for Kamala and defaulted to her voters primary answer "No, freedom of speech laws should only protect you from criticizing the government."

She has made statements that support censorship.  

Quote

We will hold social media platforms responsible for the hate infiltrating their platforms, because they have a responsibility to help fight against this threat to our democracy. And if you profit off of hate—if you act as a megaphone for misinformation or cyberwarfare, if you don't police your platforms—we are going to hold you accountable as a community.

10. Do you support banning guns?  (Kamala does)

11. Do you support biological males beating up females in boxing?  (Kamala does)

isidewith shows that Kamala supporters believe transgender athletes should be allowed to compete against athletes that differ from their assigned sex at birth.  This is how isidewith marked Kamala as a 'yes.'

In follow up research, Kalama is 100% for rainbow rights (no issue, people have rights)... but cannot find an direct statement for or against supporting XYs competing against XX in sports.

[uncle bernard]

27 minutes ago, jross said:

 

3. Do you support elections that includes non citizen voting?  (Kamala does)

Isidewith.com says "yes" for Kamala.  Looking into the reference, the quote does not directly support that her answer is yes.  This raises doubt to how isidewith picks answers.  It is possible that additional thought is from an inferrment of being anti Voter ID, pro immigration rights, along with the general Democrat responses of 'yes.'

https://www.isidewith.com/candidates/kamala-harris/policies/electoral/right-of-foreigners-to-vote

 

If Kamala Harris had come out and said non-citizens should be able to vote, it would be headline news 24/7. She didn't. This looks like lazy AI work from isidewith.

[Bigbrog]

10 hours ago, billyhoyle said:

KSM was originally charged in 2008 when Obama took office. Bush had held him without trial since his capture in 2003. His trial still hasn't even started yet. So that means between 2008 and 2024, including all 4 years of Trump's presidency, they couldn't bring KSM to trial. 

That seems ridiculous on its face, but it is a consequence of how complicated the case is both in terms of national security (what he might say publicly in trial, what CIA might have to reveal as part of the trial, what precedent it sets for the ability to hold detainees without trial in the future) and from a legal standpoint since he is the single most notorious person to undergo waterboarding. 

Given how complicated this case is, it would likely take many more years to be able to actually get him to face trial, and once he was found guilty and sentenced to death (which he 100% would be), it would then be decades before his appeals were exhausted. In a normal death penalty case it takes decades, but this case has so many avenues for appeals, I can't imagine it would be possible to ever have a death sentence carried out. 

Yeah...this is a tough one...at first I was like what the heck, how could we make a plea deal with these monsters, but after thinking about it more, like you said, it is pretty complicated.  Would probably be really hard to get every duck in a row to have a good trial based on the things you mentioned, and the actual execution of these cowards would take decades and they would probably end up dying before we could inject them anyway.   However, I can also understand how many of the people involved on 9/11 and/or lost loved ones would be outraged over this. 

[billyhoyle]

33 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

Yeah...this is a tough one...at first I was like what the heck, how could we make a plea deal with these monsters, but after thinking about it more, like you said, it is pretty complicated.  Would probably be really hard to get every duck in a row to have a good trial based on the things you mentioned, and the actual execution of these cowards would take decades and they would probably end up dying before we could inject them anyway.   However, I can also understand how many of the people involved on 9/11 and/or lost loved ones would be outraged over this. 

Maybe some would be outraged, but probably not most. The US did kill Bin Laden and many others involved in the planning of the attack. KSM they just had other purposes for (source of intel for CIA)-the consequences of which make putting him on trial in a death penalty case impossible. 2003 was a different time though, and we were barely a year removed from 9/11, so it’s hard to second guess the way he was handled.

I’m sure Obama, Trump, and Biden would all have loved to have seen him put on trial, but 16 years after announcing it was something they wanted to do, it still hasn’t happened. 

[uncle bernard]

@jross can you explain why you think Harris is a DEI candidate other than she's black?