Well sure, Trump’s a classic corrupt Democrat, still is with respect to policy. He tied in to the racist and bigot segments of the Republican party when he ran in 2016 but has consistently been the antithesis to both fiscal and constitutional conservatives. The only thing that loosely fit into a plurality (minority, but enough for the nomination) of the Republican tent was racism, xenophobia, unequal rights for “the gays” (disqualifies him with Christians, but attracts the fake segment that calls themselves christians), and isolationism (which slightly appeals to libertarians).
But, anyways… 2014 is not “back in the day”. It’s the immediately prior election cycle before Trump ran as Republican for THIS term.. It’s not possible to be more recent.
Yes, we’re all supposed to ignore the incessant nonsense from Trump. Just focus on the positive. Oh wait. I mean… Just focus on the fearmongering since there are no positives. Think of what those liberal Democrats mightare going to do! They’re going to outlaw guns! Weeklong response times from IVR 911 operators! They’re going to take away the health insurance 180 million people love! Mandatory vaccinations with dna from aliens!
Trump feels Harris’s record in public service is so terrible that he recently donated to her campaign. Makes perfect sense. No reason to harp on it.
It’s all about “proving” your intellectual superiority. That you’re more enlightened, reality be damned. “See how stupid he is, and how smart I am for not falling for it!”
This is where it goes once we start letting people decide their gender based on their superior thinking rather than indisputable genetics - talk about ignoring the science! Everything you’re criticizing as intolerant, idiotic, or ignorant is merely following the standard that has been set by pushing the liberal agenda.
I’m not following, you’ve lost me. How does Trump donating to Harris’s campaign recently and now claiming her record is (and has been) terrible prove his intellectual superiority? I see the “reality be damned” portion you’re referring to, but not the rest.
Edit: I haven’t looked into Harris myself. But apparently the president vetted and supported her.
Actions Trump took as a businessman are not relevant to his role today as a political figure.
Hell, Trump supported and contributed to Romney for goodness sake!! You can bet he would never do that today.
But business people must “grease the skids” in hope of buying favor and access for their various projects. They do this in effort to increase their income . . . . NOT as a show of approval for the politics of the candidate being supported.
Heck, Trump even contributed to Schumer. No serious observer would believe this means he supports, or supported, everything Schumer stands for. Instead, Trump thought his contribution might buy him a bit of influence to help this or that deal slide through and make him some money.
Like it or not, this is how things work in America. Many of us do not like all this, I admit that. But it is what it is.
Of course you are lost. Because you assume every argument has stipulated to your beliefs and biases. Under which terms they don’t make any sense. But when you go backwards a couple more steps to a truly clean slate, then it starts to make a lot of sense.
I should just stop there. But I’ll try again. Incessantly calling out every percieved flaw and shortcoming serves no purpose but to say “see, I’m right”. Despite what you claim to be “clear” and “obvious” being debatable at best, and rarely being of any consequence whatsoever either way. You can’t grasp that people aren’t “denying facts”, they simply don’t care about petty things that do not matter. No matter how much you seem to care about such things.
I know you’re going to ignore everything in my last two posts, and reply with little more than another version of “but you’re just denying what’s so clearly obvious!” (In other words, “you need to see it my way 'cause I’m obviously right”). So this is all I’m going to say on the matter, this isn’t the thread for it anyways.
Yes, end of July 2020 was before he was a politician.
Oh, I get it, Is this your explanation? “He was just playing 4-D chess and trying to goad Biden into picking a bad running mate! Because he doesn’t care about America, the opposition being slightly ‘weaker’ is more important than Americans having the best possible options to choose from.”
An alternate and less sinister explanation is that Trump was strongly warned Harris would be a very strong addition (as has been reported in the past). So in talking her up, it was intended to dissuade the pick.
I’ll preface this by agreeing that this seems too intellectual for him; Trump is more strategic than you give him credit for, but it’s still a leap to connect these dots as being intentional.
But why can’t she be considered a fine choice for the Democratic party, but at the same time a terrible option as VP of the country? They’re two entirely different questions, much like how the best ball player in most summer rec leagues would make for a terrible professional player.
As you point out, those aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive statements.
But in a two party system, the outcome of the election will be one of the two choices. Anyone who has the least concern for the interests of the country as a whole would want both options selected by the two parties to be the best possible (or least potentially damaging). That would be patriotism, anyways.
Edit: Can’t resist inserting the aggravating cliche of 2020 - “Don’t forget, we’re all in this together!”
You missed part of the point - I could send the undisputed best baseball player in town to go play for the Yankees, and the result still won’t be pretty. It’s not ‘endorsing’ a worse option, it’s saying the best option still isn’t good enough.
We can debate if that’s true about Harris, on either level (I have no opinion of her, besides knowing she was selected for being a black woman, which are about the least meaningful qualifications possible for the job). But there’s nothing contradictory about it.
I think that may be a big part of the calculation. Trump’s campaign ads were trying to scare people with “you won’t be safe in Biden’s America” etc… her law enforcement background kinda puts a damper on that to reassure independent concerned about the rioting, looting, etc… that she (and by extension Biden) won’t allow it.
On the downside, they may lose some of the black vote because of it but they may have assumed they would not flip to vote for Trump so not that huge a potential loss in the calculation.
The other thing is that early on, he was clear that he wanted someone who was battle tested and had run her own campaign. Rice looked untested on that ground. And it’s not like Rice was unattackable either.
No I think you got that wrong. He was simply bribing her for future favors. He never makes mistakes.
The only person who thinks they have superior thinking is you. Science or genetics may determine sex, not gender (though science clearly demonstrates that there are more than just two combinations of chromosomes). Get with the program, grandpa.
This is not true. I’m sure there are plenty who know but don’t care, but there are also plenty of people who are denying facts because they either don’t know better or just don’t believe them. They’re not ignoring things just because they don’t care about those things.
