• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Harris Trump debate

She needs to keep quoting his line that he 'was not in charge of security' at the Capitol' -- and emphasize that means his oath of office meant nothing to him.
 
Yeah, it's true the president doesn't manage the day to day security of the capital. But the president using the department of defense can call on the military to assist in defense under extreme circumstances. I agree that it was extreme circumstances due to the event going on in the capital at that time and what it meant for the nation.
 
Let’s face it, Trump has wrapped up the vital “we’re against brown-skinned immigrants eating our domesticated pets” voting bloc, so that’s probably the end of the Harris campaign. :confused:
 
BTW - They should really hand out dollar-store mics at these debates—nobody needs to be blanketed with delicate yet disturbingly moist saliva clicks. (n)
 
My wife and I abandoned all caution by having dinner before the debate, thinking we would need our strength to get through it. Hence, we recorded it. That was a good idea, because by the time he got to pet-eating immigrants in Ohio, we couldn't stop laughing. We had to stop the video a few times and go back over portions that we missed in order to hear what we had missed because of our laughter. He really is a blithering idiot.
 
ideologyhunter said:
pood said:
Let’s face it, Trump has wrapped up the vital “we’re against brown-skinned immigrants eating our domesticated pets” voting bloc, so that’s probably the end of the Harris campaign. :confused:
Click to expand...
I dunno...doesn't Kamala own the unhappy cat ladies?
Click to expand...

Yes, the childless cat ladies, so her best bet is to press home the point to Trump voters that the more pet cats dark-skinned immigrants eat, the fewer cats there will, hence fewer childless cat ladies. On this issue I feel the election will ultimately turn.
 
The debate was an actually enjoyable watch. The people who chose to not be enthusiastic and watch it made a bad choice. Every minute of that debate was either thrilling (Harris's domination of Trump, and being so extremely obviously the only presidential person on that stage) or it was laugh-out-loud hilarious (Trump).

I was muttering while waiting for the Biden-Trump debate to start, "please be prepared, please be prepared". And then the disaster... I turned it off and went to bed early to get unconscious ASAP.

Then I worried the Dems would saw off their own feet and make things even worse in response to the failure. Dems don't often inspire confidence with me.

But what a wonderful surprise that Harris has turned into. I'm very enthusiastic about her candidacy now.
 
There were quite a few questions that Harris deflected and refused to answer. But OMG! That was fun to watch. My dreams came true! Finally someone who can call out the Orange one on his crap! She beat the bully to a pulp. She did what no one else ever could. She is a true leader.

He was hunched over, red in the face, eyes squinting, and steam coming out his ears. What a show! I would have bought tickets to that.

Now that is task is done, Harris needs to be more specific and lay out better answers on immigration, and the economy. She owes the electorate that and Joe Biden, to take the torch and keep it away from the crazy person. IMO she will not win until she can get this message out.
 
abaddon said:
The debate was an actually enjoyable watch. The people who chose to not be enthusiastic and watch it made a bad choice. Every minute of that debate was either thrilling (Harris's domination of Trump, and being so extremely obviously the only presidential person on that stage) or it was laugh-out-loud hilarious (Trump).
Click to expand...
I gain no enjoyment with that because 2016. It isn't as if Trump has become all that much more unhinged. He performed poorly in 2016 and still won. He performed likewise in 2020 and lost. And now in 2024, he just keeps going to the well of hyperbole more and more, but overall, you can only do so poorly in a debate.

And Trump's "eating pets" was his version of "Dred Scott," (George W Bush for those not old enough) where the statement seemed absolutely absurd at the surface, but was a dog whistle (or in Trump's case as noted on ElectoralVote.com, a bullhorn) to the base. Too many people will remark "Yeah, that was kind of dumb to say that about immigrants, but..."
 
Ever since being a Trump supporter became something one could be, they very quickly became sensitive to be considered stupid. It's the old problem of taking insult from an apt description. Trump supporters are a half and half mix of those stupid enough to believe Haitians are eating cats, and those who know it's silly, but repeat it for the other half. Both halves think they are the smart half.
The problem with the "I'm with stupid" theorem is the stupidity is very superficial. A Trump supporter would never tolerate a spouse, child, coworker, or employee, who behaved like Trump. Lying, cheating, assaulting women, etc. They're not that stupid. This means their stupidity is a more subtle lie. It's a mask that lets them vote for Trump without having to explain to us the real reason they support him.
 
Bronzeage said:
The problem with the "I'm with stupid" theorem is the stupidity is very superficial. A Trump supporter would never tolerate a spouse, child, coworker, or employee, who behaved like Trump. Lying, cheating, assaulting women, etc. They're not that stupid.
Click to expand...
Unless they themselves are the ones doing the lying, cheating, and assaulting women. Trump is not the only person in the country who does that, but I'd bet those others who do are much more likely to be Trump supporters than Harris supporters.
 
Bronzeage said:
The problem with the "I'm with stupid" theorem is the stupidity is very superficial. A Trump supporter would never tolerate a spouse, child, coworker, or employee, who behaved like Trump. Lying, cheating, assaulting women, etc. They're not that stupid. This means their stupidity is a more subtle lie. It's a mask that lets them vote for Trump without having to explain to us the real reason they support him.
Click to expand...
So true -- and consider the much deeper pathology of Ted Cruz. Can you imagine being so spineless that you pretend the man who called you Lyin' Ted, who disparaged your wife's looks, who said your father was complicit with JFK's assassins -- is a great American who you are proud to call your leader? There just aren't words. (Not to mention the run of the mill MAGA fans, who saw him attack a man's wife and still don't see what it says about Trump's essential cowardice and sadism.)
 
Bronzeage said:
Ever since being a Trump supporter became something one could be, they very quickly became sensitive to be considered stupid. It's the old problem of taking insult from an apt description. Trump supporters are a half and half mix of those stupid enough to believe Haitians are eating cats, and those who know it's silly, but repeat it for the other half. Both halves think they are the smart half.
The problem with the "I'm with stupid" theorem is the stupidity is very superficial. A Trump supporter would never tolerate a spouse, child, coworker, or employee, who behaved like Trump. Lying, cheating, assaulting women, etc. They're not that stupid. This means their stupidity is a more subtle lie. It's a mask that lets them vote for Trump without having to explain to us the real reason they support him.
Click to expand...
It takes all kinds. Both parties have a solid block of stupid voters. Indeed, those supporting Trump... the January 6th rioters weren't a bunch of local yokels. Many were likely hard working white collar management folks. These people have been lied to for decades by the media they consume up to 12 hours a day. They were lied to so much, they actually revolted against the mainstream GOP starting in 2012!
 
Debate went so well for Trump, he doesn't want another one.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom