Your racist grandpa vs an ivy leaguer who brags about having a small business owner in her life during the debate (she grew up with a nanny)
Also jesus both of them trying to outracist eachother. Kamala might be beat on the home front but she makes up for it on the world stage with the israel comments.
Kamala says ‘Trump is gonna pull us out of Nato’ and Trump says ‘Kamala will make the US Venezuela on steroids’. I dont know why each candidate is trying to convince me to vote for the other
One of them talked about a Marxist who will get rid of Israel within 2 years and wants to defund the police and give everyone healthcare and provide transgender operations to illegal immigrants, and the other talked about a person who hates the US military, admires China’s handling of COVID, and wants to defund the police and pull out of NATO, and I just wish I knew the names of either of those candidates because they’re both way better choices than what we’ve actually got.
Yeah, wish we could vote for those candidates.
The question is, does making the US Venezuela on steroids also include pulling out of NATO?
This is the funniest shit I’ve ever seen.
I knew Harris would wipe the floor, but this is incredible.
The immigrants are eating our pets\s
It would be funnier if there wasn’t a sizeable percentage of people who support the cheetoh. There is still a real chance of that demented racist pos winning come november.
With any luck, that number just got smaller, even if by just a little bit.
Something I noticed is that even Twitter was making fun of Trump. I never thought I’d see that happen.
EXECUTE THE BABY was trending for at least a little bit
With any luck, that number just got smaller,
The Zionist tangent from Kamala is likely going to alienate more Muslim-Americans, which genuinely puts Michigan into question. Muslim-Americans have been leaning more towards Stein and West than Harris according to polling, so we will have to see.
Dude read the room. You’ve railroaded a ton of threads to talk about Harris and Israel. You don’t have to force every conversation into that. Let this comment thread be about something else.
I am literally talking about the debate, though. This isn’t a random Harris thread, she very clearly went on a Zionist tirade in the face of her losing ground in Michigan and other Swing States with high percentages of Muslim-American voters, that’s factually a bad move that could impact her electoral chances, regardless of my personal disdain for genocide.
Yeah she did, and you started another comment thread in this post about it. Talk about it there. You don’t need to railroad every conversation into trying to convince people that Harris is a monster. Let other people talk about other stuff from time to time.
It isn’t derailing, the comment was about Trump’s chances getting smaller, when there are material reasons for Trump’s chances to get larger despite his poor performance specifically due to salient issues in swing states.
Counterpoint: Harris doesn’t need to be a monster such that it is a dereliction of democratic duty to not speak about it constantly.
Post-script to that counterpoint: You don’t need to railroad people talking about Copmala Handcuffs being a flamethrower unto human life and liberty her entire career into trying to convince people it’s worth helping and hoping she gets a new fuel tank handed to her.
You realize that by demanding people shut up about genocide, you’ve actually incentivized users to talk about genocide, right?
two hitler-particle-emitting politicians sitting on a mountain of corpses, arguing over who can make the pile grow faster. so, par for the course as far as american elections go.
Completely and utterly masturbatory. The reality is that the US is extremely polarized politically because the living standards are collapsing. There are basically two competing narratives for why that’s happening, and people subscribe to one or the other. The democrats and republicans have fundamentally different world views, so nobody is going to be swayed by the debate. People subscribing to each respective view will hear what they want to hear.
People who will vote for Harris are the ones who think that the dems have been doing a good job for the past three and a half years, meanwhile people who aren’t happy with the way things are going will vote against them or stay home. It’s that simple.
The democrats and republicans have fundamentally different world views
Correction: the democrats and republicans have fundamentally different standards of decorum and of how close they can be to the stench of the consequences of their highly similar world views without turning away.
Fair, it’s more that each one sees themselves as being an antithesis of the other.
I can’t believe that these are the best two people that the US can produce right now.
I hate them.
Trump looked more incoherent this time than in the previous debates, what with the “immigrants are coming to eat your pets” line and other zingers like post-birth abortion nonsense. There were also some weird moments where he said stuff like “Kamala hates Israel,” prompting her to go off on her undying loyalty to Israel.
Harris was overall more presentable, but had some horrible policy moments, such as repeating debunked claims about sexual assault on October 7th as she restated her undying loyalty to Israel (which could materially cost her Michigan as Muslim voters are turning to Stein and Cornel West over Harris), or stating that Climate Change is an existential threat in one breath and promising to never ban fracking in the next, along with bragging about gas production.
Overall it’s a clear “win” for Harris over Trump if we are purely measuring debate performance, Harris looked far better and answered more coherently, though her environmental positions, immigration positions, and foreign policy are far to the right of where they should be, especially concerning swing state polling.
That is, of course, ignoring my personal disdain for liberalism and both candidates in general for being far-right, this is purely an analysis of the debate within the context of the election.
this pretty much sums it up. I thought trump would be incoherent, but some of the stuff out of his mouth was borderline surreal. Harris had completely tuned herself to ‘beat’ trump, and while it worked, it’s painfully clear that she doesn’t have a single original thought - nothing but platitudes, the same canned phrases about working families and small businesses, same tired defence of Israel.
He’s at his best when he’s borderline surreal. Remember when he accused Ted Cruz’ dad of killing JFK? lmfaoo
Both of these candidates deserve the Hague. But the Netherlands better arm up first! (That bill passed the Senate 75-19, with 30 democrats and 45 republicans in support. Never not a terrible country. Vote Communist and join the PSL)
That pretty much sums them up nicely. Both represent the two sides of dying Empire.
Trump is a bit of a wrecking ball, his far-right populist rhetoric appeals to rising material frustrations with the Petite Bourgeoisie, ie small business owners and the like, along nationalist lines. Strong aesthetic patriotism, lack of consistency or coherence, promises of restoring grander times and power. General far-right nonsense that sees dying Empire as it is, but blaming it on immigrants and minorities instead of addressing material conditions.
Harris is plucked straight from the stock-standard Empire maintainers. Her policies are largely Biden’s promises carried over, with firm Imperialist support for Israel and “the most lethal military in the world.” She isn’t attempting to appeal to fascists, but she is trying to appeal to those with vested interest in maintaining Imperial Hegemony. Small concessions and frequent doublespeak - claiming Climate Change is an existential threat in one breath, then boldly taking pride in record gas production and promising to never ban fracking in the next. She’s more coherent, which ironically makes the double-speak stand out clearer.
It would be funny if it wasn’t tragic.
