2024 Presidential Election | ELECTION DAY 2024

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 8K
  • Views: 207K
  • Politics 
CFordUNC said:


He is truly a disgusting goddamn motherfucker and I have no qualms about wishing for his untimely demise, nor do I give a fuck about what it says about me as a person that I have no such qualms in this instance.
Click to expand...

Alabama? What’s happening in Alabama, other than a major football game Trump took the time to attend Saturday night?
 
HeelYeah2012 said:
I don’t watch every Trump speech but from a quick Google search, sounds like he was talking about ways to stop petty crimes and shoplifting.

Are you suggesting he was promoting a national day of violence against all liberals or something? Or are you acknowledging this was about shoplifting and other similar crimes and how he believes we should respond by actually doing something to stop them instead of letting the crimes go unpunished?
Click to expand...
Wait, you think that makes it better???
 
lawtig02 said:
Wait, you think that makes it better???
Click to expand...
Of course it makes it better. Struggling to understand how anyone could believe differently.

From the way they were talking about it, seemed like he was promoting a widespread day of violence instead of a day of roughing up opportunistic criminals.
 
Trump claims that Biden and Harris are refusing him enough secret service to interfere with his campaign and hogging protection for themselves even though they don’t need it.

IMG_3026.jpeg

IMG_3029.jpeg
IMG_3030.jpeg
 
rodoheel said:
I'm sorry, do you think an outburst of violent police reprisals for "petty crime" is somehow better? Do you endorse the theory of "maybe we'll let the police beat a few shoplifters to death in public" as a means to accomplish something positive?
Click to expand...
Yes, getting rough with opportunistic criminals is more palatable than getting rough with random people who didn’t commit crimes. Beating people to death isn’t the answer in either scenario and not something anyone rational would endorse
 
HeelYeah2012 said:
Yes, getting rough with opportunistic criminals is more palatable than getting rough with random people who didn’t commit crimes. Beating people to death isn’t the answer in either scenario and not something anyone rational would endorse
Click to expand...
Fortunately, Biden did not have to implement a day of police violence to reduce the crime rate that we suffered under Trump. My expectation is that the crime rate will continue decrease in a Harris administration.
 
HeelYeah2012 said:
Yes, getting rough with opportunistic criminals is more palatable than getting rough with random people who didn’t commit crimes. Beating people to death isn’t the answer in either scenario and not something anyone rational would endorse
Click to expand...
Well I'm glad we both agree Trump isn't rational. Since that's, uh, exactly what he suggested. Or did you think when he said he wanted "one real rough, nasty day" and later "one really violent day … one rough hour, and I mean real rough" he just meant a concussion and a couple ruptured internal organs? I find it hard to believe that anyone thinks advocating for police violence against people who have not been committed any crime. Can't wait for the stories about people who were put into comas by cops who were "sure" they were shoplifting but actually weren't. It's gonna be hard to convince people you're a moderate, as you usually try to do, when you think the leader of a political party openly calling for extralegal police violence against suspected criminals is a rational solution to a made-up crime wave.

Also, who is advocating getting rough with "random people who didn't commit crimes"? What sort of false dichotomy is this?
 
HeelYeah2012 said:
Of course it makes it better. Struggling to understand how anyone could believe differently.

From the way they were talking about it, seemed like he was promoting a widespread day of violence instead of a day of roughing up opportunistic criminals.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I’m sorry, that’s just straight amoral.
 
HeelYeah2012 said:
Yes, getting rough with opportunistic criminals is more palatable than getting rough with random people who didn’t commit crimes. Beating people to death isn’t the answer in either scenario and not something anyone rational would endorse
Click to expand...
Yeah, this is the United States. We have due process here. Police beating the shit out of suspects is dictator-shit.
 
UNCBAdookJD said:
Yeah, this is the United States. We have due process here. Police beating the shit out of suspects is dictator-shit.
Click to expand...
Correct, I agree with you. Criminals should be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, not beat to death by police and also not just ignored and allowed to steal with no consequences. All of the above should go without saying but I guess in this environment you never know what people may believe.
 
HeelYeah2012 said:
Correct, I agree with you. Criminals should be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, not beat to death by police and also not just ignored and allowed to steal with no consequences. All of the above should go without saying but I guess in this environment you never know what people may believe.
Click to expand...
Then call out your own damn candidate for saying this BS rather than inventing strawmen to argue with us about. Trump said, verbatim, that he wanted "one real rough, nasty day" and later "one really violent day … one rough hour, and I mean real rough" to deal with alleged shoplifters. That is your own candidate advocating for violence against alleged criminals. Stop dissembling for once and actually admit that it's your own damn candidate saying the thing you are now apparently conceding is ridiculous and contrary to everything our country stands for.
 
rodoheel said:
Then call out your own damn candidate for saying this BS rather than inventing strawmen to argue with us about. Trump said, verbatim, that he wanted "one real rough, nasty day" and later "one really violent day … one rough hour, and I mean real rough" to deal with alleged shoplifters. That is your own candidate advocating for violence against alleged criminals. Stop dissembling for once and actually admit that it's your own damn candidate saying the thing you are now apparently conceding is ridiculous and contrary to everything our country stands for.
Click to expand...
Trump should not be advocating for police violence against criminals. Is that clear enough for you?
 
nycfan said:
Click to expand...

It is hard to imagine a candidate more unworthy to serve as president of the United States than Donald Trump. He has proved himself morally unfit for an office that asks its occupant to put the good of the nation above self-interest. He has proved himself temperamentally unfit for a role that requires the very qualities — wisdom, honesty, empathy, courage, restraint, humility, discipline — that he most lacks.

Those disqualifying characteristics are compounded by everything else that limits his ability to fulfill the duties of the president: his many criminal charges, his advancing age, his fundamental lack of interest in policy and his increasingly bizarre cast of associates.

This unequivocal, dispiriting truth — Donald Trump is not fit to be president — should be enough for any voter who cares about the health of our country and the stability of our democracy to deny him re-election.

For this reason, regardless of any political disagreements voters might have with her, Kamala Harris is the only patriotic choice for president.

If the Editorial Board can see this, it's a damn shame the news division can't cover the daily news understanding this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top