Harris/Walz Catch-All | Kamala blitz in closing stretch

  • Thread starter Thread starter aGDevil2k
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 1K
  • Views: 33K
  • Politics 
ZenMode said:
So, the original question was whether or not Democrats harbor and responsibility for the rise of Trump. The implication by Snoop was no, Dems have no responsibility. I pointed out that there is some actual basis for the belief that Dems are soft on crime... and a couple were pretty substantial examples..... one bordering on crazy.

That was just one example. I have others. There aren't 72 million nut cases like MTG/Lindell in the country. There are a lot of reasonable, sane people who voted for Trump and it very likely wasn't because they saw him as a great choice or even a good choice, any more than the 82 million Biden voters were voting FOR Biden because he was such a great candidate. Clearly he wasn't.
Click to expand...
Those are substantial examples? New York's bail reform to address the inequities associated with poor people being unable to make bond for low level crimes while people with money can? And something that a city council member in one city said?

And regardless of what one thinks about any of that, none of that has to do with the job of the POTUS. The POTUS’s job has nothing to do with state and local criminal laws or enforcement of those laws, and very rarely involves anything having to do with federal criminal law (which, generally speaking, the public seems much less concerned about than state-level crime).

And Trump certainly hasn’t shown himself to be tough on crime. He has embraced crime, welcomed criminals into his administration, and has let criminals off the hook just because they were loyal to him. And he’s made threats of people committing crimes if he doesn’t get his way.

Now I 100% agree that there is a perception among people that Democrats are soft on crime and Republicans are tough on crime. But that perception is based mainly on those people’s ignorance of both facts and how things actually work, rather than actual democratic policies and positions relating to federal criminal law.

Hell, they gave Biden hell in the last election for his past support of the 1994 crime bill (signed into law by Bill Clinton), which was a “tough on crime” bill that resulted in substantial prison sentences for certain criminal defendants, and praised Trump for signing the First Step Act, which reduced sentences for many prisoners and led to many early releases. (For the record, I supported the First Step Act am glad Trump signed it).
 
superrific said:
It is not arrogance for a professional to understand that he is better at his profession than non-professionals. To the contrary, the real arrogance comes from the non-professional who thinks his opinion is just as good.

You are right that whataboutism would be more accurate than bothsides. This might be the first time in board history that you've admitted you made a mistake. I'm not conceding that whataboutism is accurate, but at least it's in the realm of plausibility. It's not definitionally false.

If you think politics was the reason that people were pushing back on your false contention that abnormal is a factual description, then I don't know what to say. Maybe some people objected because they thought it was mean. My objection was based on semantics and logic. Normal is a judgment, end of story. Just like norms and normative. They all come from the same root (normal in math is different and comes from the Greek). I'm not going into this again.

Chalking up your errors to political persecution is pathetic. People weren't correcting you because of politics. They were correcting you because you were wrong.
Click to expand...
First, I never claimed political persecution. I'm not a victim of differing opinions.

Second, while I'm sure you are educated and reasonably intelligent, that doesn't mean you're flawless or unbiased. To me, your bias seems clear.

During the COVID pandemic/George Floyd riots, over 1,000 medical professionals signed a document saying that the protests should not be shut down due to the pandemic. Do you think those professionals were educated in their field? Do you think they were intelligent? Do you think they were reasoning based on the best available scientific information about the pandemic and believed that walking shoulder to shoulder, in huge groups, was a good idea during a pandemic or do you think they were biased by political views and emotion?
 
Last edited:
ZenMode said:
First, I never claimed political persecution. I'm not a victim of differing opinions.

Second, while I'm sure you are educated and reasonably intelligent, that doesn't mean you're flawless or unbiased. To me, your bias seems clear.

During the COVID pandemic/George Floyd riots, over 1,000 medical professionals signed a document saying that the protests should not be shut down due to the pandemic. Do you think those professionals were educated in their field? Do you think they were intelligent? Do you think they were reasoning based on the best available scientific information about the pandemic and believed that walking shoulder to shoulder, in huge groups, was a good idea during a pandemic or do you think they were biased by political views.
Click to expand...
You referring to when Trump was president during Covid?
 
These clowns with their endless conspiracy theories are so exhausting. While one like this is being corrected (the correction itself will only convince many MAGA that the conspiracy is true and even more wide ranging than anyone knew, of course), eight other conspiracies sprout like poison mushrooms.



 
Last edited:
ZenMode said:
There are some Democratic positions/policies that, I believe, drive people to Trump.
Click to expand...
There are no Democratic positions/policies that drive people to Trump.

You may be - and are likely - able to make a list of Democratic positions/policies that would push folks to the Republican Party as the alternative to the Democratic Party. But nothing the Democrats did made Republican voters choose Trump via the primary process twice over other reasonably (and often better) qualified Republican candidates.

The choice to leave the relatively moderate conservatism of the past Republican Party and turn to fascist authoritarianism under Trump was a choice made entirely by the Republican Party.

To be sure, they did so, in part, in reaction to the modern Democratic Party, but it was wholly a choice the voters of the Republican Party made and was in no way, shape, or form forced upon them by anything Democrats did.
 
SnoopRob said:
There are no Democratic positions/policies that drive people to Trump.

You may be - and are likely - able to make a list of Democratic positions/policies that would push folks to the Republican Party as the alternative to the Democratic Party. But nothing the Democrats did made Republican voters choose Trump via the primary process twice over other reasonably (and often better) qualified Republican candidates.

The choice to leave the relatively moderate conservatism of the past Republican Party and turn to fascist authoritarianism under Trump was a choice made entirely by the Republican Party.

To be sure, they did so, in part, in reaction to the modern Democratic Party, but it was wholly a choice the voters of the Republican Party made and was in no way, shape, or form forced upon them by anything Democrats did.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by "modern" Democratic Party that is different from the prior Democratic Party?
 
ZenMode said:
What do you mean by "modern" Democratic Party that is different from the prior Democratic Party?
Click to expand...
Nothing specific, except that we know parties change in both big and small ways over time.

Simply think "the Democratic party since 2008".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top