Biden “forced” out of race…what do Dems do now ?

[astonmartin708]

Because extreme liberal policies are just as dangerous , lawpoke also pointed out some very good points as well as why people would not vote for Harris , she hasn’t proven anything that would suggest she would be a good president , there are going to be people out there that vote for her just simply for the fact that she is a black woman , we should never pick someone or not pick someone because they are a certain gender or color , it shouldn’t be that hard for democrats to win this election if they could put out some sort of decent candidate , but the best they put out is Kamala Harris , sorry , but that’s not good enough for me to vote for her

While I don't agree that this is true (at least for Harris' relatively innocuous level of "extremity" as compared to far left policies in other nations' histories), you have an opportunity to limit the amount of "extremely liberal policies" that any president could pass via your Congressional vote. Trump, if he does take office in the current cycle, is much more likely to do so with a congressional majority that will allow him to do essentially what he pleases.

The more you speak the more I'm starting to think that you would begrudgingly vote for the next Mussolini just so long as he never said anything about being pro-choice and promised you a tax cut.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

Because extreme liberal policies are just as dangerous , lawpoke also pointed out some very good points as well as why people would not vote for Harris , she hasn’t proven anything that would suggest she would be a good president , there are going to be people out there that vote for her just simply for the fact that she is a black woman , we should never pick someone or not pick someone because they are a certain gender or color , it shouldn’t be that hard for democrats to win this election if they could put out some sort of decent candidate , but the best they put out is Kamala Harris , sorry , but that’s not good enough for me to vote for her

You speak in a lot of generalities.

 

[TULSARISING]

While I don't agree that this is true (at least for Harris' relatively innocuous level of "extremity" as compared to far left policies in other nations' histories), you have an opportunity to limit the amount of "extremely liberal policies" that any president could pass via your Congressional vote. Trump, if he does take office is much more likely to do so with a congressional majority that will allow him to do essentially what he pleases.

The more you speak the more I'm starting to think that you would begrudgingly vote for the next Mussolini just so long as he never said anything about being pro-choice and promised you a tax cut.

Think that all you want , Trump is not Hitler , Hitler killed over 6 million Jews , I don’t know where they started getting compared with , we are both complete opposite in our thinking , I think you are an extreme liberal so we are never going to agree on things , as far as the pro choice deal goes , that is one issue you keep hammering on , that’s one thing , and you are correct in assuming I don’t support abortion ( unless the moms life is in danger ) I don’t think people should go get knocked up and then just decide to kill the bang because they don’t want to deal with being a mother , if that makes me an evil person in your eyes , so be it .

 

[lawpoke87]

You can do whatever you want, but we all know that's a wasted vote considering the realities of the situation.... and if you're in a battleground state it could be effectively a vote for Trump.

I don't believe economic prosperity should be your primary driver over freedom and democracy. (Though I don't particularly believe that Kamala or any Dem admin would be particularly terrible for the economy considering that things are subpar but not atrocious right now, and not all of what has happened economically can be pinned singularly on the Democratic Party)

Things were pretty touch and go economically, before, during, and after the American Revolution that doesn't mean King George was a better alternative.

If I believe freedom and democracy were truly at stake I might agree with you. They’re not despite the hyperbole on the left. I don’t recall my freedoms being limited or reduced under Trumps four years. I do recall my speech being censored under Biden. I do recall Biden trying to force us to take a vaccine which at the time of enforcement didn’t even prevent to virus. Those are an attack on our personal freedoms. As such, the ability to feed and house my family as well as the people who work for me take priority. They are my responsibility. I will do what I believe is best for them period.

Do I support Trump…no. Do I support Harris…no. Do I even support RFK….no. My vote for RFK is a more than simply a protest vote. It is a vote for a viable third party in this country. Something I feel will need.

 

[TULSARISING]

You speak in a lot of

If I believe freedom and democracy were truly at stake I might agree with you. They’re not despite the hyperbole on the left. I don’t recall my freedoms being limited or reduced under Trumps four years. I do recall my speech being censored under Biden. I do recall Biden trying to force us to take a vaccine which at the time of enforcement didn’t even prevent to virus. Those are an attack on our personal freedoms. As such, the ability to feed and house my family as well as the people who work for me take priority. They are my responsibility. I will do what I believe is best for them period.

Do I support Trump…no. Do I support Harris…no. Do I even support RFK….no. My vote for RFK is a more than simply a protest vote. It is a vote for a viable third party in this country. Something I feel will need.

I really wish the 3rd candidate would be taken more seriously, im not saying they are automatically going to be better , but how will we know if we don’t get a chance to hear them speak

 

[astonmartin708]

Think that all you want , Trump is not Hitler , Hitler killed over 6 million Jews , I don’t know where they started getting compared with , we are both complete opposite in our thinking , I think you are an extreme liberal so we are never going to agree on things , as far as the pro choice deal goes , that is one issue you keep hammering on , that’s one thing , and you are correct in assuming I don’t support abortion ( unless the moms life is in danger ) I don’t think people should go get knocked up and then just decide to kill the bang because they don’t want to deal with being a mother , if that makes me an evil person in your eyes , so be it .

Reusing Lawpoke's flawed argument eh? Secondly, I didn't compare anyone to Hitler. I said you would vote in a dictator (doesn't matter which one.... take your pick) without much hesitancy as long as they stroked your fragile conservative ego and you had an opposing liberal candidate to pin your problems on.

Despite what you may think, I'm not particularly on the extreme of liberalism, at least not how you tend to think about it. I would argue that I do want progress more than stasis / regression, but I am also extremely pragmatic and logical. My biggest interest is in justice, fairness, and decency for all Americans regardless of their viewpoints.

Finally, you say I 'Keep Hammering' on an issue, but you miss my point. I'm not calling you out for being pro-life.I'm calling you out for not being pragmatic enough to put your interests and opinions (even the ones you find especially important) aside momentarily to realize that anyone who did what Donald Trump (and his conspirators) did on January 6th shouldn't be elected to be a local dog catcher, much less POTUS. That's before we even start talking about his other innumerable disqualifying flaws which, if present on the other side, you would be so appalled by that you would be incredibly vocal about that candidates' lack of merit.

I'm asking you to wake up and smell the coffee. Use some deductive reasoning. If nothing else, what should clue you into the danger you waltzing into is Trump's unwavering opinion that he has broad and unlimited immunity for what he did while he was President. I think all presidents would argue for limited immunity due to the nature of the office... but can you imagine George Washington arguing that ANY and ALL of his actions while in office should warrant immunity? Probably not, he would surely have a more measured and moralistic opinion on the expectations for the officeholder. Can you imagine Putin lobbying for blanket immunity? Of course you can. Ask yourself which side of the spectrum of fitness (or unfitness) for office is Trump on between those two gentlemen.

 

[astonmartin708]

If I believe freedom and democracy were truly at stake I might agree with you. They’re not despite the hyperbole on the left. I don’t recall my freedoms being limited or reduced under Trumps four years. I do recall my speech being censored under Biden. I do recall Biden trying to force us to take a vaccine which at the time of enforcement didn’t even prevent to virus. Those are an attack on our personal freedoms. As such, the ability to feed and house my family as well as the people who work for me take priority. They are my responsibility. I will do what I believe is best for them period.

Do I support Trump…no. Do I support Harris…no. Do I even support RFK….no. My vote for RFK is a more than simply a protest vote. It is a vote for a viable third party in this country. Something I feel will need.

Here is where your argument is flawed. YOU don't recall your freedoms being limited or reduced during Trump's years, but also are willing to forget that 80 million people were nearly disenfranchised by Trump and his cabal's malfeasance. He fundamentally threatened the sanctity of our Union. That IS why freedom and democracy are said to be at stake. We, your brethren who were threatened, are raising the alarms begging you to listen to us. We understand that we have many philosophical differences, but this is truly existentially important to the future of our country.

This isn't about Roe. It's not about climate change. It's not about immigrants or Ukraine or Palestine or anything else. It's about putting the interests of our Republic over our squabbles. If you don't heed this warning there could be very well be a timeline where things become very dim for all of our families.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

Reusing Lawpoke's flawed argument eh? Secondly, I didn't compare anyone to Hitler. I said you would vote in a dictator (doesn't matter which one.... take your pick) without much hesitancy as long as they stroked your fragile conservative ego and you had an opposing liberal candidate to pin your problems on.

Despite what you may think, I'm not particularly on the extreme of liberalism, at least not how you tend to think about it. I would argue that I do want progress more than stasis / regression, but I am also extremely pragmatic and logical. My biggest interest is in justice, fairness, and decency for all Americans regardless of their viewpoints.

Finally, you say I 'Keep Hammering' on an issue, but you miss my point. I'm not calling you out for being pro-life.I'm calling you out for not being pragmatic enough to put your interests and opinions (even the ones you find especially important) aside momentarily to realize that anyone who did what Donald Trump (and his conspirators) did on January 6th shouldn't be elected to be a local dog catcher, much less POTUS. That's before we even start talking about his other innumerable disqualifying flaws which, if present on the other side, you would be so appalled by that you would be incredibly vocal about that candidates' lack of merit.

I'm asking you to wake up and smell the coffee. Use some deductive reasoning. If nothing else, what should clue you into the danger you waltzing into is Trump's unwavering opinion that he has broad and unlimited immunity for what he did while he was President. I think all presidents would argue for limited immunity due to the nature of the office... but can you imagine George Washington arguing that ANY and ALL of his actions while in office should warrant immunity? Probably not, he would probably have a more measured and moralistic opinion on the expectations for the officeholder. Can you imagine Putin lobbying for blanket immunity? Of course you can. Ask yourself which side of the spectrum of fitness (or unfitness) for office is Trump on between those two gentlemen.

No president from Gerald Ford to today(modern era) would argue for blanket immunity except Trump. Nixon might.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

If I believe freedom and democracy were truly at stake I might agree with you. They’re not despite the hyperbole on the left. I don’t recall my freedoms being limited or reduced under Trumps four years. I do recall my speech being censored under Biden. I do recall Biden trying to force us to take a vaccine which at the time of enforcement didn’t even prevent to virus. Those are an attack on our personal freedoms. As such, the ability to feed and house my family as well as the people who work for me take priority. They are my responsibility. I will do what I believe is best for them period.

Do I support Trump…no. Do I support Harris…no. Do I even support RFK….no. My vote for RFK is a more than simply a protest vote. It is a vote for a viable third party in this country. Something I feel will need.

Because Jan 6th failed. If it had succeeded, I hope you would be stating a different viewpoint. The next time, it won't be Pence, it will be Jd Vance. I don't think Vance will stand his moral ground. I'm not even sure he has any moral ground to stand on. That moral ground changes about like Haley's changes, depending on who he or she is representing.

How was your speech censored under Biden. I tried to comment on cnn's articles, and they censored me, but that is a private site, and they can censor me all they want. I didn't put anything on facebook or twitter that got censored. But that was not considered a 'private site' being social media,

At the beginning of the period of mandatory vaccine for government offices, I don't think you were forced to take it, so unless there was a category I don't knowm bout, your freedoms weren't infringed on, only the government workers. I know you weren't put in the category of medical, seeing as how you deal in reality. At the beginning of the period they were enforcing mandatory vaccines, it was not known whether they stopped the spread. It was meant for the better health interests of the population, and justifiable. That they held onto mandatory for a little longer than they should have is not really a horrible infringement. It kept 'you' alive. My uncle went into the hospital unvaccinated and proceeded to die. He was relatively young, 65, and in decentish health. That probably wouldn't have happened if he was vaccinated.

I just balk at these antivaccine people out there. My grandparents would take the vaccine voluntarily, now there is a large % of the population who is anti vaccine like your friend RFK Jr. And my grandparents were Republican right down to their boots. They didn't like their freedoms infringed on as much or more than the next guy. Their views were a lot further right than mine.(they would have been on the right half of far right at a minimum) But they would have never been opposed to vaccines. I don't believe it was voluntary to get vaccines when I was a child. My grandparents supported that 1000%. But they were of a generation that saw what things like polio did to you. I'm not so sure you don't agree with RFK, as much as you don't seem to feel that is a nut job view that works against him from the start. There isn't really a negative aspect to taking the Covid vaccine, despite what conspiracy theorists out there try to convince you of. The problems with blood clots happened in 60 patients out of 18 million.(except J & J)

 

[astonmartin708]

I think we should all agree that, considering the tac of today's conversation, comments like this one today from Trump make things seem even more tense for the state of our Republic.



I know the phrase "you won't have to vote again" can be construed many ways.... but when it's being said by someone who tried to seize power via an underhanded scheme / show of violent authority.... one tends to jump to a particular connotation.

 

[astonmartin708]

No president from Gerald Ford to today(modern era) would argue for blanket immunity except Trump. Nixon might.

"Well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal"

Spoken like a person who was bitter that they were being held accountable for their actions. Watergate is the most blatant and obvious evidence for the necessity of no person being unreachably above justice.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

I think we should all agree that, considering the tac of today's conversation, comments like this one today from Trump make things seem even more tense for the state of our Republic.

View embedded media

I know the phrase "you won't have to vote again" can be construed many ways.... but when it's being said by someone who tried to seize power via an underhanded scheme / show of violent authority.... one tends to jump to a particular connotation.

Thank God, even if he was to pull something off like this,(which he won't) he wouldn't have much time to rule as a dictator, considering his age. An 82 year old refusing to give up power isn't as scary as a 62 year old. Of course if he did pull something off like this, who is to say that he might try to become Kim Jong il, and put his son in office without an election. None of that will happen, but it's scary nonetheless. Trump's cult of personality will die with him.

 

[TULSARISING]

Reusing Lawpoke's flawed argument eh? Secondly, I didn't compare anyone to Hitler. I said you would vote in a dictator (doesn't matter which one.... take your pick) without much hesitancy as long as they stroked your fragile conservative ego and you had an opposing liberal candidate to pin your problems on.

Despite what you may think, I'm not particularly on the extreme of liberalism, at least not how you tend to think about it. I would argue that I do want progress more than stasis / regression, but I am also extremely pragmatic and logical. My biggest interest is in justice, fairness, and decency for all Americans regardless of their viewpoints.

Finally, you say I 'Keep Hammering' on an issue, but you miss my point. I'm not calling you out for being pro-life.I'm calling you out for not being pragmatic enough to put your interests and opinions (even the ones you find especially important) aside momentarily to realize that anyone who did what Donald Trump (and his conspirators) did on January 6th shouldn't be elected to be a local dog catcher, much less POTUS. That's before we even start talking about his other innumerable disqualifying flaws which, if present on the other side, you would be so appalled by that you would be incredibly vocal about that candidates' lack of merit.

I'm asking you to wake up and smell the coffee. Use some deductive reasoning. If nothing else, what should clue you into the danger you waltzing into is Trump's unwavering opinion that he has broad and unlimited immunity for what he did while he was President. I think all presidents would argue for limited immunity due to the nature of the office... but can you imagine George Washington arguing that ANY and ALL of his actions while in office should warrant immunity? Probably not, he would surely have a more measured and moralistic opinion on the expectations for the officeholder. Can you imagine Putin lobbying for blanket immunity? Of course you can. Ask yourself which side of the spectrum of fitness (or unfitness) for office is Trump on between those two gentlemen.

You don’t have to tell me anything about January 6th that I don’t know about , I’m not voting for Trump or Kamala, I think they both will be bad for the country , all I’m saying is if I had to choose , I would pick Trump over Kamala

 

[lawpoke87]

Because Jan 6th failed. If it had succeeded, I hope you would be stating a different viewpoint. The next time, it won't be Pence, it will be Jd Vance. I don't think Vance will stand his moral ground. I'm not even sure he has any moral ground to stand on. That moral ground changes about like Haley's changes, depending on who he or she is representing.

How was your speech censored under Biden. I tried to comment on cnn's articles, and they censored me, but that is a private site, and they can censor me all they want. I didn't put anything on facebook or twitter that got censored. But that was not considered a 'private site' being social media,

At the beginning of the period of mandatory vaccine for government offices, I don't think you were forced to take it, so unless there was a category I don't knowm bout, your freedoms weren't infringed on, only the government workers. I know you weren't put in the category of medical, seeing as how you deal in reality. At the beginning of the period they were enforcing mandatory vaccines, it was not known whether they stopped the spread. It was meant for the better health interests of the population, and justifiable. That they held onto mandatory for a little longer than they should have is not really a horrible infringement. It kept 'you' alive. My uncle went into the hospital unvaccinated and proceeded to die. He was relatively young, 65, and in decentish health. That probably wouldn't have happened if he was vaccinated.

I just balk at these antivaccine people out there. My grandparents would take the vaccine voluntarily, now there is a large % of the population who is anti vaccine like your friend RFK Jr. And my grandparents were Republican right down to their boots. They didn't like their freedoms infringed on as much or more than the next guy. Their views were a lot further right than mine.(they would have been on the right half of far right at a minimum) But they would have never been opposed to vaccines. I don't believe it was voluntary to get vaccines when I was a child. My grandparents supported that 1000%. But they were of a generation that saw what things like polio did to you. I'm not so sure you don't agree with RFK, as much as you don't seem to feel that is a nut job view that works against him from the start. There isn't really a negative aspect to taking the Covid vaccine, despite what conspiracy theorists out there try to convince you of. The problems with blood clots happened in 60 patients out of 18 million.(except J & J)

I had numerous comments on social media censored which criticized the removal and censorship of suggestions that Covid originated as a lab leak. I also had comments removed suggesting wearing cloth masks did more harm than good. As we now know those posts were being flagged by the Biden Admin for removal. Speech which was not blatantly false or misleading.

Your argument about Biden vaccine mandate is disingenuous imo. Biden issued an executive order requiring private citizens to submit to a Covid vaccine in order to keep their job. The same mandate in turn required employers to fire said employees if they failed to comply. Please remember at the time said mandate was to take effect the “vaccine” was shown not to prevent the contraction of the virus. Despite that fact the Biden Admin still sought to enforce the mandate. The only reason private citizens were spared the mandate was due to the same being found to be unconstitutional. Which imo makes the mandate that much more egregious. I can’t recall an Administration unconstitutionally attacking individual rights in such a severe manner in my lifetime.

 

[lawpoke87]

I think we should all agree that, considering the tac of today's conversation, comments like this one today from Trump make things seem even more tense for the state of our Republic.

View embedded media

I know the phrase "you won't have to vote again" can be construed many ways.... but when it's being said by someone who tried to seize power via an underhanded scheme / show of violent authority.... one tends to jump to a particular connotation.

If they had included the clip 60 seconds before so we would know the context no one would have to jump to any connotations. Doesn’t make for nearly as good of sound clip. This isn’t directed at just Dems. Pubs do the exact same thing. We take a 30 second sound bite and leave off the prior few sentences for shock value. Pubs didn’t to Biden all the time. One of many reason to doubt most things you see on social media.

 

[astonmartin708]

If they had included the clip 60 seconds before so we would know the context no one would have to jump to any connotations. Doesn’t make for nearly as good of sound clip. This isn’t directed at just Dems. Pubs do the exact same thing. We take a 30 second sound bite and leave off the prior few sentences for shock value. Pubs didn’t to Biden all the time. One of many reason to doubt most things you see on social media.

Eye roll… your self imposed ignorance will be your downfall.

 

[lawpoke87]

Eye roll… your self imposed ignorance will be your downfall.

Ok buddy. I will continue to be skeptical of social media propaganda on both sides. You do you tho.

 

[astonmartin708]

Ok buddy. I will continue to be skeptical of social media propaganda on both sides. You do you tho.

You post right wing social media on here all the time lol.

 

[lawpoke87]

You post right wing social media on here all the time lol.

…and you advise not to believe everything on social media . Just saying we should all follow thst advicd.