Harris Vs Trump 2024 US Presidential election - read the warning in the OP posted 18/09/24

Trump is definitely favoured as a leader on wartime - that’s fact.

By who? Cousin Billy Bob?

Because actual National Security Experts - over 700 of them, including Generals, Cabinet officials, National Security Administrators, etc. endorsed Kamala Harris last week. Maybe you missed it?

https://www.nsl4a.org/nsl4a-announcements/nsl4a-endorsement-harris

I count 149 Ambassadors, 86 Admirals, 174 Generals, 99 Directors, 22 Sergeants, Secretaries of Defense, State, Veterans affairs, Assistant Secretaries, etc. (there may be a view overlaps where individuals held multiple titles, I used word search)

That's not including the 400+ economists and former economic officials that have also endorsed her separately.

Newsweek also collated the full list as of 2 days ago every Republican that has endorsed her:

https://www.newsweek.com/full-list-republicans-endorsing-kamala-harris-trump-1960937

And those who signed a separate letter of endorsement along the same lines as the above one:

https://www.newsweek.com/kamala-harris-endorsement-letter-republicans-1956304

So I'm curious what you're support of that "that's fact" is.

Like I said we’re done here. I gave you the chance to discuss and you simply mocked and abused and twisted - I’ve no interest in engaging with you now. Thanks

like I said we’re done here

Not sure how serious you are about this, but I could certainly see Trump being reluctant to capitalise on a star performance by Vance for this very reason…

Indeed there will be many problems left. It is a serious issue that Republicans have not put forward a serious candidate for these issues to be properly discussed instead of nonsense about eating cats and dogs to throw out sound bites.

Note I said Trump was not serious in that he is not a serious person with actual policies for governing a democracy. He may still win in spite of this.

Trump is apparently planning to 'live-truth' the debate, because everything has to be about him :D

It will certainly impact the election and how some people vote.

There were no wars during Trumps tenure, he was largely a passive President.

The National security experts, are these the same hawks and warmongers who said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, the same people who invaded Afghanistan, who meddled in Syria and multiple other countries ?

The same people who goaded Russia by pushing for Ukraine to join Nato.

These are the people who have fuelled the machinery of war.

No wonder they are endorsing Harris, they know where their bread is buttered.

They know Harris will be easily manipulated unlike Trump.

There were no wars during Trumps tenure, he was largely a passive President.

Why do you keep repeating demonstrably untrue, easily disproven lies?

In addition to the Afghanistan war still going on, Trump abandoning the Kurds etc. the Ukraine Russia war also began under Trump with the Kerch Strait Incident.

They know Harris will be easily manipulated unlike Trump.

Yes Trump is so hard to manipulate that Kamala definitely didn't wind him up like a toy at the debate by poking fun of his crowd sizes. /s

So unmanipulable was he that he forgot what he was supposed to be debating about and ranted and raved about the people on TV saying his dog had been eaten.

Belle of the 5th Column had a great essay about easily manipulable he was, as demonstrated by Kamala Harris, about the debate:

Her exact 3 minute argument was that it showed how easily manipulated Trump is in foreign policy situations, the last kind of 'leader' you'd ever want in a Presidency. I agree with her of course. Harris didn't just go off about his crowd sizes, but also about his 'best people' most of whom would not endorse him for President again. Trump wears all his insecurities on his sleeve, which makes him very susceptible to both criticisms and to flatteries.

But I also wanted to highlight a more important 4 minute essay of hers in relation to some bad faith claims that 'Trump had no wars etc.:' - about a month ago, Trump also claimed along this vein that he had a period of no US soldier casualties for an 18 month period…

Think about that claim for a second: he was president for 48 months, so he's definitely saying soldiers were shot at and killed during his presidency, so he for sure was involved in wars - nevermind the categorical evidence of losing marines in the Yemen raid, losing soldiers in Niger, or the family Trump personally wrote a $25,000 cheque to by way of admitting guilt at their death.

Well anyway, she looked at the numbers, and aside from some of his other lies (which she documents, such as about 'abandoned' equipment that was donated to the lawful government of Afghanistan) this claimed 18 month period never happened, which means Trump is erasing the deaths of servicemembers for his political agenda. She found there is no way to even be charitable about it: you can't even stitch together 18 completely different months of his presidency to reach the claim.

"In fact while pulling the numbers for this, we noticed something interesting: the longest period without a US death in Afghanistan wasn't under him - it was under Biden. Surprise! I didn't even know that until pulling these numbers."

The people telling you that Trump had no wars etc. aren't just lying, they are effectively pissing on peoples graves, and implying they don't even "deserve the respect of being remembered," as she put it, and I completely agree.

On the other hand, there was a poll at the start of this election that put Trump well ahead as leader on the issue of security.

That's rather useless now, isn't it? A poll from when then, 2022, when Trump kicked off the election race?

At the start of the campaign, Biden was still in the Primary.

I guess you have no more recent information to attempt to validate your claim?

Trump hasn’t been involved in a war

Why are you gobbling up that lie now too? Who are you saying was in charge over Yemen, Afghanistan, Niger, Syria, etc. while he was in office, not Trump?

as I said above we’re done here

why? do you think their media tells reality as it is , the obvious answer is no but its why its fun watching on, seeing how their media attempt to manipulate their public , if their media did their job there would be one basic set of facts to look at

for instance did you ever fall for the "fine people" hoax? its been well debunked by now , does it not make you question all the narratives on this basis?

What’s the debunk? Can you tell me who the fine people were attending the rally where they all carried torches and shouted “Jews will not replace us,” etc? It’s not as though we haven’t had this conversation dozens of times already this thread and no one defending Trump has been able to identify a single one of these alleged “fine people” that weren’t neo Nazi, KKK or White supremacist or similarly adjacent to.

Looks like 45 is running scared.

God forbid he'd have to answer a straight question on policy.

Harris getting a free 60 minutes on prime time network TV to speak her speak to the millions while Trump eats some fast food and SHOUTS on Truth during the 60 minute.