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

isn’t that just another “but but Trump” post? Yes we know what he is - but maybe more balance and discussion on what Harris is doing and how she’s doing it would be nice - this paranoia about Harris criticism is just pathetic.

Anyway back to Harris - apparently she loves Joe and wouldn’t have done anything differently - lost chance to distance herself from the last 4 years - if people want change they won’t think “Harris” - thats what voters will get from this article -

@Zoom in: 

When she was asked how a Harris presidency would be different from a Biden presidency, she said: "We're obviously two different people and we have a lot of shared life experiences ... but we're also different people and I will bring those sensibilities to how I lead."”

https://www.axios.com/2024/10/08/harris-biden-view-abc-2024-differences

eh- again- to correct if I may - I NEVER stated she lied with “malice” and “forethought”

I can see where this is going - you’re quite simply stating things I haven’t said and trying to get a rise - I’m not taking the bait but you’ve proved my point admirably

eh no it isn’t - but I’m not going to engage in a bickering contest with you - Harris criticism would be nice

People are very forth going in criticism of her, you are making up scenarios here mate. When compared to Trump, she is poles apart overall, she isn't a conman, a convicted felon, sexual predator or charlatan.

Why would she want to distance herself over the last 4 years, she is the VP for gods sake!

I'll engage with people who come to a discussion with a sense of perspective.

I will absolutely listen to criticism of Harris, but not when that criticism is either invalid or comes from a position of hypocrisy.

MAGA is a cult. The democrats are not. This is exemplified by the fact that Biden was removed for the good of the party and to increase the chances of defeating Trump. Contrast that with trump going after anyone who dares criticise him and his zealots saying he can do no wrong.

If you can't see the difference between the two, you are either delusional or disingenuous.

why shouldn’t she? She’s her own person - and also if I didn’t like Biden for the last 4 years I’m voting 4 more years of Biden by voting Harris- that makes no sense - it’s very weak leadership - it’s an extremely very weak arguement for not voting for Trump - I expected more from her

Criticism of Kamala Harris is welcome. Indeed any valid and honest criticism of any politician is welcome. They, by the very nature of their position, are open to critical assessment. Which, of course, should be the case. However, absolutely none of the "criticism" that's been offered on this thread by certain quarters has either been valid or honest. It has, so far, merely consisted of cheap hyperbole and flimsy invective all delivered in a completely insincere manner.

haven’t a clue what you’re on about

There’s considerable doubt over Harris funding plans - it’s basically smoke and mirrors

“Harris was asked about how she’d pay for her economic plan in her “60 Minutes” interview on Monday, with correspondent Bill Whitaker noting that while she wants to make the richest Americans pay more taxes, “We’re dealing with the real world here.” Harris expressed optimism that Congress will be willing to pass her economic agenda, arguing, “When you talk quietly with a lot of folks in Congress, they know exactly what I'm talking about, 'cause their constituents know exactly what I'm talking about.” The vice president disagreed with Whitaker saying Congress “has shown no inclination” to back her economic plans, saying she knows “the limitations of government” and claiming, “There are plenty of leaders in Congress who understand and know that the Trump tax cuts blew up our federal deficit.””

And what’s this?

“BIG NUMBER

$3.5 trillion. That’s how much Harris’ economic plan would increase the federal deficit by through 2035, according to an estimate released Monday by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget—still far smaller than the $7.5 trillion Trump’s plan would cost. The organization noted its estimate is subject to a “wide range of uncertainty,” and actual figures could range anywhere from not having any impact on the deficit to costing $8.1 trillion at most.”

So, not $3.5 Trillion then

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2024/10/07/what-to-know-about-kamala-harris-economic-agenda-as-she-claims-congress-will-pay-for-it/

So, not $3.5 Trillion then

Not $7.5 Trillion then, either…

Ultimately how an revenue raising and spending proposal is structured will depend on the makeup of Congress, which will be decided in the election being held next month.

It's not clear what the 60 minutes interviewer was alluding to with his flippant "real world" remark, when Harris was talking about ensuring teachers etc. pay less of a tax rate than billionaires. Her platform discusses targeting unrealized capital gains.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/06/politics/capital-gains-tax-harris-tiktok/index.html

wonderful at last some debate - and I’m glad that we agree that neither figure is “the final figure” - because all I’ve been seen on this thread is how much Trump will cost vs Harris - now there’s clarity - neither figure may be accurate - which in reality means that no one knows - Trumps estimate could be completely realistic - Harris estimate could be completely unrealistic - I’m not going to argue for one figure over the other ax quite simply as we’ve seen and you agree - neither figure amounts to truth, reality or clarity - it’s all up for discussion debate and opinion .
wonderful !

Speaking of the cheese and pickle sandwich: 'undecided' Pro Palestinian voting bloc has decided what's for lunch (and it's not a 2nd Trump term)

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/08/us/politics/palestine-uncommitted-trump.html

[I]n the video, Ms. Zeidan, a Palestinian American, bluntly said a second term for former President Donald J. Trump would be worse than a Harris victory. She detailed how Mr. Trump tilted U.S. foreign policy strongly toward the Israeli government in his first term and floated plans that “effectively dismantled any pathway to Palestinian self-determination.”

The video takes particular aim at Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation blueprint for a Republican presidency that was crafted in part by allies of Mr. Trump, who has tried to distance itself from its proposals, which include eliminating humanitarian aid to Gaza and the West Bank while stifling pro-Palestinian protests at home. The video includes clips of David Friedman, Mr. Trump’s former ambassador to Israel, and Jared Kushner, his son-in-law, who have proposed expulsions from Gaza and annexation of the occupied territories by Israel. It also shows a top Trump donor, Miriam Adelson, promising that the former president would pursue the Israeli far right’s policy aims without regard to world opinion.

“It’s clear Netanyahu will be doing everything in his power to get Trump elected,” Ms. Zeidan concluded, referring to Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister. “And we have to do everything in our power to stop him.”

Uncommitted’s shift could be significant in a key swing state, Michigan, which has more than 300,000 residents of Middle Eastern or North African ancestry. Polling of those voters is scant, but anecdotal information indicates many are reluctant to vote for Ms. Harris, and some are shifting to third-party candidates like the Green Party’s Jill Stein.

If we assume Harris takes North Carolina (because of Mark Robinson's black nazi scandal) and now secures Michigan because Pro-Palestine and Muslim Americans there see her as the lesser of their 2 evils, then she wins the race with either Pennsylvania or Georgia. And Georgia just reinstated its 6 week abortion ban by judicial decree, and the SCOTUS also refused to hear an appeal of the Texas ban affecting health of women in emergency situations. So TX and FL could still be taken away from the GOP and we might see a historic landslide, and Georgia is the GOP's to lose as well.

4 weeks to go.

Good job he didn't send him the cure, drinking US bleach marked Covid medicine would not have gone down well.

How are you getting to people with 'barely a high school education' can't run a business successfully? And extrapolating that out to 'granting money to people that aren't capable of running a business?' It seems like such a weird tangent to go down, and nothing in her proposal targets business owner education levels. It feels like reaching for a criticism that simply isn't valid.

That said there is data to suggest anywhere from 10% to 25% of business owners have less than a college degree. And many more only got an associates or dropped out of college. This isn't therefore a precise measure of whether their business is successful or not. I can also attest some of the smartest engineers/owners I've worked with in industry never received any college education, and were taught in the trades, designing and making things up to and including ITAR-controlled components for nuclear reactors… and making a killing doing so. A piece of paper is not the arbiter of success.