Re: The US Politics Thread

[Vibe]

KH: "Donald Trump doesn't care about border security, he only cares about himself. But when I'm the president, I will work to actually solve the problem"

Thunderous applause

Is the VP right now, directly in charge of border security Opened the borders to anyone and everyone.

Ffs.

[Vibe]

Why do I even care tbh.

I keep getting blindsided by human stupidity despite being well aware of it's magnitude.

[Arquitecto]

Willing to hear an argument about how opening the border to anyone and anyone, is beneficial and if its a BS argument about that borders should not exist every has the right to etc that will be ignored.

[Pedram]

#Updated Electoral Map Based on @MorningConsult

Harris 284
Trump 254

____
Polymarket Odds https://t.co/X95VbfTk9R pic.twitter.com/uDFfIKf3Ro

— Political Polls (@PpollingNumbers) July 31, 2024

[Pedram]

Trump fans in this thread, this is who you are supporting.

He has nothing to offer, just pure racial attacks and dogwhistles.

[Myesyats]

You keep boxing people into teams, just because someone thinks that Kamala has nothing of substance to say doesnt mean they're automatically a 'Trump fan'

Trump is an awful person, a grifter and possibly a pedo but that doesnt make Kamala qualified either

Not sure why you care either, regardless who is president they will support israel. They say one thing and do another. Kamala will express concern for the people of Gaza but keep sending weapons anyway. That is a geopolitical interest of the US that is beyond any particular president

[Pedram]

Not sure why you care either, regardless who is president they will support israel. They say one thing and do another. Kamala will express concern for the people of Gaza but keep sending weapons anyway. That is a geopolitical interest of the US that is beyond any particular president

Not sure why you think i have a ulterior motive?

Yes Trump is obviously worse for the world and will give Israel a blank check to continue their massacre. i'm under no illusion that Democrats are any different on that issue but it's about harm reduction, who will cause less damage is what matters in my opinion.

Like this whole conflict could be pin-pointed to his Abraham Accord, moving the embassy to Jerusalem, his son in-law signing a $2b deal with the Saudis, killing a top Iranian general nearly causing a war between two countries.

So i'm sorry if i can't take this argument seriously that Republicans are better at managing conflicts abroad, history has shown they are more likely to enflame them rather than end them. Democrats while, they are no peace-niks, are at least not entirely opposed to diplomatic solutions.

While Trump himself might sound like he is opposed to wars, people close to him are some of the blood-thirstiest people on the planet Earth. i'm talking about the neocons who never saw a war that they didn't like like. guys like John Bolton, Lindsey Graham, Nikky Haley etc etc, you get the picture. these people will be in his administation and they will shape him toward endless conflicts, so it doesn't matter what he says on the campaign trail, it's a party policy and he will abide by them.

[Vibe]

Trump fans in this thread, this is who you are supporting.

He has nothing to offer, just pure racial attacks and dogwhistles.

I actually watched this, what a fake title

The interview was a total setup, a lot of hostility from the host but Trump calmly dismantled her.

[Vibe]

Trump fans in this thread, this is who you are supporting.

He has nothing to offer, just pure racial attacks and dogwhistles.

I actually watched this, what a fake title

The interview was a total setup, a lot of hostility from the host but Trump calmly dismantled her.

ABC's Rachel Scott opens her interview with President Trump at the NABJ conference by calling him a racist for criticizing black politicians and journalists.

Trump gives a masterful response while also mentioning how he showed up while Kamala Harris did not. pic.twitter.com/AeMGH0D87I

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) July 31, 2024

[Myesyats]

Not sure why you care either, regardless who is president they will support israel. They say one thing and do another. Kamala will express concern for the people of Gaza but keep sending weapons anyway. That is a geopolitical interest of the US that is beyond any particular president

Not sure why you think i have a ulterior motive?

Yes Trump is obviously worse for the world and will give Israel a blank check to continue their massacre. i'm under no illusion that Democrats are any different on that issue but it's about harm reduction, who will cause less damage is what matters in my opinion.

Like this whole conflict could be pin-pointed to his Abraham Accord, moving the embassy to Jerusalem, his son in-law signing a $2b deal with the Saudis, killing a top Iranian general nearly causing a war between two countries.

So i'm sorry if i can't take this argument seriously that Republicans are better at managing conflicts abroad, history has shown they are more likely to enflame them rather than end them. Democrats while, they are no peace-niks, are at least not entirely opposed to diplomatic solutions.

While Trump himself might sound like he is opposed to wars, people close to him are some of the blood-thirstiest people on the planet Earth. i'm talking about the neocons who never saw a war that they didn't like like. guys like John Bolton, Lindsey Graham, Nikky Haley etc etc, you get the picture. these people will be in his administation and they will shape him toward endless conflicts, so it doesn't matter what he says on the campaign trail, it's a party policy and he will abide by them.

They create an illusion to make it seem like their policy differs but fundamentally American interests remain the same for decades, especially when it comes to foreign policy

It's true that Dem administrations were more willing to find diplomatic solutions though, i won't deny that. I am skeptical of their intentions though

[Myesyats]

ABC's Rachel Scott opens her interview with President Trump at the NABJ conference by calling him a racist for criticizing black politicians and journalists.

Trump gives a masterful response while also mentioning how he showed up while Kamala Harris did not. pic.twitter.com/AeMGH0D87I

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) July 31, 2024

Yeah I don't like trump but the headlines are always sensationalized and the interviewer is unnecessarily combative in order to elicit a reaction. Having watched the interview its a far cry from what media would like it to be.

A lot of people vote for trump despite him being a terrible person when they see such a campaign from the media.

[Vibe]

Precisely.

I always thought Trump was a ridiculous figure.

What got me interested is the fact that the democrats have weaponized every single asset against him. The media, the institutions, the entire establishment. It's been going on for almost a decade now.

This would destroy any single man a long time ago, especially today when being cancelled has become so easy, so how is he still standing there swinging is beyond me. So much that I've started to be on his side, ever since they started doing it with Clinton.

When I look at myself, my upbringing, the life I live, the things I believe in, I should be well on the left. But the current generation of democrats is so disgusting, the worst I've seen in politics. And I've seen shit, being from where I am.

Trump is well ahead in any reasonable election, but I'm certain dems have the ability to steal at least 10% from Trump and give it to Harris. Trump has to win by a lot to become president.

Will be difficult now. It is also important that if Trump wins, Trump will be president. When Harris was selected, do you think they called her into a room and told her - Kamala, we chose you to be our leader and guide us as president in the future?

I'm pretty sure that is not the case. She will have no authority or any autonomy, just like Biden had none. Unfortunately he had to go completely senile for Americans to realize, and they had to replace the puppet hanging from their strings. The guys that want criminals to come into your country unchecked and cut off your children's genitals without your knowledge or approval will be president. And that frightens me.

[McLewis]

KH: "Donald Trump doesn't care about border security, he only cares about himself. But when I'm the president, I will work to actually solve the problem"

Thunderous applause

Is the VP right now, directly in charge of border security Opened the borders to anyone and everyone.

Ffs.

The VP is not in charge of border security and never has been. There is no such thing as a "Border czar" as rightwing media calls her.

The Department of Homeland Security is responsible for Border security and it's leader, the Secretary, sits on Biden's cabinet.

[Vibe]

Biden literally said, on live TV, that Kamala Harris in charge of the border.

[Vibe]

I remember her press conference or something from back then, where she told the migrants "Do not come, do not come"

I remember mainly because of the memes

[Myesyats]

Thats true Vibe, "a key asssignment for VP Harris"

[Thimmy]

Like Mystats, I've never been a big fan of Trump as a person. My impression of him as a businessman, prior to him becoming president, was that he was a charming, but rather shady character who likely has more than his fair share of skeletons in the closet. And that opinion hasn't changed since he became president and some of his scandals were revealed to the public.

But I imagine that applies to all of these candidates. They all seem to be flawed, dishonest people who will tell their camps exactly what they want to hear. I also watched the NABJ conference, and I don't think Trump said anything wrong in that interview.

He questioned whether Harris is indian or black, which is now leading to controversy in a lot of media outlets, including the ones here in Norway. we only know what we read about the political situation in the US, and no one seems to be willing to, or capable of reporting on it from a neutral, level-headed point of view.  

I recall Harris being commonly described as a woman of indian heritage in international media before she started talking about supposedly having grown up with racial discrimination. In retrospect, those assumptions by the media seem about as controversial as what Trump's being accused of being right now. I can't confirm whether or not it's true that she did grow up with discrimination or racial tension, but it certainly made her fit right into the race hero role that was expected of her, which benefits her campaign more than anything else she could possibly do.

Up until recently, she did not seem to be a very popular figure in American politics, but she's donning her hero cape as a potential presidential candidate now, and suddenly everything has changed.

She's opportunistically describing said interview as an indication of why "America deserves better" than Trump, which I personally think she could have handled more gracefully, but this is clearly all about agendas and dividing the voters, moreso than shedding light on what these two candidates will actually bring to the table if they win the election. And it works incredibly well.

I can't help but find it comical how this, yet again, is becoming another good vs evil, black vs white showdown in the eyes of us, spectators, and American voters in particular. And I imagine none of us will be surprised if future candidates are the same.

Rincon once suggested, rather arrogantly in my opinion, that Norway and Sweden should look to how the US has handled mass immigration, as an example of how to successfully integrate and run a country that's largely multicultural, when we were discussing rising crime rates among the youth in immigration dense areas of Norway and Sweden. I'm not sure exactly what he was referring to when he said that, but I can't imagine there's a single country in the world that would want to find inspiration in this never-ending shit show spectacle of race centrism and smoke and mirrors that's occurring in the US. We will find our own solutions

[BarcaLearning]

Can I just ask u guys in general how was Obama as a president n person? From what I can tell he was the 'best' in the past few decades? He seemed so much more genuine n classy compared to what I have seen with the likes of Bush n these clowns today? Would love to see ur opinions... n sorry if Ive asked this somewhere b4?

Vibe - what do u mean by Trump has to win by a large margin to become president beocs Democrats can steal 10% from him?

[Arquitecto]

To sum it up:

Bad president
Great person

[McLewis]

Biden literally said, on live TV, that Kamala Harris in charge of the border.

Biden also called her VP Donald Trump .

[McLewis]

Thats true Vibe, "a key asssignment for VP Harris"

I'm going to say it again:

No VP in history has ever been "assigned" securing our border. None. What I saw in that press conference is Biden attempting to delegate the issue of the border to his VP, yet all that means in practice is that DHS loops her in on the actions they're taking at the border. She has no official authority over any border official. That doesn't mean they won't show her the due deference her office demands, but legally speaking this "delegation" is essentially nominal.

As with all right-wing politics when it comes to this particular administration, it's kabuki theater.

[BarcaLearning]

So how was Obama bad president? He came in at the financial crisis right, did it affect his job in making it harder or that just an excuse?

At least hearing ppl appreciating him as a person, although prolly not that important if cant do a good job

[Myesyats]

I'm going to say it again:

No VP in history has ever been "assigned" securing our border. None. What I saw in that press conference is Biden attempting to delegate the issue of the border to his VP, yet all that means in practice is that DHS loops her in on the actions they're taking at the border. She has no official authority over any border official. That doesn't mean they won't show her the due deference her office demands, but legally speaking this "delegation" is essentially nominal.

As with all right-wing politics when it comes to this particular administration, it's kabuki theater.

That is just bickering over technicalities. The management of the DHS is still appointed by the president and I'm sure Kamala, while legally not responsible for it, still has a finger in this pie as certainly she had Biden's ear on this matter. She is part of this administration and can't distance herself from its policy like that

[elitedam]

How about the bipartisan bill that would beef up border security that Trump torpedoed so that immigration would remain a campaign issue?

Also, and I don't understand why we keep having to repeat this, Trump tried to overthrow the fucking government. It's not good versus evil. It's regular, flawed human beings against an authoritarian piece of shit.

[McLewis]

I'm going to say it again:

No VP in history has ever been "assigned" securing our border. None. What I saw in that press conference is Biden attempting to delegate the issue of the border to his VP, yet all that means in practice is that DHS loops her in on the actions they're taking at the border. She has no official authority over any border official. That doesn't mean they won't show her the due deference her office demands, but legally speaking this "delegation" is essentially nominal.

As with all right-wing politics when it comes to this particular administration, it's kabuki theater.

That is just bickering over technicalities. The management of the DHS is still appointed by the president and I'm sure Kamala, while legally not responsible for it, still has a finger in this pie as certainly she had Biden's ear on this matter. She is part of this administration and can't distance herself from its policy like that

I prefer the term "facts". They are inconvenient, pesky things when one is trying to build a counter-narrative.

The reality is that you're correct in that VP Harris will have to deal with this admin's border policies, despite having no real authority on the matter. She knows that and so does her team.

Ultimately what it comes down to is that MAGA has never cared about facts. They understand, at a much deeper level than the left, that politics is perception. Control perception and one can control political reality. So if they can successfully control the perception that VP Harris is this "Border Czar" and that all illegal immigration is her fault, the facts that debunk that won't matter. Low information voters don't tend to be critical thinkers on topics of this nature.

This is essentially the 2016 playbook.

[Pedram]

I'm going to say it again:

No VP in history has ever been "assigned" securing our border. None. What I saw in that press conference is Biden attempting to delegate the issue of the border to his VP, yet all that means in practice is that DHS loops her in on the actions they're taking at the border. She has no official authority over any border official. That doesn't mean they won't show her the due deference her office demands, but legally speaking this "delegation" is essentially nominal.

As with all right-wing politics when it comes to this particular administration, it's kabuki theater.

That is just bickering over technicalities. The management of the DHS is still appointed by the president and I'm sure Kamala, while legally not responsible for it, still has a finger in this pie as certainly she had Biden's ear on this matter. She is part of this administration and can't distance herself from its policy like that

They understand, at a much deeper level than the left, that politics is perception. Control perception and one can control political reality. So if they can successfully control the perception that VP Harris is this "Border Czar" and that all illegal immigration is her fault, the facts that debunk that won't matter.

Ditto McLewis

[Sponsored content]