• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is Harris Really Worth Voting For?

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
lol, are we talking about the guy who thought there were airports during revolutionary war, that injecting bleach cures covid, that windmills cause cancer, or that water stop magnets? Let's be serious.
Maybe Trump can consult Biden who actually talks to dead people and talks of experiences he never did.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Its funny that with anything about Harris you try to defend it with "but Trump".
You're aware, I hope, that there's an election coming up, and those two are the choices? Any discussion of either with regard to their qualifications to lead must be considered in the context of comparing it to the other.
This will reflect her administration and party if elected. Just watch. Harris will be leading the most secretive and hidden administration in American history and will be notably antipress and anti-interview keeping the American people in the dark will be their mainstay throughout her term if elected.
Is there any rightist propaganda you question? You've extrapolated Harris' not answering all questions to the satisfaction of people who you let think for you into something completely different that frankly wouldn't matter were it true.
Far more sharper than Biden that's for damn sure.
Far sharper, not far more sharper.
 
Last edited:

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
[Laughs] Those parties are always shut out from the process. The insane criminal candidates are your only options, you are only too complicit to see that.
There's no such nuance here. Trump is a narcissist and instinctive liar, he's a rapist, so found by a jury, and a convicted fraudster, his previous term was chaotic, his self-serving exercises of power were blatant, and his attempts to pervert the US Constitution by force, and by multiple fraudulent and baseless legal applications, and by attempting to suborn public officials, will live in infamy. On top of that, his little brain is decaying and at his age it won't get better.

It seriously matters to the US, including the US's role as leader of the free world, that he not be re-elected.

As a footnote, Harris doesn't qualify as an "insane criminal candidate" in any event.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
You've not seen any stolen elections? Oh, yes you have. Bush/Gore, Trump/Biden. Stolen elections are certainly nothing new and they've known the multiple reasons and methods of that for a long time. And done nothing. Why do you suppose that is? Bush was meant to win. Trump was meant to win. Biden was meant to win. Harris is meant to win. Bush for 911, Trump for Covid, Biden and Harris for no change. But they've underestimated.
You're confusing conflating stealing with chaotic
results due to metastability of a complex system.
Those elections weren't theft....they simply went
against the popular vote. USA doesn't use the
popular vote.

How do you discern who is "meant to win"?
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
I had the misfortune of turning on my radio this morning.
I heard coverage of the DNC convention.
No voice for Palestinians allowed.
Harris parroted the Biden lament about misery in Gaza.
Harris parroted the Biden code phrase for allowing the
genocide to continue...."Israel has the right to self defense".
Both advocate widespread price controls.
Both favor government seizing private assets.

It's beginning to appear that she's just a clone of Biden.
But a DEI version. (They repeatedly make a big deal about
her sex & race....& how presidential her pantsuits are.)
IMOP this portrays the situation well.

MSN

Opinion: Kamala’s moment: The pantsuit is truly empty​

Opinion by Derek Hunter, Opinion Contributor

When Joe Biden picked Kamala Harris as his running mate four years ago, he said he did so because she could assume the office “on day one.” More than 30 days after becoming the presumptive nominee, Harris still does not seem ready to be the Democratic Party’s nominee, let alone president. She is an empty pantsuit, basking in the glow of positive media coverage and unburdened by accountability.


Her acceptance speech confirmed that.

Harris has now officially accepted the Democratic Party’s nomination. Her nomination was “historic,” as liberals like to say, but not because of her ethnicity. Rather, she is the first nominee of either party who did not have to secure a single delegate or a single vote in the primaries. She is “historic” in that it is highly unlikely that she could have secured that nomination had there been any sort of competition for the job.

In keeping with how she got the nomination, her acceptance speech was all sizzle and no steak. It will be billed as containing her “vision” for America, but it contained no such thing. It wasn’t much different from the stump speech she’s been reading off the teleprompter since Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Democratic Party power elite knifed Biden last month and tossed his body into the dumpster earlier this week.


Kamala came from humble beginnings; she repeated them, as if the circumstances of anyone’s birth could be an accomplishment. She was born in Oakland, Calif., which sounds pretty rough nowadays thanks to its misgovernment, but she was actually the child of two college professors, not manual laborers or blue-collar workers. Raised on the “mean streets” of Berkeley, and Montreal, Canada, she was not some underprivileged child or hard-luck story.

The biographical part of her speech was spent reshaping standard information into applause lines. Her introductory video talked about her time on various Senate Committees, questioning witnesses about issues near and dear to the left. What it didn’t contain was any accomplishments.

In her brief time in the Senate, Harris authored zero bills that became law. The crowd didn’t care. Its sustained standing ovation took the place of a resume. Existence as accomplishment is something speakers do only when they lack actual accomplishments. This was why Harris’s speech ran flat.


The night was more about vibes than anything else. The crowd cheered like it was their job, because it was their job. They’re partisans bent on selling her candidacy. That’s what they did.

As for what Harris would do as president, your guess remains as good as mine. She has given us no vision to talk about. There was nothing new in the speech, and nothing specific. It’s difficult to fight a cloud. You can see it coming, but there’s really nothing to it.

When it came to policy, the speech consisted of multiple word salads. She’s against this, in favor of that and will make everything better somehow, the “somehow” part being key. How she will pay for her laundry list of promises is unknown. For example, she just promised to make everything more affordable and to fight inflation through price controls that almost certainly cannot be executed and won’t work in any case. Say what you will about Trump’s wall or Obama’s health care plan, but they were both actual proposals. Neither of their promises were so inane or inconsequential.


For a big speech, this one was also devoid of urgency or earnestness. Her price controls discussion began and ended with her denunciation of “corporate greed.” She never even bothered to define what that means.

The only things for certain is she loves abortion and hates Donald Trump, whom she falsely claimed wants to jail political opponents and journalists.

She said she “grew up immersed in the ideals of the Civil Rights Movement.” She didn’t explain what this word salad meant, but the truth is that she was born in 1964. She almost certainly has no memories before 1970.

It was just one empty line in a very empty speech. “We are all in this together” is a great bumper sticker, but it’s meaningless when you view people as parts of separate groups based on their skin color, sexual orientation or whatever other ways you can divide and conquer voters based on irrelevant demographic characteristics.


After four days of speeches, I have no clearer an idea of what Harris would do as president than I did beforehand. I have no idea why, if she has all these wonderful ideas to “fix” the nation’s problems, she has sat by as vice president and let things get so bad during the last three years and seven months.

Kamala Harris’s resume is a mostly blank page. Her time in the Senate was mostly spent grandstanding for the cameras in committee hearings with meaningless lines of questioning from which nothing substantial resulted. Her tenure as vice president might as well not have happened, if you just listened to the speeches at the Democratic convention. In fact, her participation in Biden’s hugely unpopular administration was quite deliberately buried in the midnight time slot on Monday along with Biden. And she treated your desire to change the nation’s direction as if it were a character flaw on your part.


The many fawning speakers, the positively glowing press coverage and so many unquestioned assertions; At the end of it all, the only thing you can say for sure about what Harris believes is that she should be president, and she’ll say literally anything to get there. She will renounce all of her past positions if that’s what it will take.

What she’d do on that job is entirely a matter of speculation. Her unwillingness to tell people either means that she doesn’t know or she doesn’t want us to know. Neither option is good.

Derek Hunter is host of the Derek Hunter Podcast and a former staffer for the late Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.).


 

Colt

Well-Known Member
Her new image is "Freedom".
Yet she advocates a more powerful government,
able to dictate our prices, & confiscate our assets.
Oh, & perpetuating the genocide we pay for in Gaza.
Harris is an EXTREEME Leftist, that hasn't changed! She can't say what she believes about the Israel-Palestinian conflict.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
All of the prizes ones will be British.....of course.
Nah, by the 1830s, the New England area
was becoming the precision machining
center of the world. We'd overcome the
British embargo against importing their
machinists. Interesting history there.
Well....interesting to a very small abnormal
group of geezers.
I've a good mind to go to our Parliament with a placard announcing 'Revolting's got our heritage!'
Woohoo!
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
IMOP this portrays the situation well.

MSN

Opinion: Kamala’s moment: The pantsuit is truly empty​

Opinion by Derek Hunter, Opinion Contributor

When Joe Biden picked Kamala Harris as his running mate four years ago, he said he did so because she could assume the office “on day one.” More than 30 days after becoming the presumptive nominee, Harris still does not seem ready to be the Democratic Party’s nominee, let alone president. She is an empty pantsuit, basking in the glow of positive media coverage and unburdened by accountability.


Her acceptance speech confirmed that.

Harris has now officially accepted the Democratic Party’s nomination. Her nomination was “historic,” as liberals like to say, but not because of her ethnicity. Rather, she is the first nominee of either party who did not have to secure a single delegate or a single vote in the primaries. She is “historic” in that it is highly unlikely that she could have secured that nomination had there been any sort of competition for the job.

In keeping with how she got the nomination, her acceptance speech was all sizzle and no steak. It will be billed as containing her “vision” for America, but it contained no such thing. It wasn’t much different from the stump speech she’s been reading off the teleprompter since Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Democratic Party power elite knifed Biden last month and tossed his body into the dumpster earlier this week.


Kamala came from humble beginnings; she repeated them, as if the circumstances of anyone’s birth could be an accomplishment. She was born in Oakland, Calif., which sounds pretty rough nowadays thanks to its misgovernment, but she was actually the child of two college professors, not manual laborers or blue-collar workers. Raised on the “mean streets” of Berkeley, and Montreal, Canada, she was not some underprivileged child or hard-luck story.

The biographical part of her speech was spent reshaping standard information into applause lines. Her introductory video talked about her time on various Senate Committees, questioning witnesses about issues near and dear to the left. What it didn’t contain was any accomplishments.

In her brief time in the Senate, Harris authored zero bills that became law. The crowd didn’t care. Its sustained standing ovation took the place of a resume. Existence as accomplishment is something speakers do only when they lack actual accomplishments. This was why Harris’s speech ran flat.


The night was more about vibes than anything else. The crowd cheered like it was their job, because it was their job. They’re partisans bent on selling her candidacy. That’s what they did.

As for what Harris would do as president, your guess remains as good as mine. She has given us no vision to talk about. There was nothing new in the speech, and nothing specific. It’s difficult to fight a cloud. You can see it coming, but there’s really nothing to it.

When it came to policy, the speech consisted of multiple word salads. She’s against this, in favor of that and will make everything better somehow, the “somehow” part being key. How she will pay for her laundry list of promises is unknown. For example, she just promised to make everything more affordable and to fight inflation through price controls that almost certainly cannot be executed and won’t work in any case. Say what you will about Trump’s wall or Obama’s health care plan, but they were both actual proposals. Neither of their promises were so inane or inconsequential.


For a big speech, this one was also devoid of urgency or earnestness. Her price controls discussion began and ended with her denunciation of “corporate greed.” She never even bothered to define what that means.

The only things for certain is she loves abortion and hates Donald Trump, whom she falsely claimed wants to jail political opponents and journalists.

She said she “grew up immersed in the ideals of the Civil Rights Movement.” She didn’t explain what this word salad meant, but the truth is that she was born in 1964. She almost certainly has no memories before 1970.

It was just one empty line in a very empty speech. “We are all in this together” is a great bumper sticker, but it’s meaningless when you view people as parts of separate groups based on their skin color, sexual orientation or whatever other ways you can divide and conquer voters based on irrelevant demographic characteristics.


After four days of speeches, I have no clearer an idea of what Harris would do as president than I did beforehand. I have no idea why, if she has all these wonderful ideas to “fix” the nation’s problems, she has sat by as vice president and let things get so bad during the last three years and seven months.

Kamala Harris’s resume is a mostly blank page. Her time in the Senate was mostly spent grandstanding for the cameras in committee hearings with meaningless lines of questioning from which nothing substantial resulted. Her tenure as vice president might as well not have happened, if you just listened to the speeches at the Democratic convention. In fact, her participation in Biden’s hugely unpopular administration was quite deliberately buried in the midnight time slot on Monday along with Biden. And she treated your desire to change the nation’s direction as if it were a character flaw on your part.


The many fawning speakers, the positively glowing press coverage and so many unquestioned assertions; At the end of it all, the only thing you can say for sure about what Harris believes is that she should be president, and she’ll say literally anything to get there. She will renounce all of her past positions if that’s what it will take.

What she’d do on that job is entirely a matter of speculation. Her unwillingness to tell people either means that she doesn’t know or she doesn’t want us to know. Neither option is good.

Derek Hunter is host of the Derek Hunter Podcast and a former staffer for the late Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.).
Wow! Long post!
I'll just say that I find pantsuits to be a great choice.
I've always thought that dresses looked strange &
uncomfortable.....with too much flesh showing.
Pantsuits look practical & comfortable.
I approve of her sartorial style.

BTW, the great thing about her pantsuits is that
they're empty....empty of treasonous rapists.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Harris is an EXTREEME Leftist, that hasn't changed! She can't say what she believes about the Israel-Palestinian conflict.
Both candidates are extreme...just in different ways.
Don't forget that attempting a coup that resulted
in guards dying, & raping women is also extreme.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
Oh, yeah – “Trump is a business man, so doesn’t he know what he's talking about?" No, he isn't and no, he doesn't.

Look how his bankruptcies have crushed small businesses and the men and women who worked for them, He inherited his business; he didn't create it. Whatever happened to Trump Airlines? How about Trump University? And then there's Trump Magazine and Trump Vodka and Trump Steaks and Trump Mortgage! Where are they?

A business genius he is not.

Never said he is a genius. Said he is a business man which he is. Learn to read.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
You're aware, I hope, that there's an election coming up, and those two are the choices?
Really? When did this start :rolleyes:
Any discussion of either with regard to their qualifications to lead must be considered in the context of comparing it to the other.
When did magazines and shoes count for discussions for their qualifications?

Discussions of qualifications for either are as rare as bigfoot.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Just heard on NPR Harris saying that
being American is a "privilege".
Dang....I thought that my citizenship
was more than a privilege. It's my right.
 
Top