• 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!

New York Times endorses Harris as ‘the only choice’ for president

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
Why, do you think Trump will retaliate against the free press if he is elected?
Trump will understand that the NYT had to bow to the pressure, since law fare would be used against them. It is not free press when you carry the water for the swamp, under threat or bribe. This endorsement will not matter, since they do not reach beyond their own biased base. Harris needs undecided votes and this last minute change of the NYT, from impartial observer, to DNC advocate, will show the undecided, why the swamp needs to lose. We can to clean house and return to a free press. Bezos is sticking to his guns.

What I think should happen is freedom of the press should be limited to impartial news; facts and not opinions, lies and propaganda. If you do too much lying, with no statute of limitations to get caught, you lose your press credentials. You still retain freedom of speech, but can no longer pose as part of the press, running con jobs under that disguise. Loss of press credential means loss of its many legal protections. That would mess up the DNC propaganda wing, and help unify the country with a higher press standard.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
All I asked is what Kamala's restrictions are. What are they?
See, this is forgetting that every human being that ever lived is unique -- and every medical situation is likewise unique. One of the most foolish things law-makers can do -- and something you are trying to do right now -- is lay out the simple "rules" that will cover evern single unique situationg forevermore. Humans tie themselves into knots trying to do that -- and seem unable to ever learn from their mistakes.

So, Donald Trump claims that Democrats allow abortion even after birth. This is, I hope even you can figure out, sheerest nonsense. There is a law for that already -- it's called murder. On the other hand, what is your recommendation for 18 hours before birth, when it becomes completely clear to doctors in the delivery room that the birth will kill both baby and mother? Do you say, "too late, hands-off, let nature take its course?" Or do you say, "if we can save one of them, then we should?"

There you go, Solomon. Choose wisely.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Harris has explained nothing to anybody. That's why she is going to be fired in less then two weeks.
Do you believe Trump has fully explained his many claims?

I judge both Trump & Harris by the same standard....
Both make unsupported promises. This isn't significant.
During a campaign, this is commonly done because
the public won't read much more than one sentence,
preferring brief sound bites. Naturally, candidates
cater to this lowest common denominator
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
About time. Talk about an 11th-hour choice. But at least they got there eventually.
That decision could well have been motivated by Trump's racist tirade at MSG. Not much has moved the needle for a few weeks, but that high-profile rally might actually be something that affects the outcome of the election favorably for Harris. Was this our October surprise? And if so, who benefits more from it?

Immediately after the Puerto Rico insult, three big Puerto Rican names - Bad Bunny, Jennifer Lopez and Ricky Martin - also endorsed Harris. Harris was already going to get most of the Puerto Rican vote, since the highest concentration of Puerto Ricans abroad is found in New York, which is solidly blue, but all Hispanic people are apt to recognize that it's not just the Puerto Ricans that MAGA consider garbage.

Florida also has a lot of Puerto Ricans, and that state is solidly red at the presidential level, but they've got a Republican senator (Rick Scott) fighting for reelection in a fairly close race (Scott was up by 3 points before this MSG stunt), so this may cost the Republicans that Senate seat.

It was an interesting strategy on the part of the Trump campaign to go full-throated racist in the home stretch of the campaign, and to do so in a blue state not up for grabs. It seems like it was hoped that this would motivate people who mildly preferred Trump and who weren't all that motivated to vote would be energized to get out and vote for such racism because it was so in-your-face, and that that would appeal to them.

That's quite a gamble, since it is fairly likely that such ugly extremism is off-putting even to Trump-leaning potential voters. The kind of bigot that would be attracted by such rhetoric is already strongly motivated to vote for Trump.

Trump voters aren't going to become Harris voters whatever either of them does, but what can happen is that more or fewer who prefer one candidate over the other get out and vote because of this stunt. Consider all of the people who don't consume political news who have heard Trump called racist, but don't know whether to believe that. These headlines, which have gotten widespread coverage on shows like Good Morning America with largely apolitical audiences, help answer that. Trump has directly confirmed that narrative by having a featured speaker hurling racist insults at Trump’s highest profile rally of the election, comments the campaign has tried to walk back, but not Trump himself.

This might cause some would-be Trump voters to stay home, and it may motivate a lot of Latinos and blacks including the men, who seem to be suspicious of a woman leader and more reluctant to vote for Harris than their sisters, wives, and daughters, to either not vote for Trump if that were the plan or motivate them to get out and vote for the woman candidate given how Trump has so visibly and unabashedly trashed these men as well.
 

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
Several of us, on numerous occasions, have articulated a great deal of Harris's platform. And then there are those who refuse to even look at them, because they fear the "temptation of the devil." It's a great way to remain ignorant.

I guess @Twilight Hue will get the message mid-next week, and won't like it. In 80 years, if the markets have been up for the 6 months leading up to the election, the party in power wins. That goes to Democrats. A new poll by YouGov, of nearly 49,000 likely voters (that's a HUGE poll), gives Harris 4 points: 51 to 47. That goes to Harris. Nobody who can't get above 47% in polls wins. That goes to Harris.

I'm guessing @Twilight Hue will be moving on, after it's over and done with, to trying to prove the Democrats called on the Invisible Pink Unicorn to stuff ballot boxes, or some other such nonsense. Because admitting loss is going to be as hard for him as it will be for Trump.
The problem is Harris should be the one articulating her platform to show she knows it, has a good handle on the issues, and that she is not just a puppet being propped up by a liberal army who all speak for her; tada tot queen. You probably know "her platform", better than her. She does not discuss it nor go into the weeds. She demonstrates no knowledge of it.

She comes across as a rubber stamp and placeholder, for others who tell her what to do and say. Who is in charge behind the scenes? Who will be the real president in terms do power, without ever being elected? It is a Obama, Hillary, Pelosi triad plus some American and EU Oligarchs; Soros. At least with Trump, he knows his stuff, and you know he will be in charge, and not a puppet or rubber stamp. Ee do not know when it comes to Harris who does not seem to know her stuff.

One way to find out who is the puppet master, for Harris, is to reverse engineer by asking who made out the best over the past 4 years even though most of the America people suffered. We follow the money. Did Obama lose money or gain money? We know Pelosi did some insider trading with green energy stocks and made a fortune. That was made possible by causing oil price to rise, which caused inflation, since the entire supply chain got more expensive, causing all prices to soar. It made green energy look better on paper; stocks, so some made out like a bandit, by this action, that hurt a lot of people.

Gasoline at $2/gallon made green energy stocks worthless. The Biden and Harris Government interfered and through regulations double the price of gasoline to to stack the deck for green energy insider trading. The Chamber of Commerce benefits by illegal immigration; cheap labor, with the tax payer forced to foot the bill; welfare, schools, housing, etc. This means kickbacks to the DNC. We may need to send the Chamber of Commerce the bill. The tax payer gets no benefit, just the liability. Four more years of the Harris Puppet will harm everyone except the rich and greedy.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
he problem is Harris should be the one articulating her platform to show she knows it, has a good handle on the issues
And how the heck do you think we know her platform “better than she does?” Because we did what you refuse to – or pretend you haven’t: we listen to her articulate it.

And what's Trump's platform? Huh? I've asked the simplest question several times here, and do you know how many answers I've got from all the folks who think Trump is the next-best-thing to God? Precisely ZERO.

So, I’ll give you another chance: Trump's first platform promise out of his own mouth at MSG was: "I will end inflation on day one!" Does he say how he's going to do that? Because a "magic wand" isn't a political platform you know. They no longer work, the fairy dust or whatever they use has all dried up. So, you like to type long screeds -- explain how on January 21 inflation will no longer exist if Trump is elected.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
Nope but the Times will take a massive hit to their reputation for endorsing Harris as president who has to this day offered not a single thing at the table aside from meaningless word salads and repeated memorized lines over and over without adequately answering and explaining any questions in detail people have asked her.
Yeah. At least Trump is exposing the pet-eating Haiti immigrants and expressing his admiration for dictators. :shrug:
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
Nonsense. Be serious, brother. Do you really think Putin - who can barely hold onto the eastern 1/3 of Ukraine - is somehow going to march into the rest of Europe? He is surrounded by members of NATO. He knows war againt NATO would be suicide. Ukraine is a corrupt former Soviet state, not in NATO. I find it insane that we are using that country as a geopolitical pawn.
Newsflash.

The reason he can barely hold on to eastern ukraine......................................... is billions worth of help to ukraine from the west.

Funny, how that works, ey?

Without that support, Ukraine is overrun in a matter of weeks.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Nope but the Times will take a massive hit to their reputation for endorsing Harris as president who has to this day offered not a single thing at the table aside from meaningless word salads and repeated memorized lines over and over without adequately answering and explaining any questions in detail people have asked her.
You've just perfectly described Trump. Amazing.

When should we believe the words Trump literally keeps saying, exactly? I thought he spoke his mind and means what he says. Now you're telling us we can't believe the literal words that come out of his mouth.
 

Regiomontanus

Eastern Orthodox
Are you completely unfamiliar with U.S. foreign policy over the last 75 years?

Quite the opposite; that is why I say our empire needs to end. Enough our being the global police force and bending other countries to the will of the corporations that hold the real power here.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
And what's Trump's platform? Huh? I've asked the simplest question several times here, and do you know how many answers I've got from all the folks who think Trump is the next-best-thing to God? Precisely ZERO.
As you imply, Trump has no platform apart from imposing tariffs, which is likely at the behest of large American manufacturing concerns, who benefit by being able to raise their prices, this not his idea.

If a foreign car is $50,000 and a competitive American car sells for $45,000, if the price of the foreign car increases 100% (or even 60%), the American manufacturer can impose the same "tariff" on consumers of domestic products.

Not a platform, but Trump has an agenda - to acquire absolute power by any means he can including lying and election tampering, and if elected, pillage the treasury, avoid criminal consequences, persecute immigrants to offer the rabble who support his racism raw meat, and exact revenge on perceived enemies by weaponizing the Justice Department.
Trump's first platform promise out of his own mouth at MSG was: "I will end inflation on day one!" Does he say how he's going to do that? Because a "magic wand" isn't a political platform you know.
Agreed. A promise, but not a platform policy.

Trump also promises to rid the cities of imagined vermin beginning day one.

This is as simplistic as it can be: make the issues inflation and immigrant crime and promise to fix them on day one. He doesn't need to say more and he can't say more. He knows nothing. He has expertise in nothing but grifting and gaslighting.

But that's enough for his knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing sycophants, who require no more and would understand no more anyway.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
I actually think the economy is a top priority the border is definitely second according to what I understand about it. The economic impact of bringing in millions and millions of people into this country is undeniable. It's a massive shock to the system.
What do you think will be the ecomomic impact of mass deporting millions of people all at once?
Has any MAGA ever thought about that for like, one second?

 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Except that as usual you have it backwards. Trump is the one that has backed out of interviews recently, not Harris. Trump was too afraid to have a second debate since he lost the first one so badly. He would not go on 60 Minutes because they would not give him the questions ahead of time. Harris is the one that has give out some details of her health care that she proposes. Trump only has "concepts of a plan" and he does not tell us what those supposed concepts are.

It is amazing that everything that you complain about Harris supposedly being guilty of Trump is ten times more guilty of doing that.
Almost everything coming out of the Trump/MAGA camp is projection.
 
Top