Trump is losing the debate acting like a raving lunatic

[PureX]

Has anyone read Project 2025 or is everyone depending on fake news for bogeyman trick or treats? It is 920 pages. I doubt the whole thing is bogeyman. I have not read it, since it is more think tank minutia and legal talk.

From what I understand, it I about streamlining government to make it a lean, mean, governing machine.

Yes, and this is where it runs off the rails right from the start, for me.

Whenever I hear cries for "smaller government" I know that what I am actually hearing are cries for weaker and even less effective government. And those cries are inevitably coming form people that want to abuse the power vacuum that will result, for their own gain. ... Corporations that want to pollute the Earth and bilk the public with impunity, and zero interference. Ideological extremists that want to force all humanity to live by their ideals. Criminals and bully-boys that just want to rape, rob, and pillage because their minds and hearts are poisoned by blood-lust. All people that genuinely dislike their fellow humans and see them as fodder for whatever form of abuse they feel inclined to meet out.

It is like starting with an over weight person with relative medical problem and trimming them back to health. Many things need to be done. The Government is set up for unions jobs to keeps adding bodies and spending money, that is from tax revenue and borrowing. This is not sustainable. How do you get Big Government to work within its means; skinny down to tax revenue only? Project 2025 has a plan, but Trump does not fully support it since in the short term it can lead to pain, for those who can least take the pain.

This is all BS. The government is not "overweight", it's been totally corrupted by legalized bribery and has therefor become incompetent and ineffective. All the politicians do nowadays is divert billions of tax dollars into the pockets of their wealthy cronies and fellow criminals that are bribing them. Even foreign nations can and are playing the bribes and kickbacks game.

Trump is more hoping he can get the economy revving enough to eliminate the need for some programs, and thereby mothball programs as well as consolidate others, to reduce the bureaucratic redundancy; redundant union jobs.

Trump couldn't care less about "revving up the economy" or streamlining efficiency. His #1 reason for wanting to be president is keeping himself out of prison, and his #2 reason is bilking the whole world out as much money as he can possible get for himself and his pathetic family of con-men (and women).

I worked for the DOE and if there was no path upward for promotion, due to this being occupied, they would make a new lateral path with no ceiling. This is reward, but is how the government spreads out. More for the jobs and less for the need, with the bill mortgage bill sent to the tax payers.

Yes, the corruption has poisoned every corner of government. But again, it's not a "size" problem. It's a corruption/incompetence problem. And the solution is not to eliminate the government, or the power of government. The solution is to eliminate the corruption. And that means eliminating the wholesale bribery that has poisoned it. What is needed is real and effective oversight within the government, top to bottom.

This can also be done with streamlining regulation, to reflect genuine need, and not the excuses to sustain and grow over bloated bureaucracies, where you cannot fire anyone due to union leverage over the DNC; donations. But the rank and file can become a victim of circumstances and Trump sees that, so the drastic change in four years, is not Trump's style. He wishes to keep all options open for all citizen, as the President, and not just one party, like the DNC just did. Trump is smarter and more empathetic than pin heads like Harris.

There is no "streamlining regulation" when one can so easily bribe the regulators to write the regulations that favor the bribe-payer's wallet or personal ideology.

And I ask you ... when has Donald Trump EVER addressed the government corruption caused by this wholesale legalized bribery of our legislative body? The answer is never. Because he's the first one in line with his hand out when the bribe money is being passed around. The only difference is that he won't even bother to honor the bribe money he took unless it advantages himself in some way.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Anyway, Trumps tariffs on goods imported from China will cost consumers more money. And the government will collect. Meanwhile he intends to keep his tax cuts that help the wealthy the most. The middle class and poor? They get screwed.

Ok just avoid the conversation and change the subject. Then she should say what you just said instead of saying Trump wants to implement a national sales tax. That is untrue and meant to mislead.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

I was never a fan of Harris, but her changes in position have increased my respect for her and hope in her presidency. These "changes," NOT FLIPS, show that she listens to the people, that she is teachable and reachable, that she is true in her statement she will be a president for ALL the people. I admire a leader that is willing to bend to avoid a break. That's the heart of negotiation which is the job of the office.

Ok, do you think she needs to explain why she changed her mind? Because she hasn't.

 

[metis]

When I watching the debate, what I saw with Trump is, he is a businessman and not a career politician. His name and reputation is important to his hospitality business. When Harris attacked him with lies and zingers, he fell the need to defend his reputation, since his hospitality business and his reputation is important to that end. It is not like Obama's golden parachute quid pro quo arrangement. The DNC, knew he would defend his reputation, and in doing so he has less time to attack Harris. It was a team against one like the Russian Collusion Coup.

A survey I saw last night on the news showed that most Pubs felt he lost the debate. Notice I used the word "lost", whereas he was more "smoked". He said he ain't doing it again.

Trump is well known as being a conman for decades now and has been twice impeached [not removed along party lines] and has found guilty of numerous felonies. We know he has cheated on each of his three wives and has used at least one prostitute and has over 20 women who have said he groped them, and a couple more said he raped them.

So, my question to you is, why would you support such a man? Do you think for even one minute that he believes in and adheres to even the most basic Judeo-Christian/humanistic morals? Do you have a hate wish for our country and innocent people who have been hurt by Trump?

 

[Estro Felino]

I understand why so many pro-Trumpers would rather change the subject than talk about the Trump-Harris debate topic. That's why Estro is working so hard to make this about Ukraine.

It's on topic because Mrs. Harris lost the debate.
Because she basically said: we couldn't care less if a WW3 breaks out...all that matters is that we defeat Russia.
And she said that peace would be a negative thing.
That thing is what a man would say. So she is basically telling Putin: come here and fight like a man!

That said, you've triggered another of my pet peeves, which I am entitled to have as a linguist who can read Ukrainian. The double "yy" actually stands for two different letters in Ukrainian Cyrillic. It is one of the worst transliteration schemes I can think of for that language into a romanized alphabet, but the Ukrainian government seems to prefer it. A more common rendition of the name as just "Zelensky" makes better sense, since English speakers cannot pronounce the two different vowels correctly anyway. However, better romanizations would be "Zelenskij", "Zelenskiy", or "Zelenskiĭ".

It also depends on the alphabet used.
Anyway there is a video where this former comedian (who has lost any credibility in my eyes) said that Ukrainians and Russians should love each other and that the Kiev regime is the bad guy for preventing Russian-speaking people from using their language only.

There are lots of documents revealing who is the bad guy here and when the war is over, I suggest many people to disappear and to change name.

 

[Revoltingest]

No, Rev. The word "national" is what makes that not true. The US does not have what is called a "national sales tax".

No one is saying that we currently have a national sales tax.
The issue is that Harris is calling Trump's campaign promise
of tariffs a "national sales tax".

In Europe, they do, but it is called a "value added tax" (VAT), because it works like a tariff. The tax is charged before the product gets to a point of sale.

Everyone is well aware of the VAT & how it works.
Describing it doesn't support the claim that proposing
tariffs is the same as proposing a national sales tax.

 

[Estro Felino]

It doesn't serve you to distort reality just for
the purpose of insulting someone you loathe.
Your posts end up looking insane.

Trump can be called the worst names ever.
Double standards at its best.

This is just stupid histrionics.

I am just tired of people normalizing war.
We are not animals.

 

[Revoltingest]

We are not animals.

We are.
Especially Italians.

 

[F1fan]

Europe will be the impediment for the warmongers in Washington DC.

A nonsense statement.

He can.

No one trusts Putin.

You might, but that just makes you look odd given your refusal to acknowledge he’s a war criminal.

But you can't deny that the MIC is gaining billions from the sale of warfare.

I deny most everything you assert. Why? It’s absurd and baseless.

So if the war terminated, they would stop gaining.
Do you deny it?

I have no idea what you are talking about since you typically vague.

 

[Estro Felino]

We are.
Especially Italians.

Italians have been at peace for 80 years.
Unlike your country...Vietnam War...etc...
it's disgusting to go to South-East Asia to bother those people.

 

[Revoltingest]

Italians have been at peace for 80 years.

After the allies beat your beloved Hitler.
You're welcome.

 

[Estro Felino]

I deny most everything you assert. Why? It’s absurd and baseless.


I have no idea what you are talking about since you typically vague.

The MIC sells weapons to the Government that will use taxpayers' money to buy it.

 

[Estro Felino]

After the allies beat your beloved Hitler.
You're welcome.

But now the Nazis are in Ukraine.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Trump dosent need my help in defending him. Unlike others that do indeed need help.

Then why are you trying to defend him, exactly?
I'd say Trump needs all the help he can get after losing that debate so badly. He's made himself look like an unhinged delusional person.

 

[Revoltingest]

But now the Nazis are in Ukraine.

Let's hope that Ukraine can drive them back to Russia.

 

[PureX]

Europe will be the impediment for the warmongers in Washington DC.

He can.

But you can't deny that the MIC is gaining billions from the sale of warfare.
So if the war terminated, they would stop gaining.
Do you deny it?

Putin can't be trusted. He lied to everyone about the pretext for his invasion of Ukraine. He is lying to his own people constantly about how the invasion is going and the degrading state of their own military. So, if he lies to the world, and he lies to the Russian people, why wouldn't he also lie to the Ukrainians about ending the invasion? And about respecting the agreed upon borders? Just to buy time to build his military back up and try again?

No one in their right mind would trust him.

 

[F1fan]

Ok just avoid the conversation and change the subject. Then she should say what you just said instead of saying Trump wants to implement a national sales tax. That is untrue and meant to mislead.

Another defeat for you, unable to rebut my post.

As i have noted Harris said that she calls Trumps tariffs as “Trump’s s sales tax “. It’s a political point to help those uncertain about what a tariff is that it will cost them more You MAGAs going off on the meaning of the phrase aims to deflect that the criminal candidate will impose a costly fee on products from China. That’s the real issue and you can’t defend it.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It's on topic because Mrs. Harris lost the debate.
Because she basically said: we couldn't care less if a WW3 breaks out...all that matters is that we defeat Russia.
And she said that peace would be a negative thing.
That thing is what a man would say. So she is basically telling Putin: come here and fight like a man!

It also depends on the alphabet used.
Anyway there is a video where this former comedian (who has lost any credibility in my eyes) said that Ukrainians and Russians should love each other and that the Kiev regime is the bad guy for preventing Russian-speaking people from using their language only.

There are lots of documents revealing who is the bad guy here and when the war is over, I suggest many people to disappear and to change name.

She said no such thing.
What debate were you watching??

Trump can be called the worst names ever.
Double standards at its best.

I am just tired of people normalizing war.
We are not animals.

People who sexually assault and defraud people should be called "the worst names ever."
They're not a good person.
And when said person spends his life making up childish nicknames for everyone else, he's fair play too. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Funny how MAGA just loves it and applaud and cheers when Trump calls his opponents names all day long but cry foul when they call him names in return and point out the terrible things he's done in his life.

You get what you give.

 

[F1fan]

But now the Nazis are in Ukraine.

Putin disinformation. Why do you keep making false statements?

 

[Copernicus]

When I watching the debate, what I saw with Trump is, he is a businessman and not a career politician. His name and reputation is important to his hospitality business. When Harris attacked him with lies and zingers, he fell the need to defend his reputation, since his hospitality business and his reputation is important to that end. It is not like Obama's golden parachute quid pro quo arrangement. The DNC, knew he would defend his reputation, and in doing so he has less time to attack Harris. It was a team against one like the Russian Collusion Coup.

What arrant nonsense. Donald Trump is a quintessential politician and a lousy businessman who squandered his father's fortune into six bankruptcies. Like other celebrity politicians (e.g. Ronald Reagan), he is comfortable in performing before large crowds, and he has created a rather large personality cult around himself. Getting supporters to call him "not a politician" is part of his politician shtick. In the old days, every politician was born in a log cabin. They all come from humble backgrounds, even the "hillbilly" multimillionaire Silicon Valley venture capitalist that is running as Trump's VP candidate. (Whatever happened to the old one he ran with? )

My advice is, if they debate again, Trump needs to come up with a funny name to describe Harris spitting daggers, such Krazy Kamala, who trying to get him to waste his debate, time addressing her attacks on his reputation. Trump can make a funny, cut down to allow 5 seconds for dismissal and go back to the business of her reputation and his vision. She will get flustered. If you ever argued with a woman, not fighting and dismissal, gets under their skin.

Misogynists love to underestimate women. The fact is that she used his misogyny-tainted racist ego to play him like a fiddle, deliberately baiting him at every turn. He took the bait every time. Your advice plays on a stereotype of women that simply backfires with her. She knew how to handle him, and she was the one getting under his skin and flustering him by poking him to go after race and gender stereotypes. He claims he won't debate her again, and we all know why. He is afraid of her.

I heard an idea that would be fair to both Trump and Harris. Each candidate can select their own moderator, to question the other candidate Trump is used to the DNC ambush; 3 against w, but Harris is used to her team of moderators. Instead of three against one, it will be two against two, which will make it easier for Trump to stay on target.

I'm sorry, but that is such a goofy idea. Trump only does interviews with the kind of moderator you suggest--someone who spoon-feeds him softball questions and coddles his ego. He is too fragile to answer tough questions. You could see the man visibly wincing whenever Kamala turned to face him and address him directly. He wouldn't even look at her or the moderators. He just stood there with a frozen scowl on his face when she called him a disgrace to his face. Before the debate, he was saying all sorts of lies and taunts about her, so she directly challenged him in her acceptance speech at the DNC convention, saying that, if he had anything to say to her, he should "say it to my face". Then she went to a debate in which she said a lot of things to his face, and he wouldn't even look her in the eye. This is the guy who is supposed to negotiate with world leaders. She just scolded him by telling him that Vladimir Putin would eat him for lunch. And Putin has already dined on the man several times now. He's looking forward to doing it again.