US Presidential Election 2024 - Trump vs Harris - Vote Hard with a Vengence

[Remius]

Wholly unsuitable to Remius means: no new wars, decent economy, compelling NATO countries to spend more on defence (still shocked army.ca people argue about this one...), being right about EU dependence on Russian energy, ME peace accord...etc etc...

As usual completely wrong. I generally accept that when you make things personal in a discussion that you are at the point that you have lost whatever argument you were trying to make.

But nice try.

 

[QV]

As usual completely wrong. I generally accept that when you make things personal in a discussion that you are at the point that you have lost whatever argument you were trying to make.

But nice try.

You said he is wholly unsuitable to be POTUS and I presume favor the alternative in the binary choice. Normally that means you disagree with that person's policies and achievements, am I mistaken?

 

[dimsum]

No argument here.

State voters determine state laws. Majority rules. Unfortunately, most people vote emotion and personal morals. Very few are actually physically affected by the decision.

“Any woman of childbearing age, in one of the states that has since repealed R v W” is an…interesting definition of “very few”.

For those that are, they can find places (states) that align with their personal needs, from no abortions for any reason to abortion up to birth. Everyone has a choice.

So how about the ones who are too poor, have no social support, or otherwise can’t leave the state they’re in?

In other words, if your province decided to revert back to something that affects you personally negatively (say, public healthcare for sake of argument), and when you complain, their answer is “well you can move”, is that an acceptable answer?

 

[Remius]

You said he is wholly unsuitable to be POTUS and I presume favor the alternative in the binary choice. Normally that means you disagree with that person's policies and achievements, am I mistaken?

Yes you are.

Disagreement with a leaders policies or achievements (real or imagined) does not mean that one then thinks they are unsuitable for the job.

Actions, demonstrable behaviours, lack of certain criteria etc etc

For the record I also thought Biden was wholly unsuitable for the job this coming cycle. Not for all the same reasons but some overlap.

 

[QV]

I take this to mean you could think Harris is suitable to be POTUS though you might disagree with the direction she takes the country.

Is this accurate?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

“Any woman of childbearing age, in one of the states that has since repealed R v W” is an…interesting definition of “very few”.


So how about the ones who are too poor, have no social support, or otherwise can’t leave the state they’re in?

In other words, if your province decided to revert back to something that affects you personally negatively (say, public healthcare for sake of argument), and when you complain, their answer is “well you can move”, is that an acceptable answer?

Ahh, another one that thinks the rights of the majority should be overridden by the wishes of the few. A true liberal/democrat.

 

[Remius]

Ahh, another one that thinks the rights of the majority should be overridden by the wishes of the few. A true liberal/democrat.

You are misunderstanding his position.

What rights of the majority are being overridden by the few exactly?

I assume you are familiar with the concept of the Tyranny of the Majority? I’ll make the assumption that you aren’t in favour of that (correct me if I am wrong in that). In which case I fail to see the issue you would have with that position.

 

[Remius]

I take this to mean you could think Harris is suitable to be POTUS though you might disagree with the direction she takes the country.

Is this accurate?

I would add that I might also agree that she is not exactly the best choice that could have been offered by that side.

Which would be consistant with my thoughts on Trump as well.

But those are the choices Americans will have to decide on. Or stay home.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Everyone has a choice. You either accept it or change it. That's what freedom is. Only you can choose to live/ die on your feet or serve on your knees. I have spent nine years disagreeing with the tyranny of the majority of people that keep our current government in power and its draconian policies. However, I choose to pay my taxes and participate in our elections, while personally mitigating the damage to me and mine, by being vocal in my condemnation of Ottawa and other means. Knowing that the country, like my province has, will eventually right itself, I choose to bide my time. If it doesn't there are other choices I can make when that time comes. But they are all my choices, nobody else's. Blaming others for your own personal situation is a mugs game. How you got to a personal situation may not be wholly on yourself, but where you go from here is fully within your own control and on you. It just depends how determined you are to get where you want to be.

 

[Remius]

Everyone has a choice. You either accept it or change it. That's what freedom is. Only you can choose to live/ die on your feet or serve on your knees. I have spent nine years disagreeing with the tyranny of the majority of people that keep our current government in power and its draconian policies. However, I choose to pay my taxes and participate in our elections, while personally mitigating the damage to me and mine, by being vocal in my condemnation of Ottawa and other means. Knowing that the country, like my province has, will eventually right itself, I choose to bide my time. If it doesn't there are other choices I can make when that time comes. But they are all my choices, nobody else's. Blaming others for your own personal situation is a mugs game. How you got to a personal situation may not be wholly on yourself, but where you go from here is fully within your own control and on you. It just depends how determined you are to get where you want to be.

Ok, so maybe you don’t quite get the definition of the Tyranny of the majority in the context I was using.

It isn’t necessarily policies you might have a beef with (although it can) or ones that might not advantage you but it is policies that affect the minority or minorities in relation to their rights.

An example would be Quebec’s language laws. The majority is curtailing and limiting the language rights of the minority.

Your argument in favour of the majority rule or at least justifying seems to be: Democracy take it or leave it. Even if it means your rights get trampled or removed.

 

[dimsum]

Ahh, another one that thinks the rights of the majority should be overridden by the wishes of the few. A true liberal/democrat.

There are more women than men in the US. So, the “majority” is women.

Male to Female Ratio by State 2024

worldpopulationreview.com

To add: The directly affected are women of childbearing age. Women, either too young or too old, will either be affected, or have…opinions on things affecting younger women that they know. So I’m including them in there.

Also, the men who are partners, brothers, dads, etc of said women.

Meet the newest abortion rights supporters: Men in red states • Nevada Current

Like it or not, abortion access has always been viewed as a “women’s problem.” Men rarely talked about it, at least not publicly, and it didn’t seem to rank very high on their list of political priorities. Not anymore. Since Donald Trump proudly took credit for overturning Roe v. Wade with his...

nevadacurrent.com

 

[Fishbone Jones]

In the big scheme of things, the difference is so miniscule as to make your argument moot.

 

[dimsum]

In the big scheme of things, the difference is so miniscule as to make your argument moot.

I’m not following how it is minuscule. As in percentage of the population in the states that have repealed Roe v Wade? Or folks who can’t leave said states because of whatever reason?

And that doesn’t even touch on the follow-on effects. Say that everyone who wants an abortion moves, as you mentioned. How many folks will want to move in to replace them? How about the doctors, who are already not really plentiful in those states? Idaho has a huge issue where the OBGYNs have packed up and left for the states that allow abortion.

 

[Remius]

In the big scheme of things, the difference is so miniscule as to make your argument moot.

If you are referring to my post, then no. It is not as minuscule as you think nor is the argument moot.

Tyranny of government (which is what I think you are talking about) and tyranny of the majority (what some of us are talking about) are different beasts. They can overlap yes but it isn’t as minuscule as you are portraying it.


Unless you can expand on that.

 

[dimsum]

https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/10/media/fcc-rosenworcel-trump-cbs-license-60-minutes/index.html

In a statement, Rosenworcel emphasized that the federal agency “does not and will not revoke licenses for broadcast stations simply because a political candidate disagrees with or dislikes content or coverage.”

“While repeated attacks against broadcast stations by the former President may now be familiar, these threats against free speech are serious and should not be ignored,” Rosenworcel said. “As I’ve said before, the First Amendment is a cornerstone of our democracy.”

 

[Remius]

https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/10/media/fcc-rosenworcel-trump-cbs-license-60-minutes/index.html

Censorship?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

If you are referring to my post, then no. It is not as minuscule as you think nor is the argument moot.

Tyranny of government (which is what I think you are talking about) and tyranny of the majority (what some of us are talking about) are different beasts. They can overlap yes but it isn’t as minuscule as you are portraying it.


Unless you can expand on that.

Wasn't talking to you.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Not much point worrying about federal abortion policy for this presidential election. It isn't top of mind for most voters. Democrats would like it to be a top-three issue, but it isn't, and their efforts to get it there haven't yielded results. They'd be better off addressing the top few survey-reported issues, but since those include economic turmoil and immigration/borders, it's a difficult election for them.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Censorship?

CBS editing Harris's word salad response to present a more favorable impression would be a form of censorship, yes?

 

[Remius]

CBS editing Harris's word response to present a more favorable impression would be a form of censorship, yes?

I’d put that in the influence column.