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

[Fishbone Jones]

Good that Trump is switching to match Harris’s views on marijuana decriminalization.

Trump signals support for reclassifying pot as a less dangerous drug, in line with Harris' position

Donald Trump has signaled support for a potentially historic federal policy shift to reclassify marijuana as a less dangerous drug.

apnews.com

But you ignore all of Trump's points that she has stolen.

 

[dimsum]

But you ignore all of Trump's points that she has stolen.

I’m not seeing much similarity between the two:

Harris and Trump: Compare where they stand on key issues

The 2024 presidential election will give voters a stark choice between Harris and Trump. See where they stand on issues like taxes, EVs, climate change, TikTok and more.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Grunt_031]

Because people for Harris want to untruthfully tie it to Trump. How many times did the democrats drag the tome onto the stage at the DNC, claiming it was Trump’s manifesto?

Yes guilty by association. And that many of his policies are mirrors of the project, because Project 2025 used Trump's views and policies as their framework.

And connections are not proof in this case.

Doesn't help that a number of his top advisors are tied to the organizations at that are championing it including his VP pick.

 

[brihard]

You mean like Harris. You're obsfucating. You're basing on gut. Not evidence. Tangible or otherwise. Tell me, would you prefer charges based on your evidence? Would you expect a conviction?

I’ll explain this to you as gently as possible because I know it can be hard- but the threshold to criminally convict someone and maybe send them to jail is different from the threshold to believe someone may hold and be concealing support for a not super great political agenda. If this shocks you I’m sorry.

I of course see what you’re trying to do in taking my rigorous application of evidence in criminal matters, and flip it back on me to suggest that nothing political can be believed save that it hits such a high level of convincing proof. So you’re still being silly, but also hypocritical and disingenuous. You yourself have shown over and over that you’ll believe some outlandish and wacky stuff on the strength of nearly nothing if it aligns with a preconceived belief you hold.

Back in the real world, many of us are very capable of recognizing that Trump has already shown himself capable and willing of saying and doing anything he has to to try to gain or hold power, or to otherwise enrich himself. And everything he does in the political realm is tainted by that.

You cannot take someone at face value when they have a multitude of faces. He only gets to burn the benefit of the doubt… I don’t know, a few hundred times before he stops getting it.

 

[MrWhyt]

So you have nothing except angst.
All I've asked for is proof. The true evidence everyone always harps on. You can't provide that.
I've kept our exchange pretty impersonal. If you want to move to personal attacks I can do that in spades buckwheat.

Oh and one of these fine Mentors better sort you out on the TDS shit.

this is not a court of law, I have no need to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I've taken trump's past behaviour as a liar and applied it to his statement of disavowal. Add in the various connections between his administration/campaign and project 2025 and i've come to the conclusion that he's most likely not being truthful, again.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

this is not a court of law, I have no need to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I've taken trump's past behaviour as a liar and applied it to his statement of disavowal. Add in the various connections between his administration/campaign and project 2025 and i've come to the conclusion that he's most likely not being truthful, again.

So just hate. Not proof.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Yes guilty by association. And that many of his policies are mirrors of the project, because Project 2025 used Trump's views and policies as their framework.

Doesn't help that a number of his top advisors are tied to the organizations at that are championing it including his VP pick.

Nope. Doesn't work, unless you want to create a new level of proof on the forum. Hearsay and hate doesn't cut it.

 

[dimsum]

Nope. Doesn't work, unless you want to create a new level of proof on the forum. Hearsay and hate doesn't cut it.

Doesn’t work for who?

Several people have shown major connections between Trump and Project 2025, practically handholding that A + B = C. But no, that’s not enough proof.

Meanwhile, anything remotely bad about Trudeau is totally believable and 100% verified.

Pick a lane.

 

[Remius]

Doesn’t work for who?

Several people have shown major connections between Trump and Project 2025, practically handholding that A + B = C. But no, that’s not enough proof.

Meanwhile, anything remotely bad about Trudeau is totally believable and 100% verified.

Pick a lane.

Or stay consistant…

 

[Fishbone Jones]

this is not a court of law, I have no need to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I've taken trump's past behaviour as a liar and applied it to his statement of disavowal. Add in the various connections between his administration/campaign and project 2025 and i've come to the conclusion that he's most likely not being truthful, again.

There's a couple here that would disagree with you. And not of my persuasion.

So, tell me what you think of Harris' lies and Walz's stolen valour?

 

[PuckChaser]

Since everyone can't get over attacking posters for their views instead of the views themselves, this is getting locked until after the debate.

- Milnet.ca