• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Kamala Harris vs. Donald J. Trump

Logician Man said:
Compare and contrast your thoughts and observations on a Trump rally and Kamala Harris's Town Hall meeting she held tonight with the American populace. ( 1/28/2019 )
Click to expand...

All the far-left progressives on my FB feed hate her due to her track record in the criminal justice system, like supporting the "three strikes" rule. This tells me she'll have an issue making it out of the primaries, but if she does, it won't matter what the far-left progressives think because they'll vote for her to get Trump gone.
 
Fishking said:
All the far-left progressives on my FB feed hate her due to her track record in the criminal justice system, like supporting the "three strikes" rule. This tells me she'll have an issue making it out of the primaries, but if she does, it won't matter what the far-left progressives think because they'll vote for her to get Trump gone.
Click to expand...

'Hating' a person is a pretty strong word simply for disagreeing with certain policies. Sounds like you may be stretching the truth a little, interjecting some of your own sentiments, or some of both ?
 
Harris vs Trump would be a scenario that would be attractive to Howard Schultz. It is also a scenario in which he might win.
 
Logician Man said:
'Hating' a person is a pretty strong word simply for disagreeing with certain policies. Sounds like you may be stretching the truth a little, interjecting some of your own sentiments, or some of both ?
Click to expand...

*shrug* Well...I have some very far-left progressives as FB friends. The kind that basically call for the abolishment of all police. Anyways, just pulled this from one quick.

50999743_10104392049873704_6930668539485356032_n.jpg
 
Fishking said:
*shrug* Well...I have some very far-left progressives as FB friends. The kind that basically call for the abolishment of all police. Anyways, just pulled this from one quick.

View attachment 67249206
Click to expand...

It appears you went from 'all' to 'some' in just one post...kinda proves my point....just sayin'
 
Fishking said:
For the sake of argument, do you actually need more than that? Say she wins the nomination w/o providing much of substance and it's her against Trump, do you vote 3rd party or go with the "not Trump" vote?
Click to expand...

Not possible. You can't get the nomination going that blind. For the sake of hypothetical... I've gone third party many times. Against trump... We'd just have to see.
 
Compare and contrast your thoughts and observations on a Trump rally and Kamala Harris's Town Hall meeting

Kamala Harris, Intelligent and articulate what a refreshing change it would be from Trump.

Unfortunately she is not electable. Kamala is an African American woman. I and many Americans have absolutely no problem with either race or gender, most qualified candidate should be the deciding factor.
But many voters can't get past his or her prejudices.

Hillary and Trump had many background issues, America, through the electoral college overlooked this white man's issues, while holding the possible first female President to higher standards.
As for Obama, where do I start? An intelligent, well spoken family man, with a factually and through Republicans non-finding investigations had a solid Presidency, but he was black and got attacked, very sad.
 
poweRob said:
Not possible. You can't get the nomination going that blind. For the sake of hypothetical... I've gone third party many times. Against trump... We'd just have to see.
Click to expand...

Obama got the nomination basically blind. Just basically gave pep rallies and talked about "hope and change".
 
Fishking said:
Obama got the nomination basically blind. Just basically gave pep rallies and talked about "hope and change".
Click to expand...

How hard does one really need to campaign after a typical republican economic crash?
 
I think she's great.


Any woman who would blow her way to the top shows me she's got what it takes to get the job done. No matter how dirty it gets.


Harris 2020!!
 
poweRob said:
How hard does one really need to campaign after a typical republican economic crash?
Click to expand...

That's side-stepping the point. It still can happen, so will it really be up in the air on whether you vote for someone who doesn't provide much or will they still get the vote because it's not Trump? I have a feeling we both know the answer to this.
 
Fishking said:
That's side-stepping the point. It still can happen, so will it really be up in the air on whether you vote for someone who doesn't provide much or will they still get the vote because it's not Trump? I have a feeling we both know the answer to this.
Click to expand...

Oh of course. You want to try and play a "gotcha" moment. Well, you failed.

I didn't vote for Obama in 2008. Sorry fish. Better luck next time with your games.
 
poweRob said:
Oh of course. You want to try and play a "gotcha" moment. Well, you failed.

I didn't vote for Obama in 2008. Sorry fish. Better luck next time with your games.
Click to expand...

Never said you did. You claimed that it's not possible to win the nomination w/o having substance. I pointed out that it actually can happen and you tried to make an excuse for why that happened, but it still happened, none the less. So it's possible.

Now...this election is going to be Trump vs Someone, and I was curious if not having a candidate of substance really meant the possibility of withholding your vote, in that context. You've worked your hardest not to answer but we both know the answer already, especially by this point.
 
dobieg said:
I think she's great.


Any woman who would blow her way to the top shows me she's got what it takes to get the job done. No matter how dirty it gets.


Harris 2020!!
Click to expand...

Sucking all that pipe on the way to the top might explain the reason for the ornery disposition.
 
Fishking said:
Never said you did. You claimed that it's not possible to win the nomination w/o having substance. I pointed out that it actually can happen and you tried to make an excuse for why that happened, but it still happened, none the less. So it's possible.

Now...this election is going to be Trump vs Someone, and I was curious if not having a candidate of substance really meant the possibility of withholding your vote, in that context. You've worked your hardest not to answer but we both know the answer already, especially by this point.
Click to expand...

You're right it did happen, just recently in 2016.

The fact that the idiot voters in your political party voted for a Reality T.V. Star with zero substance despite their parties leaders begging them not to, doesn't mean the Democrats will do the same.

And Obama's campaign in 2008 contained a vast amount more substance than your president's campaign in 2015/2016, and in fact Bush's campaign in 2000 as well.
 
Last edited:
Fishking said:
Never said you did. You claimed that it's not possible to win the nomination w/o having substance. I pointed out that it actually can happen and you tried to make an excuse for why that happened, but it still happened, none the less. So it's possible.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you were implying I did vote for Obama. Why else would you reference him and his election? Oh it's possible. How else do you think the GOP wraps up the evangelical vote so easily? Plus trump... flat out lying nonstop got him elected as well. So his content was more than empty.

Fishking said:
Now...this election is going to be Trump vs Someone, and I was curious if not having a candidate of substance really meant the possibility of withholding your vote, in that context. You've worked your hardest not to answer but we both know the answer already, especially by this point.
Click to expand...

See... I told you you were playing "gotcha" games. It won't work sonny boy.

I won't vote for someone lacking content. But that still reserves the ability to vote against. And trump has provided enough to vote against. That said, I'd rather vote for. Check mate on your worthless typical fish game. :wink:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom