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

[Jarnhamar]

Merriam-Webster.

Thanks. I took a look at the definition, I think both of them fit in their own respective ways. Both have had some real ludicrous speeches and behavior. No?

 

[Lumber]

One person has a history of making outrageous claims, often contradicting themselves, spreading misinformation, and using demeaning nicknames for opponents. They’ve also been involved in highly publicized outbursts, including calls to overturn democratic processes, and have frequently dismissed expert advice in favor of personal opinions. Their approach is more about spectacle than substance, with a tendency to turn serious moments into reality TV drama.

The other speaks with poise, often delivering clear and measured responses, even under pressure. In interviews and debates, they focus on explaining policy positions with a steady tone. While not without criticism, they prioritize issues over theatrics.

Which is which, and which one of those most meets the definition of a Baffoon?

 

[Brad Sallows]

An explanation of a policy position has to go a little deeper than, "So, I grew up middle class...".

 

[dimsum]

An explanation of a policy position has to go a little deeper than, "So, I grew up middle class...".

One of the two keeps on topic long enough to explain a policy position.

I wonder if Trump’s spokesperson will eventually just lose it trying to explain his ramblings, like this person.

Gaddafi's Loyal-ish Translator

I've been a fan of Gaddafi's translator since September 2009 -- when he screamed, "I can't take it any more" and collapsed while translating Gaddafi's speech before the UN General Assembly.

www.huffpost.com

 

[Fishbone Jones]

The other speaks with poise, often delivering clear and measured responses, even under pressure. In interviews and debates, they focus on explaining policy positions with a steady tone. While not without criticism, they prioritize issues over theatrics.

No she doesn't. She hasn't spoken on point to a single consequential question that's been put to her. The masterchef of word salad.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

One of the two keeps on topic long enough to explain a policy position.

Is there a third person in this race, because your words don't describe Harris. Not one little bit.

 

[Lumber]

No she doesn't. She hasn't spoken on point to a single consequential question that's been put to her. The masterchef of word salad.

No, you're just limiting yourself to watching truncated click bait bullshit from pro-Trump media.

Do your god damn homework.

Here are some questions and her answers from recent interviews, some live form reporters, some from sit downs. Show me how any of this is "word salad" and not a clear and direct answer to the questions. They are coherent and substantive.

Question: "Madame Vice President, do you think think that Republican voters, especially women voters, might be more likely to vote for you because of the fall of Roe. Will order Republican votes be key to winning?"

Harris:

"I look at what happened in the midterms and special elections to guide my thinking on this issue. What we saw, in both so-called red states and blue states, is that when the issue of a woman’s freedom to make decisions about her own body is on the ballot, the American people vote for freedom—regardless of the party they are registered with. I believe this is a fundamental issue. People need to understand that you don’t have to abandon your faith or deeply held beliefs to agree that the government should not be telling women what to do with their bodies.

This is a compelling issue, especially when we consider that, for many of us, our daughters now have fewer rights than their grandmothers. One of America’s strengths, and a key attribute of our progress, has been the expansion of rights—not the restriction of them. But we’re seeing those rights being taken away because Donald Trump created this situation when he appointed three members of the United States Supreme Court with the intention of undoing the protections of Roe v. Wade, and they did exactly as he intended."

Question: "Regarding some of your economic policies announced last week, can you explain how you plan to pay for those? And what other policies do you want to unveil moving forward?"

Harris:

"Sure. Let’s look at what we are talking about, for example, around children and the Child Tax Credit, as well as extending the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) to $6,000 for the first year of a child’s life. The return on that investment, in terms of what it will do and how it will pay off, will be tremendous. We’ve already seen this when we implemented similar measures in the first year of our administration, reducing child poverty by over 50%.

When it comes to tax credits, we know there’s a great return on investment when we increase home ownership in America. This expands the tax base—especially property taxes—which, in turn, helps fund schools. Once again, this is a return on investment.

I think it’s a mistake for anyone discussing public policy not to critically evaluate how to measure that return. Strengthening neighborhoods, strengthening communities, and, in particular, investing in the local economy results in benefits for everyone. In the end, it pays for itself."

Question: "You've marshalled unprecedented support from Republicans, why do you think that is?"

Harris:

"So, you know, in my career—whether it was as the elected District Attorney, elected Attorney General, elected United States Senator, and, of course, now Vice President—I have taken the oath of office six times. For the elected leaders here, we know it is an oath one must take sincerely and unequivocally. Among other things, it is an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, to understand what those principles represent, and what they require of the individual who holds the office of public trust.

Let's not undervalue that point—it is not about the individual, nor about their personal interests. It is about what serves and advances the public good. This election presents a real contrast between how I, as one of the two nominees, and my opponent, the former president, view that duty. And it is a duty. There are certain things in our lives we have the choice to engage with if we feel like it, and then there are things that are fundamentally our responsibility, like raising our children. This oath is a duty we must take seriously, for the sake of the public good.

I think this moment, and the choice the American people have in this election—just two weeks and one day away—is presenting, for the first time in certainly recent history, a very clear choice and difference between the two candidates. That, as much as anything, is bringing us together as Americans. We are understanding that, with such fundamental stakes being presented, we cannot afford to be mired in ideological differences without focusing on the most fundamental ideals upon which our country stands. Thank you."

Question: "I know a lot of people who call my radio show and say, 'Well, what happens? How does this impact my pocket? I don't know what you mean. How would inflation reduction or infrastructure affect me?' Share with our viewers how it has impacted them, and what a President Harris would do to focus on what needs to go in their pocket, not the Beltway language."

Harris:

"That’s a very legitimate and important question, and voters deserve an answer before they even have to ask it. So, for example, how will it affect individuals? Part of my plan is to expand the Child Tax Credit to $6,000, specifically targeting young parents in the first year of their child’s life. This would ensure they have the resources to buy essential items like a crib, a car seat, or clothes. We know the vast majority of parents naturally want to care for their children well, but many don’t have the resources. When we expanded the Child Tax Credit in the past, although it was for a lower amount than I’m proposing now, it cut childhood poverty in America, including Black childhood poverty, by half.

Another part of my plan is to address home healthcare for seniors. I often go off script to share a personal story: When my mother was sick, and as it turned out, dying from cancer, I took care of her. Taking care of an elderly relative means cooking for them, helping them dress in comfortable clothes, or just finding ways to make them smile. It’s about dignity. Far too many people caring for elderly relatives are struggling, often forced to leave their jobs, which reduces their income, or spend down their savings just to qualify for Medicaid. My plan recognizes that this should not happen, and we’re going to have Medicare cover these needs.

I also think about people in the 'sandwich generation,' who are caring for both young kids and elderly parents. They shouldn’t have to choose between leaving their job or losing all their savings just to apply for Medicaid. These are just a few examples of how my plan will build what I call an 'opportunity economy.' It’s an economy that recognizes the vast majority of Americans have ambition, aspirations, and an incredible work ethic. They have dreams but often lack access to the resources that would allow them to achieve their goals. Unlike my opponent, who has a very different perspective on the world."

 

[Fishbone Jones]

"No, you're just limiting yourself to watching truncated click bait bullshit from pro-Trump media.

Do your god damn homework."

I have watched more of her complete speeches than you have likely. Something else you appear to know nothing about, but still find the need to comment wrongly on. I even listened to her useless pandering and softball questions on Call Her Daddy. Did you? And don't get so snippy about telling me what to do.

She said nothing. Moreover, with all her promises, she has yet to say where any of the money for her great plans is coming from.

All your post shows me is your own gullibility for falling for marxist drivel.

But don't let me try dissuade you from thinking she's intelligent.

I stand by my statement.

You go your way, I'll go mine.

 

[Pelorus]

"No, you're just limiting yourself to watching truncated click bait bullshit from pro-Trump media.

Do your god damn homework."

I have watched more of her complete speeches than you have likely. Something else you appear to know nothing about, but still find the need to comment wrongly on. I even listened to her useless pandering and softball questions on Call Her Daddy. Did you? And don't get so snippy about telling me what to do.

She said nothing. Moreover, with all her promises, she has yet to say where any of the money for her great plans is coming from.

All your post shows me is your own gullibility for falling for marxist drivel.

But don't let me try dissuade you from thinking she's intelligent.

I stand by my statement.

You go your way, I'll go mine.

Referring to anyone in mainstream US politics as Marxist is really undercutting your claim that you're an informed political observer.

 

[dimsum]

"No, you're just limiting yourself to watching truncated click bait bullshit from pro-Trump media.

Do your god damn homework."

I have watched more of her complete speeches than you have likely. Something else you appear to know nothing about, but still find the need to comment wrongly on. I even listened to her useless pandering and softball questions on Call Her Daddy. Did you? And don't get so snippy about telling me what to do.

She said nothing. Moreover, with all her promises, she has yet to say where any of the money for her great plans is coming from.

All your post shows me is your own gullibility for falling for marxist drivel.

But don't let me try dissuade you from thinking she's intelligent.

I stand by my statement.

You go your way, I'll go mine.

So, to confirm, are you saying that she didn’t say the things that @Lumber quoted?

Because I’m very confused reading their comment with quotes on her responses to questions, then your comment that she said nothing.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Referring to anyone in mainstream US politics as Marxist is really undercutting your claim that you're an informed political observer.

Not when talking about Harris. The same could be said about you for not recognizing the fact and being so naive about politics. Nor do I ever recall describing myself as an informed political observer. That's just more bs on your part.

I was expecting someone else when I clicked 'Show ignored content' so this is simply a complimentary response. It'll be the last for this though.

 

[Brad Sallows]

"...can you explain how you plan to pay for those?"

Failure to answer the question asked. People want to know how the funds are going to be collected, and in particular whether it'll be more borrowing or not. Even if the side-step is just "Medicare will cover...", adding more non-discretionary spending doesn't specify where the funding comes from, although it will default to more borrowing.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

So, to confirm, are you saying that she didn’t say the things that @Lumber quoted?

Because I’m very confused reading their comment with quotes on her responses to questions, then your comment that she said nothing.

You appear to get confused a lot. She puts out lots of verbiage but doesn't say anything substantial or consequential.

 

[suffolkowner]

Points against Harris might have some validity if the opponent was anyone other than Trump. What standard is he to be held to?

One can always vote Republican for the Senate and House and etc..

 

[Lumber]

The

"...can you explain how you plan to pay for those?"

Failure to answer the question asked. People want to know how the funds are going to be collected, and in particular whether it'll be more borrowing or not. Even if the side-step is just "Medicare will cover...", adding more non-discretionary spending doesn't specify where the funding comes from, although it will default to more borrowing.

Your claim that Vice President Harris "failed to answer the question" overlooks the core of her response, which directly addressed how policy investments, such as the Child Tax Credit and Earned Income Tax Credit, pay for themselves through long-term returns. Harris emphasized the proven effectiveness of these programs in reducing child poverty and boosting the economy, particularly by increasing homeownership, which expands the tax base and funds local services. This approach reflects a sustainable fiscal strategy—rather than simply "more borrowing," the emphasis is on generating economic growth and a larger, stronger tax base that contributes to funding essential programs. The notion of evaluating returns on investment is central to responsible economic policy, demonstrating an understanding of both the costs and the long-term benefits.

 

[Remius]

You appear to get confused a lot. She puts out lots of verbiage but doesn't say anything substantial or consequential.

Possibly. But the other guy says things then an army of surrogates have to go out and explain “what he really meant was…”

 

[RangerRay]

Possibly. But the other guy says things then an army of surrogates have to go out and explain “what he really meant was…”

And then when he gets a softball question the next day going along with that, he says “No, I meant exactly what I said”.

 

[brihard]

Worth a read as time allows: The Atlantic has a lengthy and sourced article with insider views from former Trump officials about his views on the military and the apparent appeal authoritarianism has for him.

It doesn’t reveal anything not already known about his character and the risks inherent in giving him power, but it does further reinforce them.


Trump: “I need the kind of generals that Hitler had”

Trump: ‘I Need the Kind of Generals That Hitler Had’

The Republican nominee’s preoccupation with dictators, and his disdain for the American military, is deepening.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[dimsum]

Worth a read as time allows: The Atlantic has a lengthy and sourced article with insider views from former Trump officials about his views on the military and the apparent appeal authoritarianism has for him.

It doesn’t reveal anything not already known about his character and the risks inherent in giving him power, but it does further reinforce them.


Trump: “I need the kind of generals that Hitler had”

Trump: ‘I Need the Kind of Generals That Hitler Had’

The Republican nominee’s preoccupation with dictators, and his disdain for the American military, is deepening.

www.theatlantic.com

I’ve seen that in a few subreddits.

The top comment is usually something to the tone of “those generals tried to kill Hitler”. Hell, they made a Tom Cruise movie about it.

 

[KevinB]

Points against Harris might have some validity if the opponent was anyone other than Trump. What standard is he to be held to?

Well, that of a felon out on bail?

One can always vote Republican for the Senate and House and etc..

Pretty much what I plan on doing.