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

[Fishbone Jones]

An opinion piece, in a left leaning newspaper, by a nameless, faceless newpaper employee. No medical professional fact check or opinion.

"Editorially, the Sun almost exclusively endorses Democratic candidates such as Hilary Clinton in 2016 and Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012. They also announced in 2024 that they are endorsing current Democratic President Joe Biden. Opinion pieces tend to lean left with advocacy for clean energy and education reform. In general, news reporting is low-biased and factual, while op-eds tend to moderately favor the left."

5 days out and they are panicking. Calling him hitler, didn't work. Calling him fascist didn't work. Neither did the bloodbath, dictator, turning the military on the public work. They have nothing left. Biden scared people at the debate, so they figure to try the same with Trump. Nobody is even talking about Harris' wrap up rally. It was a wasted opportunity. Mainly because Biden, once again, came in like Leroy Jenkins and described all republican voters as garbage.

Tired and skipping engagements? Even Stevie Wonder can see the guy doing two or three appearances a day. Harris is the one who goes on radio silence for two days before an interview to rest up and practice.

The way he speaks is no different than the way he spoke in 2015. In fact, there is nothing about his actions that is different from 2015.

But, if it makes you sleep better at night..............

Go ahead and believe the hit piece if you wish. People like and agree with the article because it fits their bias, not because it's true.

 

[Brad Sallows]

I think that’s Peter Thiel’s and Elon Musk’s plan.

I doubt it. I suspect they'll be happy to see Trump serve a full term, and then work out a fresh nomination from a slate that includes Vance and might include DeSantis again.

 

[Lumber]

An opinion piece, in a left leaning newspaper, by a nameless, faceless newpaper employee. No medical professional fact check or opinion.

"Editorially, the Sun almost exclusively endorses Democratic candidates such as Hilary Clinton in 2016 and Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012. They also announced in 2024 that they are endorsing current Democratic President Joe Biden. Opinion pieces tend to lean left with advocacy for clean energy and education reform. In general, news reporting is low-biased and factual, while op-eds tend to moderately favor the left."

5 days out and they are panicking. Calling him hitler, didn't work. Calling him fascist didn't work. Neither did the bloodbath, dictator, turning the military on the public work. They have nothing left. Biden scared people at the debate, so they figure to try the same with Trump. Nobody is even talking about Harris' wrap up rally. It was a wasted opportunity. Mainly because Biden, once again, came in like Leroy Jenkins and described all republican voters as garbage.

They absolutely are NOT panicking. You must just be regurgitating posts by conservatives who are saying that the Dems are panicking. If you actually look at what Democrats, Harris supporters, and the Harris campaign itself, are posting online, there is absolutely no panic at all. In fact, I would describe it and jubilant. The information so far coming out from early voting is highly favorable for the democrats. What I'm seeing democrats say is not even that they think Harris will win, but they are wondering now if it will be a blow out! Hardly a sign of "panic". And it may seem like no one is talking about Harris' warp up rally, but they are. It's just that by comparison, you are used to seeing Trump do nothign BUT talk about his rallies and how great they are, the best, biggest ever.

Tired and skipping engagements? Even Stevie Wonder can see the guy doing two or three appearances a day. Harris is the one who goes on radio silence for two days before an interview to rest up and practice.

That's because Harris is on the road doing in person meet and greets, grass roots campaigning, vice just holding constant rallies with sycophants (some who have claimed to having gone to 90+ of his rallies), or going on friendly tv shows.

 

[Lumber]

If Trump wins, undoubtedly Democrats will be eager to see him removed under 25A or impeached and convicted, so that Vance can assume the office. If they can get it done quickly enough, the partial term will count as his first.

I disagree. I don't think Dems would be eager to remove him knowing Vance is his replacement. I'd rather a 4 year Trump presidency than a 3.5 years Vance presidency.

 

[QV]

I disagree. I don't think Dems would be eager to remove him knowing Vance is his replacement. I'd rather a 4 year Trump presidency than a 3.5 years Vance presidency.

Holy cow. If you think Trump is fascist, does that make Vance a super fascist?

 

[Brad Sallows]

I disagree. I don't think Dems would be eager to remove him knowing Vance is his replacement. I'd rather a 4 year Trump presidency than a 3.5 years Vance presidency.

Once again, I was being facetious. (I ought to use <pseudo-tag> markers, like every other reasonable person.) Although I didn't think Vance was a particularly good choice for swaying a group of voters not normally attracted to Trump, I thought he was an excellent choice for impeachment-proofing. I doubt Democrats would like Vance to be the incumbent in 2028.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

They absolutely are NOT panicking. You must just be regurgitating posts by conservatives who are saying that the Dems are panicking. If you actually look at what Democrats, Harris supporters, and the Harris campaign itself, are posting online, there is absolutely no panic at all. In fact, I would describe it and jubilant. The information so far coming out from early voting is highly favorable for the democrats. What I'm seeing democrats say is not even that they think Harris will win, but they are wondering now if it will be a blow out! Hardly a sign of "panic". And it may seem like no one is talking about Harris' warp up rally, but they are. It's just that by comparison, you are used to seeing Trump do nothign BUT talk about his rallies and how great they are, the best, biggest ever.


That's because Harris is on the road doing in person meet and greets, grass roots campaigning, vice just holding constant rallies with sycophants (some who have claimed to having gone to 90+ of his rallies), or going on friendly tv shows.

Opinions

 

[Brad Sallows]

They absolutely are NOT panicking. You must just be regurgitating posts by conservatives who are saying that the Dems are panicking. If you actually look at what Democrats, Harris supporters, and the Harris campaign itself, are posting online, there is absolutely no panic at all.

They aren't panicking, but there are degrees of worry. Ignore what Democratic politicians and campaigners are saying openly; the public facade is always going to be a unified front of optimism. Identify the Democratic supporters who are self-critical honest brokers - mostly these will not be found in political and campaign offices - and see what they are reporting second-hand from their sources in political and campaign offices (almost always anonymously, necessarily if they're also participating in the public-facing facade). They can count registrations and reports of early voting by party affiliation; they know the history of polling bias; they have noted the large shifts away from Democrats in groups that formerly voted heavily Democratic; they can read the top 10 list of voter issues and not turn a blind eye that issues favouring Republicans are at the top and those favouring Democrats are at the bottom; they don't allow their preferences to sway recognition of when a political stunt is goofy (unhelpful) and when it's fun (helpful); they don't shout down inconvenient observations.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Holy cow. If you think Trump is fascist, does that make Vance a super fascist?

He says I'm a fascist as well. He probably considers you one also if you support Trump or MAGA.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I disagree. I don't think Dems would be eager to remove him knowing Vance is his replacement. I'd rather a 4 year Trump presidency than a 3.5 years Vance presidency.

So you'd rather the guy that you consider the Number One, supreme fascist to remain in office over someone who you consider the Number Two fascist of the Republican Party?

At least you have your priorities straight.

 

[AmmoTech90]

He says I'm a fascist as well. He probably considers you one also if you support Trump or MAGA.

I do not, in fact, consider you a fascist.

Reading comprehension fail for the win!

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Hey, just because your political arithmetic brings you to that conclusion doesn't mean mine does. I do not, in fact, consider you a fascist.

How do you square your bigoted comments then?
You clearly and plainly, without dispute, called MAGA people fascists.
I am a Trump supporter and support MAGA. It doesn't matter what my citizenship is.
You, in fact, even if by association, called me a fascist.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Reading comprehension fail for the win!

Not on my part.

 

[brihard]

He says I'm a fascist as well.

He explicitly said that he does not consider you, individually, a fascist, so that’s a lie.

 

[Lumber]

How do you square your bigoted comments then?
You clearly and plainly, without dispute, called MAGA people fascists.
I am a Trump supporter and support MAGA. It doesn't matter what my citizenship is.
You, in fact, even if by association, called me a fascist.

Lol, you aren't MAGA.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Robyn Urback, writing in today's Globe and Mail, say that the takes in next week's elections may never have. been higher for Canada:

----------​

Canada’s next relationship with the U.S. could be our most vulnerable​

ROBYN URBACK
PUBLISHED 1 HOUR AGO UPDATED 46 MINUTES AGO
FOR SUBSCRIBERS

Prime minister Lester B. Pearson once said that to live alongside the United States is “like living with your wife. At times it is difficult to live with her. At all times it is impossible to live without her.”

Canada is on the precipice of a new relationship with a partner yet unknown. In one outcome, we’ll get a new wife not unlike the old: a familiar type, relatively predictable, and governed by convention and the burden of expectations. We haven’t really known her for that long, but we do know where she comes from, and that means we can expect the marriage to be within the range of normal.

In the other outcome, Canada will be forced to reconcile with an ex: one we know is erratic, vindictive and prone to wild mood swings. Forget to take out the trash, and she will lock you out of the house (or to be more precise: she will lock you out of the U.S. manufacturing market with hefty tariffs on aluminum and steel), and if you don’t start picking up your slack in terms of the bills (or rather, defence spending as a percentage of GDP) she might follow through on threats to leave you on your own if you get into trouble.

Reconciling with an ex is always a gamble, but doing so after she’s spent four years plotting her revenge seems downright diabolical. Yet this is an arranged marriage – Canada has no say in the matter – meaning all we can do is get our own affairs in order and brace for whoever it is that ends up walking down the aisle.

The stakes are high for Canada on multiple fronts, the most obvious of which are economics and trade. We’re in a vulnerable position; Mexico has surpassed Canada as the U.S.’s largest trading partner, though the U.S. remains our largest partner, with $3.6-billion worth of goods and services still crossing the Canada-U.S. border every day. The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) is up for renegotiation in 2026, and Canada, as ever, is extraordinarily dependent on negotiations going well. (Our efforts to diversify trade in the past few years have mostly fallen flat; talks with Britain over a free trade deal broke down earlier this year, for example, over Canada’s stubbornness regarding its supply-managed dairy sector, among other factors.)

The U.S., meanwhile, is in a protectionist mood. President Joe Biden signed an executive order early in his tenure strengthening “Buy American” provisions in procurement for manufacturing industries, and he has expanded its scope over the past several years. Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris (who, notably, was one of 10 senators to oppose replacing the North American free-trade agreement), is expected to largely stay the course. Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, however, has already said he will impose a 60-per-cent tariff on goods from China and floated the idea of 10-to-20-per-cent tariffs on goods from all other countries. Without an exemption for Canada, Mr. Trump’s move would devastate our economy – a Scotiabank report from April estimated it would mean a 3.6-per-cent decline in GDP – effectively delivering a “Nixon shock” for the 21st century.

But trade isn’t the only area of concern for Canada. In 2017, Canada saw the effects of a relatively minor policy change under Mr. Trump’s administration at its own border with the U.S. In November of that year, the Trump administration ended the Temporary Protected Status of Haitians living in the U.S., ordering them to leave by 2019 or face deportation. Shortly thereafter, Canada began seeing migrants enter the country through irregular border crossings, including that at Roxham Road, which allowed migrants to claim asylum in Canada because of a loophole in the Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA).

Though that loophole was closed in 2023 and irregular border crossings have slowedsubstantially this year, Mr. Trump’s promise of mass deportations – the largest in American history, for which he has threatened to use the National Guard to deport millions of undocumented immigrants – will undoubtedly send asylum-seekers heading for the Canadian border (despite amendments to the STCA, migrants who avoid interception and wait a few weeks can still try to claim asylum). And with Canada bracing for a refugee crisis of its own making, the addition of migrants fleeing Mr. Trump’s deportation orders would further exacerbate our already overburdened immigration, health and housing services.

A second marriage with Mr. Trump will be one of uncertainty. Will he help us defend Canadian interests in the Arctic, for example? Or will his administration go beyond the warnings of the Biden/Harris one, and leave Canada to fend for itself? What will it mean for our intelligence-sharing regimes if a notoriously loose-lipped and carelessleader again occupies the highest office in the U.S.? Canada might soon have a partner that mistakenly sees us as a foe. It will be impossible to live without him, yet utter chaos to live with him, too.

----------​

She's spot on, I think.