ADVERTISEMENT

One conservative’s argument for a Harris vote

Prior to the 2020 election, it was all bare knuckle politics. But Trump's post-election conduct and the ransacking of the Capitol he promoted was the deal breaker. No going back after that. The stealing of state secrets was the icing on the cake.
I don’t like any of that either. Trump is no good. Sadly we have two Americas and it is what it is.
 
Prior to the 2020 election, it was all bare knuckle politics. But Trump's post-election conduct and the ransacking of the Capitol he promoted was the deal breaker. No going back after that. The stealing of state secrets was the icing on the cake.
His post-election conduct will again be fascist-like. He’ll declare victory on Election Night, before the polls have closed in many locations and days before the winner is actually determined. Baseless allegations of voter fraud, advanced by both him personally and his surrogates, will begin before Election Day. That will be just the beginning of a blizzard of lies. Don the Con’s Post-Election Shitshow - Part 2.
 
His post-election conduct will again be fascist-like. He’ll declare victory on Election Night, before the polls have closed in many locations and days before the winner is actually determined. Baseless allegations of voter fraud, advanced by both him personally and his surrogates, will begin before Election Day. That will be just the beginning of a blizzard of lies. Don the Con’s Post-Election Shitshow - Part 2.
And then if he wins, he won't backtrack. He'll say the fraud was real and they overcame it. His followers will demand prosecution of the fraudsters.
 
Last edited:
Kamala Harris really offers almost nothing in terms of policy priorities for disaffected Republicans.
The only thing she offers is that she's not Trump.

What happens if Kamala would get the House and Senate?
That is what concerns me. I don't know why so many Rs that are not voting for Trump are so sure that the Rs will win the senate and/or the house. They were suppose to win big the last election. Have the forgotten what happened?
 
If the authentic Kamala is the moderate Kamala, why did she not vote that way in the Senate?
Exactly, if Trump all of a sudden started being a nice person would you believe that's really who he is? I sure wouldn't because he has a hstory and it doesn't jive with the new personality.
 
The only thing she offers is that she's not Trump.


That is what concerns me. I don't know why so many Rs that are not voting for Trump are so sure that the Rs will win the senate and/or the house. They were suppose to win big the last election. Have the forgotten what happened?

I’m voting Republican for House and Senate, despite (a) not voting for Trump, and (b) not being a huge fan of Jim Banks.

But I’m hoping for divided government, whoever wins the presidential race.
 
Exactly, if Trump all of a sudden started being a nice person would you believe that's really who he is? I sure wouldn't because he has a hstory and it doesn't jive with the new personality.

Past record (as Massachusetts governor) was a problem for Romney, too.

I remember thinking “Well of course he ran to the left to become governor of a blue state. But it’s a perfectly fair question of his core values.”
 
That's not the only difference. Governments can refinance their debt in perpetuity. Individuals can't. Eventually you die, and your debt comes out of your estate. Governments can just keep borrowing.

Here ya go. F it let’s see. Gov efficiency
 
That is what concerns me. I don't know why so many Rs that are not voting for Trump are so sure that the Rs will win the senate and/or the house. They were suppose to win big the last election. Have the forgotten what happened?

I think there is a belief that several R candidates (Lake excluded) are not as crazy or polarizing as Trump, so that even if you are a Liz Cheney Never Trumper-type, you still may vote R for Senate and House.

But, I agree with you that it is risky and seems unlikely that they will go different directions (Executive vs. Legislative).
 
Someone else who was great at efficiency, Stockton Rush. He didn't let things get in his way, a doer and not a talker.
Few examples. We have a product that would be good for the military. There’s no way to describe how overly cumbersome the process is to sell to the gov. Marv falls on his way to the dog park. Disabled. You’re looking at 3 years to get a check from social security. Harris just let in ten million immigrants. There’s also a massive backlog already. How on earth are they going to adjudicate those claims. On and on. Maybe Musk isn’t the guy but hell if he thinks he is let’s hear the ideas. Why wouldn’t we want to hear them?

We long lament our brightest don’t go to gov. Well now we have someone interested
 
Last edited:
They worked it out and even died in the same day. It happened to be July 4th.
But they were rational people back then, There's not any today. You only have to go back to Reagan's presidency to see some rational people. Reagan and Tip O'Neill were political opposites but they could make a deal.

I don't think it's realistic to say in an election between two people you can make the case for one without comparing them to their opponent.
That is true but when your whole arguement is that you aren't the other candidate then that is a very weak argument to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcmurtry66
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT