Kamala Harris For President!

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Now, you suggest policy doesn't matter. What I do remember is you and I debating the relative merits of the Trump tax cut, so I guess it mattered then and doesn't matter now? Spare me your selective indignation...

You stated a tax cut would be inflationary (it wasn't), it would screw up interest rates (it didn't), and plunge the government deeper into debt.
Here's where policy matters.

What I said was specific policy nuance doesn't matter in this election campaign and that mood, larger policy themes (as opposed to detail), and preservation of democracy are more important to Harris's campaign. If you've been watching the DNC for the past 3 nights, you'd recognize that what I'm saying is correct. As for the actual impact of Democratic vs Republicans policies upon job creation, since the end of the Cold War, Democratic presidents have created 50x more jobs than Republicans.

Harris has stated that she would allow the Trump-era capital gains tax cut reduction to expire. Certainly the economy is better than it was a year or two ago but its still not great. Does raising the capital gains tax to 28% (Harris previously stated she wanted to see 35%) sound like a good idea to you?

I've already stated in this thread that I'm not particularly fond of Harris's economic policy proposals and find them rather gimmicky, but that I find them rather benign compared to Trump's tariff proposals. Indeed, the very same WashPost columnist who you quoted criticizing Harris's proposal (criticism I largely agree with) also found that keeping the Trump tax cuts and passing his tariff plan would have a net negative effect on all Americans but the Top 1% (costing the average American household $2,600).



There is simply no question that in broad policy strokes and in light of the favorable treatment that the 1% have gotten over the years (and the accompanying widening of the wealth gap), Harris's economic plans certainly have broader appeal and greater benefit to a larger share of the electorate.

All that said, I'm far more interested in my kids inheriting an intact and vibrant democracy than whether their inheritance goes up or down a few percent. You should be too.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Chicks

You bash McCain's service every time you tout the "achievements" of your Dear Leader.

I'll grant that there is such a thing as an expansive definition. However, your definition of "bashing McCain's service" is beyond absurd. Try again, Chicklet.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

What I said was specific policy nuance doesn't matter in this election campaign and that mood, larger policy themes (as opposed to detail), and preservation of democracy are more important to Harris's campaign.

No, you didn't mention any of that in the message I replied to. But even if you did, that's BS as well.

Originally Posted by finnbow

I've already stated in this thread that I'm not particularly fond of Harris's economic policy proposals and find them rather gimmicky, but that I find them rather benign compared to Trump's tariff proposals. Indeed, the very same WashPost columnist who you quoted criticizing Harris's proposal (criticism I largely agree with) also found that keeping the Trump tax cuts and passing his tariff plan would have a net negative effect on all Americans but the Top 1% (costing the average American household $2,600).

Then why the hell did Biden choose to keep most of them in place for the last 4 years?!?!? And Biden just announced more tariffs on Chinese goods just a couple months ago. Are you suggesting that Biden's tariffs are all about benefiting the "top 1%"?

Originally Posted by finnbow

There is simply no question that in broad policy strokes and in light of the favorable treatment that the 1% have gotten over the years (and the accompanying widening of the wealth gap), Harris's economic plans certainly have broader appeal and greater benefit to a larger share of the electorate.

All that said, I'm far more interested in my kids inheriting an intact and vibrant democracy than whether their inheritance goes up or down a few percent. You should be too.

We agree on the objective. We disagree how to get there. You and your fellow traveler's keep mouthing how any tax or budget proposal you disagree with always benefits "the top 1%". The facts continue to say otherwise.

Harris plans may be appealing to those who are susceptible to good marketing. "Tax the rich" certainly rings some bells with the left side of the Dem party. There's no evidence to claim that they will have greater benefit .

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

I'll grant that there is such a thing as an expansive definition. However, your definition of "bashing McCain's service" is beyond absurd. Try again, Chicklet.

OK, then what are your views of Trump himself insulting/dissing McCain, the Gold Star family of CPT Humayun Khan, and Medal of Honor recipients? Don't employ your tired "false narrative" response as all of these were done publicly and we all saw them with our own eyes.



As for McCain, your response was pretty damned disrespectful and dismissive of an honorable man and war hero for voting against a bill that didn't fulfill his party's "repeal and replace" promise (a promise that you believed and promoted on this very site, BTW). Why not blame the entire party for bringing forward a bill that contradicted this promise rather than McCain for casting a principled vote?

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

the border is out of control (border crossings are the lowest in years)

This is BS too. They're down from where they were 3 years ago, but 3 years ago was already an insanely high number.

You'll find some perspective here: https://www.statista.com/statistics/...border-patrol/

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

No, you didn't mention any of that in the message I replied to.

I've mentioned it repeatedly in this thread and you know it. Indeed, you've responded several times to it. Your "in the message I replied to" is simply another of your cheap, disingenuous dodges.

There's no evidence to claim that they will have greater benefit .

I provided a Catherine Rampell post and graph showing exactly that.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

This is BS too. They're down from where they were 3 years ago, but 3 years ago was already an insanely high number.

You'll find some perspective here: https://www.statista.com/statistics/...border-patrol/

And Trump instructed his own party to kill the most comprehensive border/immigration bill in decades. Also, what happened to the big, beautiful wall that Trump promised?

The GOP does not want to fix the problem. They want the issue to persist for electoral purposes. Hell, Trump famously used illegal alien labor on his NY and NJ projects and continues to use cheap immigrant labor on his properties to this day.

[Chicks]

Gus Walz broke the internet with his tearful love for his dad. Then the bullying began
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...y/74906490007/

Whell's World - sociopathic bullies.

[Pio1980]

As with 'pub border policy, cruelty is the point. Anyone think this, or Trump, is what Jesus would do?

Originally Posted by Chicks

Gus Walz broke the internet with his tearful love for his dad. Then the bullying began
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...y/74906490007/

Whell's World - sociopathic bullies.

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by RickeyM

You sound surprised.
I just realized an interesting parallel here and with the current Republican party. The Republican party leadership has been so corrupted and it's voters so radicalized that honest conversations and discourse are a thing of the past. The party needs to be replaced with a new conservative party. There is no hope to save the party as it now stands. All their standard bearer has to offer are lies and silly personal insults and yet they are his ride-or-die partners.
We also could use some new rational moderate conservative voices around here. Currently there is no honest conversation and discourse being offered. Maybe that's what's keeping more moderate Republican voices away?

The conversation here has verily been poisoned. Moderates of all stripes are put off by the whell vs everyone slugfest. every so often one ventures to say so.