The Real timschochet

Both parties just assume that the American voters are stupid. And since the voters continue to vote for them, I guess they have good reason to believe this. But it didn’t use to be that way. 30 years ago Ross Perot criticized free trade and promoted tariffs, making the exact same moronic arguments that Trump does now. Of all people, Al Gore took him on in a debate on Larry King- anyone remember this? Gore destroyed him, and Perot was never heard from again. Al Gore, the lifelong liberal and environmentalist, gave the best and most impassioned defense of free market capitalism I’ve ever heard. We need way more of that.

And she is wrong about this. Both political parties continue to pursue nativism, populism, and anti-globalism. There hasn’t been a truly pro-free trade candidate since Mitt Romney. It’s really sad.

They were given a level of political freedom, but they didn’t have economic freedom. They were prevented from freedom of movement, from agriculture, from industry, from trade. Their cities were (are) overcrowded and hopeless. There is no means of social mobility, no sense of economic stability. Under such conditions we would also elect extreme radicals who promised a violent solution.

Hamas can only be ultimately destroyed by the Palestinian people. And that can only happen when the Palestinian people have economic stability, freedom, and a certain level of pride. Therefore IMO the end game is a 3 state solution. My model is a miniature version of the British Raj in 1948: India = Israel The West Bank = Pakistan Gaza = Bangladesh

This gets to the heart of the thread. I think you misuse the word “evil” here. Evil is a deliberate attempt to do malice to others. I can assure you with 100% sincerity that I have no such motive. I honestly believe that my views will bring about good results without bringing harm to others. I could be wrong about that; I’m sure you believe I am. But if I’m wrong it’s not deliberate. Likewise I feel the same about you. I have read your views and I think many of them are wrongheaded and would bring real problems and in some instances potential catastrophe to this country if they were ever enacted. But I don’t believe that they are evil and I don’t think you are evil. Evil is Hamas and Hitler and Stalin and Charles Manson, Pol Pot, etc. The word has no place in a discussion between American liberals and conservatives. Neither Joe Biden, nor Donald Trump, nor any American politician of consequence in our history, has been evil.

It will come as no surprise to you that I strongly disagree with your opinion of how we should have handled this affair. I think the exact opposite: that we should have put MORE pressure on Netanyahu and Israel not less. I think that letting Israel do what it wanted would have resulted in more death and destruction and no solution at all and no safety for Israel. We are at complete odds here. However, this all misses the point I was trying to mistake. You can blame Biden and I can blame Netanyahu but neither is responsible for these deaths. The moral responsibility is with the terrorists , not the civilized people who try to deal with them. No matter what errors we make we are not the culprits. They are. That was my point.

You know what’s so sad and pathetic? I KNOW that you and @Patented Phil agree with me about what I wrote in the opening post. But you can’t bring yourself to acknowledge it. You can’t write “I disagree with Tim on most issues but he’s got this one right.” You can’t bring yourself to do it because your dislike of me is so great, or your tribalism is so strong, or a combination of both. So you feel the need to attack me instead. And that’s really sad. Not at all surprising coming from you but sad. I hope and pray I’m never like you.

This is a good example of what I’m talking about: in order, you attack the MSM, President Biden, and myself.

I have never welched on anyone. And feel free to attack me all you want for my views on undocumented immigrants. I stand by all of those. And they have nothing to do with this topic.

I think you’re going to be surprised. We will find out soon.

ZeroHedge is another of these far right sites I don’t understand any more. It claims to be rooted in the Ludwig Von Mises Austrian free market school of economics, which is laudable. But anyone in that school would be screaming from the rooftops about Trump’s tariff ideas and insisting that Kamala Harris is preferable simply by default. But of course ZeroHedge does the opposite: it slams Harris at every opportunity and ignores Trump’s ideas- and also promotes an alt-right pro-Putin agenda. What does that have to do with free market? Nothing. In the article you linked the description of Kamala’s CNN interview with phrases like “training wheels” and “nearly imploded” is so far removed from what actually took place that it destroys the credibility of the author. As does the entire premise of the article. Don’t you guys know what is actually going to happen in the debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris? If you’re unsure let me fill you in: she’s going to destroy him.

Well that’s easy. Because she started way down in the swing states, then she cut the lead in half, then she closed the difference, now she’s a slight favorite. And she’s also tied it up in North Carolina and Georgia which weren’t in play a month ago. And the Georgia and North Carolina numbers are in the last few days. Meanwhile there’s no significant reversals in Trump’s favor. This leads me to conclude that her momentum continues.

He wrote that but it doesn’t make much sense. Here is RCP polling on Pennsylvania: https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/pennsylvania/trump-vs-harris As you can see, contrary to Silver, Trump does NOT have a stubborn lead. In fact Harris based on all polling has a slight lead. Only the latest Trafalgar poll makes it even a tossup, otherwise Harris would average a 2 point consistent lead. So I don’t know where he’s getting this.

I think you’re being the hack not me. I note that you rely on 538 when you want and ignore them when you want. Now you’re relying on Silver to claim there’s a change in momentum when he never says that or ever indicates the trend is reversing. To the contrary he insists that nobody should put too much stock on the difference between 52-48 for Kamala vs 52-48 for Trump. I would also note that per Real Clear, the betting markets remain with Harris as slight but nearly unanimous favorite to win: https://www.realclearpolling.com/betting-odds/2024/president My estimation, based not on “feelings” but on constant reading about this subject, is that, for the moment, Kamala’s momentum continues but that the race remains a toss up. So I see no reason to change the thread title.

What ignorance? Did you read the Nate Silver poll? Here’s a summary: https://www.benzinga.com/news/24/08/40665199/trump-vs-harris-nate-silver-says-former-president-now-ahead-of-vice-president-in-electoral-college-o Read it carefully and get back to me. See if it indicates a change of momentum. It doesn’t. There are no polls that do.

No this is nonsense. The whole basis of Nate Silver’s change is the assumption that Kamala’s DNC bounce will fade. The problem with that is that there was no DNC bounce; her surge came before that. So you have Silver, and Trafalgar which is unchanged and within the margin of error, and nothing else. The vast majority of polls show Kamala continuing to have momentum. Next time try to read stuff more carefully. I DO want to have discussion but only if your facts are correct. In your case they’re usually not and certainly not this time.

I don’t see any evidence of that. There’s a few Republican funded polls that continue to show Trump slightly ahead in some of the swing states. The majority of polls do not. And Kamala continues to have a national lead in poll averages by 4 points per 538.

Harris is also closing in on Trump in Texas: https://www.newsweek.com/kamala-harris-chances-beating-donald-trump-texas-polls-1947135 However Harris is not going to win Texas.

Um if you think Trump is winning votes as a result of this incident you’re sadly mistaken.

Lol 1. Kamala was never going to win Minnesota by 10 points. 2. Kamala was never going to not win Minnesota.

Wait- what did Biden do exactly?

Let me put this in language you’ll understand: I think she will win because that’s what Jesus wants to happen.

I thought she performed well. Outside of conservative news sources nearly all journalists seem to agree. As far as the general public goes I have no idea. I certainly haven’t seen any poll results that indicate otherwise. It’s going to be a close election. But for those of us rooting for Harris to win, the good news remains that since she entered the race just over a month ago, there has been no break in her momentum. No pull the other direction, no halt to the honeymoon and gain by Trump. That’s not to say it won’t happen at some point but it hasn’t happened yet.

Thats not what I said. There ARE costs short term and overall gains long term. Politics, however, are about short term gains and losses so my arguments won’t work with the general public.

If I were in charge of Trump’s campaign I would be running 3 ads. The first would be a video of Kamala talking credit for being the deciding vote for the Inflation Reduction Act, followed by a woman struggling to shop in a grocery store and facts about how much prices have risen. I would run this ad the most. The second ad would be the Democratic mayor of New York City saying that he can’t afford the cost of undocumented immigrants, followed by statistics about these costs, followed by statistics on border encounters during the Biden/Harris years vs the Trump years. The third ad would be a series of statements by Kamala in the past as opposed to now: against fracking, now opposed. For getting rid of the border patrol, now opposed, etc. End with Kamala saying “if I’m elected President the first thing I will do is fight inflation” followed by this question: “But she’s been in office 4 years, why hasn’t she done this already?” I think these would be effective.