The debate accomplished more for Harris than it did for Trump
The debate accomplished more for Harris than it did for Trump
Brookings Senior Fellows William Galston and Elaine Kamarck react to the first and potentially only Harris-Trump debate.
You're viewing a single thread.
A good debate is where both sides have some points to try and establish evidence for. That's a rarity in today's political election cycles. Here, Harris just had to show who was the adult in the room and maybe get some talking points out to anyone who hadn't heard them yet. It could have been a town hall or campaign rally with a screaming toddler in the background, same effect.
A good debate is one that informs voters and helps undecided folk decide
What you are describing is an entertaining episode of the West Wing
Lady, your debate is too busy being indicted for tax fraud!
Harris just had to show who was the adult in the room
I felt that was Hillary's strategy as well, but with Kamala, she had 4 years of his failures to bait him easier. Also shes just generally more likeable.
Harris did a good job showing everyone why they shouldn't vote for Trump. She did very little to show why people should vote for her. People may prefer her over Trump, but if they don't show up to vote, she will lose.
Other than the abortion issue, which only affects you in a deep red state, she had no energizing policy positions.
Bad on the economy. Terrible on social issues, health care. Awful on immigration. Dogshit on Gaza.
Choosing not to vote is an option if both candidates aren't going to improve people's lives, especially considering that voting is made such a burden.
You go right ahead and ignore the lever, I'm sure all the people on both sets of tracks understand you not wanting to get involved since it doesn't benefit you to pull it.
Two levers installed by the capitalist ruling class. Go ahead and pull one to pretend it makes a difference.
Corporations are donors to both parties.
Go ask your gay friend if they can tell a difference
This has been reported as homophobic. This means people have a reading comprehension issue. They were obviously stating one party is homophobic.
Opinions on the policies aside, I agree with your point, votes are the only way she can win. That we have such low turnouts in a country founded on the idea of voting in representation is a travesty, no matter what party you prefer.
I disagree that not voting is a valid option, as there are plenty of ways to vote even if you hate both main Presidential candidates. At least the Green/Communist party voters are trying to make a statement, even if it's not going to change anything (my opinion). And down ticket you can vote for local people that will affect you more directly, so not voting at all is a loss of your voice.
As for voting being a burden, you can thank Republicans for that. It's their best way of ensuring seats and power.