Moonglow
Diamond Member
Which are still humans covered by the ConstitutionDemocrats are bad fruits.
And nuts, wackos, weirdos, tree-huggers, fags, and trannies.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Which are still humans covered by the ConstitutionDemocrats are bad fruits.
And nuts, wackos, weirdos, tree-huggers, fags, and trannies.
Yer idea is to continue hating other humansThe argument is if the world just all gets along and every country has DEI and we hug terrorists, Russians, the Chinese, North Korea, etc. they will hug us back and we will have all achieved Utopia. World first and everyone can drive around with COEXIST bumper stickers on our EV's.
Harris-Walz certainly don’t want to run on their record!Have you noticed? In the Media, on the TV, in the Web or here on USMB, every discussion, every heated argument, every thread is against TRUMP! Not only do you never see any JUSTIFICATION for what exactly it is the Harris would do, her POLICIES that would be so much better than Trump's plans, but nothing criticizing Trump plans!
Or anything he actually DID when president. The entire election debate by the Left has been made PERSONAL.
It is all aimed at THE MAN HIMSELF. Trump. You know, that fat, overweight, orange golfer who eats poorly and used to camp around with international models. Every attack is either against HIM or his SUPPORTERS.
You know, those awful, DEPLORABLE, country hicks, hillbillies, backwoods people who have never even had electricity who drive horse-drawn wagons and sleep with their cousins who support Trump. Still living in the 19th century. It is the same bias they cleverly disguised in the 1960s as The Beverly Hillbillies and in the 1970s with Archie Bunker.
In the vernacular of logic, we call that an AD HOMINEM attack--- attacking not the message but the MESSENGER. This is a fallacious argument, it is a personal rather than logical argument first recognized and defined by Aristotle himself. It is a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion often using a totally irrelevant, but often highly charged attribute of the opponent's character or background.
We have seen it all here countless times by people like Mac1958 and numerous others.
This is the Left. This is the substance of the entire case against Trump (and his supporters). That is the basis of the entire "cult" argument, that by minimizing or delegitimizing the people themselves, you avoid the argument itself. Basically, those attacking Trump, their entire case is: "We didn't like him in 2016 and we still don't like him now." Even when they manage to point to some event, it isn't actually about anything that Trump or his supporters themselves really did, but a situation THE LEFT CREATED that merely INVOLVED Trump or his supporters that they created or drew these people into as a result of their embittered dislike of him.
I dare the Left to present an actual argument here that ISN'T about Trump the man or his supporters! But they cannot. They never do. Worse, they use this same crutch, JUST AS WITH JOE BIDEN in 2020, as their ENTIRE CASE FOR SUPPORTING KAMALA HARRIS. I mean, was there ever a single time since 2020 that you ever heard anyone say: "Gee, instead of Joe, I sure wish we had Harris as president instead?"
The entire case AGAINST Trump or FOR Harris, it is all based on a cleverly disguised leftwing fallacy. This is the core of the means of defeating Kamala Harris at the voting polls--- The Left actually have NO REAL ARGUMENT as to why Trump shouldn't be president or that Harris should be, other than THEY JUST DON'T LIKE HIM.
Ad hominem - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
View attachment 1026596
Lol. So you like party elites picking your candidate.That is democracy you fucktard. The Democratic Party is an organization that can decide it's nominee any way it chooses. Trump was also technically nominated by Republican party delegates as well, idiot.
I prefer a primary but in the aftermath of Joe's decision to fold to I was looking forward to a contested convention until Kamala impressed me by doing what I didn't think her capable of and wrangling the delegates to her side and convincing the rest of the would be's not to run. The party didn't choose her so much as she ran unopposed after she cleared the field. That's the part of this cosplay and fan fiction that you all conveniently leave out. No other democrat wanted to run against her.Lol. So you like party elites picking your candidate.
You aren’t very bright are you?
Have you noticed? In the Media, on the TV, in the Web or here on USMB, every discussion, every heated argument, every thread is against TRUMP!
That's a good point.Harris-Walz certainly don’t want to run on their record!
Less than nothing.Just as I suspected. Three pages and the left still has got nothing.
Democrats are bad fruits.
Just as I suspected. Three pages and the left still has got nothing.
How have they caused any of what you said?His appointments to the Supreme Court while he was in office have shown that to be true.
Trump is the undisputed king of the AD HOMINEM attack.
I've got your name calling loser swinging:BULL. He only attacks the people for what they do in misleading the public with lies and misdirection. The damage to this country they do that he rails about is OBVIOUS.
Even so, it still fails to address any significant past or future policy of his which is so flawed that Harris' would be much better. This thread is about America First, yet I see you have once again deflected away from it.
But thanks for proving my case for making your whole argument against Trump ABOUT Trump, not his policies. With no supporting evidence, you couldn't even make a cogent argument without even BEGINNING your argument ABOUT TRUMP.
LOSER.
Figured that out, eh?Trump was PRESIDENT before Biden.
Right. She has done ZIP.Harris has never been president.
"Economists?" You mean like 500 psychologists? What competent economist would tout the strengths and efficacy of the economic policies of someone WHO HAS NEVER HAD ANY ECONOMIC POLICIES ACTUALLY TESTED IN PRACTICE YET? Meanwhile Trump's economic policies were tested and were great. America ROCKED all through his term right up to when Covid hit the world and we shut everything down trying to stop its spread.Economists have stated that Harris policies would be better than trumps.
I am temporarily taking all you idiots off ignore to once again show that YOU GOT NOTHING. You have presented nothing. Your every argument is about Trump. You have shown not a single policy of his as having been so flawed as to need Harris, Why Harris would be so much better as to take a chance on her, much less anything bad about putting America First.You guys keep repeating the lies trump told yo during his presidency. Trump did not crete the economy we had. You dummies don't understnd this.