Where Are The Arguments Against America First?

[toobfreak]

If you vote for Trump you vote against America. If you are back and vote for trump, you are self loathing and hate America.

So... TRUMP, TRUMP and TRUMP. Thanks for proving my case. You can't even spell BLACK, moron. Go away.

 

[toobfreak]

Dude [TRUMP] happens to be a malignant narcissist, a sociopath. Nothing good comes from a sociopath. The Bible calls people like Trump bad trees. A bad tree will not bear good fruit.

So... TRUMP. You hit the ground right out of the gate making a PERSONAL AD HOMINEM argument against the man, not his actual polices, just as I predicted. You are dismissed.

 

[Marener]

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

I have a problem with Trump trying to get state legislators to change the electors for him because he didn’t want to lose to Joe Biden.

Does that seem okay to you?

 

[toobfreak]

Neither are worthy of the office.

No argument here. Says or proves nothing about America First, as you WILL be getting one of them.

End of thread.

End of you. You are dismissed.

 

[toobfreak]

I stated reality.

The only reality you stated is a totally unsupportable, subjective, appeal to the gallery. You are right because you SAY you are right. Fallacy. Pathetic.
You are finished.

 

[toobfreak]

Trump shouldn't be president because his policies are moronic, unworkable, and will do nothing but cause misery.

So, Trump is a moron. Meanwhile, 2017, 2018, and 2019 ALL PROVE YOU WRONG.

His appointments to the Supreme Court while he was in office have shown that to be true.

Because they followed the Constitution to the letter of the law and merely returned abortion to the states? And a handful of states clamped down on killing children?
PLEEEASE. You are dismissed.

BTW Ace, SCOTUS has ruled on a lot of other things, some of which were in the Left's favor. Dismissed.

 

[toobfreak]

Because the nominee dropped out,

That does not justify bypassing the primary process. Show me the law supporting this. The woman has NOT A SINGLE VOTE FOR HER BY THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY in TWO elections.

Biden dropped out, in effect, he should have forfeited the race.

OFF TOPIC. You are finished here.

 

[toobfreak]

Except that's not the truth. He wasn't forced out.

Sorry, Biden ADMITTED AS MUCH on national TV. He said he dropped out FOR THE GOOD OF THE PARTY after repeatedly stating he would never quit.

ALL THAT LEAVES is that he was PRESSURED to leave and there is hundreds of cases where political operatives PRESSURED HIM TO LEAVE.

Your arguments dismissed.

 

[Curried Goats]

That does not justify bypassing the primary process. The woman has NOT A SINGLE VOTE FOR HER BY THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY in TWO elections.

Biden dropped out, in effect, he should have forfeited the race.

OFF TOPIC. You are finished here.

No one by passed it. We had one and then the nominee dropped out and in the midst of figuring out a new one every potential candidate bowed out to her. And your laughable suggestion of what he should of done is just you being a sad cuckold. He didn't ask you cuck.

 

[toobfreak]

That is democracy you fucktard.

Too bad we are not a democracy. Show me anywhere in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights or the Northwest Ordinance where it says we are a democracy! It says we are a REPUBLIC OF LAWS.

The Democratic Party is an organization that can decide it's nominee any way it chooses.

WRONG AGAIN, SPUD. We are a Republic of LAWS and the DNC has to obey the LAW.
Show me the law saying that the party elites themselves can nominate a person for president that never even got a single primary vote,
JUST TO SAVE THEIR ASSES AND TRY TO SAVE THEIR HOPES OF WINNING AN ELECTION.

 

[toobfreak]

I've got your name calling loser swinging:

View attachment 1026720

Do that again and I'll report you and have you thrown off the thread. Either present a non-Trump logical case against America First policies or STFU.

 

[Marener]

pretty clever how the right demands we debate Trump’s policies but fail to admit he barely has any policies.

 

[JohnDB]

 

[toobfreak]

I have a problem with Trump trying to get state legislators to change the electors for him because he didn’t want to lose to Joe Biden.
Does that seem okay to you?

What makes you think that happened? There were solid grounds to believe the election had not been conducted legally. The courts refused to adjudicate it. They refused to resolve these matters before certification. There was a concerted effort by both the government and media to suppress any dialog on the election. There is precedent for offering alternate electors for consideration. It has been done before. Trump followed every legal path trying to prevent what he saw as an illegal election.

And if I have to remind you: Trump was way ahead of Biden throughout election day, evening and night until about 6AM the next day when, while everyone was home sleeping, there was a massive ballot dump, nearly all of which were for Joe Biden, statistically impossible.

Dismissed.

 

[Zincwarrior]

but nothing criticizing Trump plans!

he has no plans.

 

[Marener]

What makes you think that happened? There were solid grounds to believe the election had not been conducted legally. The courts refused to adjudicate it. They refused to resolve these matters before certification. There was a concerted effort by both the government and media to suppress any dialog on the election. There is precedent for offering alternate electors for consideration. It has been done before. Trump followed every legal path trying to prevent what he saw as an illegal election.

And if I have to remind you: Trump was way ahead of Biden throughout election day, evening and night until about 6AM the next day when, while everyone was home sleeping, there was a massive ballot dump, nearly all of which were for Joe Biden, statistically impossible.

Dismissed.

The legislators testified that Trump asked them to change the electors for him. It wasn't really a secret. Trump and his team were talking about it openly too.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/giuliani-tells-pennsylvania-legislators-they-can-override-popular-vote-to-appoint-pro-trump-electors-010121925.html

So you think that's okay?

 

[toobfreak]

No one by passed it. We had one and then the nominee dropped out

So then you admit it was bypassed. Harris has NOT A SINGLE PRIMARY VOTE IN TWO ELECTIONS. Bypassed.
SHOW ME THE LAW that allows the DNC to just pick a new nominee by themselves bypassing the voters after the primaries are over and the person 14 million people voted for just drops out in the 11th hour after saying he never would?

I've asked twice now. You got nothing. You are done here.

 

[Curried Goats]

Too bad we are not a democracy. Show me anywhere in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights or the Northwest Ordinance where it says we are a democracy! It says we are a REPUBLIC OF LAWS.

That strawman doesn't move me. I don't care if you want to cry about the word democracy because you don't know what it means. Have at it.

WRONG AGAIN, SPUD. We are a Republic of LAWS and the DNC has to obey the LAW.

Dipshit, nothing about being a Republic means we can't be a democracy. Rome was a Republic and an Oligarchy.

Show me the law saying that the party elites themselves can nominate a person for president that never even got a single primary vote,
JUST TO SAVE THEIR ASSES AND TRY TO SAVE THEIR HOPES OF WINNING AN ELECTION.

Private organizations can organize however they want. They could nominate their candidate by a Hogwartz sorting hat if they wanted to.

 

[d0gbreath]

Do that again and I'll report you and have you thrown off the thread. Either present a non-Trump logical case against America First policies or STFU.

I'd like to try, but I don't know what the America First policies are. I've heard that they are not Project 2025.
If one of them is to order the military to attack the enemy within, then I'll say that that one sucks more than anything has ever sucked before.

 

[toobfreak]

I guess the Left STILL DOES NOT GET IT.

The case here is THIS:

We have two candidates. Put a bag over their heads so you can see nothing of the person then give me the argument why one person's stated policies and proven leadership is so bad that we MUST elect the other, and why the other person's polices are so good we should look no further?

My argument is that Trump was tested in office, his policies worked well for America, so all of your arguments are against TRUMP THE MAN, not what he does or would do as our president.

Meanwhile, you cannot make any case for what is so damned good about Harris, especially with her only known record being as a do-nothing senator and as a horrible, do nothing VP.

The Left's who case against electing Trump is that:

ORANGE MAN JUST BAD. YOU DON'T LIKE THE BIG ORANGE ALPHA MALE.