Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Writing the Wrong's avatar

This election is a fierce contest between two sides: Donald Trump, and Not Donald Trump.

It's amazing to me that the margins of this election are reportedly so tight when Donald Trump is not running against a Democrat candidate. Kamala Harris is so profoundly terrible as a candidate that she provides literally zero benefit to her own ticket. The same can also be said of Tim Walz. They are non-entities, running solely on animosity for Trump. And that animosity is entirely synthetic - a creation of the media, entirely constructed by lies.

In every election, you can name good reasons to vote for either side. There were good things about Joe Biden, Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Al Gore, and their platforms. Same for Trump, Romney, Bush, etc. But Kamala Harris is so uniquely unaccomplished, her platform so vague, that even her own supporters can't name a single credible, tangible reason to vote for her.

Seriously, Charlie Kirk has asked hundreds of Kamala supporters on camera to name "her greatest accomplishment" or "one achievement during her time as VP". Not one person has answered with something even halfway convincing.

I personally don't sense that the depth of hatred for Trump is sufficient enough to deliver a fair election to a non-candidate like Kamala. I don't think a Kamala win could or will be delivered honestly. So it does beg the question - why did they pick her? Do they know something we don't?

Expand full comment
mvlbob's avatar

Mayor Pete ?? A wastrel and incompetent to boot. We all would be under the boot if this comment prevails.

Expand full comment
2 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?