Cory1848

Right, and also because they (the campaign workers who resigned) may look for political jobs in the future, and staying on with a piece of work like Robinson would be a big stain on their résumé.

I don’t think he passes even that low bar; gnats can be pretty clever. They know exactly what blood type they need for nourishment, whereas Trump dives into a bucket of chicken parts deep-fried in oil without even thinking about it.

Do you even know what a Marxist is? Apparently, you haven’t absorbed much that’s useful from your “broad” reading.

He's absolutely terrified of debating her again. Last time, she shredded him to pieces. She made him small. He couldn't even look her in the face.

That’s a really good point. I think the number of dual (US/Israeli) citizens who primarily live in the US is significant; it’s my understanding that one can get Israeli citizenship by simply demonstrating one’s Jewish heritage in some documented way. However, given the overwhelming support for Democrats among American Jews, most dual citizens would also be voting along those lines. (Not surprising: two-thirds of Israelis living in Israel want Netanyahu to step down.) I’ve tried to convince some Jewish American friends of mine to obtain Israeli citizenship purely so they can vote in Israeli elections, but it’s not that simple apparently. In order to vote in Israeli elections, you have to live there for awhile.

No, that’s not what he said, either. What he said is precisely this: “I’m not going to call this a prediction, but, in my opinion, the Jewish people would have a lot to do with a loss if I’m at 40%” (meaning if only 40% of Jewish Americans voted for him; he’s actually polling at around 25% of the Jewish vote). This is clearly an example of “blaming the Jews” for one’s own (imminent) failure, and it’s one of the oldest antisemitic tropes in the book. And what does this do. Some very misplaced “verbage” from Trump and his running mate have brought bomb threats and Nazis in the street to an Ohio town. When Trump inevitably loses this election and starts blaming everything and everyone except his own lunacy, how secure do you think American Jews will feel? I don’t know if you support Trump or not, but stop apologizing for him. Don’t be part of the problem.

Then why does he say that if he loses the election, it will be the Jews' fault? Why did he entertain actual neo-Nazis at Mar-a-Lago? Trump "cares about" nothing but himself; he has no loyalty to any person or entity that does not provide him with immediate benefit. Wake up.

You are confusing citizens of Israel with citizens of the United States who happen to be Jewish. What difference does it make to a Jewish American where the US embassy in Israel is located? I have a great many American friends who are Jewish, and they all support Harris for the very good reason that they believe Trump’s plans for a second administration to be disastrous for US democracy, regardless of what his relations are with the Israeli government. As for moving the embassy, why was this a good idea? It was done only bilaterally, with no coordination with scores of other nations that have friendly relations with Israel, who should have been on board with it; European commenters called the move, at best, “unwise” or “inflammatory.” It was a “loose cannon” kind of move. Trump also recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights and said that he would support Israeli annexation of at least parts of the West Bank. This is worse than inflammatory; this puts Israel itself in a precarious situation vis-à-vis its neighbors, and global support more generally. Look what’s happening there now. But what does Trump care about Israel, or Jewish people? Nothing. His only reason for such reckless moves is to attract big donations from Sheldon and Miriam Adelson.

Ah, so the truth came out only "yesterday" about the crimes of General Millie [sic]. So happy to hear that you're on top of things! Keep doing that "research" ...

You guys are so funny sometimes. Men who are liberal are “weird”? What about men who are so eager to stroke Trump’s, um, “ego” that they whoop about useless legislation such as this? (FYI, it’s already quite illegal to commit violence against women, whether you were born in the US or not.) All he has left are chest-beating, pseudo-macho-men who prostrate themselves before his every utterance; talk about “weird.”

I don’t disagree (with your second and third paragraphs), and it rubs me the wrong way when Harris and other Democrats express such concern for Trump’s safety. But I’m pretty sure they’re taking the high-road approach so as to appear (at least) civilized, in the expectation that this will help them win the election fair and square. Should Trump somehow legitimately win the election (and the possibility of that happening is rapidly vanishing), all bets are off, especially during the period of time between the election and inauguration.

On the contrary, the Electoral College system keeps it very unfair, as voters in small states like North Dakota have more voting power than those in large states like California. And while there are some small blue states (Vermont) that have outsize power, and some large red states like Florida that have less (although Florida’s looking pretty purple again), this imbalance works in Republicans’ favor. Which is why a Democratic candidate can win the popular vote by millions of votes and still lose the election; that would never happen to a Republican candidate.

OK, here’s a nonaggressive answer from someone who’s somewhere to the left of the Green Party. Negatives about the Democratic Party: they are as up to their necks in corporate donor money as the Republicans are, and thus are beholden to corporate interests. I would add, however, that Democrats generally retain some sense of civic responsibility; present-day Republicans have gone off the deep end in their fealty to corporate money. Trump is a threat to democracy because he intends to bring the Justice Department under his personal control (for purposes of prosecuting people he doesn’t like). While he can’t directly fire judges who don’t follow his orders, as he’s also threatened, he can direct Congress to impeach such judges. As he has already demonstrated, he can kill legislation by making a few phone calls to his congressional allies. And he intends to replace tens of thousands of career bureaucrats in the federal government with his own loyalists. US democracy is based on the separation of powers (executive, legislative, and judicial); Trump has no interest in this and would seek to control all three branches of government. He has expressed admiration for strongmen, leading me and (based on polling) most other Americans to believe he seeks to emulate them. And if I may be “mildly aggressive,” your original post requests, “no Russia collusion nonsense.” I would suggest that your news sources may not all be on the level, as there is broad evidence of Russian interference in the 2016 election, including contacts between Russian intelligence agents and Trump campaign staffers. This in and of itself does not pose a threat to US democracy, but your mentioning it in your original post tells me that you might be starting out on the wrong foot here.

I didn’t miss any of my education but was responding to your word “savages”: they may have been behaving inappropriately, depending on your level of prudishness, but they are not “savages.” I myself have never had sex in public, but once years ago when I was drunk I urinated in public, in a small park, and unfortunately this was in Singapore so I was immediately apprehended by the police. Boy was that embarrassing.

The Euro-woman is clueless; I couldn’t get beyond two minutes into her video. There are any number of reasons why foreign men (and foreign women, too) come to Thailand and purchase “companionship” -- probably as many reasons as there are people who do it.

Given all the actual “cave-born savagery” that’s on full display the world over, criticizing a young couple for expressing intimacy seems disingenuous and silly. Make love not war.

What you're saying bears no relation whatsoever to what I was saying. None.

I’m not apologizing for what this person did. I was responding to the original poster’s comment that this incident somehow justifies Trump’s rhetoric about “migrant crime.” My point is that “migrant crime” is a myth, in the sense that it is no different from crime committed by US citizens (both are murderous), and that in fact, proportionately, migrants in the US commit fewer crimes than US citizens. Basically, I was implying that the original poster had fallen prey to Trump’s race baiting -- blaming migrants, or people of color, or gay people, or Jews, or “the Other,” for your problems is the oldest political play in the book, and it’s all that Trump has left. OK?

What tragic cases like this confirm is that people who enter the US illegally are Homo sapiens, and as such they are just as capable of murder as other Homo sapiens, say, native-born white guys with closets full of AK-47s. Statistics show that native-born Americans cause crime at a greater rate than immigrants (whether they entered the US legally or not). There’s tons of research showing this. And as for this particular immigrant, it’s a matter for law enforcement, whether they incarcerate him or eventually deport him back to the DR for incarceration there.

Then why is he saying every day that he is going to START by clearing Springfield, Ohio, of its Haitian population, regardless of the fact that those Haitians are living and working there legally. Sure, maybe Trump is just one big fat joker, jokes all day long, but the US is not immune to falling under authoritarianism. Why play with fire by voting for someone who promises to do just that?

He has said explicitly how he plans to bring a large proportion of the federal bureaucracy under his direct control (firing bureaucrats who aren’t personally loyal to him), use the Justice Department to go after personal enemies, and threaten judges with removal if they don’t follow his wishes. He’s already demonstrated how he can kill legislation in Congress by making a few phone calls. Whether such rule is a “dictatorship” or not is a matter of semantics, but I take him for his word; this is all laid out in full view. If you think it’s all a joke, or if you think that joking around is a mark of serious leadership, I can’t help you. Open your eyes.

Oh, boo hoo. Somebody stole your signs? You were taunted for wearing your hat? Don’t be a crybaby. A person who supports Trump openly favors strongman rule, which is an assault on everything the US stands for, and openly favors the roundup of (20 million?) people who aren’t white and their imprisonment in “camps,” which is barbaric. And much else besides. This is how he says he will govern; there are no secrets. So, I’m sorry, I’m sure that most Trump supporters are good people who have simply been led down an errant path, but I have no sympathy if you’re going to sob about your hat.

No, you'll just get a lot of laughing emojis.

OK, and Snopes, which is generally a very reliable fact-checking website, also said what you’re saying (I haven’t read the Snopes article). But, getting a little deeper into the weeds on Trump’s rhetoric and doublespeak, perhaps it’s not that simple: https://newrepublic.com/article/183082/nopes-trump-very-fine-people To state up front, the New Republic, which printed the above article, is (these days at least) a left-leaning publication, so you’re likely to dismiss it for that reason alone, but you should read it anyway. Drawing another analogy, of the more than 5 million German soldiers and sailors who died during World War II (and the many millions more who fought and survived), the great majority were decent men who simply thought that they were doing their duty; they were not Nazis. But that’s very different from making a conscious decision to attend a rally that is organized by white supremacists and neo-Nazis and very much promoted as such. For Trump to hem and haw on the issue in an effort to not lose voters, even the worst sort, tells me that he has no principles whatsoever.

What on earth are you talking about. The Haitians eating cats story is a laughable falsehood (Trump said he “heard it on TV”). Trump is up to his neck in Project 2025; much of what he says he wants to do is contained in the report, and it’s drafted by people he would likely pick as his advisers. And he called Nazis “fine people”; it’s on video and has been replayed ad nauseam (he also dines with Nazis at Mar-a-Lago). You’re in dire need of a reality check. If Trump is sobbing about a couple of “aggressive” debate moderators hurting his feelings, Putin, as Harris pointed out, will eat him for lunch.