Cameroni

Indeed Trump is different. He has vowed to fight the political establishment. Harris and Biden just continue it But irrespective of this crucial difference, it is not right for someone who has influence to use that influence to get the vulnerable to do their bidding. This is like a teacher telling their students how to vote, only Swift will carry far more influence than most teachers.

Abortion is the reason why Swift endorses Kamala Harris. In case anyone had anyone had any doubt: "Taylor Swift condemns the end of US abortion rights: ‘I’m absolutely terrified’" https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/taylor-swift-abortion-rights-b2109009.html

Absolutely false. Walz has removed all restrictions in Minnesota. It is NOT illegal to demand aborton in the 8th month in Minnesota now. There is no restriction in terms of gestational period whatsoever in the law. "Yes. Abortion is legal in Minnesota. There is no limit on abortion in Minnesota based on how far along in pregnancy you are." https://www.abortionfinder.org/abortion-guides-by-state/abortion-in-minnesota

That's of course completely false. Unless you've had a traumatic head injury recently you should have no problem comprehending that many women wish to abort not for medical reasons but because the child is not wanted.

No they did not. Walz's law specifically prohibits anyone to interfere with the right to abortion, which is granted up to 9 months. So if a woman insists she wants an abortion with this law from Walz nobody can stop her from getting it, in fact she is exercising a constitutional right in Minnesota. Why do you think they changed the wording of the law? The law that Walz signed in May 2023 changed things, he law originally stated that medical personnel must “preserve the life and health of the born alive infant”. The amendment reworded this to say “care for the infant who is born alive”. Why do you think that is?

Given that he waited for 12 hours, no less, it's fair to say his intent to kill was serious. Only the advance, alert security agent shooting at him prevented another assassination attempt.

Minnesota, the home state of Harris’ running mate, Gov. Tim Walz, has some of the most permissive pro-abortion laws in the country. Walz signed legislation in January 2023 that declared abortion “a fundamental right” and prohibited local governments from taking any action that interferes with that legal right. This provided even stronger protections for Minnesota’s laws on abortion, which permit the procedure until the moment of birth. However, the CDC does report its estimates of how many abortions occur in the 21st week of pregnancy or later. In 2019, the CDC estimated about 4,882 abortions were performed at least 21 weeks or later into pregnancy. The data is incomplete because it excludes the nine states that permit abortions at that stage of pregnancy and the District of Columbia. The pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute, which provides estimates through voluntary surveys, reported that about 0.9% of abortions were conducted in the 21st week or later in 2023. The report estimated more than 1 million total abortions, which would mean that more than 9,000 abortions occurred in the 21st week or later. If the Guttmacher Institute’s reporting is correct, this would mean that, on average, between 24 and 25 abortions in the 21st week or later occur every day in the United States. https://www.ncregister.com/cna/post-debate-explainer-the-truth-about-late-term-abortions-in-the-united-states This is why Taylor Swift voted for Harris. She wants unfettered abortion where women can decide right up to the 9th month to get an abortion for any reason. This is morally wrong,

During Tuesday night’s presidential debate with former President Donald Trump, Vice President Kamala Harris refused to say whether she opposes late-term abortions and denied that they happen in the United States. However, more than a dozen states, in fact, allow on-demand abortions after the point of viability, and nine of those states permit abortions throughout the entirety of pregnancy. What’s more, studies from pro-abortion groups and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that thousands of abortions happen late into pregnancy every year. https://www.ncregister.com/cna/post-debate-explainer-the-truth-about-late-term-abortions-in-the-united-states

Yes. Abortion is legal in Minnesota. There is no limit on abortion in Minnesota based on how far along in pregnancy you are. https://www.abortionfinder.org/abortion-guides-by-state/abortion-in-minnesota

Not in Minnesota, thanks to Tim Walz. Alll restrictions on abortion were removed: "Under current law, abortion is allowed in late-term pregnancy — though it’s worth noting that these cases are very rare. Lawmakers passed and Walz last year signed a law removing many of the restrictions on abortion in the state. https://www.mprnews.org/episode/2024/09/11/minnesota-mentions-trump-harris-presidential-debate Late-term pregnancy is defined as 41 0/7 to 41 6/7 weeks. https://www.msdmanuals.com/professional/gynecology-and-obstetrics/approach-to-the-pregnant-woman-and-prenatal-care/late-term-and-postterm-pregnancy#Management_v25896684

I didn't believe it existed either. Until I read the Minnesota Public Radio news: Under current law, abortion is allowed in late-term pregnancy — though it’s worth noting that these cases are very rare. Lawmakers passed and Walz last year signed a law removing many of the restrictions on abortion in the state. https://www.mprnews.org/episode/2024/09/11/minnesota-mentions-trump-harris-presidential-debate

Routh was clearly a Democrat supporter and again good work to evidence this beyond any shadow of a doubt.

Btw, I think it's wrong to see abortion in this way. Abortion is not just about women controlling their bodies, it is also about the right of another life, and also about the right of the father. It's not a one-dimensional issue. The states shouild decide. It's the democratic thing to do.

No, you don't get it. Swift HERSELF saw that her endorsing political candidates is wrong. She said so HERSELF! "During an interview with Time to promote her 2012 album "Red," Swift dodged questions about the upcoming presidential election. Swift said she'd been following the race between President Obama and Republican nominee Mitt Romney, but she felt uncomfortable trying to influence her fans."I try to keep myself as educated and informed as possible. But I don't talk about politics because it might influence other people," Swift said. https://www.businessinsider.com/taylor-swift-politics-endorsements-timeline#ahead-of-the-2012-election-swift-declined-to-comment-on-politics-2 Obviously she was right then. She understood the problematic nature of pop star endorsements and refrained from doing so herself. However, she has the moral backbone of an alley cat and then turns around and does exactly the opposite of what she KNOWS is the right thing to do.

When Taylor Swift takes a bullet to the head, and has another assassin trying to kill her, due to her political views let me know. The difference is that Trump put his money where his mouth is, he could play golf anonymously all day without assassins trying to kill him. But he felt he had to enter politics. So that makes it his job to influence people politically. Swift's job is to look pretty with lipstick whilst she complains about her exes.

Actually there was a time when Swift had a shred of decency: "During an interview with Time to promote her 2012 album "Red," Swift dodged questions about the upcoming presidential election. Swift said she'd been following the race between President Obama and Republican nominee Mitt Romney, but she felt uncomfortable trying to influence her fans."I try to keep myself as educated and informed as possible. But I don't talk about politics because it might influence other people," Swift said. https://www.businessinsider.com/taylor-swift-politics-endorsements-timeline#ahead-of-the-2012-election-swift-declined-to-comment-on-politics-2 Yes, you were right then Taylor. You were decent once. You KNEW what you were doing. Alas, now, you've crossed over to the dark side.

You mean like she did in all the previous elections when she publicised how she voted and whom she endorsed?

Are you really sure he's insane? And evil too?

Didn't he specifically say that he wil not implement Project 2025?

Well, if he's insane and evil, certainly then that would be bad.

Please, that's laughable. She knows very well if she says she's voting for Harris, some of her gullible weak-brained fans will do likewise. Why do you think she publicised how she votes, instead of keeping it quiet? Every one should choose their own candidate...oh but by the way, everyone look here, I AM voting for Harris! Lol, come on.

Have you read the lyrics of Ms Swift? I would urge you to do so. You will see that this is a woman obsessed with her own power trip in relationships, who actually writes very poor lyrics, on the level of a 14 year old. Before I take political advice from the likes of Ms Swift I would sooner ask Megan Thee Stallion to install my solar panel system. The problem with Swift voicing her support is that she knows that she has a number of fans who will drink toilet water if she says they should, so she is using her fans to accomplish HER political goals. How is this not reprehensible in the extreme?

If Ms Carroll told the truth, and her friends told the truth, about an incident that supposedly happened over 30 years ago. Even then though, on a very mild scale. I mean this was not Mazan.

Not at all. Don't like her. She can't move.

It's not a bad thing for someone to use their reach to make others politically aware. But Swift knows she has an army of braindead youth, who if she said "I'm putting a plastic bag over my head for 5 minutes hahaha" would proceed to asphyxiate themselves with plastic bags a la Jonestown, so she's not making them "aware", she is trying to influence them to vote Harris. All because she is rabidly pro-Abortion, for obvious reasons. This is really reprehensible, with great power comes great responsibility and instead Swift is abusing her fame to obtain a poltiical goal. It actually should be illegal. But anyway, the interesting thing is we think Swift has all this influence, but looks like US voters are waaaayy more sophisticated than we thought.