WDSmart

Yes,it's all about the emphasis on "me" and "we." Socialism is not about compelling others to do things against their will. Socialism is about allowing others to do what they want without forfeiting the fulfillment of their needs. And is worked well, didn't it?

What I do and think may be meaningless to you, but not to me. My "Me" and "We" distinction is the very foundation of right-wing/left-wing thinking. Yes, it is somewhat like the summer of 69. That's when I was 23. And yes, I was a "Flower Child." I've taken a long look at reality over my 78 years, and I've already voted against Trump and for Harris. I have a good grip on reality, but I don't like it very much. I define science as just another religion that worships the human intellect. I had to look up "FING TEST." How would I do one, and what would I do one on?

I "believe" in private property because that is what we (USA) have now, but I'd rather there be none. Socialism allows private use of state property, like you and your family living in an assigned apartment. In communism, however, there is no private property. Everything belongs to everyone equally.

I agree with you that communism is at odds with human nature. Capitalism is compatible with human nature, but of course, human nature is what is destroying our planet. So, we (humans) can either try to change or at least ameliorate our nature or go with it and destroy not only our planet but probably others before we go extinct. I know I can't change human nature, but I can conduct myself with a little less selfishness. I've always said the difference between lefties and righties is the first letter in a two-letter word. For righties it is "me" and for lefties, it is "we." This upcoming election will shed some light on just how divided we (USA) are. I hope there are still enough "we's" to keep going and trying to change things, but if it's predominately "me's," our demise will come very, very soon.

And Harris is a step in that direction, that’s why you support her, and I support Trump. Yes, that is one of the reasons I support Harris and the Democrats, although they are nowhere near doing that yet. I see that as like living in an open neighborhood. Why would you support someone who is for closed borders? I see that as being like living in a locked house on private property.

I would love to support open borders, but in fact, have no borders - just one world. But I don't think we're ready for that yet; we're not even close to ready. We won't be ready until we consider all mankind one and enact a true socialistic, and eventually a communistic, economy.

So, these are the tactics used to enforce the adjudication of asylum applicants, not the strategy for treating them. And I agree, these need to be tightened up and moved forward much faster for both the benefit of the US taxpayer and the asylum applicant. These are the types of things that Harris has spoken about when she says our system is now "broken" and needs to be fixed. I'm sure she'll try to do that if elected, and I am sure Trump will expel all of them without hearings if he is elected. We don't, even now, have unvetted immigration. But the vetting process, as described above, needs to be revised and speeded up. Harris has promised to try to do that, but she needs the Republicans in Congress to help her do that. If Trump is elected, we will indeed have unvetted immigration, better called "unvetted deportation."

If you define "open borders" as borders that have no fence or authorities posted there stopping everyone trying to cross, then yes, the USA does have thousands of miles of "open borders." So does every other country I know of, especially those whose have seaside borders. What you call "open border policies" are not the same as "open borders." The USA has no border policies which allow illegal aliens to flood into the country. They do have border policies that require everyone to register at an immigration office as soon as they can after they enter the country. I do like socialism. I also like open borders, but there is no such thing as the "open border policies" you've described above, which allow illegal aliens to flood into our country. If we did, I would not like them either. You, again, are conflating "policies" with "activities." It would be like saying we have an open bank-robbing policy because some banks are robbed each year. I am not only welcome to vote; I have already, and the receipt of my faxed-in vote has been acknowledged and verified. Of course, my vote, since it's for Harris and is in California, doesn't really matter a whole lot, but at least I can say I voted. And, I can truthfully say I did not specifically vote FOR Harris; I voted AGAINST Trump.

The USA does not have an "open border" anywhere. Those with valid visas or those from countries who need no visa may come in whenever they want. Otherwise, our borders are only open to the extent that those fleeing oppression may come in and apply for refugee status. They will then be granted a hearing and their claims adjudicated. If they are successful, they are granted an asylum visa. If they are not, they are deported. And BIden/Harris did not start this policy. It has been in existence in some for or other since 1948.

We just have a disagreement on how much latitude a VP has when carrying out the policies of the president. When Harris says she would not have done anything differently than Biden, she is saying that Biden's priorities and general strategies were/are the same as hers. That doesn't mean her tactics for implementing those strategies will be the same now if she gets elected. Do you think that would be any different between Trump and Vance? One of the things I dislike about her is that she is not left enough for me. And, yes, I do want that. I want our economy to become more and more socialist. Unfortunately, she doesn't, or at least hasn't run espousing those principles.

No, a VICE president. In this case, "vice" means second-in-charge, not first-in-charge." The vice president can advise and even disagree with the president, but the final decision is the president's alone, not the vice president's.

AGAIN, Harris was vice president under Biden. She was in charge of enforcing his policies on border control. In doing that, I'm sure she would have had to agree with all of his policies' strategies but not all of the tactics. What the mainstream media (MSM, as I've recently learned, is their TLA) is not important to me. I only listen to and believe CNN.

I like the photo of the girls in the heading of this forum. And why? Partly because none of them have tattoos that I can see, anyway. Tattoos are a turnoff for me, not only for women but men also. I judge a man's IQ partially on the number of tattoos he has. The more tattoos, the lower the IQ.

Lock him up! And preferably in a cell full of water.

Well, all I can say to the Demon is, "Better luck next time!"

If the execution was of a dual-national, why didn't they just close half of the agency?

I certainly hope that helps! Another Trump presidency would be a disaster for the USA, my home county.

Oh, when I started to read this, I thought you would talk about real problems like memory, mental acuity, and balance, but I assume what you're talking about is getting an erection. I quit reading as soon as I figured that out. What a waste of space!

No, you're wrong about all of these and probably many other things about the current political situation. I'm sure Harris considered and suggested many things when asked what she would do differently. And I'm sure some were accepted, and some were rejected or modified. That's what the VICE in vice president indicates. Their strategy, as far as I can tell, was to allow as many legitimate refugees into the country as possible. To do so would mean there would also be some illegitimate aliens who were only claiming to be refugees. The claims of all immigrants were examined in court, and those who were legitimate refugees were allowed to remain in the US. Those that weren't were deported. Those who didn't show up for their court appearance were hunted down and, when found, were deported. Pence went against Trump because Trump asked (told) him to do something illegal, which was against the Constitution. Harris, a law-abiding VP, did what she was supposed to do: offer suggestions, but in the end, help the president enact his policies. I'm sure if she has been asked to do something illegal or unconstitutional, she would have refused. Putin, IMO, sees Trump as his puppet and will do whatever he can to help him get re-elected.

Sounds like it would be useful if you're suffering from an annoying bout of constipation.

This is disappointing. As a US citizen, I thought I might be able to use this if Trump were re-elected president.

This is like fighting over who is describing the best sighting of Bigfoot. All delusions!

Good for them! I hope they pick up a lot of ex-Washington Post subscribers as a result.

All of them.

Hungry for what?