Here is another take. You vote for both:

1. The group that most closely resembles what you want AND
2. The group that most likely will listen to your requests during the administration

If there are things you want changed, Nov 5 is not the last day but the beginning. The next president will make decisions for 4 years, and every decision is influenced by people and our voices.

Ask yourself, between Harris and Trump, which administration is most likely to want the things I want, and which is most likely to listen and be influenced by my side of political views and the people I support?

For me, the answer is a hard NO on Trump, and a pretty solid Yes on Harris.

Like the other thread abut guns. Sure, the Dems talk about wanting gun reform and it never gets done because they don't have a super majority in Congress. But the GOP is 100% against it and will never contribute. Which side is more likely to do anything to help the reform I want to see? 4 years of Dems is a good amount of time to press for issues and seek some improvements. If I let the GOP have 4 more years, we are not even going to talk about change until the next election.

Those that are willing to sit out an election because the Dems are not perfect, are inflicting the worst candidate on all of us and themselves. Don't you dare later complain about school shootings, wealth inequality, tax cuts for the rich, abuse of queer folks, women's rights, international inhumane policy. Don't inflict Trump on us and then pretend to care about our issues or be on our side. If you sit out, you've picked a side.

I think that's a good point. I wonder if reasonable politicians should prepare a few outlandish talking points to give the media something tasty to sink their teeth into. Like do a normal interview saying normal thoughtful and nuanced things, but also throw in a couple specific wacky clickbait nuggets so the media has what they crave for their news cycle.

Like, what if Kamala had worked this into her interview: Once his criminal trials are over, I don't think imprisonment in Attica would be appropriate for Trump as an ex president.

Leave it at that and have the media frenzy over it, even though it means nothing. Then they won't spend as much time trying to invent drama over her interview because she gave them some drama to go with.

I think that's what Trump is best at. Trump knows most of his base are dumb and the media are thirsty clickbait whores, so he treats his interviews with the decorum of a 2-bit bordello and ends up getting tons of attention that works for his base.

Brazille was working for CNN at the time of Clinton, not ABC.

Harris is negotiating the rules of a debate she hadn't agreed to yet since she wasn't running for president at the time the debate was agreed to by BIDEN. Trump is also negotiating terms. Seems fair to me that they both get to negotiate for whatever they want before agreeing to final terms.

do a debate on a Conservative network

Conservative news network? WHERE? All I see on the right-wing are garbage propaganda outlets. Why would anyone serious agree to a debate at a propaganda outlet?

A debate has to happen on a real news network like ABC, CBS, PBS, NPR, AP, Reuters, CNBC or something of the like, or hosted by a neutral university or some other serious institution. The point is to try to have less BS, not more.

And I agree, if the DNC operative Brazille gave one candidate the questions ahead and not the other, that's a major issue and she is right to be shamed for it and have been removed by CNN. Nobody wants to see that favoritism crap, which is also the reason we can't have the debate at Fox or any other trash-tier outlet either.

There's also politicking involved. Trump is currently losing this election, so he should be more desperate to get a debate going even if he is most likely to do poorly. From a politics perspective, the Harris campaign is right to press Trump and push the rules to make him as uncomfortable as possible. Trump can back out if he wants, but he is the one that needs the debate the most. That's just how politics works. If Trump was ahead he could simply avoid the debate and run a telethon by himself like he's done in the past when he refused to participate, in the same vein of political gamesmanship. It's only fair that when Harris is on top she gets to be the gamester. That's Trump's lack of decorum coming back to roost. Those that lead with being dicks get mirrored treatment when the tables turn.

I know it's hard to find real images of these families since most pics online are going to be PR-approved. But that image of the Vance family is quite disingenuous.

The Vances are cosplaying as a regular rural family, but he is an Ivy graduate who sold himself to a twisted libertarian billionaire, and she is a highly paid Ivy lawyer that has worked with the corrupt conservative SCOTUS judges. A real picture of those 2 would be in fancy dressing at an exclusive cocktail party for the dirty right-wing powers trying to control the country. Far from salt-of-the-earth Americans just trying to live their lives.

It's the new line of Republican attacks on Kamala as they try anything they can think of.

They found out that she likes Doritos, because she said that when she won her election for the Senate in 2016, she ate a bag of Doritos watching the election results on TV as she mentally accepted the mandate to fight for her state of California against whatever Trump had in store to antagonize them. So now Republicans have decided that eating Doritos when pondering on one's life is beneath the dignity of a head of state.

https://www.salon.com/2024/08/20/are-you-kidding-me-fox-news-guest-fumes-over-kamala-harris-eating-a-bag-of-doritos/

It is a known fact that briefly dating Montrel Williams several decades ago, when you are both available singles, provides a direct path to becoming the Leader of the Free World. I tried it myself but couldn't get Montrel to set a date for a movie night no matter how desperate my DMs. Ah, to think I could have been a contender.

Yet I, for one, am glad that Mr. Trump's dating history is unimpeachable, because I don't think I could handle 2 risqué backgrounds in a single presidential season.

I think that's the point of the chart. Your elected officials are not going to magically know what you want and bend over backwards to give it to you. If you are serious about a topic, it's on you to join the political process and have your points heard. That's what they mean by "we work to find a fair balance." The work part is a lot of political arguing back and forth. If you want to have influence, you have to make an informed argument for why what you want is better than what we have, and you have to square off with the group on the other side that thinks they have a better solution and will make their case too.

The Democrats don't guarantee you that the compromise will break your way. The guarantee is that you do get a voice if you choose to participate in the political process, which is not something that's on offer with the other party.

And to those that are annoyed by the Dems due to lack of progress or any other reason, we get it. Don't think I'm not annoyed too. The difference between you and me is not that I don't find the Dems disappointing, the difference is that I understand I would be disappointed with anyone because politics are about negotiation and compromise, not about having our whims fulfilled.

We have to take the wins we can get, and then work on pushing for the next thing. Objectively, Biden has been one of the most progressive and effective presidents in history, let alone my lifetime. One of the first things he did within days of taking Office was move the min wage of gov positions to $15/hr. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/biden-sign-executive-order-raising-federal-contractors-minimum-wage-15-n1265427

People forget how much he has done and how progressive he's been compared to even Obama. People complain that Bernie got sidetracked, but Bernie's movement is still in the conversation and pushed the Dems further left on a ton of things. That's what discourse looks like, and if you want real change you have to get involved with the only party that is offering a path. That's why Bernie and AOC caucus with the Dems, because being sour about what you want solves nothing, but getting involved is a real path.

Vote for the only party that offers discourse and power to change things, and then get your voice in the mix as much as you'd like. Bernie is not sour, he is in the Senate getting things done, he is campaigning influencing the conversation, and he is constantly in the media making his points. A voice from within the system is way more powerful than one sitting on the sidelines pouting. Vote, and then tell your Officials what you want.

For a presidential ticket https://votevets.org/press-releases/votevets-makes-historic-first-ever-endorsement-for-president

WASHINGTON, DC—For the first time in the group’s nearly 20-year history, VoteVets is making an endorsement in the presidential general election, backing the Harris-Walz ticket in 2024. Tim Walz is a National Guard Veteran, and the group only endorses Veterans, national security professionals, and military family members.

The group will immediately begin fundraising for the ticket, mobilizing its over 1.5 million supporter list.

“The Harris-Walz ticket will defend America and our Veterans,” the group said in a statement. “Vice President Harris already was the best choice for America in this election, but the addition of Governor Walz will supercharge this ticket, and we’re proud to back it.”

The dog appears to be a celebrity fortune teller: "Babydog says we'll retain the house, the majority in the House. We're going to flip the United States Senate overwhelmingly. We're going to elect Donald J. Trump and JD Vance in November."

https://www.newsweek.com/babydog-jim-justice-bulldog-west-virginia-rnc-elections-1926628

This works in 2 levels. If they know their arguments are dishonest, it's important to call them out on it and let them know that their BS didn't work, and that they have further debased themselves in the discourse by attempting a bad-faith argument. We need to dispel the myth that playing dirty and arguing BS has no consequences. It has severe consequences, as the bad-faith actor loses credibility, respect, dignity and their seat at the table.

If they don't know that their arguments are dishonest, calling them out allows an opportunity for progress, by engaging in the discussion to show them how their arguments are BS, and how they've debased themselves, exposing their ignorance, their bad company and sources, and pointing out how they are losing their seat at the table if they don't sharpen up their civics.

Either way, taking the "high road" against dirty politics serves little purpose. Calling them out and holding a mirror to their dirty faces is essential if we are to have real dialog. Bullies only know strength.

The response to a low takedown attempt is a knee to the face, because it says: we saw it coming, you've achieved nothing and impressed nobody, and you are now concussed from the weight of your own ineffective maneuver.

Notice how the "high road" would actually be detrimental because it's enabling. Engaging in discourse with their bad-faith BS only serves to validate their BS, legitimize their argument and show them unearned respect as participants in the discussion. When they act in bad faith, if we don't treat them as bullies deserving of a knee to the face, we've embraced their BS and validated their approach. So, of course, they will do it again and again, and take it further every time. The "high road" people have made our political division worse, not better.

The bully doesn't ponder on their bad string of choices until something shakes them up. If we want our national discourse to regain civility, since we've allowed it to get this bad we now must teach a bunch of people how to behave, by the way of corrective blows in response to each of their BS attacks.

And we must teach the "high road" people to cut it out and smarten up in how they deal with bullies and cultists. You are not going to Kumbaya a cultist away from racism, misogyny and religious adoration for their orange crimelord - because there's no time and space to sit down with each broken, indoctrinated mind and cuddle it back to health. We need to set firm boundaries on how much BS we'll tolerate (and at this point it should be near none), we need to hold a mirror up to their BS to show them how we see them and how much they've lost the argument and the respect, and we need to clarify why they are dead wrong and full of shit, and stress that they are the largely responsible for turning our civics into a mess and we demand that they cut it out.

Donald Trump, June 9, 2024:

“So I said, let me ask you a question and he said, nobody ever asked this question and it must be because of MIT, my relationship to MIT. Very smart. He goes, I say, what would happen if the boat sank from its weight? And you’re in the boat and you have this tremendously powerful battery and the battery is now underwater and there’s a shark that’s approximately 10 yards over there, by the way, a lot of shark attacks lately, do you notice that a lot of shark? I watched some guys justifying it today. Well, they weren’t really that angry. They bit off the young lady’s leg because of the fact that they were, they were not hungry, but they misunderstood what who she was? These people are. He said there’s no problem with sharks. They just didn’t really understand a young woman swimming now. It really got decimated and other people do a lot of shark attacks. So I said, so there’s a shark 10 yards away from the boat, 10 yards or here, do I get electrocuted if the boat is sinking? Water goes over the battery, the boat is sinking. Do I stay on top of the boat and get electrocuted or do I jump over by the shark and not get electrocuted? Because I will tell you he didn’t know the answer. He said, you know, nobody’s ever asked me that question. I said, I think it’s a good question. I think there’s a lot of electric current coming through that water. But you know what I’d do if there was a shark or you get electrocuted, I’ll take electrocution every single time.”

He's spoken against MAGA: https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2021-04-20/george-w-bush-condemns-the-trump-era-republican-party