DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Comrade Harris Pt 2

jc

Comrade Cackela lying out both sides of her mouth to pander to all audiences. Libtards lap it up like suckers.

162 lies and distortions in a news conference. NPR fact-checks former President Trump

https://www.npr.org/2024/08/11/nx-s1-5070566/trump-news-conference

Analysis: Trump is still telling lies he told eight years ago

https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/03/politics/trump-fact-checking-analysis/index.html

I think you will probably find that the last two posts on here are quoting Russian propaganda... Kamala is NOT a commie. Trump IS a facist.

I keep hearing the dog whistle cries of "Marxism" and "Communism" to activate the amygdalas of those in the older Gen X and Boomer generations, but when I keep looking out into the world, I see a country that has been overcome by rampant, unbridled capitalism (corporations puppeteering politicians, M&As severely reducing competition, price gouging, enormous wealth gap, tax breaks for the wealthy, ever-increasing billionaires, etc.). That's been getting worse no matter the administration (Republican or Democrat).

But yeah, communism, amirite?

I dont know I am still trying to figure out what "amygdalas" means

Clem used the phrase before me. Basically, the part of your brain that activates fight or flight. When your amygdala is activated, you set aside logic in response to a fear stimulus and start reacting.

Awwe. Look at Daman. Now everything is Russian propaganda! He was just waiting on his sheep whistle.

Are you sure it's wise to be sharing family photos here?

That's my maw. See how she stares at the end? That's cuz she will lay an asswhoopin' on you.

She would have to find me first. That's why I never post my real name on the internet.

The message she tries to sell sounds pretty "communist" at times. "Workers of the world, unite!" was the slogan of the Stalin-led USSR.

I agree that's not actually what we'd likely get.

We seem to agree quite a bit about the problem/your parenthetical.

We just seem to see the solution, or lack of a solution, differently.

"Unity" sounds good. I'm not sure it actually is. The ideal, sure, but now it seems to be more of a call that everyone should think like "me." Everyone should get on board and think the same. Or just do what I say and not actually think about how that would actually work.

I think there's an element of tolerance for differences that appears lacking in the modern usage of the word.

I'm surprised so many people would be upset to tax wealthy people--- and, the percentage of those people in general population is VERY SMALL. Meaningful data can be hard to find- here is my example--" Data from tax year 2021 (as reported on Americans' 2022 tax returns), shows that taxpayers in the top 1% had adjusted gross income (AGIs) of at least $682,577, according to an analysis by the Tax Foundation".... so, if you're making over 1,000,000 you way under that 1 percent.....

JMHO, Trump paid less tax than I did one year- hiring all those folks to save his money from tax man pays off--- would it bother me to tax heavily the ball players in- baseball, football, tennis, soccer, basketball...on and on making more than million---- NO, did they earn it-- good question?....but I say tax their and any other cooperate big shot, billionaire---heavily, cuz, if they don't like it they can go some place else and pay more in tax.... lastly, I'm for flat tax for everyone- then no complaining....imagine the money available without all the big shots keeping theirs. Communist, hell, no---flat tax would be completely fair....do rich want that---HELL NO.

I certainly don't think she's trying to evoke anything Stalinist or Marxist. Quite honestly, I doubt she really even knows all that much about either one of those men.

Heck yeah, she's flawed, but I don't see anyone in the Government that comes close to employing the policies of Stalin, Marx, Lenin, be it whoever. Even Sanders is a far cry.

For now, I see it for what it is: an invocation of call-back, fear-based reinforcement in attempt to drive votes, without providing any substance.

You think that's bad, go look up tax rates under Eisenhower. Man, what a Marxist he must have been...

You're not allowed to say that about Ike! He was a republican when republicans were republicans. Republican values as presented then offend trumpians.

It was probably all the time he spent with Zhukov over in Europe after the surrender. The communism must have really infected him and became malignant.

...Yes, the college educated daughter of a Marxist professor, who, herself, has always been involved in politics, doesn't know all that much about political systems.


Is that an argument for or against her?

I agree the policies don't really reach there. Yet, that doesn't mean she isn't using language and ideas similar to their "propaganda."

That's kind of my biggest issue with her. She isn't really providing what she's selling.

I think he was trying to make America great.

...there was a little thing called World War 2 going on. It may have had some effect on taxes....

Hopefully Kamala doesn't get World War 3 to use as an excuse.

Ike was elected in 1952. WW2 ended in 1945.

Who is it that's making up excuses?

I stand by it. You'll never see me argue FOR her. I just see the other guy as the bigger danger, and that's where we've gotten. I'm aware of who her father was. She was estranged from him since her parents divorced at 7, and I think it was one newspaper in the 70's who called him Marxist, IIRC. Honestly, I think she knows politics and knows how to play the system but I stand by the fact I don't think she could substantively say all that much about it, or at least let me put it this way: I'd be surprised. I think she's a lot of "form" over very bland substance. I hope if she gets elected that she puts people in the cabinet who know how to do things, because I don't have much faith that she does.

Any language she uses I believe would be incidental, but that would not stop someone from finding some way to try and make the shoe fit for cheap points. It would be the same if someone said Eisenhower was Marxist. Heaven forbid she gets cold in the winter and puts on a babushka.

Dude, WW2 ended seven years prior...

There is plenty of data and quotes on why Eisenhower advocated for the tax rates he had, but I won't go down that rabbit hole in this thread. If we start a tax thread, then I'd give it a shot.

I dunno. It's the danger you don't see that gets you. Trump's too obvious. He's certainly an embarrassment and lousy statesman. But is he a sheep in wolf's clothing? I worry Kamala may be the opposite.

It seems Trump can be managed. Yes, he says ridiculous things and is a vile man, but I don't think he actually writes the policy. He's more a piece that is being played. Yes, a loud and vulgar one.

Kamala might actually be a player that's biding her time, acting as a piece.

Something about her makes me doubt that her spoken agenda and actual agenda align. The "My values haven't changed" answer on repeat is part of it.


Re her father only being called a Marxist due to "one newspaper:"

Here are some papers her father wrote: Published Works link from Stanford Bio


"On Marx's Scheme of Reproduction and Accumulation," Journal of Political Economy, 80(3), Part I, May/June 1972, 505‑522.

[reprinted in The Economics of Marx, M. C. Howard & J. E. King (eds.), Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1976, 185‑202].



“The Theory of Capital,” (with D. P. Levine), in Economic Studies: Contributions to the Critique of Economic Theory, D.P. Levine, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1977, 202-230.



"Accumulation of Capital and the Rate of Profit in Marxian Theory," Cambridge Journal of Economics, 7, September/December 1983, 311‑330.



"Value, Exchange, and Capital," in Rethinking Marxism, Essays for Harry Magdoff & Paul Sweezy, S. Resnick & R. Wolff (eds.), New York: Autonomedia, 1985, 151‑183.



"The Organic Composition of Capital and Capitalist Development," (with Robert E. Rowthorn), in Rethinking Marxism, Essays for Harry Magdoff & Paul Sweezy, S. Resnick & R. Wolff (eds.), New York: Autonomedia,1985, 345‑357.


While this doesn't definitively make him a "Marxist," his economic beliefs do seem to have been influenced by Marx. Kamala's expressed opinions on economics also seem to show a similar influence. While many of his other works don't have Marx in the title of paper or journal, the influence can be seen in his writing. I'm not saying it's a bad thing. It just is what it is.

I stand corrected. It's what I get for quick googling with an outcome in mind.

Edit: Eisenhower World War 2 pulled up "Eisenhower planned and supervised two of the most consequential military campaigns of World War II: Operation Torch in the North Africa campaign in 1942–1943 and the invasion of Normandy in 1944."

Writing about Marx doesn't necessarily make one a Marxist. I'm sure he espoused some of the ideals, yeah. But I don' think there is any definitive notion that he was a Marxist.

Re: Trump. The fact that his cabinet turned over about 8 trillion times during his admin between the firings and resignations I think unequivocally denotes that he can't be controlled by greater minds. I think some people can sway him, yes, but I think that makes him more vulnerable to extremism when you have people like Ginni Thomas walking unannounced into the Oval Office spinning him up about god-knows-what conspiracy theory.

The idea of requiring definitive notions would be nice if people applied it to everything instead of just things they disagree with.

My "point" is that it's not "definitive" that he isn't, and so what if he is?

It sounds like Kamala could be, or wants people to believe she could be. She wants the support of people that like the ideas, but doesn't want the label. I'd prefer it if the actions lined up with the talk. It'd be nice to have a politician willing to have a hard talk about our economy, instead of a politician that says he or she wants to have a hard talk about the economy while really just using the existing system for their own ends.

Trump is what he is. He's an angry, greedy idiot. Yes, he'll fire people. Yet, he's predictable.

I'm not sure what Kamala is. It's too scripted. Nothing feels genuine. Nothing seems to have any depth. She's a politician trying to catch the winds of public opinion to get her where she wants to go. What she'll do if she gets there, it seems hard to say.

It's the predictable things that should concern you the most.

I think we're already putting too much effort into the association with Kamala and Marxism. Yes, she wants the union vote and the blue collar vote. The bottom line is that she appears to be a garden variety hollow politician for the most part. I think Trump is predictable on a macro level, but not a micro level. Big picture you know where he'll go with things (elections, name-calling, tantrums, etc.), but the individual things he says and comes up with, combined with what appears to be a Biden-like mental slide makes him pretty unpredictable on the day-to-day.

I'm old enough to remember " I like Ike" - for decades we've been given from the Republican Party- cut taxes on wealthy, they'll increase business AND trickle down economics- big boys get richer, the little man gets richer.....except it ain't happened. Cut taxes for business, they bought back stock and gave executives more money-- back to Ike- what he did--"President Dwight David Eisenhower, perhaps the last real Republican, had a 90 percent tax rate for the super rich during his administration.

Eisenhower explained it this way: The super rich could avoid the high taxes by investing their money in things that make America stronger. If they wanted to avoid high taxes, he said they could invest in business expansions and higher employee wages. They could give a million or two to tax-exempt non-profits that feed, house and clothe poor people of America, among other things."

Republicans don't do that now. Nor do they fund/ get done an interstate highway system like Ike got done- it took Democrats to pass first infrastructure bill in DECADES. Please don't think Republicans are "for the people", they take care of millionaires and billionaires- like those in Congress and the one begging for money all the time to pay his rape and porn star monies. BEAT TRUMP

Trump's policy is predictable. I still don't like it.

Do I vote for the Devil I "know" or the "Devil" I don't? Right now, I'm not choosing either. I've tried to give Kamala every opportunity to sway me, and she just doesn't do it.

The arguments for Kamala seem to be "She's not Trump" and "She's not a Marxist" (though her rhetoric often is.) What exactly is she? She's a woman and a minority, but that should have no bearing on the job. Her "values haven't changed," but what exactly are they? And how do they get expressed as policy?

Do the policies she does express actually seem likely to have positive net results? Or only superficial ones with glossed over or flat out ignored downsides?

Would I go to a party she throws? Sure. Do I trust her to run a country? No.

I don't think I'd even go to a party thrown by Trump.

It's the worst days I'm worried about, though. Not the "fun" ones.

Nothing's shown me she can function well under "duress." She seems to get "Trumpier" ( ) every time she's asked a question that wasn't rehearsed.

Bull, just don't get it- you KNOW what Trump is- convicted rapist, convicted porn star payment hidden as "legal fees", and recently- admits he lost AND as President tried to change the election-- he's a known liar, thief, and criminal, yet he could be President----anyone is better than TRUMP.

If the question were "who is better than Trump?" Yes, I'd pick Kamala.

Unfortunately, the question is "who should be President of the United States?" Not Trump isn't good enough for me. Shouldn't be for anyone, but here we are.

why is that a bad thing?

>OP

Funny, it wasn’t Kamala that the Russians were trying to help. Comrade.

You shake in your shoes about russians but are ok with Comrade Harris installing Soviet style price controls. Libtards are dumb.

#TheEnemyWithin

Because it STILL doesn't address the real problem of the rich not being taxed fairly. The loopholes still exist. It's all just political theatre.

It's stuff like this that allows people to convince themselves disrupting that status quo is less worse than a second Trump presidency.

Maybe she’ll put Bernie on it. Those loopholes wouldn’t stand a chance. Lol.

It's not in her interest to hurt her greatest benefactors. Like I said... it's all just theatre.