r/benshapiro • u/narcabusesurvivor18 • Oct 29 '24
Ben Shapiro vs. Sam Harris on Trump Ben Shapiro
https://youtu.be/cTnV5RfhIjk?feature=sharedTo me, what sticks out in this debate is how quickly Sam changes standards with how he looks at the actions of politicians. When it’s a Democrat, he treats what they say/do as mostly unimportant, unserious, etc. but when it’s Trump it’s super important, serious, etc. It’s what Ben pointed out multiple times; the actual policy and comparing actions vs words matters more. But even the rhetoric itself, Sam changes standards. When Hillary denies the results of the 2016 election, (and launders the Russiagate lies) that’s just water under the bridge. Trump denying the election results in 2020 and then leaving office, that’s the end of the world. It bothered me quite a bit how Sam’s standards seem to change so radically but for no solid reason.
19
u/jcmiller210 Oct 29 '24
Sam gave me second hand embarrassment every time his defense of all the shitty things Democrats have done or said were either BuT tRUuMp iS WOrSe or iTs (D)ifFReNT. What an intellectually dishonest man.
1
u/uusrikas Oct 29 '24
When it is a binary choice of A or B it is totally valid to pick the least bad candidate
4
u/jcmiller210 Oct 29 '24
That would be fine if he could actually distinguish which one was actually worse than the other, but like many on th left he has TDS and as a result, doesn't care about open borders, high inflation, terrible and weak foreign policy that's plunging the world into a potential WW3 scenario, and the underlying threat Democrats pose to our institutions and constitutional rights. Blind to it all because Trump mean and bad.
1
u/McClain3000 Nov 01 '24
Your are so confused.
First you use this very common argument, that all they do is bash Trump they actually don't support Kamala or say how she would be better. They this time is Sam.
Focusing on Trump is a perfectly valid argument. If I had to select a babysitter and my choice was binary... And one of the babysitters was a heroin-addict and thief. It would be sensible to frame the other babysitter as better for simply being not a heroin addict, and a kleptomaniac. You could talk about how the other babysitter had good references, was kind, and responsible but really not being a heroin addict, and a kleptomaniac is the most relevant reason.
Trump denies elections, commits crime, proposes deporting millions of people, proposes record high tariffs. Both the status quo and Kamala's proposed policies, on all these topics, are preferable. Is that difficult to understand?
doesn't care about open borders, high inflation, terrible and weak foreign policy that's plunging the world into a potential WW3 scenario, and the underlying threat Democrats pose to our institutions and constitutional rights. Blind to it all because Trump mean and bad.
Again it's not blind because Trumps bad. Trumps proposed solution to all these things are worse. Trumps plan for the border is worse than the bi-partisan border bill that was proposed under Biden and Harris.
Inflation is now down because Biden let the Fed do it's own thing. Trumps proposes tariffs and all economists say this will cause inflation to sky-rocket.
Trump simps for dictators and abandons American allies. The status quo is better than Trump. All of Trump's generals say that Trump is unfit and dangerous, Sam brought this up. Also it's odd that you think Sam doesn't care about this topic. He frequently speaks to world renown experts on foreign policy on his Podcast.
Trump and Vance are the only people on the ticket who have either violated the constitution or promise to do so.
0
u/Calm_Row122 Oct 30 '24
Ah good ol’ TDS, or better know as the right’s favorite deflection tactic. I guess we will all see what happens in a week when one candidate wins. I have no concern that if Kamala loses she will concede and there will be a peaceful transfer of power in January. I don’t think you can say the same about your guy.
1
u/jcmiller210 Oct 30 '24
It's not my fault when leftist froth at the mouth upon hearing Trump's name or seeing him. It's really sad how many leftist brains have been melted over the past decade from Trump. Nobody on the right thinks about Joe Biden or Harris all day like Democrats do about Trump. We just think they're dumb and move on with our lives.
I think it's really naive of you to think if Trump wins there will be no riots. Democrats have set the stage for it with their rhetoric of Trump being the next Hitler and there are just too many dumb people to fall for it. Personally I think people on both sides need to grow up and accept election results. Sometimes it just doesn't go your way and that's the reality.
0
u/Calm_Row122 Oct 30 '24
Haha I wish we could all agree that Trump is dumb and move on. We had a chance to do that in 2020 but we know how that went down.
How convenient of you to conflate rioting with the peaceful transfer of power so you can make bullshit “both sides” argument. There might be riots if Trump wins, but that’s not what the peaceful transfer of power means so it’s an irrelevant point to make. Do you think democrats will organize an assault on the capital to disrupt the certification of the election? You don’t have to answer that.
1
u/jcmiller210 Oct 30 '24
How convenient of you to ignore violence as long as it doesn't interfere with the "peaceful transfer of power." There was more death and destruction caused by the BLM riots than Jan 6th, yet the left won't talk about it and only screeches about Jan 6th when both events were bad.
I hope I'm wrong, but I think Democrats are setting the stage for something worse than Jan 6th if a Trump victory happens. Guess we'll see how it plays out.
1
u/Calm_Row122 Oct 30 '24
Rioting is wrong. We agree. I condemn the BLM riots. I’m not ignoring anything. Why are we talking about BLM riots that have absolutely nothing to do with elections? This is another bullshit “both sides” argument that simply doesn’t work.
Do you not see how groups of citizens destroying private property in riots is categorically different than a sitting president inciting a violent mob to disrupt an election? Are those the same thing to you?
1
u/jcmiller210 Oct 31 '24
When you're trying to take the moral high ground over someone, it simply doesn't work when your side committed an objectively worse atrocity than the other.
Sure, symbolically Jan 6th is worse, but let's be real, the US was never in any real danger of getting taken over by red necks and only delayed the certification of the vote.
The peaceful transfer happened. Trump left and Biden was signed in as intended. Meanwhile more people actually died during the BLM riots and 2 billion worth in property damage happened, yet I'm supposed to take you and other leftists seriously when you screech over Jan 6th trying to act morally superior? You can't have this both ways.
1
u/Calm_Row122 Oct 31 '24
Nobody is taking a moral high ground here. You’re trying to draw a false equivalency between two things that aren’t related and I’m calling it bullshit. The BLM protests were bad. They happened during the Trump presidency. They have nothing do with this election so why are you so focused on them?
The peaceful transfer of power did not happen… january 6th happened. The transfer of power wouldn’t have happened at all if any of the multiple illegal mechanisms that Trump used to attempt to overturn the election had been successful. Why isn’t that a big deal to you?
Also, side note, why do you refer to every democrat as a leftist? Do you know what that term means or do you intentionally use it incorrectly?
1
-3
u/PoignantPoint22 Oct 29 '24
That’s what you took from what he’s saying? Fucking yikes.
3
u/jcmiller210 Oct 30 '24
How else am I supposed to take it? The only reason he offered up to vote for Harris is that she isn't Trump and that's enough, despite the fact the past 4 years proves him wrong entirely. She will be a disaster if elected.
2
u/PoignantPoint22 Oct 30 '24
Would be nice to see you actually form a real thought and not boil everything Sam said as, “but Trump is worse” because that’s just not what happened in this conversation. Sam had plenty of pushback against Kamala and agreed with Ben on a lot of her flaws.
You could argue the same exact thing about what Ben said about Trump’s flaws. “Trump says and does wild stuff, but Kamala is just so much worse”!
Personally anybody who is still supporting Trump is delusional. Kamala is far from perfect but if people don’t see what a unique danger Trump and his style of politics is, then they are hopeless. They simply don’t care because the people who Trump berrates and talks shit about, aren’t them, at least not yet. He’s done it many times to anybody that’s gone through his administration.
It’s the same tired shit with Trump. He “only hires the best” but when that person has reasonable reason to pushback or doesn’t immediately agree with him, they are dead to him. He’s a fascist and there is no other way to it based on his personality, rhetoric and the things he tried to do but wasn’t allowed because of the “guardrails” of his administration. Those guardrails will be gone if he is elected and we will be worse off as a country. And if he and any of his supporters don’t like being called a fascist, then perhaps it’s time to look in the mirror and take an honest look at what they cheer for when Trump says fascistic things at his rallies and on Twitter. The best way for someone who may or may not be a fascist to stop getting called a fascist, is to stop saying and promoting fascist things.
1
u/jcmiller210 Oct 30 '24
Ben actually laid out points to vote for Trump though, unlike Sam with Kamala. Throughout the debate he repeatedly kept going back to Trump's first term where he had a strong economy, the border was stronger than what it is now, and that despite all the claims that Trump is this wanna be fascist, he started no new wars and the other world powers were kept in check due to them not knowing what Trump would or would not do. An example being Russia didn't invade Ukraine under Trump's watch, but the moment Biden and Harris showed weakness, he invaded Ukraine.
Sorry about your hurt feelings concerning Trump and what he says though. I'm sick of political correctness and Trump is the symbol against that. It's making our country weak and the sooner its done away with the better. If I'm a fascist for wanting our borders secured, law and order restored, low inflation, and getting the woke ideology out of our institutions, then so be it. In the meantime please keep saying Trump is Hitler. It isn't moving voters at all from what I've seen.
2
u/PoignantPoint22 Oct 30 '24 edited Oct 30 '24
It’s not a political correctness thing, you dumb fuck. Calling for using the military to go after, “the enemy within” is beyond FUCKED. I’m so tired of people normalizing what Trump says and discounting the harmful effects it has had on both his supporters and critics. This isn’t a, “you’re soft and a snowflake with soft feelings” about Trump. This is the recognition that 30% of our country is completely ok with reelecting this abhorrent and odious human being and another 20% might not like him but view him as preferable to any Democratic candidate.
People who I am friends with are fine with his rhetoric because they either think he’s joking/trolling, or like Shapiro, even if he means it, somehow think there will still be people around to stop his more insane ideas. It’s not because I’m a soft liberal snowflake, I’m just shocked at how many intelligent people on the conservative side of the political aisle have completely bought into Trump and his obvious bullshit. It was blatant in 2016 and here we are 8 years later and he only has “concepts of a plan” on how to repeal Obamacare. Shapiro and others seem to think Trump has an advantage when it comes to policy and I just don’t see it anytime Trump tries to talk about anything in detail. I only see a man who repeats the same tired phrases that get applause from his crowds. The same tired phrases, “the best” “big beautiful” “you’ve never seen anything like what I have planned”. It’s all bullshit.
Also, this was a funny format because Sam isn’t a Kamala supporter in the same way Ben supports Trump. On the outset Sam made it clear that he’s voting against Trump and not specifically a staunch supporter for Kamala. So yeah, that’s probably why you aren’t seeing Sam tout policies under Harris and Biden that have been good. Would’ve loved another measured person to actually defend/support Kamala in this discussion.
I’m still with Sam though. Say anything you want to prop up the good that Trump did or the benefit he “might” have if re-elected. The fact that he didn’t agree to a peaceful transfer of power and then did everything he could to ensure that we didn’t, is immediately disqualifying to him holding office. It’s wild to see so many people discount his efforts to overturn the results simply because he failed. “The guardrails were in place so it didn’t really matter”. I’m sorry, but just because you forgot the drill to the safe, doesn’t excuse a bank robber from being held accountable for trying to rob the bank. If Trump tried what he did in 1820, he would have been rightfully charged with treason. There were legal avenues that he did pursue and that is all well and good. But once those challenges were dismissed, why continue to lie? Why tell a crowd that is riled up to go protest at the Capitol on the day they were certifying the election? Surely a morally defensible person would immediately come out against their supporters who were actively chanting to hang their own Vice President? Surely that person wouldn’t tweet out something that would add more danger to that situation, right? Trump sat on his hands for multiple hours while his supporters were clashing with the Capitol police, breaking into the building which the joint session of Congress to be suspended. Trump sat on his hands while the people in his own party were sheltering in place or evacuating over the very real threat posed by these rioters. And when he was forced to actually make a statement, Trump gave a half assed message where he again repeated that the election was stolen from him and that he loves the people who broke into the Capitol building and that they are patriots.
I’m sorry but that’s fucked and no amount of posturing toward Iran that Trump may have could ever outweigh that type of behavior from our own sitting President.
2
u/jcmiller210 Oct 30 '24
Someone's watching way too much MSDNC where they constantly take him out of context because Trump isn't great at clarifying what he is always saying making him very susceptible to it. If you truly believe he's going to use the military against US citizens who are following the law, then I don't know what to tell you. You're too far gone.
Yeah I can agree January 6th was awful and shouldn't have happened. I don't think the protesters getting violent is on Trump though. He told them to peacefully and patriotically go to the capital, which is part of his speech the media doesn't play. He tried to do things within legal bounds more or less to challenge the election and when that didn't work a peaceful transfer of power did happen. Trump left office and Biden resumed the presidency.
But here's where all this Jan 6th talk is bullshit. People love to blow that up over proportion and try to paint all Republicans as traitors to country, yet in the summer of that same year some people on the left were way more violent and caused more death and destruction over that very summer. They even tried to take over a block of the city and claim it's their territory and no longer territory of the US. Yet when asking some people on the left to denounce that violence, they'll say it was justified and in the same breath screech about Jan 6th. Both were bad, but one was worse than the other in terms of actual death and destruction.
2
u/PoignantPoint22 Oct 30 '24 edited Oct 30 '24
I don’t watch MSNBC or CNN but thanks for making how you view politics clear.
I honestly don’t see how you cannot put any blame at Trump’s feet for January 6th or how you can honestly characterize what happened that day as “a peaceful transfer of power”. It wasn’t, the certification was actually delayed, the joint session of Congress WAS delayed and the certification was delayed. Everything else that happened on that day and the scheming beyond normal legal challenges are all examples of not a peaceful transfer of power. The guardrails held and the certification did go through but come on, you can’t honestly argue that it was peaceful. Fucking Ashli Babbit got shot. Police officers were injured, one died a day later possibly as a result of what happened.
But sure, Trump did say peacefully, like once or twice. However, everything else he said during that rally was said with the sole purpose to rile up his supporters and enrage the crowd. Saying peacefully a couple of times doesn’t negate the rest of his rhetoric. And even if it did, what happened once his beloved supporters were clearly not being peaceful?
The simple fact is that if Trump agreed to a peaceful transfer of power, lost the election and lost the legal challenges he made, but stopped lying and scheming to stay in power, January 6th wouldn’t have happened. Trump continued to stir the pot and riled up his supporters by repeating unsupported lies about the election being stolen and that they wouldn’t have a country anymore. A solid amount of blame has to be on him. If he immediately released a statement once his supporters clashed with police on January 6th, calling for calm and order, my view would be completely different. But that did not happen. He continued to stoke anger on that day and has done nothing to show remorse over it. People were chanting to hang his Vice President, who was there, while the gallows was assembled outside and what did Trump do? He Tweeted something along the lines of Pence not having the backbone to refuse to certify the election. That’s FUCKED. Why do you discount that behavior? Trump set up January 6th and once things got out of control, he sat back and watched because they were doing it FOR HIM. Like, fuck me. This isn’t rocket science.
I’m not going to defend the rhetoric from some people on the left surrounding the BLM riots but again, in terms of actual danger and norm breaking to our society, a sitting President trying to overturn the results of an election that they legitimately lost is FAR more damaging than some looting and arson. I’m not excusing those other things, just that Trump and January 6th/beyond is far more problematic to our democracy.
8
Oct 29 '24
[deleted]
1
u/alpacasallday Oct 31 '24
The reason is severe TDS, which Sam has been suffering from for years.
Don't you get tired of calling every criticism here TDS? For Sam Harris and a lot of other people there was a line and that line is the peaceful transition of power. Trump did not give up power peacefully as even Ben admits. If you draw this line and this line is crucially important to you, then yes, you would vote for a rock or an empty sandbag instead of Trump.
Sam spent quite a bit of time explaining that he does not agree with Kamala on many things, that if Romney or another "old school Republican" would be up for the vote, he would likely lean more towards them. His criticism of Trump was quite substantial - even if you disagree with it. He thinks Trump has broken core democratic rules and principles and has been shown to be quite incompetent as a lot of his former staff have corroborated. That conversation is 1 hour 44 minutes long and yet all you take from it is "TDS". When you are facing an adverse point of view and the only answer to it you can come up with is a fantasy illness, then that's intellectually empty. I am assuming you are smarter than that, right?
1
Oct 31 '24
[deleted]
1
u/alpacasallday Oct 31 '24
But he is not "stubbornly anti-Trump". That implies he has no reasoning when he seems to clearly do. He has very clear reasons for why he thinks Trump is not a good president. It's odd that this is what you take away after listening to an hour and a half.
1
Oct 31 '24
[deleted]
1
u/alpacasallday Oct 31 '24
Did I say he had no reasons? You implied Jan 6 was some tipping point and the only reason he is anti Trump. I was listening to Sam long before listening to Ben Shapiro, he has always been anti Trump for a variety of reasons and has never been willing to say anything positive about him.
I said that that seems to be his definitive line. This does not mean that there are no other reasons - Harris mentioned a lot of them - for why one or he might not be in favor of Trump. Again, you handwave them away by saying "TDS". Yet he has offered a huge list of reasons for why he thinks Trump is not trustworthy, not competent and with fewer guardrails even worse. This isn't your made up illness, these are real reasons. And the fact that you know that Harris is not fond of Trump and hasn't been for a long time doesn't make these reasons illogical or wrong, if anything it shows a consistency and one that he seems to still be able to argue for.
1
u/Flimsy-Shake7662 Nov 01 '24
The peaceful transfer of power thing is important, I agree. But that isn't what pushed sam over the edge. He hated him from before he won in 2016, and after he did, sam platformed multiple people for months promoting the russiagate nonsense. It's funny he says in the interview he doesn't know any of those people who believe in russiagate when he himself was one of them.
Not saying he doesn't have decent criticisms, i thought this was a pretty good conversation, just correcting you on where sam drew the line
1
u/alpacasallday Nov 01 '24
Yes, he disliked him before and that is understandable too though, isn't it? He gave many arguments for why he didn't trust him and didn't find him competent and also shared accounts of a lot of people who don't. That the peaceful transition of power is crucial and his inability to adhere to it disqualified him he has mentioned time and time again. So what's the gripe then? Why do people claim "TDS" when he clearly has given a number of reasons in the interview and over the years for why he doesn't like him?
1
u/Flimsy-Shake7662 Nov 01 '24
You don’t think him supporting russiagate is TDSish at the very least?
1
u/alpacasallday Nov 01 '24
I would first really recommend that people who want to be intellectually honest stop using a made-up illness to describe their disagreement with someone. We're not in kindergarden, right? I do think "russiagate" was overblown and the Democrats went crazy on that front, totally agree. However, multiple high level indictments did come out of that investigation. It's not like all of that was entirely empty. If Harris was a full blown supporter of it, I'd say that he overshot and should really rethink his mistakes there. But this does not make all his other reasons for disliking Trump any less reasonable.
And to be very honest, I don't buy Ben's reasoning all that much. He basically describes Trump like a lose canon that can do a lot of harm and should be graded on a curve and despite him having tried to break very fundamental rules (which Ben definitely has agreed he tried) he thinks if the checks and balances hold tight enough this guy can be controlled. It all seems a bit iffy to me that someone as smart as Ben really thinks this is an argument.
1
u/Flimsy-Shake7662 Nov 01 '24
ok, i'm not attached to the label, you just sorta asked me to justify how it applies to sam.
"Why do people claim "TDS" when he clearly has given a number of reasons in the interview and over the years for why he doesn't like him?"
I was just trying to answer you here. If you don't like the label, we don't have to use it, that's fine.
The salient point is that Sam deserves some blame for being one of those democrats who was overblowing the story though. I listened to his podcast at the time and I actually trusted his judgement, which turned out to be kinda hysterical in retrospect. I'm talking when he had guys like gary kasparov on, and others like him every week or so. I only mentioned that in this interview with ben he says "idek who these crazy democracts are bro." It's like dude. They're you. Or at least they were. That should be mentioned. Some of his past judgements regarding Trump have been pretty unbalanced. He makes better arguments here though that I can get into if you wish.
Sam's criticisms of trump at the end of this conversation were his strongest imo. That you can make the same obfuscations regarding any politician really, and presuppose that they have some brilliant policy even when everything that comes out of their mouth is nonsense. It is cancerous politics I would say. But here we are.
Yeah ben's argument is iffy i'd agree. He might be right though. Overturning an election in favour of a third term is a whole different level and isn't likely possible for trump, since that involves turning over the constitution, not just counting a few thousand faux votes in your favour. Ben might very well be right that Trump couldn't do that even if he wanted to. If that's not possible, then it really is just another election that comes down to whose policies you agree with, and obviously ben is gonna vote for the republican.
1
u/alpacasallday Nov 01 '24
ok, i'm not attached to the label, you just sorta asked me to justify how it applies to sam.
Makes sense!
I'm talking when he had guys like gary kasparov on, and others like him every week or so. I only mentioned that in this interview with ben he says "idek who these crazy democracts are bro." It's like dude. They're you. Or at least they were. That should be mentioned. Some of his past judgements regarding Trump have been pretty unbalanced. He makes better arguments here though that I can get into if you wish.
I am not too familiar with his take on the Muller investigation or claims about Russian interference. Funny enough I can't really stand Sam for completely different reasons. In any case, if he was not too objective there or made mistakes obviously he should be truthful about it. I do understand that in this climate conceding something like that while the Republican side is completely unwilling to do anything even remotely close to it won't be high on his priority list but nonetheless if what you're saying is true, he should do so.
1
u/Flimsy-Shake7662 Nov 01 '24
yeah if you're curious scroll to like episode 58 and just look at these thumbnails lmao: Making Sense Episodes | Sam Harris
it's like peak 2016 russiagate hysteria imo.
Yeah sam doesn't seem like the kinda guy to lie about that, i think he just might not realize the hypocrisy or doesn't realize the extent of what ben's saying. Yes, people on the left were undermining the 2016 election with these claims for years. So were you sam.
You still might be able to claim that it isn't as "dangerous" as the right wing election claims, which is what sam was saying, since those sorta lies aren't violent, or at least haven't led to violence. That might be true. But it's also true that we do have both sides undermining the credibility of elections. It really started in 2016 and to ben's point, it can be more damaging precisely bc of the subtly of these lies, and how credible news outlets were backing them for years. I'm positive that led to a major distrust in major institutions. Idk who I agree with more on this, they both have good points.
1
u/reggiesdiner Nov 02 '24
In fairness, most republicans (including Ben) hated Trump before. They probably all still do, but they have to act like they like him now as per the loyalty test.
0
u/ChickenMcTesticles Oct 29 '24
I think the biggest issue is the refusal to accept election results.
1
u/PoignantPoint22 Oct 29 '24
Anyone who dismisses criticisms against Trump as “TDS” shouldn’t be taken seriously. It’s wild how people have just normalized Trump’s insane behavior and rhetoric. Absolutely insane cultish behavior.
9
Oct 29 '24
[deleted]
1
u/Calm_Row122 Oct 30 '24
What are your legitimate criticisms of Trump? I’m curious to hear it from a Trump supporter because the left has been calling them out constantly for the past 8 years and all you hear from the right is “something something TDS”.
1
Oct 30 '24 edited Oct 30 '24
[deleted]
1
u/Calm_Row122 Oct 30 '24
Thanks for sharing. I appreciate your good faith response.
Does someone who has many many obvious and documented character flaws, lies routinely, rambles incoherently, is a grifter sound like the profile of a strong leader, though?
While, as Sam said, I think our institutions and democracy are strong enough to withstand another Trump presidency, his erosion of our norms surrounding the election, and the subsequent whitewashing of his attempt to overturn the election by the right are what is most disqualifying and frankly confounding to me. There seems to be this idea on the right that Trump was within his legal right to do what he did, but that is simply not true. Trump, and his lawyers, broke the law in multiple ways in their attempts to overturn the election. From the knowably false claims of election fraud, to pressuring Pence to illegally refuse to certify the election, to attempting to use false slates of electors to disenfranchise voters, to inciting a mob to storm the capital to delay the certification of the vote, they used illegal means to overturn the election. Jan 6th did not happen in a vacuum; it was one piece of a no holds barred plan to overturn a free and fair election. These things are not opinions and are well documented in the related court cases, and his lawyers are now all disgraced or disbarred. In fact, on Jan 7th 2020, Shapiro himself called it an insurrection and fully condemned it as the worst moment for America since 9/11.
Call it TDS if you want but if what Trump did after the 2020 election is not disqualifying of the office of president to the American people then that leads me to question how much we as a nation truly value freedom and democracy.
2
Oct 30 '24
[deleted]
2
u/Calm_Row122 Oct 31 '24
Haha I don’t think many on the left are thrilled at their choice of candidates in the past two elections. It’s something that they need to improve going forward, though I understand the move to go with KH instead of having a runoff to find a new candidate 3 months before the election. Biden should have dropped out much much sooner.
For me the risk of electing a run of the mill democrat like Harris is just simply lower than the wild card that is Trump. Trump may have a benign second term and then sail off in to the sunset never to be heard from again (yeah right lol). His first term was fairly anticlimactic up until the very end. But what I see with his toxic rhetoric and his refusal to concede defeat, presumably because his ego just simply can’t handle it, is a far greater threat under the right conditions.
Here’s to hoping the next 4 years are boring politically and we can get back to some normalcy someday.
2
Oct 31 '24
[deleted]
2
u/Calm_Row122 Oct 31 '24
You’re not wrong here, but to me the infighting and inability to align around a single candidate or agenda speaks to the diversity of opinion on the left. Which may not be good for winning elections but is good overall I think. I’d like to see a bit more of that on the right. I don’t think the current mandate to back Trump or be destroyed is particularly healthy for the Republican Party.
1
2
u/PoignantPoint22 Oct 30 '24 edited Oct 30 '24
I’m with Sam on this: the true derangement surrounding Trump are his supporters who have normalized his blatant insanity. Any other person who might have only said half of the crazy shit Trump has, would never have a chance at being elected. And yet with Trump, his supporters have doubled and tripled down and view his flaws as positive attributes. It’s wild.
2
Oct 30 '24
[deleted]
2
u/PoignantPoint22 Oct 30 '24 edited Oct 30 '24
There was like a 2 week window where it looked like the Republican Party was going to go another direction then Trump. Part of the party tried to coalesce around Ron DeSantis and yeah, we saw how well that went.
Failed impeachment? Idk man, the fact is that Trump was at the center of January 6th and everything that happened leading up to and on that day is solely the fault of Trump. It wasn’t a failed impeachment, he was impeached he just wasn’t removed from office because of partisan politics. The same people who in the immediate aftermath of January 6th said that it was an awful event and that Trump was to blame, somehow changed their minds in the following months. Spineless cowards.
I’m sorry but if Kamala loses next week and goes on to do exactly what Trump did in 2016, I will be the first one to denounce her. Full stop. There would be no excusing any of that behavior. The vast majority of people, including the vast majority of Democrats, will reach the same conclusion because it’s completely unacceptable and something that should never happen or ever be excused/rationalized. And that is simply just not what we saw when Trump tried it. To this day Trump still hasn’t conceded the last election, his supporters are right there with him. That’s fucked and I’m sorry that so many people don’t see this as immediately disqualifying.
1
Oct 30 '24
[deleted]
2
u/PoignantPoint22 Oct 30 '24 edited Oct 30 '24
The first impeachment was the same result. Trump was definitely guilty of some fuckery surrounding allocated funding to Ukraine and was impeached for it but ultimately wasn’t removed from office because of his supporters in congress. If Obama or Biden, or Clinton did what Trump did, I would 109% back impeaching them. But since Trump was never held accountable because not enough people had the fortitude to call a spade a spade, he escaped accountability just like everything else he bungles. And here we are, 8 years later, with the possibility of him being in office and pulling shit like that again. I just don’t see why this is the route so many people are set on going.
As far as rioting goes, so far only one political party/affiliation has rioted after losing an election in recent years. Didn’t happen when Hillary lost in 2016, sure there were grumbles but Hillary officially conceded within 24 hours after the election, she didn’t go on for years to repeat the lie that she actually won to all of her supporters, there was no alternate slate of electors scheme and nobody showed up to protest or riot on January 6th when the election was certified for Trump.
I just don’t see how you can use the non existence of something that hasn’t happened and make a positive claim that it will definitely happen if Kamala loses. And yes, while the BLM riots and rhetoric from some prominent Democrats was abhorrent, I don’t think you can translate that 1:1 into rioting happening if Kamala loses. You are certainly right though, as damaging as those BLM riots were, they pale in comparison to the damage done around Trump losing the 2020 election and his behavior/scheming and rhetoric leading up to January 6th. It’s not even remotely comparable to the BLM riots in terms of an actual threat to our democracy.
1
1
1
18
u/PFalcone33 Oct 29 '24
Sam Harris actually said the Dems cheating in the 2020 election to beat Trump was absolutely ok.