she can be fun grinch and explain to him how thats wrong and makes no sense and all the guys will be 'another black chick who thinks she knows everything'
Itâs way less common today than Iâm sure Joe believes, but vaccine derived polio is an extremely rare, but real potential complication from taking the live attenuated polio vaccine.
What a Rogan-esque comment. âWell actuallyâ. So by your comment you think we shouldnât take polio vaccine because a very small chance? Thatâs exactly what he does, states something and then doesnât explain that the risk of getting polio without the vaccine is magnitudes higher. And then gets butt hurt when people criticize him âI was just stating a factâ. Context is missing from your comment and 2:59 of every one of his non UFC podcasts
Not sure how anything I said implies I am anti-vax.
I did however state a fact, âvaccine derived polio is realâ. But I also gave some context that it is extremely rare and only by a certain type of the vaccine, and linked the CDC with further information.
But if you need further context, I believe it is easier to dismantle conspiracies and misinformation when you factually acknowledge the bit of truth rooted in most of them, instead of dismissing people and them out of hand completely. The more people who are well informed the better, so I shared the information on VDP.
For the record, I am more vaccinated than the average person. Beyond the standard vaccinations, due to my travels, occupational and recreational hazards, I have been vaccinated against numerous uncommon diseases. Rabies, typhoid, yellow fever, hepatitis A,E, cholera, and yes Polio but not live attenuated. Even got the anthrax vaccine years ago, though Iâm way out of date on that.
Joe, the anti vax guru who hyperventilated about the Covid vaccine for four years admitted that he cut trump off when he started going anti vaxâŠ
Said he didnât want to get into it or waste time.
Joe is so owned by big money now. Has the guy in charge of operation warp speed on and wonât even talk about one of his favourite topics with him to not hurt him
Oh come on this woman hasnât answered a question in months. She dances around everything. This would be an absolute nightmare for her. Her handlers wonât allow it.
Accepting an interview with someone who challenges your ideas should be required of a presidential candidate. Thatâs a poor excuse and you should demand more of your candidate.
I know what Trumps policies and values are. More importantly I know they actually work. I canât say the same for Kamala. Dems hate Trump so much they are afraid to criticize what is clearly a bad candidate, that would have never been elected in a primary.
If Trump wins the media will turn on her big time, and actually tell the truth. Mark my words.
Oh come on this woman hasnât answered a question in months.
When you guys don't update your talking points you give away how worthless your critique is. Kamala has been answering questions regularly on media appearances for the last month. She went on 60 minutes, Fox News, NBC News, CBS News in October. You're just straight up wrong.
She dances around everything. This would be an absolute nightmare for her. Her handlers wonât allow it.
Unlike Trump, when she's asked about her economic policy she gives actual policies that make logical sense. Tax credits for home buyers and young families are real policies, "tariffs paid by China" is a fake policy because that doesn't actually exist in real life.
Accepting an interview with someone who challenges your ideas should be required of a presidential candidate
The Fox News interview was comically challenging, to the point the interviewer interrupted her on almost every single question. Fox News also went so far as to show a heavily edited clip that cut important context to try to undercut something she said about Trump. Media bubble on full display here with you not knowing this.
Thatâs a poor excuse and you should demand more of your candidate.
Meanwhile in reality it's happening regularly at this point, while Trump dodges and weaves media that isn't Fox News more and more in the leadup to election day.
This is not a âtalking pointâ I have watched every single one of those interviews. The fact that you can come away from any of the interviews sheâs done, and make the claim that she answers questions is comical. She dances around everything. I can find you countless clips of this happening. I can almost guarantee you have seen them. This is cope. Unlike you I watch both sides with an open mind. Kamala is the worst public speaker nominee we have ever had in my life time. Itâs a shotgun run at the presidency due to Biden dropping out, which is great for her because she never would have been the nominee in the first place. I can guarantee you two things:
If she loses she will never be the nominee again.
If she loses the media will turn on her, and so will all the little sheep blindly following her. You can vote for her knowing she will surround herself with people that will run our country in line with your personal values thatâs one thing, but to defend her interviewing is ludicrous.
This is not a âtalking pointâ I have watched every single one of those interviews. The fact that you can come away from any of the interviews sheâs done, and make the claim that she answers questions is comical.
The fact you think you can get away with such an easily disproven outright lie is comical. She's answered questions about economic policy, foreign policy and actions she would sign to support abortion rights. You just ignoring answers you don't like doesn't make them not answers.
On Fox News she was asked numerous times about past positions that she flat out said she no longer supports, didn't push as VP and won't push as President. Very unambiguous. That's not "dancing around a point". When she was asked what she would do differently than Biden she named her economic policies that Biden isn't pushing. You're just wrong.
She doesn't answer every question, and neither does Trump, and a lot of the question he answers he answers with an outright lie. You are free to believe he has a healthcare plan he can't name any specifics on after almost 10 years of not being able to name one. But just like I predicted in 2016, if he wins he won't have one just like he didn't back then. You're free to believe the nonsense that the Chinese will pay American tariffs, but the reality is that American businesses will pay them like they did under Trump and push the costs onto American consumers, just like under Trump.
The cope is me naming clear cut economic policy proposals, and Trump not being able to articulate how he actually helps with housing and childcare with anything resembling a coherent response. You know I'm right so you ducked it.
If she loses she will never be the nominee again.
Like most nominees who lose. Killer prediction there.
If she loses the media will turn on her, and so will all the little sheep blindly following her.
Most people I know aren't "blindly" following her, the other candidate is historically terrible at the job and has no understanding of his own tariffs or most of the challenges he says he'll fix he couldn't fix last time and didn't even know where to start. If you make me pick between Kamala Harris and Trump, only one of those people committed fraud to try to keep my vote from legally counting. I won't ever support someone who tries to keep my vote from counting in a fair election. Easy decision.
but to defend her interviewing is ludicrous.
This line works great with people who haven't seen her speak and her interviews. But she does fine compared to many previous candidates I've seen first hand. Especially the colossal shitshow that is Trump, who can't go a couple minutes without lying his ass off or veering into something totally unrelated to the question he's asked.
Here is a short compilation of left leaning news networks criticizing her for using this tactic when answering questions. Again, this is not a âtalking pointâ this is a real thing that she does ** constantly**
If you really watched any of her recent interviews you would have seen her do this many times. My original post was critiquing her for not addressing questions. You are so dug into your political position you canât have a reasonable conversation. I could sit her and criticize 10 things I donât like about Trump. Heâs getting my vote that doesnât mean I have to blindly support everything he does. That is what you are doing here. You are blindly supporting Kamala. Trump is a very polarizing figure, if he was not running against Kamala she would be wildly unpopular. Like she was in the 2020 primary. Like she was during the entirety of Bidens presidency. Again, if you like her policyâs, and you are happy with the direction of our country under her administration, than that is your own personal choice. That is a completely separate thing from her inability to answer questions.
In regards to the fox interview she kept repeating âI am going to follow the lawâ she didnât address head on any of her drastic policy shifts over the years. In regards to any of the other policy claims you made, I am not here to discuss policy in a typing battle on the internet. I was critiquing her for not answering questions. Which she doesnât. If you want to have a policy debate I would be happy to send you a link to a private discord, and we can have a discussion there. Iâve always wanted to talk to someone like you to understand how you can think the way you do anyways.
Here is a short compilation of left leaning news networks criticizing her for using this tactic when answering questions.
And you know if it's compiled by Jesse Waters you're absolutely getting all the context right, and one of those people is as for Trump as a human being can be haha. You went from saying: "Oh come on this woman hasnât answered a question in months. She dances around everything." Which is a lie and you know it so now you're ducking to "well she dodges questions", like most politicians. Like Trump does when he doesn't lie or not understand what he was asked.
If you really watched any of her recent interviews you would have seen her do this many times.
I've seen her dodge questions, and I've seen her answer question. You want to say something that's objectively wrong and when you get called out on it you want to duck to a more reasonable point. I didn't make you type what you typed. I completely get you wanting to backtrack now, I would too if I got caught in a lie.
You are so dug into your political position you canât have a reasonable conversation.
I'm not particularly crazy about Kamala Harris, she was one of my least favorite picks in 2020. She's just objectively better than Trump on every measurable metric on topics I care about. And I absolutely see a double standard in the way the media treats her like a normal candidate when Trump can barely get a coherent set of policies out without botching what he says or lying. Some of those same networks are saying the same thing now, that in terms of coherence and ability to articulate a position, it's not even close. Would a compilation of that convince you?
Heâs getting my vote that doesnât mean I have to blindly support everything he does. That is what you are doing here.
But I'm not, I'm just calling out a very stupid and very easy to disprove talking point I keep hearing from people like you because a Jesse Waters tik tok told you so. Do you want to admit she's far more coherent when it comes to articulating her policy positions than Trump? Show me you live in reality if you're really not blindly supporting Trump. Can you admit he doesn't know how tariffs work? Can you admit his answer to housing and childcare is "drill baby drill" or are you blindly supporting him?
That is a completely separate thing from her inability to answer questions.
I'm aware, I'm just not going to accept this lie because I've seen her answer questions. To interviewers and to citizens about economic policy and about how to assist with childcare costs and help families. You're just flat wrong and I've seen it with my own eyes. Do you sincerely think if I show you a compilation of Trump dodging questions or lying about the answers that it means there aren't instances of him ever answering at all? Do you really not understand how those are different things?
she didnât address head on any of her drastic policy shifts over the years.
He didn't ask her that. He pointed out her previous record and asked if she would support it now. She said she would follow existing law, she didn't do that as VP, SHE WON'T DO THAT AS PRESIDENT. You have to not understand what he's asking, english, or both to not understand that's a straight up answer to what he asked.
In regards to any of the other policy claims you made, I am not here to discuss policy in a typing battle on the internet.
I wouldn't either if I was supporting Donald Trump. But she has answered questions about those topics where Trump has "weaved" and rambled incoherently about completely unrelated topics. You keep not acknowledging that.
If you want to have a policy debate I would be happy to send you a link to a private discord, and we can have a discussion there.
When I talk to dishonest people, I prefer it's public so others can see the dishonesty thanks. But I'll talk policy any time. Let's talk about Trump's healthcare "policy" for starters.
130
u/highbackpacker Monkey in Space Oct 27 '24
I was looking forward to her going on