Controversial Trump vs Harris who do you predict wins?

[Logiko]

Hold it right there

Don't even dare to bring her daughter into the mix. You are crossing a line and I am telling you very clearly - don't do it

You guyz have been crossing the line for month by attacking my personnal life.
Don't you F. dare tell me what line I can or can't cross.

If you vote for a cryptofascist, when you defend a crypto fascists and a rapist that is threatening the lives of thousands, you don't get to tell people what they can or cannot do in response.

Of course you think being rational or respect is somehow bad.

No. It is good. I am a rationnal person.

But if it's used without politicization, it is useless and counterproductive.

Rationnality is what pushed France to get a Macron. The race for the extrem center is what pushed sos-dem to radicalize to the right and what pushed people to invite the far right at the "table of ideas" which completely legitimated their position mediaticaly.

Blind rationnality is has toxic and problematic has blind conspirationnism. Because both of those things negate the REAL political issues behind the systems.

Conspiracy theorist believe that big bad men are running the system behind the curtain and Ultra rationnal thinkers / centrist believe that the problem is simply dur to people "being too radical" or "not having the critical thinking" that they should or "not having enough informations" etc.

In reality, both are blind to the reality of social and political forces. They do not understand that the system and the material conditions creates the thinking and the radicality of people. They do not understand that Trump was not elected because people were angry about their paychecks or because they do not have the right knowledge, but because the system is pushing them to have an identitary vision and because capitalism feeds on the competition and the division created by people like Trump.

Rationnality is fundamental. BUT it must be used politically or it is just a tool for a different type of oppression.

Do you see rationnal centrist advocating for the end of the armements of Israel at the moment ? No. Simply because that's not in their interest and because their rationnality actually serve to create a loads of oppressions.

@Ravagerblade has said over and over again that CRONY(unregulated) capitalism is screwing over everybody.

Believing that capitalism must be regulated and believing that the system of capitalism is creating systemic oppression are two different things mate.

You kept trying to paint him as an oppression lover.

I'm waiting to see the opposite.

I don't seek stuff like that unlike you. I don't make threads glorying myself or presenting myself as a martyr.

Too bad. You missed a chance to prove that you were right.

 

[Reborn]

You guyz have been crossing the line for month by attacking my personnal life.
Don't you F. dare tell me what line I can or can't cross.

If you vote for a cryptofascist, when you defend a crypto fascists and a rapist that is threatening the lives of thousands, you don't get to tell people what they can or cannot do in response.


No. It is good. I am a rationnal person.

But if it's used without politicization, it is useless and counterproductive.

Rationnality is what pushed France to get a Macron. The race for the extrem center is what pushed sos-dem to radicalize to the right and what pushed people to invite the far right at the "table of ideas" which completely legitimated their position mediaticaly.

Blind rationnality is has toxic and problematic has blind conspirationnism. Because both of those things negate the REAL political issues behind the systems.

Conspiracy theorist believe that big bad men are running the system behind the curtain and Ultra rationnal thinkers / centrist believe that the problem is simply dur to people "being too radical" or "not having the critical thinking" that they should or "not having enough informations" etc.

In reality, both are blind to the reality of social and political forces. They do not understand that the system and the material conditions creates the thinking and the radicality of people. They do not understand that Trump was not elected because people were angry about their paychecks or because they do not have the right knowledge, but because the system is pushing them to have an identitary vision and because capitalism feeds on the competition and the division created by people like Trump.

Rationnality is fundamental. BUT it must be used politically or it is just a tool for a different type of oppression.

Do you see rationnal centrist advocating for the end of the armements of Israel at the moment ? No. Simply because that's not in their interest and because their rationnality actually serve to create a loads of oppressions.


Believing that capitalism must be regulated and believing that the system of capitalism is creating systemic oppression are two different things mate.


I'm waiting to see the opposite.



Too bad. You missed a chance to prove that you were right.

You need to shut your victim playing card.

You don't have any high moral ground to play when you attack others by calling them racists and sexists and naxis..

And, I don't remember zemmi ever attacked you personally so again you have no right to bring her daughter into an argument and get personal


As far as I am concerned, troll me however the way you deem fit. I couldn't care less about your opinions

 

[Uncle Van]

You guyz have been crossing the line for month by attacking my personnal life.
Don't you F. dare tell me what line I can or can't cross.

If you vote for a cryptofascist, when you defend a crypto fascists and a rapist that is threatening the lives of thousands, you don't get to tell people what they can or cannot do in response.


No. It is good. I am a rationnal person.

But if it's used without politicization, it is useless and counterproductive.

Rationnality is what pushed France to get a Macron. The race for the extrem center is what pushed sos-dem to radicalize to the right and what pushed people to invite the far right at the "table of ideas" which completely legitimated their position mediaticaly.

Blind rationnality is has toxic and problematic has blind conspirationnism. Because both of those things negate the REAL political issues behind the systems.

Conspiracy theorist believe that big bad men are running the system behind the curtain and Ultra rationnal thinkers / centrist believe that the problem is simply dur to people "being too radical" or "not having the critical thinking" that they should or "not having enough informations" etc.

In reality, both are blind to the reality of social and political forces. They do not understand that the system and the material conditions creates the thinking and the radicality of people. They do not understand that Trump was not elected because people were angry about their paychecks or because they do not have the right knowledge, but because the system is pushing them to have an identitary vision and because capitalism feeds on the competition and the division created by people like Trump.

Rationnality is fundamental. BUT it must be used politically or it is just a tool for a different type of oppression.

Do you see rationnal centrist advocating for the end of the armements of Israel at the moment ? No. Simply because that's not in their interest and because their rationnality actually serve to create a loads of oppressions.


Believing that capitalism must be regulated and believing that the system of capitalism is creating systemic oppression are two different things mate.


I'm waiting to see the opposite.



Too bad. You missed a chance to prove that you were right.

I missed my chance to prove myself to an unreasonable, hypocritical narcissist? Am I supposed to feel bad?

And stop playing the victim. Zemmi never insulted your personal life so you have no excuse to go after someone's children.

 

[Zemmi]

You need to shut your victim playing card.

You don't have any high moral ground to play when you attack others by calling them racists and sexists and naxis..

And, I don't remember zemmi ever attacked you personally so again you have no right to bring her daughter into an argument and get personal


As far as I am concerned, troll me however the way you deem fit. I couldn't care less about your opinions

I have never attacked him. He takes me disagreeing with him as one.

 

[Logiko]

You don't have any high moral ground to play when you attack others by calling them racists and sexists and naxis..

Yes I do. A lot actually.

I'm not perfect but I fight all those things, so don't expect me to stand down when I see them. And do not expect me to tell you that in this environment, I should not act like all of you.

And, I don't remember zemmi ever attacked you personally so again you have no right to bring her daughter into an argument and get personal

Did I ever said that I only needed to be personnaly attacked to start being disrespectfull ?

No.

I'm when I see a limit being crossed. By defending and therefore endorsing a person an elected president that attacks people in difficulties, women and minorities.. you cross the line that I consider to be the limit of my respect.

And her daughter was not brough in, only what how she views her. Because you might not have noticed it, but women are dying because of this situation and people are afraid for their lives.

So defending Trump when the guyz is advocating for the regulation of women body is not really amazing.

As far as I am concerned, troll me however the way you deem fit. I couldn't care less about your opinions

I will only troll when it's needed. I'm usually very serious.

Zemmi never insulted your personal life so you have no excuse to go after someone's children.

I have every excuse. Defending a elected rapist that threatenned the lives of thousand or millions is not something that I will just ignore.

Do not expect me or anyother leftists to be nice in front of this situation. Don't you even dare give me moral lessons on the way I deal with crypto-fascist enablers.

And no children were attacked here. None. Go read the sentence again.

"Disagreeing ?"

Defending someone that attacks millions of people ! Destroys lives ! Threaten thousands and thousands.

 

[AL sama]

You guyz have been crossing the line for month by attacking my personnal life.
Don't you F. dare tell me what line I can or can't cross.

If you vote for a cryptofascist, when you defend a crypto fascists and a rapist that is threatening the lives of thousands, you don't get to tell people what they can or cannot do in response.


No. It is good. I am a rationnal person.

But if it's used without politicization, it is useless and counterproductive.

Rationnality is what pushed France to get a Macron. The race for the extrem center is what pushed sos-dem to radicalize to the right and what pushed people to invite the far right at the "table of ideas" which completely legitimated their position mediaticaly.

Blind rationnality is has toxic and problematic has blind conspirationnism. Because both of those things negate the REAL political issues behind the systems.

Conspiracy theorist believe that big bad men are running the system behind the curtain and Ultra rationnal thinkers / centrist believe that the problem is simply dur to people "being too radical" or "not having the critical thinking" that they should or "not having enough informations" etc.

In reality, both are blind to the reality of social and political forces. They do not understand that the system and the material conditions creates the thinking and the radicality of people. They do not understand that Trump was not elected because people were angry about their paychecks or because they do not have the right knowledge, but because the system is pushing them to have an identitary vision and because capitalism feeds on the competition and the division created by people like Trump.

Rationnality is fundamental. BUT it must be used politically or it is just a tool for a different type of oppression.

Do you see rationnal centrist advocating for the end of the armements of Israel at the moment ? No. Simply because that's not in their interest and because their rationnality actually serve to create a loads of oppressions.


Believing that capitalism must be regulated and believing that the system of capitalism is creating systemic oppression are two different things mate.


I'm waiting to see the opposite.



Too bad. You missed a chance to prove that you were right.

quote where zem ever personally attacked you or insulted you??

 

[Logiko]

quote where zem ever personally attacked you or insulted you??

Did I ever said that I only needed to be personnaly attacked to start being disrespectfull ?

No.

I'm when I see a limit being crossed. By defending and therefore endorsing a person an elected president that attacks people in difficulties, women and minorities.. you cross the line that I consider to be the limit of my respect.

And her daughter was not brough in, only what how she views her. Because you might not have noticed it, but women are dying because of this situation and people are afraid for their lives.

So defending Trump when the guyz is advocating for the regulation of women body is not really amazing.

 

[AL sama]

not gonna bother reading all that nonsense I'll just punish whoever goes personal from here on

 

[Kami Burn]

I'll just punish whoever goes personal from here on

So another free pass for Logiko. How often has he to do such things until there are serious consequences for him?

 

[Ravagerblade]

Elon Musk denied his daughter. He is now negating her existence simply because she transitioned.

Trump is a known rapist : https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/19/trump-carroll-judge-rape/

And those are just the very tip of the iceberg.


I don't know

His son.

 

[Zemmi]

not gonna bother reading all that nonsense I'll just punish whoever goes personal from here on

Don’t worry about it, honestly. The low nature of it just offered to discredit he has any intention for an honest debate on the subjects.

 

[AL sama]

Don’t worry about it, honestly. The low nature of it just offered to discredit he has any intention for an honest debate on the subjects.

things are getting a bit too personal and its not just him tbh

that's why I stopped trolling a few hours ago

 

[Uncle Van]

And her daughter was not brough in, only what how she views her.

Which means she was brought in. You didn't deny what you did and in fact, double down and justified it. Now you're trying to attempt another one of your usual tactics, which is gaslighting to change the context.

No matter much you attempt to gaslight or justify your disgusting actions , you're in the wrong.

 

[dirtyLarry]

Anyone that really believed Harris was the favorite to win is delusional at best and dumb at worst.

Vegas had Trump as a 60-70% favorite for weeks before the election and this is the safest indicator you can look at.

As for the reasons why Trump won (or rather Harris lost) - it's not that hard to see it either.


Trump might be a rowdy, lunatic and whatever, but he didn't commit the three cardinal sins Kamala Harris and the Democrats commited:

1) He never treated the citizens like little children that needed to get lectured about what is "good" and what is "bad" in basically every facet of life. At worst he blasted out his own aggressive takes/insults, but he never lectured others on their personal worldview from a pedestal of moral superiority - that's important. People don't want to be lectured and treated like dumb and/or immature kids.

2) He had a strong stance on the really crazy topics (for example trans people in women's sport or new pronoun nonsense) that every sane person - even the vast majority of democrats btw - saw the same way. Only Harris and her crownies didn't realize this, because they were too afraid to piss of the small part of the radical left in her party. People hate really weird stances that only a crazy and very small bubble agrees with.

3) He didn't act like it was a foregone conclusion that he wins the election. Sure, he said that he is going to win the election (like every politician does), but Harris and the Democratic party were acting completely smug like there was no chance they could lose ever since she had replaced Biden. They were sniffing their own farts on a level I've actually very rarely seen before. Harris denying to appear on Joe Rogan - the biggest podcast on our planet and therefore best advertisement she could get - was just an unbelievably arrogant decision. It sent the signal that she didn't even care about the voters, because she had already won anyway. People want to get taken seriously and they want their candidate to actually try winning them over.

 

[Monkey D. Luffy]

The average Redditor.
https://x.com/DefiantLs/status/1855289035297804701

 

[Zemmi]

Anyone that really believed Harris was the favorite to win is delusional at best and dumb at worst.

Vegas had Trump as a 60-70% favorite for weeks before the election and this is the safest indicator you can look at.

As for the reasons why Trump won (or rather Harris lost) - it's not that hard to see it either.

People don't want to be lectured and treated like dumb and/or immature kids from a pedestal of arrogance and moral superiority.

Trump might be a rowdy, lunatic and whatever, but he didn't commit the three cardinal sins Kamala Harris and the Democrats commited:

1) He never treated the citizens like little children that needed to get lectured about what is "good" and what is "bad" in basically every facet of life. At worst he blasted out his own crazy takes, but he never lectured others on their personal worldview - that's important.

2) He had a strong stance on the really crazy topics (for example trans people in women's sport or new pronoun nonsense) that every sane person - even the vast majority of democrats btw - saw the same way. Only Harris and her crownies didn't realize this, because they were too afraid to piss of the small part of the radical left in her party.

3) He didn't act like it was a foregone conclusion that he wins the election. Sure, he said that he is going to win the election (like every politician does), but Harris and the Democratic party were acting completely smug like there was no chance they could lose ever since she had replaced Biden. They were sniffing their own farts on a level I've actually very rarely seen before. Harris denying to appear on Joe Rogan - the biggest podcast on our planet and therefore best advertisement she could get - was just an unbelievably arrogant decision. It sent the signal that she didn't even care about the voters, because she had already won anyway.

I couldn’t believe she turned down Rogan or the Catholic dinner. During the dinner broadcast, I almost felt certain a Trump victory from the vibes there.

 

[TheAncientCenturion]

I couldn’t believe she turned down Rogan or the Catholic dinner. During the dinner broadcast, I almost felt certain a Trump victory from the vibes there.

Sending the video in to the Catholic dinner was such a miss. Being able to banter and laugh at yourself is big on publicity

 

[Zemmi]

Sending the video in to the Catholic dinner was such a miss. Being able to banter and laugh at yourself is big on publicity

It is. And the long pod casts like Rogan, Theo & Flagerant (sure I spelled that wrong) with free flowing conversations allowed people to get to know them as people and not politicians. Trump & Vance took full advantage of those.

I believe her team feared she wasn’t capable of them and it would hurt her.

 

[Natalija]

I believe her team feared she wasn’t capable of them and it would hurt her.

I mean they weren’t wrong

 

[TheAncientCenturion]

It is. And the long pod casts like Rogan, Theo & Flagerant (sure I spelled that wrong) with free flowing conversations allowed people to get to know them as people and not politicians. Trump & Vance took full advantage of those.

I believe her team feared she wasn’t capable of them and it would hurt her.

The fact she wanted him to cancel on his guests, fly out to NYC only to do a 1 hour interview was bonkers. I think Kamala didn’t think she’d get a fair shake with Rogan and didn’t want to do an adversarial interview.