Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

27
Eris wrote: Tue Sep 10, 2024 1:35 pm Just a friendly note that while talking about Harris' record is perfectly legitimate, let's not let this conversation devolve into insulting people over their choice to vote or not vote for any particular person. I hate to have to say this, but it's happened so many times in the past that I feel a need to be proactive here.
You in another thread:
The people complaining about her are just being misogynistic and racist.
As I am someone whom has complained about Harris I found it insulting to be called misogynistic and racist.

Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

28
That took me back a bit as well. I don’t see misogynistic and racist applying to myself. I have more than a few issues that are important to me that she does not support or supports issues I’m totally opposed to. Just in case someone interprets that to me I support trump, I don’t.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

29
I used to think I couldn't vote for the lesser of 2 evils. I was cured of that in 2000 by the Nader voters who helped in their little bit to make George W. Bush the President instead of Albert Gore.
"Even if the bee could explain to the fly why pollen is better than shit, the fly could never understand."

Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

30
BKinzey wrote: Tue Sep 10, 2024 2:48 pm
Eris wrote: Tue Sep 10, 2024 1:35 pm Just a friendly note that while talking about Harris' record is perfectly legitimate, let's not let this conversation devolve into insulting people over their choice to vote or not vote for any particular person. I hate to have to say this, but it's happened so many times in the past that I feel a need to be proactive here.
You in another thread:
The people complaining about her are just being misogynistic and racist.
As I am someone whom has complained about Harris I found it insulting to be called misogynistic and racist.
It was pretty clear to me, from the context and from the article referenced in the OP, that Eris was talking specifically about Harris aids that have complained about her being too meticulous and detail oriented. She was saying the complaints were misogynistic and racist because those would be seen as positive qualities in a white man.

Unless you are an ex Harris aid who has made that complaint to the press, I think you're you're pretty safe on this one.
Whatever I said above, just pretend I included the obligatory “both sides,” especially if I said something mean about Trump (don’t want to hurt any feelings).

www.schayden.com

Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

31
As someone who voted for Nader, I don’t regret my vote. The dems messed up the election and gave a Republican court the chance to call a close election. Nearly 25 years later and the dems still prefer to run on divisive issues and gamble with close elections.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

32
BKinzey wrote: Tue Sep 10, 2024 2:48 pm
Eris wrote: Tue Sep 10, 2024 1:35 pm Just a friendly note that while talking about Harris' record is perfectly legitimate, let's not let this conversation devolve into insulting people over their choice to vote or not vote for any particular person. I hate to have to say this, but it's happened so many times in the past that I feel a need to be proactive here.
You in another thread:
The people complaining about her are just being misogynistic and racist.
As I am someone whom has complained about Harris I found it insulting to be called misogynistic and racist.
Forgive me, I was unclear. I mostly meant the Republicans complaining about her. I've been seeing a lot of stuff lately about her "personality", like the recent article about how people who work in the VP office complain that she alwways wants to know "why" they tell her she should do something, and how she is always "prepared" and has lots of "questions" as if those were bad things. Those traits are considered good in white men, but as soon as a non-white woman shows those traits suddenly she's being unreasonable.

I too have lots of complaints about her prosecutorial record, and if I weren't trying to stay neutral in here I could pile on her too.
106+ recreational uses of firearms
1 defensive use
0 people injured
0 people killed

Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

34
Eris wrote: Tue Sep 10, 2024 5:21 pm
BKinzey wrote: Tue Sep 10, 2024 2:48 pm
Eris wrote: Tue Sep 10, 2024 1:35 pm Just a friendly note that while talking about Harris' record is perfectly legitimate, let's not let this conversation devolve into insulting people over their choice to vote or not vote for any particular person. I hate to have to say this, but it's happened so many times in the past that I feel a need to be proactive here.
You in another thread:
The people complaining about her are just being misogynistic and racist.
As I am someone whom has complained about Harris I found it insulting to be called misogynistic and racist.
Forgive me, I was unclear. I mostly meant the Republicans complaining about her. I've been seeing a lot of stuff lately about her "personality", like the recent article about how people who work in the VP office complain that she alwways wants to know "why" they tell her she should do something, and how she is always "prepared" and has lots of "questions" as if those were bad things. Those traits are considered good in white men, but as soon as a non-white woman shows those traits suddenly she's being unreasonable.

I too have lots of complaints about her prosecutorial record, and if I weren't trying to stay neutral in here I could pile on her too.
Agree, Eris. I have lots of criticisms of her policies. But I find the questions and preparedness to be attributes. Nobody knows everything and asking questions is sort of critical to the position.

Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

35
I’m not going to try to convince anyone who to vote for. I’m going with Harris as a anti-MAGA supporter.

I don’t agree with her on some policies, but I don’t agree with anyone on everything.

I’m concerned about gun rights, but I dont think for one second that MAGA wouldn’t strip gun rights if they thought it was a threat - remember Trump banned bump stocks with executive order… Reagan signed plenty of gun control legislation during his career as governor and the (a salt) weapons ban of the 90s.

For me, it’s another bad choice, but at least Harris will have her loftier goal moderated by congress.

If Trump wins, he’ll get rid of any opponent (just like he promises) and run the deficit through the roof while lining his pockets (again)

Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

37
I watched the debate tonight and I heard Harris state that she and Walz are both gun owners and that she would not support taking away anybody’s guns. Take it as it was stated on national TV.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis Brandeis,

Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

38
TrueTexan wrote: Tue Sep 10, 2024 11:05 pm I watched the debate tonight and I heard Harris state that she and Walz are both gun owners and that she would not support taking away anybody’s guns. Take it as it was stated on national TV.
And trump has a monopoly on lying? Harris' lies about microstamping as Attorney General are why we had a 10 year ban on new handgun models. She's all over the record with support for bans, even confiscating. I, for one, believe her record over her platitudes. I've lived with it.

Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

39
Ah, now we're coming down to it.

Character matters. Character always matters. That's one of the first points MAGAs (or single issue voters) always miss, or, in some cases, are not capable of understanding. It's one of the amorphous issues that is so complex it can be impossible to explain to a young child or a chucklefuck. It can't be measured, it can only be observed.

And it matters. Right here, for whatever value there is in answering this question. And across the board, for every answer to every question, for the validity of every statement, even for the things that one doesn't do, and the things one doesn't say.

Given Donald Trump and Vice President Harris standing in front of you, both claiming that they won't work to take your guns if they are elected, which one, if either, do you believe?

However you word your answer, it's going to be another name for character that you apply as a measuring instrument.

If both claim anything, I tend to believe Vice President Harris, or at least give her the benefit of the doubt until I can check, and I never believe anything Donald Trump says. His default is to lie, and I always assume he is doing so.

Because character. There is no doubt in my mind how this particular contest plays out, who has character and who doesn't.

President Obama's character is one of the central reasons why I angrily oppose any type of term limit.
"When I have your wounded." -- Major Charles L. Kelly, callsign "Dustoff", refusing to acknowledge that an L.Z. was too hot, moments before being killed by a single shot, July 1st, 1964.

"Touch it, dude!"

Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

40
As political scientists have told us for decades, debates don't change anything. Harris supporters and Trump supporters each heard what they wanted to hear from their candidate. I agree with featureless, Harris might say she owns guns, but I'm more concerned with her history of gun control in court after court in California as AG and as a US senator and VP. Politicians of both sides say a lot of things especially during a close election. Hope everyone enjoyed probably the only debate of this election cycle.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

41
highdesert wrote: Wed Sep 11, 2024 7:51 am As political scientists have told us for decades, debates don't change anything. Harris supporters and Trump supporters each heard what they wanted to hear from their candidate. I agree with featureless, Harris might say she owns guns, but I'm more concerned with her history of gun control in court after court in California as AG and as a US senator and VP. Politicians of both sides say a lot of things especially during a close election. Hope everyone enjoyed probably the only debate of this election cycle.
My wife said the same thing about debates. Agree with you and featureless. Her actions and record have more meaning than election trail sound bites.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

43
If for no other reason I will vote for Harris is the fact that Trump will never accept any responsibility for anything. It’s always someone else’s fault…


He couldn’t even say that he should have issued a statement earlier on J6. Instead it was everyone else’s fault. He just showed up….i was asked to speak…. It wasn’t my fault….

Despite tweeting about a big protest, that’s going to be wild….

He will never ever say he was wrong, made a mistake, or even apologize.

Character? Harris isn’t perfect but I trust her to do the right thing way more than Trump.

Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

45
Character does matter. Honesty is part of that.

Here's an amicus brief Harris participated in on the 2008 Heller case as San Francisco DA arguing handguns can be banned as the 2A only confers a militia right to keep and bear, no individual right.
https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/u ... orneys.pdf

In 2014, Harris intervened on the state's behalf in
Peruta v. San Diego. The state was not a party to the suit challenging "good cause" CCW denials by San Diego Sheriff. Plaintiff had won the case at CA9 and the sheriff had decided not to appeal, opening the door for CCW in restrictive counties. Harris entered and CA9 accepted. Went all the way to SCOTUS and was not granted cert. Harris ensured no real right to CCW in California (and other restrictive states under CA9) continued.

I'm 2013, Harris' office triggered the microstamping portion of the CA handgun roster, effectively banning new handgun models from being sold in CA form 2013 until 2024 when the requirement was no longer defended by the State in the ongoing Boland case (lodged firmly at CA9). Harris' certification of microstamping was based on expired patents not impeding the technology, not that the technology was actually feasible and available. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... 3LjKIqwlbi

Harris statements on AWBs and buybacks or confiscation are easily found, so no need to dig them up.

The point is, Harris believes and has legally opined that there is no individual right to keep and bear. That is one of her "values." She has litigated that belief in court, on the record, and the real results have been a partial ban on keep and bear in CA. That she now says she owns a gun and won't take them is either a total reversal of all of her previous actions, values and legal work or a lie.

Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

47
featureless wrote: Tue Sep 10, 2024 11:33 pm
TrueTexan wrote: Tue Sep 10, 2024 11:05 pm I watched the debate tonight and I heard Harris state that she and Walz are both gun owners and that she would not support taking away anybody’s guns. Take it as it was stated on national TV.
And trump has a monopoly on lying? Harris' lies about microstamping as Attorney General are why we had a 10 year ban on new handgun models. She's all over the record with support for bans, even confiscating. I, for one, believe her record over her platitudes. I've lived with it.
:beer2:

She thinks it's perfectly fine to designate particular firearms as "assault weapons" and grab those, buy them back, ban them, etc. She has just dialed back the rhetoric during the very close campaign to try and sooth/recruit those of US who vote 2A now. She's flipping and flopping. Her past record speaks for itself.

That said, i think she mopped the floor with Trump last night and it'll probably boost her in the polls significantly. She done good if we are OK with her and Team Blue's "agenda" and platform. Vote Blue No Matter Who aficionados should be righteously smug and sanctimonious this morning knowing that Kamala and Tim are gun owners.

VooDoo
Tyrants disarm the people they intend to oppress. Hope is not a Plan.

Dot 'em if ya got 'em!

Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

48
CDFingers wrote: Wed Sep 11, 2024 9:44 am DA's and AG's are hired to enforce existing law. Then things get appealed. We perceive the results of that.

CDF
DAs and AGs have the ability to reform the law or offer leniency thereunder. It is central to criminal justice reform. Some do, some don't. Telling of the character if they do what's right at personal cost of votes or tow the line. We in California have most certainly perceived (and received) the results of that! ;)

Example: Bonta final said no to Newsom on defending that horseshit law that required plaintiff to pay for all legal costs of 2A suits if they didn't prevail. Newsom, of course, picked it up with outside council on our dime, but I give props to Bonta for dropping his defense of it. And I don't give Bonta props for much of anything in the gun world.

To add: "just doing my job" should never be an excuse, especially when under oath to protect the constitution.

Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

49
featureless wrote: Wed Sep 11, 2024 9:41 am Character does matter. Honesty is part of that.

Here's an amicus brief Harris participated in on the 2008 Heller case as San Francisco DA arguing handguns can be banned as the 2A only confers a militia right to keep and bear, no individual right.
https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/u ... orneys.pdf

In 2014, Harris intervened on the state's behalf in
Peruta v. San Diego. The state was not a party to the suit challenging "good cause" CCW denials by San Diego Sheriff. Plaintiff had won the case at CA9 and the sheriff had decided not to appeal, opening the door for CCW in restrictive counties. Harris entered and CA9 accepted. Went all the way to SCOTUS and was not granted cert. Harris ensured no real right to CCW in California (and other restrictive states under CA9) continued.

I'm 2013, Harris' office triggered the microstamping portion of the CA handgun roster, effectively banning new handgun models from being sold in CA form 2013 until 2024 when the requirement was no longer defended by the State in the ongoing Boland case (lodged firmly at CA9). Harris' certification of microstamping was based on expired patents not impeding the technology, not that the technology was actually feasible and available. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... 3LjKIqwlbi

Harris statements on AWBs and buybacks or confiscation are easily found, so no need to dig them up.

The point is, Harris believes and has legally opined that there is no individual right to keep and bear. That is one of her "values." She has litigated that belief in court, on the record, and the real results have been a partial ban on keep and bear in CA. That she now says she owns a gun and won't take them is either a total reversal of all of her previous actions, values and legal work or a lie.
Good summary featureless. Harris might have backed away from supporting mandatory gun buyback of AR-15 type rifles since she was nominated this summer, but she still supports an assault weapons ban.
We asked the Harris campaign whether she still supports mandatory assault weapons buybacks. She does not. A campaign spokesperson pointed to a comment the campaign gave to The New York Times that, like President Joe Biden, Harris wants to ban assault weapons but not require people to sell them to the federal government.
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 ... lt-weapon/
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Why I could never vote for Kamala Harris as President

50
highdesert wrote: Wed Sep 11, 2024 11:11 am
featureless wrote: Wed Sep 11, 2024 9:41 am Character does matter. Honesty is part of that.

Here's an amicus brief Harris participated in on the 2008 Heller case as San Francisco DA arguing handguns can be banned as the 2A only confers a militia right to keep and bear, no individual right.
https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/u ... orneys.pdf

In 2014, Harris intervened on the state's behalf in
Peruta v. San Diego. The state was not a party to the suit challenging "good cause" CCW denials by San Diego Sheriff. Plaintiff had won the case at CA9 and the sheriff had decided not to appeal, opening the door for CCW in restrictive counties. Harris entered and CA9 accepted. Went all the way to SCOTUS and was not granted cert. Harris ensured no real right to CCW in California (and other restrictive states under CA9) continued.

I'm 2013, Harris' office triggered the microstamping portion of the CA handgun roster, effectively banning new handgun models from being sold in CA form 2013 until 2024 when the requirement was no longer defended by the State in the ongoing Boland case (lodged firmly at CA9). Harris' certification of microstamping was based on expired patents not impeding the technology, not that the technology was actually feasible and available. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... 3LjKIqwlbi

Harris statements on AWBs and buybacks or confiscation are easily found, so no need to dig them up.

The point is, Harris believes and has legally opined that there is no individual right to keep and bear. That is one of her "values." She has litigated that belief in court, on the record, and the real results have been a partial ban on keep and bear in CA. That she now says she owns a gun and won't take them is either a total reversal of all of her previous actions, values and legal work or a lie.
Good summary featureless. Harris might have backed away from supporting mandatory gun buyback of AR-15 type rifles since she was nominated this summer, but she still supports an assault weapons ban.
We asked the Harris campaign whether she still supports mandatory assault weapons buybacks. She does not. A campaign spokesperson pointed to a comment the campaign gave to The New York Times that, like President Joe Biden, Harris wants to ban assault weapons but not require people to sell them to the federal government.
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 ... lt-weapon/
Thanks for this summary. She has a history and people need to be realistic and accept it. I have no doubt she will do everything possible at the first change to push an anti gun agenda. The current president didn’t harp on guns during his election, but it was one of the first issues he saw as important within months of taking office. I expect harris to do the same. By all means everyone should evaluate their own metric for their vote and vote for her if inclined. But, don’t be naive concerning her positions on guns and the right to bear arms. She doesn’t believe it exists as an individual right. She will have armed security for the rest of her life. Most of all of us won’t.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Amazon [Bot], Bisbee and 2 guests