Kamala Harris interviewed by Brett Baier

[A2SG]

The best predictor for a person's future performance is their past performance. On that premise, hire Kamala and you will lose your business.

How is that assessment based on past performance? How many businesses did Harris lose, exactly?

On the other hand, if you are interviewing someone to run your company, the fact that they've been found guilty of fraud multiple times, as well as recently being convicted of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records (to say nothing of other guilty verdicts, like defamation and sexual assault) does seem particularly relevant.

And that's not even getting into any personal peccadillos about his sex life.

Your customer's more likely question, "Is this man giving me a good deal on the car?" On the same premise, hire Trump and you'll have happy customers.

Unless he overvalues the car and sells it at a higher price so he can profit more from it. Past performance, remember?

Have you not read 2 Samuel 11:12:25? God did not remove David, an adulterer and murderer, from his kingship. Give Trump a break, you are not God.

No, we're not. But we're only deciding whether or not to vote for the man to lead the country...and if his past performance is the best predictor for future performance...well, we can expect to be further victims of his fraudulent activities.

-- A2SG, and it's not like he's above using fraudulent methods in the political arena.....fake electors, demanding election officials "find" enough votes, etc....

 

[Hans Blaster]

It appears you do not understand Bayesian probability theory. Until Jan. 6, 2021, Bayesian logic would predict Milley's dimissal as evidenced by Milley himself. After Jan. 6, 2021, and only after Jan.6, 2021, would the same logic reverse the prediction.

What part of not discussing alternative realities do you not understand.

Have a good day

Why is it I don't believe you? (Oh, yeah, it was the probability theory crack.)

 

[o_mlly]

We all have a responsibility to ensure that those applying for high office maintain high standards. They represent the people they serve.

I thought you were from another country, right?

And we all judge others. We judge the behaviour of our spouses, our children, our friends and colleagues. And you are judged by others for how you act and what you say.

Christians ought not judge the person, that's beyond our ability. Yes, we do judge acts, our own and others. Do you not see the difference? Are you the same person you were 20 years ago?

That position only holds if you ignore the extent of his immorality.

Exactly where is the line in acceptable vs. unacceptable immorality?

 

[o_mlly]

What part of not discussing alternative realities do you not understand.

None.

Why is it I don't believe you? (Oh, yeah, it was the probability theory crack.)

Probably because you have no faith.

"Crack"? It looks like you either did not look up Bayesian logic or did you look up it and were not able to grasp it. Which is it?

 

[o_mlly]

So your argument is literally: My guy is bad. But not as bad as yours.

Do you honestly think that's a good argument? Isn't the blazingly obvious question then: 'Why on earth did you pick someone who you admit is bad in the first place?'

Because the only alternative is much worse.

 

[o_mlly]

How is that assessment based on past performance?

Are you not economically literate? What do you think caused 19.9% inflation from 2020 to 2024? Answer Harris-Biden unnecessary government spending. Prices are highly unlikely to ever come down, they are sticky in that direction.

What do you think caused the flood of illegal immigrants to invade our country? Answer: Harris-Biden executive orders to reverse Trump's border policies.

Whose foreign policies encouraged our enemies to become more offensive?

... the fact that they've been found guilty of fraud multiple times, as well as recently being convicted of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records (to say nothing of other guilty verdicts, like defamation and sexual assault) does seem particularly relevant.

Trump will appeal the politically motivated indictment and conviction as soon as Merchan sentences him (Merchan cleverly delayed sentencing unitl after the election), Trump cannot appeal before. What other guilty verdicts are you referring to?

And that's not even getting into any personal peccadillos about his sex life.

Got evidence of those "personal peccadillos", or are you just trying to sling imaginary mud?

Unless he overvalues the car and sells it at a higher price so he can profit more from it.

Whatever are you talking about? Just give us your facts. (Your link required I dismiss my adblocker app.)

No, we're not. But we're only deciding whether or not to vote for the man to lead the country...and if his past performance is the best predictor for future performance...well, we can expect to be further victims of his fraudulent activities.

What fraudulent activities do you think Trump took as President?

 

[Bradskii]

I thought you were from another country, right?

We should hold others responsible for their words and deeds whatever country we are from. I certainly do in regards to who I vote for down here. A lot of people in the US seem not to care about it.

Christians ought not judge the person, that's beyond our ability. Yes, we do judge acts, our own and others. Do you not see the difference?

And I said that we must judge the man on what he has said (and still says) and what he has done. God will render to each according to his deeds. Does that mean that we ignore all immoral acts?

Are you the same person you were 20 years ago?

That is irrelevant. Especially as we are talking about someone's fairly recent behaviour. Even his ongoing behaviour.

Exactly where is the line in acceptable vs. unacceptable immorality?

That's up to you to decide. It seems that he hasn't crossed that line as far as you are concerned. Heaven only knows where you think that line might be.

 

[Bradskii]

Because the only alternative is much worse.

That doesn't change what you said. Why did the GOP pick someone you actually think is bad? And after they did, why didn't you complain? Why don't you point out his faults? You actually go out of your way to support him and to trivialise what he has said and done. The forum is rife with excuses for the man.

And we're still talking moral character here. He fails at the first hurdle. How does the argument run?

Yes, we know he sexually assaulted a woman, but...
Yes, we know he is a convicted felon, but...
Yes, we know he tried to overthrow the election and still claims he won, but...

There should be no 'but...'

 

[probinson]

That doesn't change what you said. Why did the GOP pick someone you actually think is bad? And after they did, why didn't you complain? Why don't you point out his faults? You actually go out of your way to support him and to trivialise what he has said and done. The forum is rife with excuses for the man.

And we're still talking moral character here. He fails at the first hurdle. How does the argument run?

Yes, we know he sexually assaulted a woman, but...
Yes, we know he is a convicted felon, but...
Yes, we know he tried to overthrow the election and still claims he won, but...

There should be no 'but...'

It's almost like you think "the lesser of two evils" is a new concept.

There are people who will cast their vote for Trump because they absolutely do not want Harris. Likewise, there are people that will vote for Harris because they absolutely don't want Trump. In both camps, there are plenty of people not thrilled with their choice, so they are not voting for a candidate but against a candidate.

I don't plan to cast my vote for either of them. At this point, I might just write in Mickey Mouse, as the whole US political system has become a pathetic joke.

 

[Bradskii]

It's almost like you think "the lesser of two evils" is a new concept.

What most people don't realise that by saying they are voting for the lesser of two evils they are accepting that they are voting for someone they have just described as evil.

I guess you have the right idea if you think that they are just about as bad as each other (but an impossible argument to make if we're talking about moral character). And that is to not vote for either 'evil'.

 

[probinson]

What most people don't realise that by saying they are voting for the lesser of two evils they are accepting that they are voting for someone they have just described as evil.

I think that people are very aware of what they're saying. But the two party system means you get exactly two viable choices, and sometimes, people will chose to vote for "evil" because they perceive it to be, well, "lesser" than another evil.

 

[Bradskii]

I think that people are very aware of what they're saying.

But that's not the actual case, is it. We have thread after thread and post after post excusing Trump for everything. Saying that yes, we should ignore what he has said and done. We shouldn't. It should be the very first thing one considers: Is this man's character suitable to represent our country? And the answer must be a categorical no.

'He's not as bad as the other guy', apart from that being utter nonsense as regards morals, is not just missing the point. It's avoiding it completely.

 

[Hans Blaster]

None.

Yet you persist in the pretense.

Probably because you have no faith.

Faith has nothing to do with it.

"Crack"? It looks like you either did not look up Bayesian logic or did you look up it and were not able to grasp it. Which is it?

Logic? Bayes Theorem is about probability. (I'm more of a frequentist, not so into this newfangled Bayesian stuff.) Probability or likelihood have nothing to do with what Trump did (push out Kelly) or not do ("retire" Milley).

 

[A2SG]

Are you not economically literate? What do you think caused 19.9% inflation from 2020 to 2024? Answer Harris-Biden unnecessary government spending. Prices are highly unlikely to ever come down, they are sticky in that direction.

I'm not an economist, no. But....I'm pretty sure covid had some bearing on inflation, so it can't be blamed entirely on any spending issues. And, since then, Biden's economic policies have seemed to bring inflation down. And, as to prices, it's been clear that, during covid, due to supply chain issues, many prices when up. And since covid, prices have not come down, but corporate profits have gone way up. So, again, I fail to see how you can blame inflation solely on government spending, or on Biden specifically, despite what the GOP wants you to believe.

But, if you're more economically literate than I am, you may want to consider this economic analysis, which disagrees with your premise:

Roosevelt Institute - The Causes of and Responses to Today’s Inflation

The evidence is overwhelming: were there no supply problems, aggregate demand would not be excessive. The inflation we’ve experienced is best understood as resulting from industry-specific problems that many OECD countries are facing. A strong labor market is part of the solution, not the problem.

rooseveltinstitute.org

As I said, I'm not an economist...but I do have a degree in Journalism, so when I don't know a subject very well, I research.

What do you think caused the flood of illegal immigrants to invade our country? Answer: Harris-Biden executive orders to reverse Trump's border policies.

I'll be honest, up here in Massachusetts, I'm not affected very much by this "flood", so my perception may be off. I've heard a lot of right wing talking points that seem extreme and overly exaggerated, but I'll admit, I may simply be reacting to Trump-style rhetorical exaggeration and flat out lying, so if you have actual data to back up that there's been a "flood" of illegal immigrants, and can specifically tie that "flood" to Biden's executive orders, I'd appreciate it.

Whose foreign policies encouraged our enemies to become more offensive?

Gee, that's such a vague question, I genuinely have no idea. What specific polices are you referring to, and what specific offensive actions have these specific enemies taken? Give me some specific information, and I'll let you know what I think.

Trump will appeal the politically motivated indictment and conviction as soon as Merchan sentences him (Merchan cleverly delayed sentencing unitl after the election), Trump cannot appeal before.

I've no doubt. He appeals every guilty verdict. So far, none have been overturned, that I know of.

But, I'm not sure I understand how you can characterize that conviction as being "politically motivated." 12 jurors viewed the evidence presented by the prosecution, as well as Trump's defense, and they unanimously decided he was guilty. Were all 12 jurors politically motivated in exactly the same way? That doesn't seem likely, as the jury was selected and chosen specifically by both sides. If the jury was overwhelmingly biased against Trump, then Trump's legal team did an exceptionally bad job during voie dire.

What other guilty verdicts are you referring to?

Well, he was found liable for defamation and sexual assault, Trump and the Trump organization have been found guilty of fraud in the valuation of his real estate holdings, for Trump University and the Trump Foundation; further, there are other charges still pending for election interference and for retention of classified documents.

For more information:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump#Legal_affairs_and_bankruptcies

Got evidence of those "personal peccadillos", or are you just trying to sling imaginary mud?

I said I wasn't even getting into those.

Whatever are you talking about? Just give us your facts. (Your link required I dismiss my adblocker app.)

Trump was found guilty in a civil fraud case of manipulating his personal net worth, basically for overvaluing his businesses and residences when applying for loans, and devaluing them when filing taxes. He was ordered to pay a judgment of $454 million for this fraud.

It was in all the papers, I'm surprised you missed it. Oh, and just to let you know, the link I presented was from Reuters, not some sketchy site. Maybe Wikipedia will be better for your ad blocker:

New York business fraud lawsuit against the Trump Organization - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

All of which would suggest that it's not entirely unreasonable to think Trump, as your used car salesman, might overvalue a used car to increase his profit from the sale. He's done that kind of thing before...and you do consider past performance to be the best predictor of future performance.

What fraudulent activities do you think Trump took as President?

He specifically lied about the results of the 2020 election, and continues to do so, claiming to have evidence the election was stolen despite never showing what that supposed evidence might be. He tried to coerce a Georgia election official to "find" enough votes to swing the state his way, he organized an attempt to present fake electors who differed from the actual results of several states, he spoke to a group of his followers and told them to "fight like hell or you won't have a country any more" which resulted in a mob attacking the Capitol in an attempt to disrupt the certification of the election.

All based on the lie that he actually won.

So, if you want to know what past performance I'm basing my vote on, as a predictor of his future performance, that's it.

-- A2SG, you're free to believe otherwise, of course.....

 

[o_mlly]

We should hold others responsible for their words and deeds whatever country we are from. I certainly do in regards to who I vote for down here. A lot of people in the US seem not to care about it.

No, we love our brothers and sisters down under.

All have sinned. So, the best criterion for voting is competence. Both candidates have records of accomplishment and non-accomplishment. History, as the best indicator of the future, makes the choice obvious for rational thinkers.

 

[o_mlly]

I'm not an economist, no. But....I'm pretty sure covid had some bearing on inflation,

Nope. Unnecessary debt-financed government spending is the cause.

And, since then, Biden's economic policies have seemed to bring inflation down.

So, the arsonist pretending now to be a fireman in order to keep his/her job is a good thing? The fact is that the arsonist's policies caused ~ 20% increase in prices. Now, as fireman, stands over your smoking embers and you think he did a good job?

As I said, I'm not an economist...but I do have a degree in Journalism, so when I don't know a subject very well, I research.

As a journalist, certainly you know citing biased sources ("Roosevelt Institute ... advances progressive policies") is not good journalism.

so if you have actual data to back up that there's been a "flood" of illegal immigrants, and can specifically tie that "flood" to Biden's executive orders, I'd appreciate it.

Does Massachusetts not have an internet search engine?

Well, he was found liable for defamation and sexual assault, Trump and the Trump organization have been found guilty of fraud in the valuation of his real estate holdings

An unbiased Manhattan jury? In 2019 when Trump is President and indicates he will run for a second term, Carroll suddenly claims an event that allegedly happened ~30 years ago now needs to be adjudicated? Does that pass your smell test? The case is under appeal. Stay tuned.

Dem judge summarily delivers his judgement in a case prosecuted by another Dem. The case is under appeal. Stay tuned.

As I have a life, let's continue this exchange after the November election decides whether your claims have sufficient validity in determining the voting public's confidence in Trump.

 

[Bradskii]

So, the best criterion for voting is competence.

So yet again, immoral behaviour such as we have seen is to be ignored. That may be the way you work. It certainly isn't mine.

 

[Aldebaran]

So yet again, immoral behaviour such as we have seen is to be ignored. That may be the way you work. It certainly isn't mine.

Since we live in a secular culture rather than a theocracy, we can't be expected to vote for leaders as if it was a theocracy. People like to bring up the "lesser of two evils" idea, but I think the "lesser of two less-than-perfect people" is more accurate. And yes, policies are what are going to affect our lives after the election than the individual's morals.

 

[probinson]

It's also accurate to say that many people are voting for their preferred platform and not the candidate.

The bottom line is that polls have shown that people trust Trump with the economy more than they do Harris. Likewise for immigration. Unprompted, these are the two top issues that voters cite as their concern for this election. Those two issues will greatly impact voters' decisions regardless of who the candidates are.

 

[Bradskii]

Since we live in a secular culture rather than a theocracy, we can't be expected to vote for leaders as if it was a theocracy.

Why on earth is that somehow relevant?

Forgive my presumption, but I do presume that you judge others on their moral character. There's quite a lot of positions held in this forum that are just based on morality. And when I say quite a lot, it's just about every position. And it's not like I'm surprised. I've been posting on religious forums for very many years indeed. If Trump was any other person (and especially if he was a Democrat) then most people in this forum would be in attack mode should anyone be dumb enough to try to excuse his behaviour.

This man is by far the most unsuitable person ever to stand for high office. And when I say 'by far' I really mean there has been no-one like him. Ever.

And what I will never understand is how so many not just ignore what he has said and done, but actually try to excuse it.