Trump tells FoxNews why he won't debate Harris

I am not interesting in defending the Democratic Party as much as the definition of democracy. Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Lincoln, Roosevelt …none of these guys were selected by public primaries, as these kinds of primaries weren’t widely used until the 1970s. Were both parties anti-democratic until then? There is no mention of primaries in the constitution because parties are private entities that were meant to select their own candidates, just as Walmart selects its own CEO.

But lawyer also has a point regarding your idea of the will of the people. Your claim is that the Democrats replaced Biden with Harris, because Biden couldn’t win the election and Harris could. Doesn’t that very fact demonstrate that the Democratic party is catering to the electorate?

 

Lol. Manipulated? I never knew about it until this thread.

YOU are the one that brought Jesus into it when you said CHRISTians are being fooled, but now refuse to tell me how YOUR view is CHRISTian.

Have whatever view you want. Just understand that your view of shipping every kid back is absolutely not CHRISTian.

 

When you said this:

 

Bless your heart. This comment is absolute trash.

First, you use a straw man fallacy by oversimplifying and misrepresenting the Democrats' motivations regarding Biden's age and mental decline. Second, you commit a hasty generalization by assuming all Democrats are indifferent to these factors based on his continued presidency. Additionally, you employ a post hoc fallacy by suggesting that because Biden is still President, it proves Democrats don't care about his age or mental state, ignoring other potential reasons for his ongoing leadership. Lastly, you overgeneralize the attitudes of all Democrats, failing to consider the diversity of opinions within the party. This requires a quite a bit of hubris to think this argument is true and persuasive.

 

That is closer, but niles away from your original quote. Now its "most adults" and not "all illegals".

I know we need to secure our border, but how we treat those already here is a different story.

 

The fact that Biden won the primaries and Democrats pushed for a switch over gut feeling rather than an election is inherently undemocratic.

With your respect to your second point, no. Winning a primary and winning a Presidential election requires two very different things.

 

Speaking hypothetically since it would have been virtually impossible as the result of logistics and state laws, do you think the Democrats should have tried to schedule a new nationwide primary after Biden withdrew? By the way for most of our history presidential nominees have been selected at conventions. The current system in which candidates are selected through primaries in which delegates are committed to vote for candidates based on the results of primaries is relatively new.

 

Followers are not the leader as in Christians versus Jesus... you are arguing like the Dems do, complete with logical fallacies. Again, I never mentioned Jesus.

Now... why are you okay with Kamala's tacit approval of child trafficking across our southern border?

 

You're right, all illegals should go back because they broke the law, but we all know that not all of them will be deported even if Trump wins. We Americans do NOT live in a giant refuge camp like Kamala Harris wants the U.S. to become. Are you for legal immigration... and immigration laws, or are you for open borders...

That is all... And no matter which words Harris utters, it won't change a thing about her willingness to allow child trafficking. She had... still has one job, and she has failed.

 

Only the Magats were able to see the physical threats by the Democrats that Biden was threatened with to resign his candidacy so that's why it would be "inherently undemocratic". LOL

 

Politically, I would’ve preferred either Biden staying in the race, or the Democrats picking another candidate and sticking with them for the entirety of the election cycle.

But as far as what their options should have been under the circumstances, their options should have been:
1. Biden drops out of the race AND the Presidency.
2. Joe Biden stays in the race
3. Democrats go with someone else from the get-go.

This halfway measure where they kick Joe Biden off the ballot insinuating because he’s old, but without actually saying it while simultaneously leaving him in office… is classic Democrats trying to have their cake and eat it too.

Which means the only option left should be that Joe Biden resigns from office, Kamala stays in the race as President and takes over for him.

But the honest truth is any scenario where
Kamala jumped in the race last second was going to be bad for Trump because 1) he had such an advantage over Biden, 2) Kamala Harris is wrongly perceived as generic Democrat right now, and 3) she has much less time to damage that perception considering the time between when she entered the race and Election Day.

 

I understand what you are saying about Harris’ nomination being undemocratic. What I’m suggesting is that parties were never meant to be democratic. Public elections are meant to be democratic. We might as well complain that no one voted for Ross Perot to run for president in 1992. Running doesn’t require votes. Winning is what requires votes.

 

What was inherently democratic about running unopposed in a partisan primary? If Biden had won hands down over actual opposition, you might have modicum of a point. But that didnt happen. It seems to me coronating Biden by clearing the field was not particularly democratic, and neither was his exit and elevation of Kamala. I'm not sure a hasty primary would have been all that democratic either. Perhaps we need a new political system that is democratic when it comes to selecting candidates for office, but I doubt that's what you are suggesting, and if you were it wasnt on the table.

 

If parties were never meant to be democratic, why bother hosting a primary at all? Let the party elites pick whoever the Hell they want.

How many at the top of the Republican Party do you think wanted Trump to be the Republican nominee in 2016?

 

To the extent that they didn't, it was because they didn't think he could win. When he won, they became ok with it, to the point where they cleared the field for him. Not really dissimilar to the Biden situation. Party leadership was ok with Biden until they believed he couldn't win anymore. Trump won a contested primary in '16, so pulling the plug would have alienated their voters and put them at greater risk of losing. Biden didnt win a real primary in '24. That's really the main difference, even though pulling Biden had some risk.

 

While risking the endurance of more of your sophistry spewage, I have a couple questions:

a. I assume you are not a member of the Democrat Party. As such, why do you care so much about their nomination process?
b. Has the Democrat Party violated any of its governing rules in response to Biden withdrawing?

 

As you rightly pointed out, political parties have a single goal: win elections. The two major parties moved to a more (but not totally) direct model because they themselves thought it would help them to accomplish this goal. If a party commits a misstep in its nomination process, it results in a failure for that party. However, this is not a failure for the nation, as the people aren’t legally bound to vote for the candidates of any particular party (even if we often behave as if we are). Instead, we are free to vote for whomever we please. This is the problem with one party states: there is no choice, even if there are elections. I’ll again invoke E. E. Schattschneider’s famous formulation: “Democracy is to be found between the parties, not within them.”

 

Do you think that she has never won a competitive race in her life because she is from California? Because it is obviously wrong (her first race to each position was competitive, as she went against a multi-time incumbent for one race, a Republican elected in Los Angeles County as DA in in the second, a Democratic Congresswoman in the third (California has jungle primaries for office now), and was VP in a competitive race for the final position).

 

lol you don’t want Kamala to be president right now. She’d then have the advantage of the incumbency and you’d be screaming about how she was coronated as queen instead of elected. At least try to be honest. You’re just fussy because you thought Trump had it in the bag and now he doesn’t.

 

And trump wants a 'rally' with a partisan crowd where he can shoutdown his opponent and get his morons chanting shit. Hard pass on all that. Some of us would actually like to hear what the candidates have to say.