If you HAD to vote for either Kamala or Trump, who you choose?

[Pete671]

And who do you think would win?

I'd vote Trump tbh, but if I was able to I wouldn't vote at all, I don't support either of them,,,

I'k UK by the way so will never be in that position, just interested what my friends over the pond think, thanks for answering!,,,

[abc3643]

Harris, of course.

Even Trump basically said we shouldn't vote for him...

This is Donald Trump campaigning in 2016:

Folks, folks, folks, she [Hillary Clinton] shouldn't be allowed to run. If she were to win this election, it would create an unprecedented constitutional crisis. In that situation, we could very well have a sitting president under felony indictment and, ultimately, a criminal trial. It would grind government to a halt.

Her current scandals and controversies will continue throughout her presidency and will make it virtually impossible for her to govern and lead our country.

Considering that Trump has been convicted of 34 felonies and is under indictment in 3 or 4 other cases, I think we all should take 2016 Trump's advice and thus not vote for 2024 Trump.

After all, 2024 Trump is on the wrong side of the law; he's a felon.
Harris was a prosecutor and Attorney General of California; in other words a "Top Cop".

So, if this flag and what it represents means anything you support...

... then you have to vote for Harris because voting for Trump - that is, voting for a criminal - is hypocrisy and anathema to that what that flag represents. It's a slap in the face to cops and all the uniformed services.

[Kelley1]

Trump is a liar, statist, egotist, and is under the thumb of Israel. However, it is a flat-out lie, to call Trump a convicted felon after trials by corrupt Trump-hating prosecutors, judges, and juries in fake trials that would make Stalin proud.

[abc3643]

@Kelley1 Trump was convicted by a jury of his peers. His trial was fair and his lawyers approved those jurors (which included Trump supporters) during the voir dire process. (*)

Trump is not under the thumb of Israel but, like many - especially NYers - is supportive of Israel. If anyone, he's under the thumb of Putin.

===========
(*) We have arrived at a teachable moment...

About Voir Dire...

From M-W:
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/voir%20dire
voir dire
noun
ˈvwär-ˈdir ˈwär-
: a preliminary examination to determine the competency of a witness or juror
Examples of voir dire in a Sentence
Recent Examples on the Web
The judge said voir dire – a process of prospective jurors answering questions to gauge their impartiality – is the best way to sniff out whether pretrial publicity has tainted the community.
—Quinlan Bentley, The Enquirer, 19 June 2024
Professional backgrounds had been discussed openly since jury selection began, as candidates read answers to a lengthy biographical questionnaire and also spoke about their jobs through voir dire questioning by the prosecution and defense.
—Isaac Arnsdorf, Washington Post, 19 Apr. 2024

From LII:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/voir_dire
French for "to speak the truth" [*], voir dire is the process through which potential jurors are questioned by either the judge or a lawyer to determine their suitability for jury service. It is used to excuse prospective jurors deemed incapable of fulfilling juror obligations, such as impartiality.

Voir dire also involves the preliminary questioning of witnesses (especially experts) to determine their competence to testify.

[*] Voir dire is NOT French for "to speak the truth". It is French for "to see" (voir) "to speak" (dire). It's the opportunity for the lawyers to see and speak with potential jurors to assess their suitability for being on the jury.

(more)

[abc3643]

From the ABA:
www.americanbar.org/.../

For both prosecution and defense lawyers, voir dire can work to identify jurors who can be fair and impartial, rather than unfair and biased.
...
Frederick has written extensively on jury selection, including three books on the topic. In understanding who would be good or bad jurors for your client, Frederick recommends doing a case analysis of the prospective jurors, whom he calls decision-makers. That analysis involves three main components:

Backgrounds. What backgrounds do jurors have (e. g., their occupations, educational background and training, socio-economic status, media viewing habits and internet footprint and usage, among other background characteristics) that may affect their decisions in the case?
Experiences. What experiences do jurors bring to the case (e. g., being a victim of a crime or involvement in prior lawsuits) that can affect how they view the case, evidence, witnesses and parties?
Opinions, beliefs and values. These are the most important things to know about jurors, because they will serve as the framework or filter through which the jurors will view the case.
“You’re looking for people who need to be removed (from the jury pool) and your questions should be designed to uncover those who should be removed,” Frederick says.

[Kelley1]

@abc3643 If the system worked as designed, all that would be true but the Democrats have proven they are not interested in what is right and will lie and ignore the rules to get the results they want. Voir dire is meaningless when they use questionnaires that prospective jurors must complete to eliminate from the juror pool those that will be fair and not biased for conviction.

[abc3643]

@Kelley1 That's bullshit.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

Trump. I can't never vote for a woman to lead a nation.

[jard82521]

You contradicted yourself... But regardless, you should choose your president based on their ideas for the country, not their gender.

[Pete671]

We had a female PM fairly recently, she crashed the economy,,,

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

@jard82521: How am I contradicting myself?

[jard82521]

you said "I can't never vote for a woman to lead a nation" basically, you said you're gonna have to vote for a woman

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

@jard82521: Maybe the grammar was wrong? Meant I can never.

[Anonymous]

I don't like either. I was going to protest vote for the Libertarian candidate because they're closest to Republicans, which is how I prefer to vote but Trump and the Republicans reached a new low lying to everyone about hurricane aid and trying to convince the victims and everyone else of all these stupid lies about there being no money for them etc so now I'm protesting further by voting for Kamala.

[Pete671]

I'd be inclined not to vote at all, but if I HAD to it would be Trump on balance,,,

[Kelley1]

They are both terrible. I choose not to vote. If enough people failed to vote, our rulers could convincingly say, "The people have spoken."

[Pete671]

My sentiments exactly!!!

[Nonamez]

Biden too old , Trump too old , woman as a president good idea , equal rights to everyone, I don't know is she good or not , but I know US never had female as a president 🤔
In general my main issue is age , should be age cap or something, Biden and Trump already are talking to ancestors 😅

[jard82521]

in my opinion Trump is just kinda unhinged but Kamala just doesn't seem smart at all. Also, when trump was president America was doing better than it is now. Possibly the smartest move Kamala made was turn herself into a viral meme so she could earn the votes of young adults around America, who tend to use apps like Tiktok for their news and sources... there's a clip of Kamala saying people aged 18-24 are stupid, and now she's relying on them to win the elections.

[CubaPirate]

Luckily I'm British so it doesn't concern me

[Anonymous]

I don’t vote, I just complain.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

😂😂

[exitseven]

President Trump.

[gatixek710]

Trump.

[beefcakebradybatson]

Cornel West.