The first few polls for Heels Up Harris vs President Trump are out.
(media.scored.co)
Comments (85)
sorted by:
All easily within the margin of fortified-ballot-printer-goes-BRRRR.
Speak it quietly...JD Vance needs to shut up or we will lose.
It's easy to bring up cheating, but Vance is attacking the main groups who switched from Democrats to GOP. Young men and childless men.
I'm sure I'll get a lot of flak for bringing this up, but it's something Trump absolutely needs to address - a pro-family platform will lose hard.
All of them need to shut the fuck up about everything but immigration.
Immigration, economics, and foreign policy. Those are the big three. Stop encouraging people to come here en masse, stop taxing and spending ridiculous sums of money on bullshit, and stop making the world a worse place through bombings and foreign aid.
Immigration and economics are intertwined. The Trump campaign is positioning itself to be Iran hawks. That's why they should should the fuck up.
Ah, but most of the natalists like Vance hate the idea of spending less money.
They just want to spend more money on the failed experiment of bribing people to have kids, which everyone knows doesn't work because South Korea already tried it.
We wouldn't need an aggressive birth policy if those in charge actually had any economic intelligence. The welfare/social security etc Ponzi will crash down eventually. The best you can do is prop it up for those close to needing it and slowly phase it out.
The only way we can "bribe" people into having more kids is to bribe them into having stable families.
This means stable manufacturing jobs. Good paying jobs that lead into a stable life which leads into a stable family.
Bribe them with a decent economy and a fair justice system.
Bribe them with all the fruits of good citizenship.
That's the only way to fix this country. Every day under this administration we stray further from this.
But you cannot ever put a bandaid on this problem. Money can never replace stability and continuity in development of our children.
Tax cuts for children is how you incentivize people who have a stable income, to reproduce.
Welfare for kids incentivizes low-IQ welfare leeches who produces more of the same. It also draws more welfare migrants.
I mean, I agree with this as well.
Tax cuts aren't a bribe and I won't really entertain a position otherwise.
Exactly. You get people to have kids by giving them a world where they want to.
Attacking and dehumanizing men who don't is stupid even from a natalist standpoint, but they don't care because they think the feminists will help them.
You finally admit that "single men are the enemy" rhetoric doesn't work?
Part of me wonders if Vance and infamous shill Richard Reeves have ever met.
Huh?
You agreed that he should shut up. Implying you know that this wedge issue is never going to win anything.
I never said to attack young men without children in the first place. The problem they are going to have with the pro family stuff is the Dems can just match it and make that a push issue. The Dems won't budge on immigration though. It's their biggest weakness.
How?
You're really under a mistaken impression. Most people, especially the people Trump needs to court, want a situation where family is more feasible. Now, there are angles you could take that would genuinely be bad but, no, a pro-family platform is good politics. Sorry.
He backed giving them less of a vote and doubled down on it recently. The women's lobby are pumping up the "cat ladies" comment as a distraction.
I'm 100% sure of it, by looking at the data, that the kind of policy Vance wants is going to send the GOP to the political wilderness. Pro-family pandering worked decades ago when feminism wasn't so obviously present.
The only reason that the GOP is winning in polls is because young men have switched in high numbers. The same reason the PPP won in South Korea.
The PPP waited until after they cashed in the votes to turn their back on those who helped them. Vance has already stated it plainly.
Anyone who spoke at the Brookings Institute is a bad fucking candidate! Brookings is swamp!
But young men want families...
Based on what data?
The fact that we're still here after 200k years.
We didn't have "kill all men" constantly trending on X and the feminist lobby speedrunning the Stanton stages of inciting genocide back then.
There's no historical precedent for the gender rhetoric of today. The closest was probably the backlash against women after the Wall Street Crash that was crushed by white nationalism.
That's probably the closest that history has been to a war between women and men.
Muh dik
How’d you get unbanned? I must have missed that somewhere.
The Mossad made the order.
Jokes aside, there's a rule here where if you remove the offending post, you can be unbanned.
Backing down? Cringe.
I thought you'd like him for criticizing women.
You underestimate how important preventing White births is to Imp. I think it's his second highest priority behind supporting Israel.
I love that you're on his ass in multiple threads. It's nice to see specific pushback and not just "imp is retarded, what can we do?".
Thanks. It's tedious as all fuck dealing with his pipul bullshit. I did it again because it's been a while.
I'm not trying to prevent births. People who want kids will have them, people who don't shouldn't be forced to.
Why are you lining up with the WEF establishment, who also pushed the idea of taking rights from single men who won't procreate?
Uh, the WEF and globalists in general hate "overpopulation," and want less births. You're really claiming that a pro-family message is inline with the globalist goals? It's the opposite, and they've done everything they can for decades to destroy the family. It's one of the things they hate the most, in fact.
This is false. Did you not see Davos 2024?
Globalists hate family, it's one of their main enemies. Everything they do helps erode family.
The only kids they like are, well...you know. They really like children, just not in any sort of wholesome way.
You cheer on the decline of White births while supporting Israel and attacking others for not supporting it despite its pro-natalist subsidies. The race of the births clearly matters to you.
The famously white Taiwanese. Unhinged as hell take.
What all those countries have in common is a love of oppressing the male population.
Unlike Israel, right?
It's not really criticizing women if he's pushing us to play happy families with threats to our rights.
This doesn't mean we go 'hah he has it in the bag', we can all see how HARD they are trying to turn the cackling witch into a 'it's her turn!'
The good thing is she's been the pedo in chief's VP for 4 years AND the Border Czar too so remember to hammer home she is in charge of the border and elder abuse.
It's his election to win, but I'm a bit concerned about some of his campaign's stupidity like courting the inmate vote.
He thinks he can win California, New York and Chicago?
I think an underrated attack is to bring up her selective prosecution of black men for non-violent crime.
The black voting block is not as cohesive as it seems.
I predict Kamala will be playing the "misogyny" card every two minutes in the debate, because she wants to keep it on moral/personality issues rather than her awful record.
Team Trump needs to hit her hard on her constant failures.
Trump's core constituency is the White working class. "Kamala put too many blacks in jail" is going to risk alienating them and fail to compensate in black votes gained.
Also the black areas are where most of the (old-school) cheating happens.
In Wayne county over half the polls had a different number of votes and voters. Fulton county is where they got caught red handed on video and nobody in Justice or democrat party cared.
They're going to vote for Kamala whether they want to or not.
I think she's more likely to play the race card, at least when it comes to trying to deflect attacks. She'll do both, of course.
Race card is too risky considering her record.
She'll play the race card, 100% chance.
It's not risky at all. She'll just go after Trump/Vance for being white rather than focus on her own race.
If she tries to go full "fellow black people" it could below up in her face, but attacking whitey is 1000% safe for a Democrat.
Bit risky doing that as then they'll try to paint her as 'law and order' to 'Trump's a felon' and there's too many dumb women who'll fall for that.
Better just focusing on why their communities are going to hell thanks to the her border 'management'
Trump should just lean into it, and start wearing leather jackets and acting like a 'bad boy.' Shit would be hilarious, if nothing else.
IMO, women will autopilot for Kamala regardless.
All polls are fake and gay until proven otherwise.
Look at how they're treating Kamala right now, or Vance. Trump smears are SOP at this point, but the Kamala gaslighting and Vance censorship are once again driving home just how controlled the media is. Polls are interesting to look at, but not to be trusted.
They have. Years ago.
wait how are you back? i thought you were banned for a year?
Reversing bans came up in this cluserfuck of a thread.
Of all the needless garbage on our sidebar (seriously, who uses 8chan anymore? and Deepfreeze has been abandoned forever), that seems like an important fucking thing to say outloud. It certainly isn't in the "you got banned" message which is the most important place for it to be either.
I'd never take him up on it, because I'm not a faggot who backs down from the consequences of what I say, but that's kind of an important fucking rule to just leave to "well you should know from Reddit."
I don't think it's in the "Welcome Ashore" post either.
Although I think anti-natalism is a self-destructive ideology and, if they really believed what they preached, they'd move to Jonestown, it's good to see Imp back. Censorship is the refuge of cowards and I don't think the vast majority of people here have an issue with speaking up if they don't like a comment.
Oh, for sure. I agree with Imp on some basics, and disagree with where he takes almost every one of his points, but I've never called for him to be censored. Quite the opposite, I've always stuck up for him.
To be honest we can't really ban him for something he says when we STILL have an issue of Indian trolls posting literal snuff pictures and videos of women on here..
This doesn't help those theories the current wave of spam is intentional to make users miss other spam from before that wasn't quite so NSFW or downright illegal.
I won't trust Trump +10. Polls are nothing more than manipulation tactics.
I thought you were banned again
Begun the Centerist Wars have.
Entirely unsurprising. Candidates usually get a bump for a while after officially declaring.
Yeah, fuck that Giant Douche, I'm voting for Turd Sandwich.