Harris Picks Minnesota Governor Tim Walz for Her Running Mate

[Seaviewer]

The picture being presented is of an affable middle of the road kind of guy. Dig deep enough on anyone and you'll find a dark side. It will be interesting to see him face off against the (shall we say) more excitable Vance.

 

[KayLloyd]

The picture being presented is of an affable middle of the road kind of guy. Dig deep enough on anyone and you'll find a dark side. It will be interesting to see him face off against the (shall we say) more excitable Vance.

Keep in mind that those painting that false picture want you forget that Walz makes Bernie Sanders look like a moderate, and the consequences of his failure to call in the National Guard for 3 days and his alarming stance on late term abortion and gender affirming treatment of minor children. It's not just a "dark side", his decision making and policies are downright dangerous for the country.





r and m

 

[Angela Channing]

Keep in mind that those painting that false picture want you forget that Walz makes Bernie Sanders look like a moderate, and the consequences of his failure to call in the National Guard for 3 days and his alarming stance on late term abortion and gender affirming treatment of minor children. It's not just a "dark side", his decision making and policies are downright dangerous for the country.





r and m

Are MAGA Republicans still spouting this nonsense? Trump praised Tim Walz's handling of the George Floyd protest so if the governor was wrong, so was the former President. As for abortion, it's up to women what they do with their bodies and Tim Walz's position on this is a vote winner. Instead of using trans children as political footballs, we should deal with these issues more sensitively, respectfully and listen to medical professionals, the children themselves, as well as parents. Tim Walz's stance on this is far more intelligent than the MAGA brigade.

I love how MAGA Republican are panicking and scrambling to find a line to attack the Harris-Waltz ticket and none of it is sticking and the Democrats are rising in the polls.

 

[KayLloyd]

Are MAGA Republicans still spouting this nonsense? Trump praised Tim Walz's handling of the George Floyd protest so if the governor was wrong, so was the former President. As for abortion, it's up to women what they do with their bodies and Tim Walz's position on this is a vote winner. Instead of using trans children as political footballs, we should deal with these issues more sensitively, respectfully and listen to medical professionals, the children themselves, as well as parents. Tim Walz's stance on this is far more intelligent than the MAGA brigade.

I love how MAGA Republican are panicking and scrambling to find a line to attack the Harris-Waltz ticket and none of it is sticking and the Democrats are rising in the polls.

Trump was praising Walz for finally calling in the National Guard, not for letting Minneapolis burn for 3 days. Walz ignored the mayor's request to bring in the National Guard sooner. A one heartbeat away from the Presidency Vice President who ignores requests for action from governors, Homeland Security, Department of Defense, State Department, and our allies, and supports abortion up to the moment of birth and states taking custody of minor children to have life altering treatments that they are not cognitively developed enough to understand the consequences of is not in the best interest of the country. The country is not better off than it was 4 years ago, and 4 more years of The Giggler and The Neighbor Snitch will only make things worse.

 

[Angela Channing]

Trump was praising Walz for finally calling in the National Guard, not for letting Minneapolis burn for 3 days. Walz ignored the mayor's request to bring in the National Guard sooner. A one heartbeat away from the Presidency Vice President who ignores requests for action from governors, Homeland Security, Department of Defense, State Department, and our allies, and supports abortion up to the moment of birth and states taking custody of minor children to have life altering treatments that they are not cognitively developed enough to understand the consequences of is not in the best interest of the country. The country is not better off than it was 4 years ago, and 4 more years of The Giggler and The Neighbor Snitch will only make things worse.

All you seem to do is repeat the same old hackneyed lines put out by the MAGA Republicans regardless of whether or not they have any factual basis.

The country is much better off than it would be if it were lead by a rapist and it seems the voters agree:

Whopping lead! Harris leads Trump by 5 points: Poll

In a separate poll conducted by Ipsos, Kamala Harris was found leading Donald Trump 42% to 40% in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. These are the states where the presidential election 2020 was closest. Now, what will happen in the US Presidential...

economictimes.indiatimes.com

 

[Frank Underwood]

If children know what's best for them, why don't we give them drugs, alcohol, and guns while we're at it. IMO, this "woke" nonsense is far too permissive and regressive. The healthcare "industry" is called an industry for a reason. Their goal is to make money, which is why they're more than happy to perform procedures that will line their coffers. Being against genital mutilation of minors used to be considered common sense. There was also a time when being "pro-choice" didn't mean supporting late term abortions.

As for the constant refrain that Trump's a "racist and a rapist felon," the current president has used racist rhetoric, implemented a crime bill that predominantly hurt people of color, was credibly accused of rape by Tara Reade, and even traumatized his own daughter by showering with her. He's also committing war crimes, which is worse than illegally using campaign funds to pay off a porn star IMO. It's funny to me how partisans can correctly point out the flaws of politicians on the other side, but not within their own ranks.

 

[Angela Channing]

If children know what's best for them, why don't we give them drugs, alcohol, and guns while we're at it. IMO, this "woke" nonsense is far too permissive and regressive. The healthcare "industry" is called an industry for a reason. Their goal is to make money, which is why they're more than happy to perform procedures that will line their coffers. Being against genital mutilation of minors used to be considered common sense. There was also a time when being "pro-choice" didn't mean supporting late term abortions.

As for the constant refrain that Trump's a "racist and a rapist felon," the current president has used racist rhetoric, implemented a crime bill that predominantly hurt people of color, was credibly accused of rape by Tara Reade, and even traumatized his own daughter by showering with her. He's also committing war crimes, which is worse than illegally using campaign funds to pay off a porn star IMO. It's funny to me how partisans can correctly point out the flaws of politicians on the other side, but not within their own ranks.

I think leaders who are willing to value the opinion of scientists and healthcare professionals above right wing lobby groups who are more interested in stoking culture wars than doing what's best for children, are the ones to support.

I know you, like the MAGA Republicans, would prefer Biden to be the candidate so you continue this bogus defence of Trump’s behaviour by suggesting there is some kind of equivalence between Trump raping a woman and anything Biden has done. Biden is not on the ballot. Trump carried out sex offensives, Kamala prosecuted sex offenders, that's the choice people have.

If you think Trump isn’t going to continue funding Israel’s war on Palestine, dream on.

 

[Frank Underwood]

I think leaders who are willing to value the opinion of scientists and healthcare professionals above right wing lobby groups who are more interested in stoking culture wars than doing what's best for children, are the ones to support.

LMAO, you don't think the so-called "woke" are stoking the culture wars just as much as right wingers?

And what about the experiences of detransitioners who claim their parents and the medical industry failed them? Do they not matter because they don't fit your precious woke narrative? I hope they sue the pants off of the people that took advantage of them. IMO, it's disturbing that being against puberty blockers and child mutilation is considered "right wing." If anything, it should be common sense. The healthcare profession has certainly done great things for humanity as well, but they're ultimately a for-profit industry.

I know you, like the MAGA Republicans, would prefer Biden to be the candidate so you continue this bogus defence of Trump’s behaviour by suggesting there is some kind of equivalence between Trump raping a woman and anything Biden has done. Biden is not on the ballot. Trump carried out sex offensives, Kamala prosecuted sex offenders, that's the choice people have.

Ask Tara Reade and Ashley Biden if there is "some kind of equivalence between Trump raping a woman and anything Biden has done."

As per usual, this is pure projection on your part. I'm not defending Trump, but you've certainly defended racist, accused rapist, and war criminal Biden until he had to drop out.

I know you love lumping me with MAGA Republicans because you can't handle nuance, but I thought you preferred Biden to be the nominee. After all, he won his intentionally non-competitive primary, and you claim to support democracy. Of course, we all know Dem supporters actually love that novelty candidate Harris was installed in his place.

And since the Dems installed Harris without a primary, let's pivot to her record. Harris exploited nonviolent criminals for cheap prison labor. She fought to uphold wrongful convictions and locked up people for smoking pot while laughing about smoking it herself because "half her family is Jamaican." But you know who she didn't prosecute for bank fraud? Trump's Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin. Coincidentally, Mnuchin donated to Harris's senate campaign. But then you condone corruption committed by Dems.

If you think Trump isn’t going to continue funding Israel’s war on Palestine, dream on.

Yeah, no kidding. That's one of the reasons why I'm not voting for him either. I don't betray my principles by supporting war criminals, regardless of which party they're in.

 

[Angela Channing]

LMAO, you don't think the so-called "woke" are stoking the culture wars just as much as right wingers?

And what about the experiences of detransitioners who claim their parents and the medical industry failed them? Do they not matter because they don't fit your precious woke narrative? I hope they sue the pants off of the people that took advantage of them. IMO, it's disturbing that being against puberty blockers and child mutilation is considered "right wing." If anything, it should be common sense. The healthcare profession has certainly done great things for humanity as well, but they're ultimately a for-profit industry.


Ask Tara Reade and Ashley Biden if there is "some kind of equivalence between Trump raping a woman and anything Biden has done."

As per usual, this is pure projection on your part. I'm not defending Trump, but you've certainly defended racist, accused rapist, and war criminal Biden until he had to drop out.

I know you love lumping me with MAGA Republicans because you can't handle nuance, but I thought you preferred Biden to be the nominee. After all, he won his intentionally non-competitive primary, and you claim to support democracy. Of course, we all know Dem supporters actually love that novelty candidate Harris was installed in his place.

And since the Dems installed Harris without a primary, let's pivot to her record. Harris exploited nonviolent criminals for cheap prison labor. She fought to uphold wrongful convictions and locked up people for smoking pot while laughing about smoking it herself because "half her family is Jamaican." But you know who she didn't prosecute for bank fraud? Trump's Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin. Coincidentally, Mnuchin donated to Harris's senate campaign. But then you condone corruption committed by Dems.


Yeah, no kidding. That's one of the reasons why I'm not voting for him either. I don't betray my priif mostlyy supporting war criminals, regardless of which party they're in.

1. Fewer than 1% of people who transition regret doing so, therefore I don't agree with the idea of the views and experiences of the less than 1% being the determining factor in these issues.

2. The trans debate exists in many countries, including the UK, in which healthcare is mostly provided by the state and funded by the tax payers. Supporting trans people here is not driven by profit because there are no profits. The suggestion that the debate is driven by healthcare professionals wanting to improve their profits is a red herring. The debate should be about determining what is best for trans children and sometimes healthcare professionals making their decisions based on sound medical judgments can be better than parents whose opinions have been distorted by dishonest anti-trans propaganda such as it's all about profits.

3. Trying to mitigate Trump's rape by suggesting it is equivalent to unsubstantiated allegations made against Biden is just wrong. A reminder, a judge ruled that the rape allegations against Trump were "substantially true". A second reminder, Biden is not the candidate.

4. Biden won the Democratic Party primary process and Harris won the nomination after Biden withdrew. Just because no one credible stood against them doesn't make their selection any less democratic. I know you, Trump, the MAGA Republicans and others wanted a divisive contest that preferably would have damaged the successful candidate so it really must be galling that the Democrats were able to unite behind a nominee with minimal acrimony.

5. The reason why I'm lumping you in with the MAGA Republicans is because you are all using the same attack lines and because you are an expert in nuance, you know that isn't the same as saying you are a MAGA Republican.

 

[Frank Underwood]

1. Fewer than 1% of people who transition regret doing so, therefore I don't agree with the idea of the views and experiences of the less than 1% being the determining factor in these issues.

2. The trans debate exists in many countries, including the UK, in which healthcare is mostly provided by the state and funded by the tax payers. Supporting trans people here is not driven by profit because there are no profits. The suggestion that the debate is driven by healthcare professionals wanting to improve their profits is a red herring. The debate should be about determining what is best for trans children and sometimes healthcare professionals making their decisions based on sound medical judgments can be better than parents whose opinions have been distorted by dishonest anti-trans propaganda such as it's all about profits.

Trans people in general are a small percentage of the population, but you still advocate for them. Who's advocating for the children who feel manipulated into transitioning?

I also said I support an adult's decision to transition, so this isn't about pushing "anti-trans propaganda." I'm also speaking from the perspective of an American, and our healthcare system is profit driven. I can't speak for the healthcare systems in other countries, but I still believe the "determining factor" should be that so-called "gender affirming care" isn't a medical necessity. Children have a lot of growing and maturing to do. That's why there are many decisions we don't let children make until they're adults.

3. Trying to mitigate Trump's rape by suggesting it is equivalent to unsubstantiated allegations made against Biden is just wrong. A reminder, a judge ruled that the rape allegations against Trump were "substantially true". A second reminder, Biden is not the candidate.

But you defended Biden when he was the candidate, just like you defend everybody in the Democratic Party. Of course, he's not the candidate anymore because the Dems pulled a bait and switch. You even accused people of pushing a "right wing conspiracy" for predicting that would happen, but now you praise the Democrats for pulling it off.

As for the rape allegations, it's interesting how they were able to "substantiate" the claims of Trump's accuser, but not Biden's. Especially since both events allegedly took place in the 1990s. On the other hand, Ashley Biden's diary has been authenticated. Of course, Biden supporters and the press swept it under the rug, along with Hunter's laptop.

That said, I'm not pointing this out to "mitigate" Trump's rape conviction. I'm simply pointing out your double standards. Biden's said and done racist things, he's been credibly accused of rape, he's a war criminal, etc., and yet you supported him until he was forced to drop out. Now you support Harris who also plans to keep funding Israel's genocide.

4. Biden won the Democratic Party primary process and Harris won the nomination after Biden withdrew. Just because no one credible stood against them doesn't make their selection any less democratic. I know you, Trump, the MAGA Republicans and others wanted a divisive contest that preferably would have damaged the successful candidate so it really must be galling that the Democrats were able to unite behind a nominee with minimal acrimony.

What's "galling" is the Democratic Party intentionally depriving voters of a competitive primary, lying about Biden's mental acuity, and then installing Harris as the nominee after Biden flopped at the debate. The voters were deprived of choosing the nominee, but Harris supporters are okay with that because it spared them a potentially "divisive contest." On the plus side, at least it forced the phony Dems and their supporters to show their hand. Now we know all of their concern trolling about democracy was bullshit.

Lastly, Biden did have credible challengers. His former advisor admitted the DNC deprived them of a fair process. Then Harris was anointed the nominee after Biden was forced out. That's not my idea of democracy in action. Of course, Harris would still be a contemptuous candidate even if she had been democratically elected by voters instead of anointed by Dem Party insiders. She abused her position as prosecutor, vowed to continue funding Israel's genocide, and committed dereliction of duty as the border czar.

5. The reason why I'm lumping you in with the MAGA Republicans is because you are all using the same attack lines and because you are an expert in nuance, you know that isn't the same as saying you are a MAGA Republican.

I didn't say it was the same, but it's obvious that you constantly liken me to MAGA and the right to try to discredit me. It shows how rigid the modern left's thinking has become.

The irony is you literally defend Democrats the same way MAGA defends Trump. I get accused of "defending Trump" for pointing out the different standards that the Dems and Trump are held to. That's why I said you can't handle nuance. It should be clear to everyone by now that I think both parties are rotten, and I refuse to vote for either of them.

 

[Frank Underwood]

An endocrinologist exposes the real propaganda and risks involved in transitioning children.

As he put it, "I see children as a vulnerable population who can't speak up for themselves, and their parents are often propagandized by this movement." Well said.

Doctor Exposes Transgender Propaganda | The Daily Signal (youtube.com)

 

[tommie]

1. Fewer than 1% of people who transition regret doing so

According to what data? Have you checked that data out yourself and if you have, do you think it's very reliable?

 

[Angela Channing]

According to what data? Have you checked that data out yourself and if you have, do you think it's very reliable?

There are literally scores of studies from numerous countries that show this and yes I have read the original scientific research.

One of the most prestigious surgical journals, the Journal of the American Medical Association, published a comprehensive paper that showed that less than 1% of transgender people who undergo gender-affirming surgeries later go on to have regrets. A study in the Netherlands found that only 0.6% of transwomen and 0.3% of transmen who underwent gender-affirming surgeries experienced regret and in the UK only 0.47% of trans people experienced regret.

If you don't believe the scientific research, what data do you have to refute it?

 

[tommie]

One of the most prestigious surgical journals, the Journal of the American Medical Association, published a comprehensive paper that showed that less than 1% of transgender people who undergo gender-affirming surgeries later go on to have regrets.

Did you read the entire paper here? It's a "viewpoint" and two pages long in full. It is not a "comprehensive" paper - they cite 10 sources.

I haven't looked into your other sources yet, but did you just google this and pull up papers to support your point of view without reading them?

underwent gender-affirming surgeries experienced regret and in the UK only 0.47% of trans people experienced regret.

Haven't found the Netherlands study yet, but that's just a think piece. Again, not a study.

Also, by the way, if a paper does not detail how they executed their study, it is not a study. A study is something you should be able to replicate.

I will say this: focusing on trans issues (which should be one for medical professionals) is bizarre on either side - it's not what's going to win an election.

The cost of living, how will people live from one day to the next, how will they put food on the table and where's work for the heartland? These issues will win the US election - or at least who comes up with the better lie how to solve it.

With that said... whoever doesn't self-implode before election day will win at this point.

 

[Angela Channing]

Did you read the entire paper here? It's a "viewpoint" and two pages long in full. It is not a "comprehensive" paper - they cite 10 sources.

I haven't looked into your other sources yet, but did you just google this and pull up papers to support your point of view without reading them?

Yes, I have read the full paper and others. Why do I say it is comprehensive? Because the conclusion was based on a study of almost 8000 transgender people who underwent surgery. I also read Shon Faye's book The Transgender Issue which is one of the most thorough and comprehensive books I've read on transgenderism and it also covered this specific point and was my original source of the less than 1% figure.

Maybe you don't understand how the process works but that paper would have been peer reviewed by at least 3 other reputable scientist who would have studied the data and verified that the conclusions drawn from it are sound.

If you don't agree with the findings, where is your data to refute them?

 

[tommie]

Maybe you don't understand how the process works

LMAO, no I understand how it works. What you linked me wasn't a study - a study has a method chapter. That you're now referencing me to a book - "Transgender Issue" - well, I haven't read it, but what sources do they use? What method do they use to determine the 1% number?

Again: where do you get the 1% number from? What research? What method? You're stating this as a pure fact, yet you've provided me with no way of me looking at how it was achieved.

 

[Angela Channing]

LMAO, no I understand how it works. What you linked me wasn't a study - a study has a method chapter. That you're now referencing me to a book - "Transgender Issue" - well, I haven't read it, but what sources do they use? What method do they use to determine the 1% number?

Again: where do you get the 1% number from? What research? What method? You're stating this as a pure fact, yet you've provided me with no way of me looking at how it was achieved.

I don't think you do understand how it works. Scientific journals publish different types of articles: some is original research which will contain the original data and some with be opinion pieces drawing conclusions on a wider set of data points. Both will be peer reviewed and will have similar standing in the scientific community. Letters to journals do not have to be peer reviewed and a published on the decision of the editorial team and do not have the same level of veracity. All the papers I quoted are from the first 2 categories and contained links to the raw data used the support the conclusions reached, for example:

Regret after Gender-affirmation Surgery: A Systematic... : Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery – Global Open

The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of regret in transgender individuals who underwent GAS and evaluate associated factors. Methods: A systematic review of several databases was conducted. Random-effects meta-analysis, meta-regression, and subgroup and sensitivity analyses were...

journals.lww.com

Again, where is your data that refutes that less than 1% of trans people regret transitioning? You can't provide it because it doesn't exist.

 

[tommie]

Again, where is your data that refutes that less than 1% of trans people regret transitioning? You can't provide it because it doesn't exist.

No, I really, really don't think you understand how science works - you made a claim that 1% regrets transitioning. Okay. But it's not my job to disprove you, because I might as well say that 99% regret transitioning! Can you disprove that? Of course you can't, because I provide no data or any method how I achieved those numbers!

No, you claim something then you have to provide data plus method. So where is it, Mr Science Guy?

 

[Angela Channing]

No, I really, really don't think you understand how science works - you made a claim that 1% regrets transitioning. Okay. But it's not my job to disprove you, because I might as well say that 99% regret transitioning! Can you disprove that? Of course you can't, because I provide no data or any method how I achieved those numbers!

No, you claim something then you have to provide data plus method. So where is it, Mr Science Guy?

I've worked in science all my professional life, I have published many papers in scientific journals and reviewed several papers too, so I know very well how scientific publications work from both sides.

I linked examples of peer reviewed papers with findings showing that less than 1% of trans people regretted transitioning. You don't like the findings but you can't produce any data that contradicts them. You give the impression that you are not interested in independent scientific studies, just your prejudged views on trans issues. If you think you can produce data that shows 99% regret transitioning please provide the link so I can study the data and yes, I can disprove it because I can provide data that shows otherwise.

If you actually read my previous post you will see I have already provided data plus the methodology used that came to this conclusion. I will post it again. You will see it's a comprehensive study of 7928 transgender people. You will see that methods used are widely accepted for this kind of research, the statistical analysis of the data is thorough and the conclusions are robust. Meanwhile you have nothing to contradict the findings.

Regret after Gender-affirmation Surgery: A Systematic... : Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery – Global Open

The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of regret in transgender individuals who underwent GAS and evaluate associated factors. Methods: A systematic review of several databases was conducted. Random-effects meta-analysis, meta-regression, and subgroup and sensitivity analyses were...

journals.lww.com

I will quote directly from the conclusion of the paper:

"Our study has shown a very low percentage of regret in TGNB [transgender and non-binary] population after GAS [gender affirmation surgeries]."

 

[tommie]

Regret after Gender-affirmation Surgery: A Systematic... : Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery – Global Open

The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of regret in transgender individuals who underwent GAS and evaluate associated factors. Methods: A systematic review of several databases was conducted. Random-effects meta-analysis, meta-regression, and subgroup and sensitivity analyses were...

journals.lww.com

The actual paper:

Again, methods and data that shows the 1% regret rate, this is not hard, is it?