Donald Trump on Sunday proposed a new policy that many critics said is equivalent to legalizing "The Purge." Trump spoke at a rally in Pennsylvania, where he admitted that his attendees were "falling asleep" at one of his earlier rallies. Vice President Kamala Harris' campaign noted that, as T...

Donald Trump on Sunday proposed a new policy that many critics said is equivalent to legalizing “The Purge.”

Trump spoke at a rally in Pennsylvania, where he admitted that his attendees were “falling asleep” at one of his earlier rallies. Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign noted that, as Trump was still speaking at the swing-state event over the weekend, rallygoers placed directly behind the former president started to funnel out of the building.

One comment Trump made drew condemnation on social media, as well as numerous comparisons to The Purge, a film series based on a dystopian world in which the government makes all crimes legal for a 12-hour period.

As reported by Sebastian Smith, AFP Washington desk chief, “Trump in Erie, PA, says in US ‘the police aren’t allowed to do their job.’ To stop crime, you need ‘one really violent day.’ He says: ‘One rough hour and I mean real rough, the word would get out and it would end immediately.’”

🗳️ Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

  • Krauerking@lemy.lol
    22·
    30 days ago

    Alright last comment cause I got stuff to do. But you literally just said you don’t agree that not voting for Trump is the same then said it’s practically the same. In literally the next sentence.

    Just because someone isn’t voting for your desired candidate or your opposition doesn’t mean they are supporting the one you have issue with. It literally doesn’t work that way. They might not be helping you but somehow it only impacts one side? Cause there isn’t a net positive for it anymore? That doesn’t equal a positive for the other just literally a neutral “wasted” vote because sure it is.

    If you can drive a car and not support climate change than this can be true as well. Attaching a moral equivalence to measure people against for a desired outcome is just you telling people they don’t matter and are “other” for not being with you. You aren’t say8ng what will happen cause if someone votes third party… They vote third party. That’s it. You just don’t like it so you push that it equates to something you see as worse.

    Step on a crack and you will break your mother’s back and you must hate your mother cause you never avoid the cracks.

    Pushing fake math to appease your own mind is not exactly great. And you can lament them not helping but saying they are doing something you view as immoral because you view it a negative as a positive for the enemy is creating a wedge that doesn’t need to exist.

    • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
      12·
      29 days ago

      But you literally just said you don’t agree that not voting for Trump is the same then said it’s practically the same. In literally the next sentence.

      3rd party/non voters ARE supporting Trump. They are not providing as much support as someone who actively votes for him, but because of the way FPTP voting works, their actions absolutely benefit the GOP more than the Democratic Party.

      Not going to continue this if you insist on this bad faith bullshit. Have a nice day!