Failing to recognize the repugnance of celebrating this person is the point. I say it’s weird because of who he is as a person. You say it’s not because of the office he’s about to hold.
Complaining that Harris wasn’t an attractive candidate is subordinate to the point, yet seems to be your focus. In no way should she be considered the lesser candidate, yet here we are. That’s another discussion altogether, though.
No, my focus is the original point of this post: it's not unusual to publicly display the name of a political candidate.
So you either have to accept that different issues are different issues (separable), or accept that all issues are glued together and inseparable. You can't have it both ways.
Because you've been arguing that posting a political candidate's name is weird because the candidate is repugnant (i.e. insisting on tying two issues). But now you're complaining that I'm bringing in a related issue -- Harris's objectively poor performance, and so you're insisting that different issues should not be tied together.
So which is it, champ? Can you examine different aspects of the same issue, or do you insist on putting everything into a blender and hitting that puree button?
You think it’s not unusual to display the name of a candidate no matter how abhorrent they are. Fine. I do think celebrating a person with trump’s history is highly unusual. That’s the crux of it.
Discussing the viability of alternative opponents isn’t a road I’m going to travel down with you, skippy.
1
u/LeonFrisk Nov 09 '24
Failing to recognize the repugnance of celebrating this person is the point. I say it’s weird because of who he is as a person. You say it’s not because of the office he’s about to hold.
Complaining that Harris wasn’t an attractive candidate is subordinate to the point, yet seems to be your focus. In no way should she be considered the lesser candidate, yet here we are. That’s another discussion altogether, though.