You clearly didn’t read this part of my post, so I will repeat it:
I’m old enough to remember that Al Gore didn’t rock the Clinton boat either. I doubt he would have been another Bill Clinton.
It’s always counterfactuals, isn’t it? You think Gore would’ve been different on points that he never distanced himself from and that you can’t point to anything concrete to show he would’ve been different, in the exact same way that you think Kamala might be different. So what? That’s not evidence. That means nothing, it’s purely in your head, based off vibes.
I picked my username and pic because I believe in basing my beliefs on evidence.
And another thing, when politicians do lie about their positions, more often than not, it’s almost always for the worse. Or maybe they’re sincere on the trail but respond to established pressured once in office. I remember when Obama said he was going to end mass surveillance and protect whistleblowers, how’d that play out? Nowadays, they even skip the part where they promise good things entirely, and it doesn’t matter because no matter what they do or don’t do, you’ll find a way to explain how they’re secretly gonna do what you want.
Unlike the hard evidence you’re going with about a future Harris presidency? Do you have a time machine? A crystal ball?
Also, I never claimed to have any facts. I leave that up to the people who claim that Kamala Harris is a genocidal maniac so don’t vote for her. (Oops, too late.)
I have her statements and the actions of the administration she’s been a part of for the past four years. That’s evidence.
If I see that a person has murdered three people, I don’t have “proof” that they’re going to keep murdering people in the future, but I have strong enough evidence to say that they present a danger to society. Don’t play dumb and pretend that you don’t understand that actions and statements provide evidence for future behavior.
