GREG GUTFELD: Trump voters expect deeds while Harris voters are fine with words
'Gutfeld!' panelists discuss why voters should vote for a particular candidate in the 2024 presidential election.
You could not get a clearer contrast. And yet, there will be those who hear Harris and love it every bit as much as you loved what you heard from Trump. So why this great divide? Well, it has to do with deeds and words. Trump voters expect deeds. Harris voters are fine with words. A Trump supporter votes for Trump expecting him to act, but a Harris supporter votes for Harris and that is the act. The act of voting is itself the policy and the point. Specifics don't matter. The vote is the virtue signal, a simple requirement with no follow-up necessary.
And that was by design, that the only basis for voting for a Democrat, whether it was Biden or Harris, was that it was only the vote that mattered and that it be against Trump. They can literally switch candidates from one with dementia to another with wet brain. They just expect you to vote for them no matter what. It's an anti-vote, an un-vote. The Harris voters will pull the lever for Kamala and then recede back into their lives where the issues the rest of us care about are left ignored, whether it's illegal immigration, rising crime, [or] the 20% increase in food and gas prices.
Because they've been convinced that none of that matters except only this one-time heroic vote for Kamala. After all, she could be the first Black and Indian female president to get us into a nuclear war. For proof, listen to MSNBC's Stephanie Ruhle with a New York Times columnist aboard-- prioritizing a vote for Harris over actual policies.
BRET STEPHENS: It's not too much to ask, Kamala, say are you for a Palestinian state if Hamas is going to run that state?
BRET STEPHENS: Yes or no?
STEPHANIE RUHLE: And let's say you don't like her answer. Are you going to vote for Donald Trump?
BRET STEPHENS: No, I'm not.
STEPHANIE RUHLE: Kamala Harris is not running for perfect. She's running against Trump. We have two choices. And so there are some things you might not know her answer to. And in 2024, unlike 2016, for a lot of the American people, we know exactly what Trump will do, who he is and the kind of threat he is to democracy.
You know, I'd say she's dumber than a box of rocks, but at least you can throw those at Brian Kilmeade. That's a strategy and it might work. So how do you persuade a Democrat voter that it's a mistake to support Kamala when they aren't even interested in issues? The only counter-strategy is not to call them idiots; that's going to fall on deaf ears. Instead, direct their attention to those outlets who are telling them what to believe.
For the best way to unravel a naive liberal is to expose the lies of those who feed them the lies-- meaning debunk the brainwasher. So next time you get a chance, simply ask a Kamala supporter: Why not Trump? And when they call Trump a racist or sexist, which they will, be prepared to debunk the lies, whether it's the fine people hoax, the drinking bleach hoax or any lawfare. All it takes is one debunking to get them to think that their media isn't giving them the whole story. So you're not asking them to vote for Trump, you're just suggesting whether the information they're getting on Trump is really, in fact, trustworthy.
It helps to remind them that 85 to 90% of the media is pro-Kamala and anti-Trump, which tells them that when they believe they're listening to legit news, they're actually being propagandized and brainwashed. That's the first step out of this bubble of blather. And next, if they're open to it, ask them to watch those two interviews because you simply cannot watch both and walk away thinking your media has been telling you the truth.
And maybe that will tell them not to let those like The View make their decisions because they'd have you voting for Harris and then celebrating with that triple order of fettuccine Alfredo.
