Gary Marcus

Rank 17 of 47
|
Score 67
7/30/2024, 3:37:23 AM
X
In reply to:
Steven Marlow
@sd_marlow
·
463d
@GaryMarcus Yes, there is anti-Trump excitement, but she brings no energy to the party.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
463d
Harris can raise money and excitement at will. She doesn’t need to be grazed by a bullet. She is going to win. She has an energy that Trump can no longer muster. Agree w Allan Lichtman, below.

At first I thought it would be close; now I think it might be a landslide.
Collin Rugg
@CollinRugg
·
463d
NEW: Forecaster who has predicted almost every election since 1984, says Kamala Harris will likely win the election in November.

Allan Lichtman, who correctly predicted Trump would win in 2016 & Biden in 2020, says his forecasts point to a Harris win.

Lichtman uses '13 keys' to…

The statement constitutes public discourse as it engages in a political debate about the excitement and support for Kamala Harris in the context of an upcoming election. The tone is assertive and somewhat confrontational, aiming to counter a previous claim about Harris's lack of energy. The intent is to provide evidence of enthusiasm for Harris by directing others to a YouTube video.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not appear to cause harm directly, but the confrontational tone could be seen as dismissive.
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech, but the phrase 'people are ready to go to war for Kamala' could be interpreted as aggressive.
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion; it is more focused on proving a point. [-1]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue; it dismisses the previous comment without addressing the underlying argument. [-1]
  5. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds the principle of free speech and uses the platform to express a political opinion, but the confrontational tone could be seen as lacking in responsibility and integrity.