(08-13-2024 02:08 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:06 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Freedom for women to make choices about their own bodies, whatever state they reside in.
Freedom to live without the scourge of gun violence.
Pass and sign the bipartisan Border Security bill scuttled by Trump.
Continue to lead the free world in support of Ukraine against Russian aggression until Putin is defeated.

Plenty more as others have noted, these four stand out for me as bringing significant policy differences from the GOP nominee.

Kill babies in the womb.
Take away most/all guns.
Sign border bill that does little.
Give more money to corrupt Ukrainian government.

FYP.

That sums it up nicely.

"Freedom to live without the scourge of gun violence".

Says yet another fool who believes that violent crimes will decrease if we just take away the guns, or at least make them all but impossible for responsible citizens to obtain them legally. Let's say you take away all guns, what will happen then is we will see a dramatic uptick in other kinds of violent assaults. most notably knives. S0 then we ban knives and we see a dramatic uptick in violent crimes that involve anything that can be swung like a baseball bat. And all of that will take place while criminals continue obtaining illegal guns and have their way with the populace.

It's a moronic take. Violent people are going to be violent regardless of their preferred violence delivery method.

(08-13-2024 02:11 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:08 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:06 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Freedom for women to make choices about their own bodies, whatever state they reside in.
Freedom to live without the scourge of gun violence.
Pass and sign the bipartisan Border Security bill scuttled by Trump.
Continue to lead the free world in support of Ukraine against Russian aggression until Putin is defeated.

Plenty more as others have noted, these four stand out for me as bringing significant policy differences from the GOP nominee.

Kill babies in the womb.
Take away most/all guns.
Sign border bill that does little.
Give more money to corrupt Ukrainian government.

FYP.

This is how threads on this board always get derailed. People prefer to plug in their strawmans and attack those instead of just listening to each other

Or some people translate doublespeak very well.

(08-13-2024 02:14 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:11 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:08 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:06 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Freedom for women to make choices about their own bodies, whatever state they reside in.
Freedom to live without the scourge of gun violence.
Pass and sign the bipartisan Border Security bill scuttled by Trump.
Continue to lead the free world in support of Ukraine against Russian aggression until Putin is defeated.

Plenty more as others have noted, these four stand out for me as bringing significant policy differences from the GOP nominee.

Kill babies in the womb.
Take away most/all guns.
Sign border bill that does little.
Give more money to corrupt Ukrainian government.

FYP.

This is how threads on this board always get derailed. People prefer to plug in their strawmans and attack those instead of just listening to each other

I listen just fine. All I did was make his policies more clear.

Clear as a bell.

(08-13-2024 02:37 PM)miko33 Wrote:  I'm not a modern liberal as defined by U.S. politics. I'll be up front and say that I don't care for Trump. I think there were a few better alternatives to him. I also think he's too old - not because I think he's compromised like Biden wrt mental health - but based on age alone he's at a point where he can easily start failing mentally. I support having every politician over the age of 70.5 years old permanently banned from running for elected office (of any kind) or holding an elected position.

I am a strong believer in someone who is willing to fight to have a strong manufacturing base, a strong energy sector and a strong agricultural sector that can easily export food to the world in addition to sever our own needs. These 3 parts of the economy are the most critical parts IMHO. I trust Trump over Harris when I weigh these areas of importance. I may not like Trump but I'll vote for the bastard since he supports these 3 areas more so than Harris.

You want to toss decades of experience out then. I have no issue with older politicians who have their wits about them.

(08-13-2024 02:52 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:32 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Take away most/all guns = Continue to enjoy frequent mass shootings, unlike any other developed nation, as streets remain awash in weapons of war wholly unnecessary for sport or defensive use

Hey numbnuts. Very very few "shootings" are committed by legal gun owners. Criminals who don't obey gun laws in the first place are who you're thinking about. And most citizens already can't buy a "weapon of war". An AR-15 is NOT a weapon of war and you'll never see a soldier carrying one in combat. Go try to buy an M-16 or similar you child. My gosh you people are ignorant.

And less than 4% of all gun deaths are attributable to rifles of any kind. But hey, muh facts, who needs them. Non-gun owners are idiots when it comes to guns. They show it every single time they open their mouth on the subject.

(08-13-2024 02:59 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:48 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:06 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Freedom for women to make choices about their own bodies, whatever state they reside in.

I truly don’t understand why this is the first thing listed and why it is so important to MEN especially. Besides there are a lot of things women are kept by law from doing with their very own body. So that part makes no sense whatsoever.

Honestly didn't intend the 4 issues I listed to be a ranking, the first two are just points I've heard VP Harris make in her stump speeches that I like. And as you noted, it is of less personal importance to men and I'd certainly rank its importance to me below quelling gun violence and defeating Russian imperialism.

But men can still be strongly in favor of the Equal Protection of the laws, as I am. I'm with the late RBG on Roe vs. Wade, it was a weak decision that should have been grounded in gender equality under the Equal Protection clause. Can you name another law that forbids one gender from doing something with their own body that the other gender is permitted to do?

(08-13-2024 02:52 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:32 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Take away most/all guns = Continue to enjoy frequent mass shootings, unlike any other developed nation, as streets remain awash in weapons of war wholly unnecessary for sport or defensive use

Hey numbnuts. Very very few "shootings" are committed by legal gun owners. Criminals who don't obey gun laws in the first place are who you're thinking about. And most citizens already can't buy a "weapon of war". An AR-15 is NOT a weapon of war and you'll never see a soldier carrying one in combat. Go try to buy an M-16 or similar you child. My gosh you people are ignorant.

It's always fun to draw out the gun fetishists with phrases like "weapons of war" and "assault weapons". Whatever you want to call them, average citizens have no need for AR-15s or similar weapons. And we in the majority who favor common sense gun laws could care less about your hair-splitting definitions.

Wait, what?? Now men can have abortions? You just lost any cred you might have had here.

By that STUPID logic no rifles should be allowed. Why? Because an AR-15 is just like every other rifle, it just looks mean. and it scares wimps like you. There are long guns that have the capacity for the same number of rounds as an AR-15 but are classic looking, you know, wooden or composite stocks and longer barrels. These guns are likely more effective for killing at distance than an AR-15 but because their names don't stand for A.ssault R.ifle (baahahahahahafuqnmorons) 15 the simps aren't concerned about them.

You morons are all about your feelings, objective reality means nothing. Remove guns from legal gun owners and the criminals will have a field day with your lily livered ass. You'll be begging for a real man to come protect you.

Fuqn morons.

(08-13-2024 03:01 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:48 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:06 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Freedom for women to make choices about their own bodies, whatever state they reside in.

I truly don’t understand why this is the first thing listed and why it is so important to MEN especially. Besides there are a lot of things women are kept by law from doing with their very own body. So that part makes no sense whatsoever.

Harris campaign talking point, lying and saying Trump will sign a national bill banning abortion despite Trump saying exactly the opposite. If you base your vote on Harris campaign ads, you are an idiot. The lies they tell about the other side are off the chart. They assume know their voters are really, really stupid. There are reasons for voting for the Democrats as a couple on here have articulated, but that is not what Harris campaign ads say.

Sorry, fixed a typo for you...

(08-13-2024 03:10 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:57 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:32 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:08 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:06 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Freedom for women to make choices about their own bodies, whatever state they reside in.
Freedom to live without the scourge of gun violence.
Pass and sign the bipartisan Border Security bill scuttled by Trump.
Continue to lead the free world in support of Ukraine against Russian aggression until Putin is defeated.

Plenty more as others have noted, these four stand out for me as bringing significant policy differences from the GOP nominee.

Kill babies in the womb
Take away most/all guns
Sign border bill that does little
Give more money to corrupt Ukrainian government

FYP.

Kill babies in the womb = Force women to give birth, in some states even if raped or their health is endangered
Take away most/all guns = Continue to enjoy frequent mass shootings, unlike any other developed nation, as streets remain awash in weapons of war wholly unnecessary for sport or defensive use
Sign border bill that does little = Massively disrupt American life and economy with mass deportations
Give more money to corrupt Ukrainian government = Bend the knee to Putin's aggression and support the carve-up of Ukraine

FYP.

Of course, nobody does #1. That's just MSM lies.

You can't uncork the bottle. We can't stop illegal drugs. You think you can stop illegal guns? Only criminals and smart people who hide their weapons will have guns. Murders are almost all committed by bad people. They will still have guns.
Importing 10 million illegals has massively disrupted American life and the economy.

Trump actually gave Ukrainians weapons to defend themselves. Obama/Biden gave them socks. Putin would have rolled in to Kiev in 3 weeks if not for Trump. Biden keeps putting handcuffs on the Ukrainian use of weapons, allowing the incursion near Kharkiv. Its a Vietnam type policy except Ukraine doesn't have unlimited manpower and massive air superiority like the US did.

Incorrect. After Dobbs, 25% of the states in this union do not have exceptions for risks to the pregnant womens health (only if her life is in danger) and/or in cases where the pregnancy results from a rape -

Alabama (no rape exception)
Arkansas (no rape or health exception)
Idaho (no health exception)
Kentucky (no rape exception)
Louisiana (no rape exception)
Missouri (no rape or health exception)
North Dakota (no health exception)
Oklahoma (no rape or health exception)
South Dakota (no rape or health exception)
Tennessee (no rape exception)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_l...tate_table

Is there any load too big for you to chug down? I have to admit though, your lack of a gag reflex is impressive.

(08-14-2024 07:48 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:08 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:06 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Freedom for women to make choices about their own bodies, whatever state they reside in.
Freedom to live without the scourge of gun violence.
Pass and sign the bipartisan Border Security bill scuttled by Trump.
Continue to lead the free world in support of Ukraine against Russian aggression until Putin is defeated.

Plenty more as others have noted, these four stand out for me as bringing significant policy differences from the GOP nominee.

Kill babies in the womb.
Take away most/all guns.
Sign border bill that does little.
Give more money to corrupt Ukrainian government.

FYP.

That sums it up nicely.

"Freedom to live without the scourge of gun violence".

Says yet another fool who believes that violent crimes will decrease if we just take away the guns, or at least make them all but impossible for responsible citizens to obtain them legally. Let's say you take away all guns, what will happen then is we will see a dramatic uptick in other kinds of violent assaults. most notably knives. S0 then we ban knives and we see a dramatic uptick in violent crimes that involve anything that can be swung like a baseball bat. And all of that will take place while criminals continue obtaining illegal guns and have their way with the populace.

It's a moronic take. Violent people are going to be violent regardless of their preferred violence delivery method.

Bold to call someone moronic and compares knives to guns.

(08-14-2024 07:55 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:52 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:32 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Take away most/all guns = Continue to enjoy frequent mass shootings, unlike any other developed nation, as streets remain awash in weapons of war wholly unnecessary for sport or defensive use

Hey numbnuts. Very very few "shootings" are committed by legal gun owners. Criminals who don't obey gun laws in the first place are who you're thinking about. And most citizens already can't buy a "weapon of war". An AR-15 is NOT a weapon of war and you'll never see a soldier carrying one in combat. Go try to buy an M-16 or similar you child. My gosh you people are ignorant.

And less than 4% of all gun deaths are attributable to rifles of any kind. But hey, muh facts, who needs them. Non-gun owners are idiots when it comes to guns. They show it every single time they open their mouth on the subject.

But you lied earlier, were presented facts for it and glossed it over.

(08-13-2024 04:30 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 03:25 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 03:10 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:57 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:32 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Kill babies in the womb = Force women to give birth, in some states even if raped or their health is endangered
Take away most/all guns = Continue to enjoy frequent mass shootings, unlike any other developed nation, as streets remain awash in weapons of war wholly unnecessary for sport or defensive use
Sign border bill that does little = Massively disrupt American life and economy with mass deportations
Give more money to corrupt Ukrainian government = Bend the knee to Putin's aggression and support the carve-up of Ukraine

FYP.

Of course, nobody does #1. That's just MSM lies.

You can't uncork the bottle. We can't stop illegal drugs. You think you can stop illegal guns? Only criminals and smart people who hide their weapons will have guns. Murders are almost all committed by bad people. They will still have guns.
Importing 10 million illegals has massively disrupted American life and the economy.

Trump actually gave Ukrainians weapons to defend themselves. Obama/Biden gave them socks. Putin would have rolled in to Kiev in 3 weeks if not for Trump. Biden keeps putting handcuffs on the Ukrainian use of weapons, allowing the incursion near Kharkiv. Its a Vietnam type policy except Ukraine doesn't have unlimited manpower and massive air superiority like the US did.

Incorrect. After Dobbs, over 25% of the states in this union do not have exceptions for risks to the pregnant womens health (only if her life is in danger) and/or in cases where the pregnancy results from a rape -

Alabama (no rape exception)
Arkansas (no rape or health exception)
Idaho (no health exception)
Kentucky (no rape exception)
Louisiana (no rape exception)
Missouri (no rape or health exception)
North Dakota (no health exception)
Oklahoma (no rape or health exception)
South Dakota (no rape or health exception)
Tennessee (no rape exception)
Texas (no rape or health exception)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_l...tate_table

Even your source says its information may be outdated.
And abortions are still permitted up to a certain time for any reason. For example, in Texas it is a heartbeat which is around 6 weeks.

Thanks bullet, that is always a risk and certainly with Wikipedia. I did google and find Texas has a heartbeat law, and as unacceptable as that is to me as policy it was not my intent to list those states in that post. Only the most draconian states with zero option for elective abortion, and clearly Texas does not belong on that list. I've edited the original to reflect that, if anyone else finds an error on the list please let me know.

(08-13-2024 04:21 PM)No Bull Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 03:25 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 03:10 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:57 PM)bullet Wrote:  Of course, nobody does #1. That's just MSM lies.

You can't uncork the bottle. We can't stop illegal drugs. You think you can stop illegal guns? Only criminals and smart people who hide their weapons will have guns. Murders are almost all committed by bad people. They will still have guns.
Importing 10 million illegals has massively disrupted American life and the economy.

Trump actually gave Ukrainians weapons to defend themselves. Obama/Biden gave them socks. Putin would have rolled in to Kiev in 3 weeks if not for Trump. Biden keeps putting handcuffs on the Ukrainian use of weapons, allowing the incursion near Kharkiv. Its a Vietnam type policy except Ukraine doesn't have unlimited manpower and massive air superiority like the US did.

Incorrect. After Dobbs, over 25% of the states in this union do not have exceptions for risks to the pregnant womens health (only if her life is in danger) and/or in cases where the pregnancy results from a rape -

Alabama (no rape exception)
Arkansas (no rape or health exception)
Idaho (no health exception)
Kentucky (no rape exception)
Louisiana (no rape exception)
Missouri (no rape or health exception)
North Dakota (no health exception)
Oklahoma (no rape or health exception)
South Dakota (no rape or health exception)
Tennessee (no rape exception)
Texas (no rape or health exception)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_l...tate_table

Even your source says its information may be outdated.
And abortions are still permitted up to a certain time for any reason. For example, in Texas it is a heartbeat which is around 6 weeks.

You’re debating a man who has a ******. You don’t understand a woman/transexual’s right to choose the way Gamenole does. Stop mansplaining to she/him.

What in the world do transexuals have to do with abortion policy? Your side seems to enjoy inserting your transphobia into everything, likely a deep seated longing of some sort. I wonder what Dr. Freud would say?

Whoa now, hold on a sec, you believe the VP candidate was right when he put tampons in boys bathrooms. There are numerous people arguing against biology over trans issues. Keep up for crying out loud. Your side thinks men can carry babies and even nurse them.

Dr. Freud would say that at least half this country has lost the ability to reason based on sound logic, your statements indicate that is true of you at least.

(08-13-2024 04:32 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 04:30 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  What in the world do transexuals have to do with abortion policy? Your side seems to enjoy inserting your transphobia into everything, likely a deep seated longing of some sort. I wonder what Dr. Freud would say?

What do YOU have to do with abortion policy?

Shhh, I was enjoying watching him kick himself in the nuts over and over. They frame an argument, then argue against it, apparently without realizing it, and then repeat it, never learning from their own history.

(08-13-2024 11:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:05 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  From what I'm reading about negative income tax it sounds like "means testing" in the same way that the covid checks were means tested, in that when you file your taxes if you earned too much you didn't get it, but I'm absolutely not an expert on this so I'd love to have this clarified for me if my understanding is wrong.

I don't know what you have been reading, but there is absolutely nothing means tested about the negative income tax or the Boortz-Linder prebate/prefund. That's why the administrative costs are so low.

Because he hasn't read any of it.

Here's a good place to start: The Fair Tax and How It Works

But to really get the most out of it he needs to read the actual book.

(08-14-2024 06:57 AM)warhawk09 Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:52 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:32 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Take away most/all guns = Continue to enjoy frequent mass shootings, unlike any other developed nation, as streets remain awash in weapons of war wholly unnecessary for sport or defensive use

Hey numbnuts. Very very few "shootings" are committed by legal gun owners. Criminals who don't obey gun laws in the first place are who you're thinking about. And most citizens already can't buy a "weapon of war". An AR-15 is NOT a weapon of war and you'll never see a soldier carrying one in combat. Go try to buy an M-16 or similar you child. My gosh you people are ignorant.

More than 80% of the assailants responsible for K-12 shootings stole their guns from family members, per the National Institute of Justice.

Nice deflection. Now tell us how many deaths that comes to and then look at the numbers for handguns. You're just another wimp who has no idea about black guns.

(08-14-2024 08:07 AM)warhawk09 Wrote:  

(08-14-2024 07:48 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:08 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:06 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Freedom for women to make choices about their own bodies, whatever state they reside in.
Freedom to live without the scourge of gun violence.
Pass and sign the bipartisan Border Security bill scuttled by Trump.
Continue to lead the free world in support of Ukraine against Russian aggression until Putin is defeated.

Plenty more as others have noted, these four stand out for me as bringing significant policy differences from the GOP nominee.

Kill babies in the womb.
Take away most/all guns.
Sign border bill that does little.
Give more money to corrupt Ukrainian government.

FYP.

That sums it up nicely.

"Freedom to live without the scourge of gun violence".

Says yet another fool who believes that violent crimes will decrease if we just take away the guns, or at least make them all but impossible for responsible citizens to obtain them legally. Let's say you take away all guns, what will happen then is we will see a dramatic uptick in other kinds of violent assaults. most notably knives. S0 then we ban knives and we see a dramatic uptick in violent crimes that involve anything that can be swung like a baseball bat. And all of that will take place while criminals continue obtaining illegal guns and have their way with the populace.

It's a moronic take. Violent people are going to be violent regardless of their preferred violence delivery method.

Bold to call someone moronic and compares knives to guns.

Tell it to the Brits, or maybe you haven't been keeping up. Take away guns and knives will become the number one weapon used in violent attacks, except for the guns criminals will still have because well, they are criminals who by their very nature do not follow our laws, I should have stated that.

Speaking of moronic, your mother wants you to come up out of her basement and get some fresh air.

(08-14-2024 08:09 AM)warhawk09 Wrote:  

(08-14-2024 07:55 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:52 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:32 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Take away most/all guns = Continue to enjoy frequent mass shootings, unlike any other developed nation, as streets remain awash in weapons of war wholly unnecessary for sport or defensive use

Hey numbnuts. Very very few "shootings" are committed by legal gun owners. Criminals who don't obey gun laws in the first place are who you're thinking about. And most citizens already can't buy a "weapon of war". An AR-15 is NOT a weapon of war and you'll never see a soldier carrying one in combat. Go try to buy an M-16 or similar you child. My gosh you people are ignorant.

And less than 4% of all gun deaths are attributable to rifles of any kind. But hey, muh facts, who needs them. Non-gun owners are idiots when it comes to guns. They show it every single time they open their mouth on the subject.

But you lied earlier, were presented facts for it and glossed it over.

What, could you restate that in English? What facts? The facts are what I stated, less than 4% (and I use that number taking into consideration that as of three years ago it was less than 3%) of ALL gun deaths involve rifles of ANY kind. You do know there are numerous other rifles, right?

If you don't believe that stat look it up on the FBI's website.

STFU, you are arguing with made up facts and are not to be taken serously,

(08-14-2024 08:25 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(08-14-2024 08:09 AM)warhawk09 Wrote:  

(08-14-2024 07:55 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:52 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 02:32 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Take away most/all guns = Continue to enjoy frequent mass shootings, unlike any other developed nation, as streets remain awash in weapons of war wholly unnecessary for sport or defensive use

Hey numbnuts. Very very few "shootings" are committed by legal gun owners. Criminals who don't obey gun laws in the first place are who you're thinking about. And most citizens already can't buy a "weapon of war". An AR-15 is NOT a weapon of war and you'll never see a soldier carrying one in combat. Go try to buy an M-16 or similar you child. My gosh you people are ignorant.

And less than 4% of all gun deaths are attributable to rifles of any kind. But hey, muh facts, who needs them. Non-gun owners are idiots when it comes to guns. They show it every single time they open their mouth on the subject.

But you lied earlier, were presented facts for it and glossed it over.

What, could you restate that in English? What facts? The facts are what I stated, less than 4% (and I use that number taking into consideration that as of three years ago it was less than 3%) of ALL gun deaths involve rifles of ANY kind. You do know there are numerous other rifles, right?

If you don't believe that stat look it up on the FBI's website.

STFU, you are arguing with made up facts and are not to be taken serously,

You said most mass shootings were illegal guns. Clearly not the case, especially school shootings.

Made up facts, right?

More than 80% of the assailants responsible for K-12 shootings stole their guns from family members, per the National Institute of Justice.

(08-14-2024 08:37 AM)warhawk09 Wrote:  You said most mass shootings were illegal guns. Clearly not the case, especially school shootings.

Another nice deflection. Kindly post the quote where one of us said this.

If you can't do that, stfu.

(08-13-2024 10:52 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(08-13-2024 10:25 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Serious question. Not being bombastic here.

What are the policies you will vote for and why do you believe Harris-Walz will properly address those policies?

I'm not "liberal" but waste of time getting into the distictions.

So if you ask me the policies I care about and will Harris/Walz address them here they are.

1. Addressing the issue of big money influence in politics: LOL no they won't address that, but neither major party will so just view that as a both suck on it issue and move on.

Spot on. Democrats have been taxing the rich since Jimmy Carter. NOT! Another talking point lackeys fall for time and again.

2. Support and encouragement of the revived labor/union movement: Highly doubt they'll be perfect here, I'm sure they'll do a whole lot I'll be critical of, but the fact that unions came out hard against Shapiro and in support of picking Walz and she picked Walz gives me some hope she'll be closer to Biden on it than the Clinton/Obama positioning on unions.

Most Unions are antiquated dinosaurs in a world market. They could be a real asset except for the fact that their leadership thinks they are politicians and look out for themselves first rather than those they represent.

3. Continued focus on anti-trust enforcement: This one I'm concerned about. This was the biggest break from the Clinton/Obama policies from Biden. Khan with the FTC and Kanter with the DOJ have been great on this, but the large money donors are pushing crazy hard for Harris to fire both if she wins, and a lot of her advisors are people who would probably be supportive of doing that. This is the thing I'm focused on the most to hear what her plans are, if she ever actually releases any.

No chance of this. Wishful thinking on your part. Can't bite the hand that feeds you.

4. Pushing for a Universal Healthcare System: I know even Bernie wouldn't have gotten this done, but she long ago showed she was faking support for Medicare for All and I don't see anything happening here in any way from Harris/Walz. I doubt she even pushes seriously for what Biden lied and said he supported, a public option. I expect nothing here.

In all honesty, I pray this doesn't happen. Everything ran by any Government agency almost overnight turns to sh!t. It becomes incompetent almost immediately.
Best overall plan would be to put caps on medical malpractice to bring down costs.

5. Pushing for some of the things that Manchin/Sinema got stripped out of the original Build Back Better bill like Universal Pre K, Paid Family and Medical Leave, etc. and reinstating the Child Tax Credit. This is actually the thing Harris has the most track record supporting and Walz got a lot of it done as Governor. Not convinced they will have the votes to get it done but I'm pretty convinced they'll actually put in real effort to do it and that's about as good as you can hope for.

No Chance, but a great idea for a campaign ad. It doesn't meet the politician's criteria of getting something in return.

So of my top 5 items #2 and 3 she has pretty wide ranging power to help without congressional action and I think she'll probably be decent on #2 and completely up in the air on #3. #1 and 4 no one is going to do anything about they are pipe dreams at this point. #5 I think they'll try but that takes congress and not confident they'll have the support or ability to get them done.