29 Comments

Full Harris quote on Ukraine:

"Let's understand what happened here: I actually met with Zelenskyy a few days before Russia invaded. Tried through force to change territorial boundaries, to defy one of the most important international rules and norms, which is the importance of sovereignty and territorial integrity. And I met with President Zelenskyy. I shared with him American intelligence about how he could defend himself.

Days later, I went to NATO's Eastern Flank, to Poland and Romania. And through the work that I and others did, we brought 50 countries together to support Ukraine in its righteous defense. And because of our support, because of the air defense, the ammunition, the artillery, the javelins, the Abrams, tanks that we have provided. Ukraine stands as an independent and free country.

If Donald Trump were president, Putin would be sitting in Kyiv right now. And understand what that would mean, because Putin's agenda is not just about Ukraine. Understand why the European allies and our NATO allies are so thankful that you are no longer president, and that we understand the importance of the greatest military alliance the world has ever known, which is NATO, and what we have done to preserve the ability of Zelenskyy and the Ukrainians to fight for their independence.

Otherwise, Putin would be sitting in Kyiv with his eyes on the rest of Europe, starting with Poland. And why don't you tell that 800,000 Polish Americans right here in Pennsylvania how quickly you would give up for the sake of favor and what you think is a friendship with what is known to be a dictator who would eat you for lunch."

Man she has a point!

Vote for Trump and get Putin for Free 😳

Expand full comment

Russia doesn't want Kiev. They want the Russian-speaking part of Ukraine, and they got it. And they're never going to give it up.

Expand full comment

I hear you, Richard—not willingly, that’s for sure.

However, let’s call it what it is: Russia has stolen the Donbas region from Ukraine. This isn’t some diplomatic misunderstanding or a minor territorial squabble - it’s outright theft, and here's why it's a dangerous precedent.

Imagine for a minute they were militarily capable - what if 🇲🇽 decided to roll tanks into Texas, claiming they needed to “protect” the Spanish-speaking population. Or if 🇨🇦 took control of Alaska, under the pretext that they were safeguarding indigenous communities.

The U.S. wouldn’t stand for it, and rightfully so. It’s not just a matter of borders; it’s about sovereignty, resources, and control.

That’s exactly what Russia is doing to Ukraine.

Donbas is the industrial heart of Ukraine - a region rich in coal, steel, and energy resources. By taking it, Russia isn’t just redrawing maps; they’re crippling Ukraine’s economy, stealing its wealth, and dismantling its future. And they’re doing it under the bogus excuse of “protecting” Russian-speaking citizens.

Newsflash: Russian speakers were never under threat.

This is about power, pure and simple.

Even worse - the bigger issue here isn’t just Ukraine - it’s the global stakes.

If Russia gets away with this, what’s next? Who’s to say another power won’t decide to slice off a piece of territory from their neighbour because they can?

This isn’t just about Donbas. It’s about the kind of world we want to live in. One where borders mean something, where sovereignty is respected, or one where the biggest bully on the block takes what they want.

So no, Ukraine didn’t “lose” Donbas. Russia stole it. And the international community should be on notice - because if this is allowed to stand, no country is safe from having its future hijacked by force.

Expand full comment

Take a good long read through the archived articles and reports by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. Following the revolution in Kiev the Azov battalion, an ultra-national armed group was sent into the Donbas to quell the displeasure over the coup. They committed documented atrocities that nobody wants to acknowledge against citizens of the Donbass who identified as Russian.

Expand full comment

Russia stole it, but they're never giving it back. This is reality. If we want this war to end, some sort of nominal control must be ceded. We have to live with reality.

Expand full comment

I feel that's a choice for the Ukrainians Richard

Expand full comment

It's our choice. Without the US, "Ukraine's frontline would collapse", according to The Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Expand full comment

Without Ukraine .. the US arms business would be in the doldrums Richard 🤷‍♂️

Expand full comment

That’s why they tried to invade Kiev at the outset of the war. Sure bud.

Expand full comment

Line of the night: “Donald Trump was fired by 81 million people, and he’s clearly having a hard time processing that.”

Expand full comment

Harris won in a rout. In football terms it was 45-10.

Expand full comment

No they did. He died.

Expand full comment

Delusional. You saw what you wanted to see.

Expand full comment

What tf did YOU see?

Expand full comment

Harris

Nervous at first, repeated her talking points, got over the nerves to some degree then appeared smug at times on serious issues. She lacked any substance on the major issues and when discussing GAZA she continued to say the same things as Biden about working diligently for peace while the US money and arms supplies keep flowing and children die.

VS

Trump

An entitled, smug and arrogant narcissist who appeared, as always, unable to change his rhetoric and acknowledge the impact his off-putting behaviour has on voters.

Unfortunately, with regard to trump, the only impactful part of the debate for me was when he spoke emphatically about the real threat of WWIII, echoed by the likes of RFK junior and Tulsi Gabbard.

Harris, of course, had no retort because the democratic partly of today represents the interest of the industrial military complex with their hundreds of billions of dollars in profits from all these wars.

Expand full comment

Haha you spelled behavior funny. Cheers mate.

Expand full comment

We do things differently in Canada. Too much pot! lol

Expand full comment

Didn’t Toronto have a crack-smoking mayor for a while? Or did I make that up?

Expand full comment

Didn’t Toronto have a crack-smoking mayor for a while? Or did I make that up?

Expand full comment

The best part of that opening handshake was when, politely Kamala introduced herself because they had never met. It was a good start

Expand full comment

I was surprised he didn't bring up eliminating the Department of Education to stop schools from doing trans surgeries without parental knowledge.

And why was he against people eating cats? I mean, why not take pleasure in the anguish of the Childless Cat Ladies?

Expand full comment

I was guessing she would do what she did but a little afraid she wouldn’t.

She went straight for him. It’s really all that needed to happen.

Sad to say, but all that matters lately would be ridiculous things in normal times— puncture Trump’s balloon, and show what they are.

Maybe this is all politics will be for the foreseeable future. Surprising how hard it is to show that up is not down but that is the job now, and possibly will be for a long time.

Expand full comment

Trump always took the last word and the moderators failed to let Harris rebut Trump’s lies - ABC bias

Expand full comment

By letting him have extra add-on nonsense time the moderators did Trump no favours at all.

Expand full comment

She didn’t have to, the moderators did that for her. The less time she has to spend correcting Trump’s BS, the better.

Expand full comment

I've always operated under the premise that Trump is a weak candidate. 47% is a low ceiling leaving your oponent 53%. If there is an effective candidate on the other side, that candidate should win, despite the electoral college. Clinton had baggage and focused on the wrong things. Biden . . . is 82. Harris may not be the best candidate but she's capable and professional. Despite her baggage (San Francisco liberal), she's a capable campaigner. In the end, this election doesn't come down to policy positions. It's a vibes election. The debate was light on policy and heavy on vibes. Harris doesn't need to be Obama. She just needs to be capable with limited baggage to win on vibes. She should win the election.

Expand full comment

It's a question of what you like. Trump is undisciplined but supremely accessible. After the debate he took questions from a wild crowd of reporters, while Vance sat down to an absolutely blistering interview on CNN. Harris is the opposite. She is disciplined but supremely inaccessible. Following the debate she took no questions, attending instead a rally with supporters, and I don't know if I saw Walz.

Expand full comment