The triumph of the woke
Link to quote: Harris takes aim at Trump as she vows 'to be a president for all Americans' | Fox News
Last night Kamala Harris officially accepted the democrat party nomination. She was the f irst presidential candidate who never received a single vote. She replaced a candidate who won the party’s nomination. A rare first and completely undemocratic. The event marked the final bump for what could be described as a Hollywood style presentation of a very uncharismatic candidate, who cannot be trusted to speak on her own. From this point forward the Harris campaign will have to work a lot harder, and the media will have to become more blatantly partisan.
The most important point we learned from this convention is how radical the democrat party has become. These past 4 nights have not really touched on the issues that most Americans care about. We heard a theme about freedom, but we learned that the only freedom the party seems interested in is "reproductive freedom," a misnomer. There is nothing reproductive about it. This is now the party of abortion on demand and Socialism.
The new democrat nominee has been rebranded as some kind of " moderate ." Yet even after being chosen and having her campaign claim that she has changed her mind on all the major policies she once stood for, she has announced a plan to impose price controls on business. She also plans to fund home buyers. We still recall that she boycotted Prime Minister Netanyahu and chose a far-left governor as her VP pick. She may also institute a $5 Trillion tax plan as president. That would be the highest tax ever imposed on the American people.
For those interested in price controls:
During this convention the promoters of Harris have her running against Trump as if he was the incumbent. It is as if they want to erase the past 3 and a half years. Right now, almost 65% of Americans think the country is on the wrong track. That is something the Harris campaign will have to deal with now that the gaslighting is over. It was really easy to energize the base over the past 4 days. After all, many in the democrat base are living in an alternate universe. When one of them was asked why Harris hadn't given an interview, he said: "I don't know." BTW, that came from a highly educated individual.
Do they really expect to win over swing voters by pretending they weren't in power the past 4 years?
In other news:
An Arizona man who planned to assassinate former President Trump was captured as Trump was visiting the border.
Arizona can require people registering to vote to show proof of citizenship according to the SCOTUS.
Arkansas’s Supreme Court rejected an effort to put an abortion-rights amendment on the November ballot, saying the paperwork was faulty.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. filed to withdraw from the presidential election in Arizona. He’s scheduled to speak about his campaign’s future today and may endorse Donald Trump.
The F.D.A. approved updated covid vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna.
Tags
Who is online
53 visitors
Good morning.
As the democrats wrapped up their convention, Donald Trump visited the border as an Arizona man seeking to kill him was about to be captured.
SIERRA VISTA, Ariz. (AP) — On a dirt road below the shrub-dotted hills of Arizona, Donald Trump used a stretch of wall and a pile of steel beams to draw a visual contrast between his approach to securing the border and that of his Democratic opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris .
Trump brought along grieving mothers, the sheriff of Cochise County and the head of the Border Patrol union to echo his tough-on-border security message at Thursday’s visit, which was themed “Make America Safe Again.”
“To my right is what we call Trump wall. This was wall that was built under President Trump,” said Paul Perez, the president of the Border Patrol union. “To my left, we have what we call Kamala wall. It’s just sitting there doing nothing, lying down.”
Election 2024: Trump campaigns in Arizona, focuses on border security | AP News
While Harris was speaking last night, Trump sat frantically trying to come up with a counter message he could "truth" out to his cult following -
"Where's Hunter?" is what he came up with.
To the contrary, Trump posted quite a lot during her speech.
Remember this line:
When Harris began talking about her vice presidential nominee, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz , she jokingly called him “Coach Walz,” referencing his days as a high school defensive coordinator. But Trump couldn’t let that one slide. “Walz was an ASSISTANT Coach, not a COACH,” he wrote.
Bitter Trump Posts Up a Storm as Harris Makes Her Big DNC Speech (yahoo.com)
Was that your only interest last night? What Trump would say?
I was looking at twitter while I was watching the convention , and posted some of what I saw here. There was the tweet from a Trumpster podcaster insanely bullying Tim Walz disabled 17 year old son, there was Stephen Miller whining about why they Democrats werent talking about Trump being shot at, there was Trump claiming that Walz doesnt deserve to be called "coach" because he wasnt the head coach (he was the defensive co-ordinator ), and they get called coach by the players ( and the head coach) 100% of the time.
Be very careful with Twitter, John. There is a lot of nonsense on there.
I think Jack Nicklaus said all that we need to know.
I didnt notice that in your comment before. Does Trump know anything about sports? Why are you posting that garbage as if it were a point in Trumps favor.
I coached 13 and 14 year old girls basketball for 10 years. Obviously not the highest level, but not all that different from a high school coach. 100% of the time the assistant coaches are referred to , by the players, and by the head coach, as "coach" Always. And assistant coaches are coaches , they have usually specific duties that involve "coaching" players into performing better by both explaining technique and motivating them. Only a true clueless moron would say an assistant coach is not a coach.
The point in Trump's favor was the term he served as President.
Is the Harris campaign really going to try and hide her right up until election? It isn't like when they hid Biden. At the time Biden appeared to be a moderate. Kamala can't pass as a moderate.
It is going to be very tough from this point on.
You continually point out what Trump says. What's conveniently ignored is what Kamala says and does, now and in the past. She can't erase her extreme far left record and remarks. The American people don't want leftist ideology and extremism to rule over them.
Just because Kamala is to the left of Attila the Hun doesn't make her an extremist. As an independent centrist I find her platform to be fairly moderate.
That's because Harris isn't an unhinged lunatic like trump is.
Thank you for the laugh. I really needed it.
trump sure was interested in what she had to say. lol!
I know I wasn't interested in what the former 'president' convicted felon and rapist had to say.
I saw where coulter called Gus Walz weird. What a bitch. What a hateful disgusting bitch.
I just saw that. So hilarious! So desperate!
I also saw some of the other demented ravings that the former 'president' convicted felon and rapist posted throughout Kamala's speech.
So desperate and deplorable and demented. That's a good one going forward, to describe the former 'president' I think.
Sounds like Jackie Childs on Seinfeld - desperate, deplorable, and demented!
During this convention the promoters of Harris have her running against Trump as if he was the incumbent
it’s like Biden presidency never existed. As Peggy Noonan wrote, “they cast a magic conjuring sorcery spell in which viewers got the feeling the whole purpose of the Democratic Party is to break away from a grim and doom-laden reigning regime . . . when they’ve been in charge for 3½ years”
Peggy could have gone further.
The democrats have held the White House for 12 of the last 16 years, with Harris a part of the last 4 years.
They also have influence in every agency of government.
The Democrats very successfully made this election about Donald Trump, which is all it has ever been about, and should be about. Now they have to finish the job.
Trump is not ethically, mentally , or morally fit to hold office , any office, in the United States, and Harris is. That is the issue people need to vote on. The rest is at the mercy of the filibuster rule.
I have to cringe at people who want to put this utter moronic criminal back in office because of "the Biden presidency". There have been presidencies better than Bidens, I suppose, and there have been worse. But there is only one Trump and he has been a plague on our nation.
How so? He's got an awful personality and says some mean and stupid things and bloviates a lot, but what did he do as president that bothers you. If you condemn and demean Trump, you're condemning and demeaning every person who votes for him. The vast majority of Republicans are not MAGA sycophant sheep, and are voting against Harris and the Dems rather than for Trump
Harris is a normal politician who is fit to hold office whether you like her political positions or not.
Trump is a mentally ill sociopath who is absolutely unfit to be president of the United States again, and he is getting worse every day.
If you consider sleeping your way to the top normal, sure. Most of us don't.
Only in leftists' warped distorted opinions.
TDS is a disease; and those inflicted to too far gone to seek help.
I sincerely wonder just how many of those on the liberal left currently singing the praises of Harris and Waltz to the heavens will be able to admit they were wrong when thing really go into the toilet should they win. Somehow I think the answer will be very few. Only time will tell either way.
You probably said the same thing four years ago about Biden and Harris. [removed][✘]
It will always be Trump's fault.
The whole DNC was about pretending Trump is still in charge.
Seems I was watching a different convention than you were.
The convention I watched had republicans who once worked for Trump standing up and saying that they were voting for Kamala.
I saw that too! Isn't that awesome? I think a lot of republicans will be voting for Kamala, A LOT.
Did anyone catch Oprah's speech?
OPRAH: "I have been on the receiving end" of "racism, sexism, income inequality.”
Translation: No matter how successful or wealthy she became, she was always the victim.
3 billion dollars in the bank and still plays the victim…
Basically, she said that some are always victims.
According to trump, he has 10 billion in the bank and always plays the victim... "The media is so mean to me!!!!!"
Let us know how if feels if the legal system is ever turned against you by people who oppose your very existence.
Yep. It did seem like all the rich people who gave speeches at the convention had a common theme, to not like the wealthy.
And that crowd lapped it right up!
Legendary golfer Jack Nicklaus: "You might not like the way our President says or tweets some things - and trust me, I have told him that! - but I have learned to look past that and focus on what he's tried to accomplish. This is not a personality contest; it's about patriotism, policies and the people they impact. His love for America and its citizens, and putting his country first, has come through loud and clear. How he has said it has not been important to me. What has been important are his actions. Now, you have the opportunity to take action."
Jack Nicklaus Has Made It Clear Where He Stands Politically - The Spun
I wonder how much money Trump will save a fantastically wealthy man like Jack Nicklaus with his tax plans. If you want to know how seemingly sane people can stomach DonOLD Trump’s rhetoric, just follow the money.
I'm too busy wondering, like many democrats, why Kamala proposed that record setting tax plan before the election.
Considering the Democrats gave the largest tax break to their wealthy donors on the leftist coasts by ending Trump's cap of state tax credits; Trump can't do nearly as much.
That is rich considering the billionaires backing Harris. They know their money is safe. The middle class and poor should be looking out as she has already stated she wants the Trump tax cuts to expire.
But I am sure American businesses will just offshore their operations and headquarters like they did before if she is elected. This time there will be no luring them back.
The Chinese and Iranians will be thrilled with a Harris Presidency.
“The Chinese and Iranians will be thrilled with a Harris Presidency.”
As will human traffickers/smugglers, drug cartels, and south american gangs.
With all due respect to Jack Nicklaus, maybe the greatest golfer of all time, he's older than Joe Biden and much more out of touch. Nicklaus circle is very rich people and very, very conservative people.
His opinion about "patriotism" isnt worth a penny more than anyone else's.
Michelle Obama owns three mega mansions, private jets and yachts and she gave us a long sermon on income inequality.
Some opinions are worth more than others.
Michelle Obama owns three mega mansions, private jets and yachts and she gave us a long sermon on income inequality.
it’s an Amazing lack of self awareness or disdain for their audience. She talked about being taught by her parents not to trust people who take more than they need, and how they’ll never benefit from generational wealth, even though her kids already have million dollar trust funds.
then Obamas just assume their audience are morons.
Yes.
Jack Nicklaus, although he is rich (richer than the Obamas I'm sure) , could be talking about income inequality too. Why isnt he?
If he did he wouldnt have any of his current friends.
And she got a bigger hand for that gaslighting than Barack did.
Maybe they decided to play good cop/bad cop.
I doubt he is richer than the Obamas. He earned what he got. He didn't acquire wealth through politics.
He hasnt made any money golfing in decades.
The Obamas made their money by writing extremely popular and successful books and Im sure through some speaking fees. Kind of like Trump in that way. And Jack Nicklaus.
Jack Nicklaus, widely regarded as one of the greatest golfers of all time, has an estimated net worth of $400 million
Nicklaus made a LOT of money through endorsement deals. Is that "work"?
Correct, just as I haven't been running in the mornings for the past dozen years. It is called old age.
The Obamas made their money by writing extremely popular and successful books and Im sure through some speaking fees.
Neither of which would have been possible without holding office.
Kind of like Trump in that way
Very unlike Trump and Nicklaus.
I don't count that as work. That is similar to the Obama's gaining wealth via notoriety.
The Obama's wealth came from their book sales, which is legit!
Those books "likely" sell because Barack Obama was a politician.
Were there ghost writers involved?
It doesn’t matter who the Democrat is, the right only has the capacity to criticize them. If their success has made them wealthy, then they’re hypocrites. If they are of modest means, then they’re failures. If their history is rich with honesty and integrity, they dig and dig until they find a tiny morsel of something to question and then blow it up as if it’s purely scandalous (look no further than Pocahontas.) And let’s not forget that if they show emotion they are disingenuous pussies.
Especially if it is one who shouted on national television that the already violent rioters in Washington DC should not stop: “They’re not going to stop, and everyone, beware. Because they’re not going to stop. They’re not going to stop before election day in November, and they are not going to stop after election day. And everyone should take note of that on both levels.”
We get it, Vic - you are incapable of saying anything good about any Democrat. No need to embellish on it.
A democrat winning in November is unacceptable. The country has been through enough.
Then stop.
The democrats are the ones in power.
Maybe he's too busy using his money for charitable purposes and making a real difference?
Sure his net worth might have been around $400 million at one point, but rather than going around tearing people down for being successful or stumping for such people to be taxed into oblivion, he focuses on giving back his way rather than how he can help force others to give back the way the government sees fit. I'd say he probably does more good his way, than the Fed Government could by taking that amount from him and "redistributing" it. And don't kid yourself, people in his tax bracket pay the bulk of the income taxes in this country already anyway.
The Obama's net worth is about $70 million, not exactly struggling. So, talking about income inequality like Michele Obama is going to solve what problem and how? Let's assume they earned their fortune through hard work and being the best at what they do like Jack Nicklaus did. Our society made that opportunity available to all of them. Perhaps they should be celebrating that and helping others to strive for the same thing and make the best of their opportunities so they can give back, rather than stumping for others to be taxed out of any opportunity to reach the pinnacles that those rich have already reached?
How many people do you think can make 70 million dollars in their lifetime? Everyone?
Think the publishing company made back their $75 million investment?
Yup, they can graft just as well as the Clintons can from our allies and enemies.
So Obama is a criminal- that is what you claim of Trump. Democrats do love their criminals.
How many people that made 70 million are as big of hypocrites as the Obamas?
They want to "tax the rich". I am sure they don't include themselves or their rich benefactors as being rich.
Not everyone who accepts speaking fees is a criminal.
The Obamas should pay the same taxes anyone else with their wealth and income does. Is that supposed to be controversial ?
As many as want to work hard enough to be the best at what they do and earn it. Why do you ask? Do you really believe that it has to be a zero sum game? That those who succeed do so only at the expense of, or to the detriment of others? How do you think economies grow?
Really, so everyone can become a multi millionaire? According to you, seemingly, everyone could be a millionaire. Not anyone, but everyone. All they need to do is work hard and "be the best". In theory , certainly, this could be everyone. If everyone were millionaires we would need new metrics on what constitutes wealth.
Of course, everyone cannot be wealthy, someone has to do the so called menial jobs and pick up the garbage and clean the rest rooms and move luggage at airports and all that. Not to mention being a house painter or plumber, jobs you dont really get rich at.
The true purpose of a wealth tax is not raise great amounts of money for the government to , maybe according to you , waste, but rather to over time reduce great disproportionate wealth that controls politics. Reduce the plutocracy to whatever extent we can. Why should money dictate how much influence someone has on political issues . There is this far right guy, Leonard Leo, who has thrown millions of dollars at the cause of building a politically right judiciary in this country, and has had some success.
Why should a Jack Nicklaus have more political influence, because of his wealth, than the plumber or a school teacher?
"Income inequality" can never be alleviated much in a capitalist society, but it can , or could, have some kind of lid put on it.
Some people say if you heavily tax billionaires they will lose incentive to do what they do . I say, ok, fine , someone else will do what they do. Does anyone think the personal computer wouldnt have been created if Bill Gates had never been born? There is no good, honest, reason to not heavily tax the extremely wealthy, and most Americans agree with that according to polling. If Elon Musk had half his 50 billion or whatever it is confiscated by tax , would he stop being Elon Musk? I dont think so.
Remember Norm on Cheers the alcoholic know it all loser who lived with his mom while waxing endless advice to others?
I just observed two of the most privileged over 65 year old white males on Facebook bemoaning the systemic discrimination against white males they blame for being unemployed losers!
Lucky for them they inherited their big houses and farmlands.
That wasn't norm
nope , it was Cliff.
It's easy when the former 'president' convicted felon and rapist is held to no standards.
That's nice.
First you misquote me with:
I of course never said that. Then you postulate:
And then you counter your own theory with:
Kind of all over the place on this John.
And then you shift yet again to the power of money in politics. You and I may actually find some agreement in this area but for me it involves campaign finance reform and election laws, not heavier income taxes on those who already pay the bulk of the income taxes in this country or those who create high paying jobs for others as well.
Who says he does? Do you think he is as politically active with his money or influence as say George Soros? Oprah Winfrey? Warren Buffet? Bill Gates? Mark Zuckerberg? Tom Steyer, Michael Bloomberg, Barack Obama? What about the huge influence and political contributions of the many teachers unions, or plumbers/pipefitters/steamfitters unions? Hell until very recently had you even heard Nicklaus' name mentioned in a political sphere, whereas the others have been actively involved for decades. Yet you might celebrate the political influence of those folks because they share your world view. See 2019 CNN article HERE . - "These Democratic billionaires could help shape the 2020 election" . If you are going to take a stance like this, you better be prepared to crack down on ALL of that my friend.
I'm ready to talk about campaign finance reform, capping individual and organizational campaign contributions, and getting super PACs, outside groups, and foreign money out of our politics and other methods of limiting the political influence and election altering impact of the rich and famous, corporations, corporate media, and other organizations. But I fail to see how more taxation is going to put a dent in that goal, unless it is so onerous that there are no rich or famous or corporations to have any political influence. And where do you think we will be at that point?
So, Jack likes a chronic, compulsive golf cheat huh?
Now we know how Jack won all those tournaments.
The very VAST majority of people already knew that he won all those tournaments by shooting lower scores than his competition.
Your insinuation that he cheated is w--a--a--a---y off base and untrue.
Jack likes authenticity.
He likes authentic pieces of shit then.
It is a real shame that people actually believe that Trump cares about the people of this nation.
It will be the downfall of the left.
Non sequitur.
He's not our 'president' and who cares what he has to say? None of it's true anyway.
PBS’ Judy Woodruff apologizes for falsely telling live audience Trump tried to talk Israel out of cease-fire deal
PBS’ Judy Woodruff apologizes for falsely telling live audience Trump tried to talk Israel out of cease-fire deal (msn.com)
They can't stop lying about Trump!
That's what they do. They have to policy to run on, they have no achievements to run on.
The policies are either Socialist or Marxist. The "achievements" are only celebrated by their radical base. Example A; The open border.
You should really read the comments on your own article.
I like to do that with a stiff drink.
There are times one counters nonsense and others where the nonsense counters itself, this column is of the latter brand full of tired and lazy old tropes embracing a death spiral imposed on it by a perpetual whiner and "only he could do it".
Rather than continuing to divide the populace over some "Marxist" bullshit the GoP needs to return to its roots else oblivion will be its just dessert in the desert where its heart and soul now reside.
Don't ask me why, but I just thought of "The Atlantic" magazine.
Would not even dream to, I'm only halfway through today's crossword and your cross words are a distraction.
How do the NT Republicans feel about Adam Kinzinger's speech? Are the Trumpians going to denounce him the same way they did Liz Cheney?
They've been denouncing him for the last two years.
You mean when he said the GOP is no longer Conservative? He is correct.
Btw, the democrat party is no longer liberal either. It is progressive.
Are the Trumpians going to denounce him the same way they did Liz Cheney?
I will.
If you don't like progress, get off the internet.
You are entitled to denounce him which says to me that you disagree with politicians who choose principles and integrity over chaining themselves to infantile party politics.
If you think being progressive means progress- you don't know the definition of progressive.
Democrats want to turn the US into a woke dysfunctional version of China- with them being the one party in charge.
That isn't progress.
You think Kinzinger has principles and integrity.
He sold his soul to Democrats.
They are feeding on what is left of it by having him a "conservative" expert on CNN.
Poor bastard couldn't even get a job with the Lincoln Project.
What I DON'T think he is is an opportunistic fraudster like the Trump supporting sleazy scumbags.
We're liberal and progressive - not dirty words.
The Republican Party has not been unified since George W. Bush's first term. Democrats have told Republicans that the GOP must change. The media mounted a constant drumbeat that the GOP must change.
Well, the GOP has changed. Now Democrats parade asswipes like Adam Kinzinger across the stage to plead for Republicans to go back. Trump and MAGA burned those bridges; there is no going back
No comment necessary, the assertion speaks volumes for itself.
You can't call yourself Conservative, or Republican and then become a paid shill for the most progressive candidate in history and be anything other than a joke.
Get a grip for god's sake. Kinzinger has specifically and repeatedly said that he supports keeping Trump out of office above all else. If he could keep Trump out of office by calling Kamala Harris an ugly bimbo he would do that too.
Kinzinger believes that Trump is way worse than Democratic policies, as everyone in this country should.
He'd be the same shill if Trump had been killed by the assassin. Like David French, his job is to be the Republican who attacks Republicans. It's simply impossible for anyone who is remotely conservative to vote for Harris. It's "we had to destroy the village in order to save it" logic.
Donald Trump is a known traitor. All this nonsense about "all he was doing was looking for a fair election" is a bunch of crap. He approved an illegal plan to have him installed as president again by Pence. He tried to subvert the DOJ by appointing a toad of his to AG. He asked Dept of Justice officials to go along with the lie that the election was rigged. He personally asked officials in various states to improve his vote tally . He lied about voting machines, he lied about poll workers. he lied about there being mail trucks in ditches with trump votes inside. And he refused to act to stop the J6 riot because he wanted it to succeed.
Someone has to be especially unpatriotic to vote for this person again.
The would-be assassin who tried to kill Trump was also a republican.
just more proof that crazy isn't beholden to any party.
Right. Because Republicans donate money to ACT Blue and go online to defend Joe Biden's immigration plan.
Exactly, he had a long history as a hard core repub.
You have proof.
Because no Republican would ever donate money to a leftist PAC.
As we all know, no leftist would ever register as a Republican; or vote in any Republican primary to try and influence the Republican selection process. It never happens- and especially didn't happen in 2016 when record setting numbers of leftists crossed to vote for Trump in the Republican primaries in swing states; as Trump was polling as the only Republican candidate that Hillary could hope to beat.
He's not the only one, and it really is necessary for reasonable people to do whatever it takes to get rid of Trump. I don't agree with the most progressive views of some of the Democrats, especially The Squad and Bernie Sanders, but whatever, a Democratic government is IMO much more to the benefit of most Americans than a Trump Republican one. And even though I might praise Trump for what he has done for Israel I also have enough of a brain to know the damage he would cause the USA. However, I'm not worried now, because I'm sure Trump is toast, and his sycophant lawmaker followers will hopefully go over the cliff with that pied piper.
Hope you're right Buzz.
How come the former 'president' convicted felon never speaks about getting his ear clipped in the 'assassination attempt'? You'd think that would be one of his top topics on his demented rambling 'press conferences' or rallies.
I was wrong. Harris will not win by 10,000,000 votes.
It will be more like Fifteen Million! Harris-Walz 2024!
Wow! How many eligible voters are there?
How do you have no idea? You know how many voted in the last election, right? Biden won it by seven and a half million in 2020!
That does not matter. It is the electoral college that counts:
In a contest with historic turnout , President-elect Joe Biden topped President Trump by nearly 7 million votes , and 74 votes in the Electoral College, but his victory really was stitched together with narrow margins in a handful of states.
The tight races in the trio of states had a big electoral impact. As NPR's Domenico Montanaro has put it , "just 44,000 votes in Georgia, Arizona and Wisconsin separated Biden and Trump from a tie in the Electoral College."
Biden Won By Narrow Margins In Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin : NPR
Dur! Vice President Harris will win all of the 2020 swing states plus North Carolina and then possibly Florida, Missouri and Ohio!
And the plan to win them will be simply to lie and never be questioned?
We heard her lecture us on the dangers of Trump whom she told us sent an “armed mob” to the Capitol (not a single one of the hundreds arrested in the Capitol was found to be carrying a firearm).
Btw, Trump had no relationship with Project 2025 as she alleged.
No habla Inglés. It's only a matter of bookkeeping without verification; sort of like Milton Friedman's theories applied to elections. Think of it as Fredrick Hyek running elections; free range voting would be very libertarian.
And, yes, it's still all about the money. How else can neoliberal monetize people?
Isn't it odd that for folks so obsessed with calling out Trump lies that they ignore their own because it is in furtherance of their Holy Grail--Get Trump!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Chosen One will lie about Trump, avoid the press, and MAYBE, just MAYBE, flesh out some of her "policy" details so America can figure out what she means by banning price gouging.
Well, yeah, but someone on CNN or MSNBC or the Times said he did, so that makes it fact now for the gullible idiots.
Must be yet another instance of the press trying to help Trump..........
If nothing else, Trump has turned them into a caricature of everything they accused him of.
Harris did as well in her acceptance speech.
Which totally negates expressions like "We the People" because it isn't "We the People", i.e. a majority of voting citizens that makes decisions in that "electoral college" twisted form of democracy, but those who are in control of the individual States of the USA, not "We the People". The loss by Gore proved that to be true, and it is all the Republicans can hope for this time around.
There is a valid reason why the US gave rural areas the same power as cities. Do we really want our candidates campaigning only in NYC, LA and Chicago? Clearly there are more people in those areas, but those areas also contain the special interests, which are not good for the ideals of a democracy. That is why I prefer the Republic.
The loss by Gore proved that to be true, and it is all the Republicans can hope for this time around.
It is the hope of Republicans every time.
A hell of a lot more since Taylor Swift encouraged her fans to get out and vote in November and encouraging those who had not already registered, to do so.
We all know who Swifty's will vote for!
and dubya IMHO
Of course he has a 'relationship' with Project 2025.
Something he knows nothing about yet doesn't approve of some of the things they're doing.
lol
So far she hasn't won by any votes. Nobody voted for her in 2020, nobody voted for her this year.
So? It is down to her or Trump now. My updated prediction is that Harris-Walz will win the popular vote by fifteen million votes!
Given the popular vote means little to the Presidential Election, is it safe to say you already bought them their Tiaras?
[✘]
How did that work out for Trump against Biden in 2020?
I am a retired katrillionaire Bitcoin investor as far as you know!
Nottagonnagoback!
Why are you trying to deflect? Oh, wait, I already know.
Deflect? From what? I haven't deflected shit! I made straight up predictions that Walz-Harris will decisively whoop Trump by well over ten million votes and sweep all the swing states!
That is not deflecting! Good Grief! Can the canned denials...
The Triumph Of The Woke!
Harris doesn't have a pandemic to blame on Trump.
I am sorry /s...
Trump does not have a pandemic to blame his loss on!
It was a rhetorical question. I know the why you deflected and why you are denying it. Time to move along.
Will you accept the results?
Then move along...
[✘]
Of Course I will! Will Trump, MAGA or you when Harris wins?
Oh, you brought Trump supporters into it.
Then I get to ask if Jamie Raskin will accept the results?
Just read an article over the past couple days discussing what would happen if no one won the EC , and how it would be decided , the premise of the article was how we COULD get a president from one party ticket and a VP from the other party ticket .
was reading how the house would decide the presidency and the senate would choose the vp . interesting read actually to me .
i was somewhat surprised constitutionally , if the house were to have to vote , each state only gets one vote , not the total of all its representatives . so whomever gets 26 votes becomes president in that case .
I can hear the screaming now if that were to happen .
* side note , congress has only once had to do this , back in 1800, when the choices were , Arron Burr , and Thomas Jefferson, of course Jefferson won .
[✘]
She probably will not go where I would and blame it on blind sycophancy to a chapter one charlatan. However, if she goes there only he will be to blame, the fool has zero self-discipline.
Ask Raskin, though I have no reason to doubt he would...
Hypothetically, under the impossible chance MAGA win!
Now, I have answered your questions. You answer mine!
Oh, but she need not move a muscle.
She has been reinvented.
Many believe that the statue of Venus de Milo depicts Aphrodite, the Greek Goddess of Love. Her perfection has withstood the test of time.
She need not do or say anything.
Congress could “disqualify” Donald Trump if the ex-President wins the keys to the White House, a top Democrat has claimed.
Democrat Representative Jamie Raskin claimed the 14th Amendment included provisions to halt Trump’s march to the Oval Office by adopting its “Civil War” provisions.
In unearthed footage first released in February, Raskin said: “And the greatest example going on right now before our very eyes is Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which they’re just disappearing with a magic wand, as if it doesn’t exist, even though it could not be clearer what it’s stating.
‘Civil War conditions!’ Democrat vows to ‘disqualify’ Trump if ex-President wins White House (msn.com)
Is there really any doubt who Dahl's "Penis Defilo" depicts?
People would lose their minds. Hell, they have been losing their minds over one of the candidates for almost a decade now
I wonder, with the advent of the current political parties and how the candidate from each party gets to choose their VP, if the Senate would still do that or just rubber-stamp the VP choice for the president who wins in the House? I have a hard time (although it's good for a laugh) with Trump being given Walz or Harris given Vance. Have to wonder who would utter Trump's TV line fastest? "Your fired!!".
as the article i read said , the chances of this happening , are next to nil , but the possibility is still there , kind of like being mauled to death by a Chiwawa, chances are small , but never zero .
like you i imagined a trump ,walz or harris, vance match in this case and simply thought of the cartoon of the old couple in the home , where the lady shows husband they now make adult diapers in thongs ... the old man thinking jesus take me now .
i take no responsibility for the mental image that just conjured .
The closest I saw that kind of thing happening was in the West Wing series episode wherein Democrat PotUS candidate Santos (Jimmy Smits) offered the prime position of Foreign Affairs to Republican Vinick (Alan Alda). No doubt that is absolutely unlikely in today's political climate. I really loved watching that series.
Whats the old saying ? Art sometimes imitates life and life sometimes imitates art .
I have been finding myself thinking of the old parable of the ant and grass hopper fable lately since i went full retired , just received my FIRST social security retirement check last month .
Knowing just how fickle the American voter is and their actual attention span , i will accept whomever wins regardless, i always have .
just because i will accept something , doesnt mean i will be co operating or complying , of course everything will be done in a legal manner .
I have pointed out many times over the years situations wherein Life HAS imitated Art, just as expected it is that Art imitates Life.
I had forgotten the fable so I had to look it up to realize what you were saying with it. In case others don't know or remember it, here is a link to it: -> The Ant and The Grasshopper - Fables of Aesop
I understand the point you are making. Isn't it fortunate that our governments back a long time ago provided us with the means and opportunity to save up our grain/corn to provide us with the sustenance through the winters of our lives.
And wouldn't it be miraculous if those winters could be lived in cooperation rather than conflict. And I mean that with more than one application.
May I also assume that you may be referring to the coming time to be a time for the Republicans to prepare for the next contest? Have I not been reading the rumours about the Republicans' intentions on what to do about social security?
as your link shows , the story has different endings depending on who it is being told by , me i am simply in a phase of reflection and contemplation, have i been an ant , or a grasshopper , maybe a little of both , thats what is crossing my mind and making me think and muse .
i will disagree that the government offers us either the means or the opportunity to save the proverbial grain for future usage , they can highly recommend it , even forcefully demand it , but there is very little they can do to make it happen and it is no gift from the government . SS in the US as we see it has been around less than 100 years , and it was never meant to be a sole source of providing for ones self but simply a stop gap to make sure the elderly dont starve to death . , anyone that retires or cant work and starts getting SS , only , is basically the grasshopper in the fables .
as for conflict, there will always be conflict because every person is different , has different ideas and different ways they think things should be done , it is totally unavoidable , and the chance of avoiding it diminishes, the more people that get involved . And thats not even mentioning some people take umbrage to the fact someone might have something , and they do not and dont think about how that happened , they feel entitled to have the same regardless of the situation .
As for politics , being neither democrat or republican , i feel and think any party that isnt looking at least 2 election cycles ahead for any particular seat in government are both fools and idiots ..
as for this election/ politics , im not letting the cheerleaders or those whistling past the grave yard influence what i am actually seeing going on , this election is very far from a sure thing , for either side , otherwise we wouldnt be seeing the virtrol , hype and constant barrage of demands one is the "anointed " one and needs the vote , preferably in a way they deem fit and proper . and i am experiencing it from both sides .
Yes, isn't it all such a useless waste of time and energy that could be used building and making life better instead of tearing each other apart.
Thats why i dont waste my time trying to tear someones ideas apart or down , i simply let them think for themselves , they will soon enough find out if they are right or wrong , letting people make their own choices makes it real easy to ignore their complaints later down the road when things go wrong as well.
Question of the day:
Who would have thought that Harris over the last three and a half years, was not really an incumbent, but instead simply a fresh new and relatively unknown face?
Navel gazers, that's who.
MAGA surely do wonder about nebulous bullshit an awful lot...
I find it rather amusing to see the very same Democrats who rejected her so soundly 4 years ago fawning over her now. The reason damn sure can't be based on her performance.
Maybe when you flip-flop on so many issues, it means you have a new second face to show the gullible.
It is amazing to see how they transformed her from Marxist moron to the personification of Aphrodite.
Maybe when you flip-flop on so many issues, it means you have a new second face to show the gullible.
And they painted her a grand one.
They rejected her like five months ago too.
But they need her to be viable, so suddenly she's the most impressive American in history. Their memories reset every 24 hour newscycle.
@!@ ... maybe a combination of the Muses, but definitely not Aphrodite.
I think we can finally agree on something.
I immediately thought of Walz as being a probable incumbent 8 years down the road. He will only be 68 then and appears to be a pretty popular figure even now. I also believe that his personal experience in China (and I agree with his criticisms of the Chinese government and have even in the past posted on NT my feelings about at least one that was the same as his) would provide America with a realistic and mutually beneficial rather than controversial relationship with China in what seems these days to be a return to a cold war mentality.
You have just identified something about Walz that most Americans were unaware of. I only learned about it after he was picked by Harris.
I'm not sure about his popularity outside of the democrat party. Stay tuned.
Maybe you should learn how China feels about Walz.
LINK -> Can VP candidate Tim Walz bring sanity to US' China policy? - Opinion - Chinadaily.com.cn
Now I cannot find where I saw it, but Tim Walz had the exact same reaction I did when as a result of the schools collapsing on the students in Sichuan Province during the massive 2008 earthquake it was discovered that the contractors who built the schools had collaborated with the inspecting officials to cheat on the strength of the structures because of money changing hands, so when the parents discovered this and tried to sue, not only were their lawsuits quashed but the lawyers representing the parents were "detained" I was horrified when I learned that, perhaps more so because I was a lawyer, to the extent that I wrote an article about it on thenewstalkers.com which some might say was a risky thing to do. When I saw that Walz mentioned that same thing, he won me over. It really impressed me about Tim Walz that he has spent so much time and done so much in China, that he, rather than reacting in ignorance about China that so many American politicians have been and are doing, would be in a position to be so much more accurate about China to the extent of not being hysterical about China's human rights record but still being critical of it. I agree with him because the same as me, he has spent so much time deeply involved in China. I totally disrespect American politicians who disparage China notwithstanding they have no experience whatsoever with the culture, traditions, lifestyle and attitude of the Chinese people. It is so typical of American politicians and media to emphasize what is bad while completely ignoring what is good.
America is bound to be much better off if its attitude and policies about China are tempered by Tim Walz, rather than a bunch of hysterical paranoid politicians who have no personal experience about China.
No, but they know their gullible base will always deflect to Trump anytime someone dares to criticize the new Chosen One.
I love how she will run on fixing some of the same problems they completely ignored for 4 years.
And her lack of accessibility to the press won't convince anyone who hasn't made up their minds (hardly a large enough number to bother with).
I think they are keeping her away from the press because maybe they learned after watching Biden for 4 years that going off-script for such poor candidates only reveals more flaws.
That convention proved it. Their hatred of Trump is their motivation.
I love how she will run on fixing some of the same problems they completely ignored for 4 years.
Not only is she running on fixing it, but nobody gets to ask why her & Biden aren't fixing it now.
And her lack of accessibility to the press won't convince anyone who hasn't made up their minds (hardly a large enough number to bother with).
J D Vance is touring the country asking why she won't hold an interview. It has to become a problem in these next two months.
I think they are keeping her away from the press because maybe they learned after watching Biden for 4 years that going off-script for such poor candidates only reveals more flaws.
The great political lesson of our time was the day the McCain campaign took a gamble an allowed Sarah Palin to do an interview with Katie Couric.
Yes, we cant stand "mean tweets" . If he just stopped tweeting mean everything would be great.
Based on what we see here, the reasons they didn't fix shit is simple.
Trump. Always and forever. They will never get enough Trump. He is the reason they are inept clowns.
It won't be much of a problem as long as the press keeps doing what Democrats want them to. Dem sycophants don't care about her policies--they just want Trump to lose.
We know after years of listening to the whine.
I recall you saying it about the 2020 election when I asked, back in 2020, what Biden's policies were. Only one person dared try to answer that question back then. She read the democrat platform. Here we are again with Harris having nothing listed on her website.
I recall you saying democrats were simply voting against Trump.
Am I wrong?
[deleted][✘]
I wish one of you could explain to me why voting against trump is supposed to be a bad thing? He was never in a million years fit for office. His birtherism alone makes him unfit to be president of the United States. He was part of a fraudulent "university", he lent his name to multi marketing (aka ponzi) schemes, he was sued hundreds of times for non payment to contractors. That was all prior to the 2016 election. What the hell is wrong with people who vote for Trump? Sociologists will be studying this for generations.
It is interesting how you posed that question. The question really is how anyone can hate a candidate so much that they would disregard the alternative of inflation, open borders, rampant crime and a world on fire?
He was never in a million years fit for office.
His performance as President has distinguished himself as a very fit candidate.
His birtherism alone makes him unfit to be president of the United States.
Barry Goldwater's birthplace was questioned. Did it disqualify the questioners?
He was part of a fraudulent "university", he lent his name to multi marketing (aka ponzi) schemes, he was sued hundreds of times for non payment to contractors.
I'm not sure of the truth in those claims, nor do I think it is disqualifying.
What the hell is wrong with people who vote for Trump?
They think he is a bulwark against wokeism.
As was John McCain's.
Correct.
How can it be? I thought questioning whether a candidate was qualified by place of birth was "racist."
Some of us remember the good old days when voters voted FOR somebody instead of merely against someone.
Some of us remember when a Donald Trump would have been laughed out of politics after the first GOP debate in 2015.
Some of us remember when Democratic primaries meant something, too.
Everything is racist in the world if you look hard enough and invent shit when you don't find what exactly you are looking for
Donald Trump is a known traitor. If you want to vote for him never talk about the founding principles of this country again.
that is fucking ridiculous.
(deleted)
what in the world are you talking about ?
We've been through it. Trump never directed anyone to storm the Capitol.
So if you vote for Trump you lose free speech. Yet donald is a threat to democracy.
"The prosecutor Alvin Bragg ran his campaign on the fact he was going to find something to charge Trump with. That was his goal, like, he was looking for the crime. He charges Trump with this misdemeanor thing about how he labeled monies for the NDA. But, [Bragg] found some obscure way to turn it into a felony by saying Trump was going to use that trick to created a bigger crime, but no body knows what that crime was. And so he got convicted on 34 counts, I think because he signed these papers. Thirty four of them. Is that right?"
"If that's right, it seems like an abuse of the law. It seems like it's politics using the system to knock an opponent off the ballot. Doesn't seem good."
"Abuse of the law": Patricia Heaton explains the bogus Trump conviction slow enough for your TDS-suffering aunt to understand - Louder With Crowder
God bless Patricia Heaton
That's why the crazies are trying to assassinate him.
Because you dont know a single thing about the events surrounding the "stolen election" plots, you are left to reduce it to what Trump said on the morning of Jan 6th. That is but a small part of the whole thing. And even there he asked Pence to change his mind and support the Eastman plan when Congress met a bit later.
You have repeatedly demonstrated that you know nothing about this subject. It is only the niceties of newstalkers that allows you to keep saying such nonsense.
1:40
Maybe not a president but "we" have damned sure asked candidates—weak sauce.
lol. He just sat and watched it happen for three hours without doing a single thing as commander in chief to stop it. Pathetic.
Nothing that was said about McCain, or Barry Goldwater (which no one remembers) is even close to the years , get it, years, of active birtherism against Obama.
They are not remotely comparable.
Thank God for the niceties of those who allow every member to speak.
He said "go peacefully."
Look at what they are voting FOR. These idiots vote "against Trump" in 2020 and look at the clusterfuck they voted FOR. Now they want to do it again with the same players (-1)? For 4 more years of the same failed policies?
Hopefully one day you will have something to say about the J6 indictment of trump that is connected to reality.
I remember. One was born into a territory not yet a state. Both men were white.
active birtherism against Obama.
And who was the first to question Obama's birthplace?
What was her name?
Didn't she go to school in MA?
Suppose you tell us what that "indictment" means?
Questioning one's integrity has no right nor wrong.
Don't hold your breath.
All I know is the January 6th Committee undermined the legitimacy of their investigation by breaking the long tradition of bipartisan and balanced membership on special committees.
Who cares what he said, he sat there and avoided contact with anyone while he privately watch the chaos on tv. You know this.
There were a lot of questions about Obama's origins, who his real father was, and his formative years, but this information is still locked up. It was Hillary who first brought it up.
The American people care.
Anyone interested in the truth cares.
Only in your imagination.
[removed] [✘] and address the other part of my comment.
Total nonsense. Obama's history is there for anyone who wants to learn about it. The jackass Trump said "no one at Columbia remembers seeing him there".
The truth is that many people remember seeing him there , including his room mate and his professors.
We are living in an idiocracy.
Funny. Supposedly there were all kinds of people in the room with him at the time that later testified even what he was doing. So, which is it? It sure as hell isn't privately.
Yes, but "Biden" (and now harris)
We are living in an idiocracy.
While some focus on the past.
It was easy for Obama to prove, so why are you so upset about it?
Donald Trump sat for hours watching the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol unfold on live TV, ignoring pleas by his children and other close advisers to urge his supporters to stop the violence, witnesses told a congressional hearing on Thursday.
Altering, hiding and destroying evidence didn't help it's legitimacy either.
You said privately and avoided contact. Wrong-o
Trump has visible consciousness of guilt about this. When Meet The Press asked him what he was doing during those hours he said "I'm not going to tell you", and when Jake Tapper asked him at the June debate he immediately changed the subject to Nancy Pelosi and "the border".
He is guilty as hell of dereliction of duty as commander in chief and everyone with a brain knows it.
That was the cherry on top.
Is that like letting 20 million people enter the country illegally?
That’s your concern about my comment? Lol, why even respond? The meat of the issue is that TRUMP DID NOTHING while his sleazy supporters were defecating in the halls of congress and setting themselves up for prison sentences, while his VP was literally be hunted, while the lives of congress members were being threatened, while the law enforcement officers in charge of protecting the Capitol were being savaged.
Or abandoning US Citizens and the deaths of 13 Servicemembers in Afghanistan?
Those families will never forget.
Nor will we.
Trump lies about anything and everything.
Was Trump in charge of DC security?
No, that was Pelosi, Bowser, and McConnell. Why didn't the Jan 6th committee interview any of them? They are the ones that dropped the ball.
Don't know why the Jan 6th rioters thought they could get away with it after the complete and utter mishandling of the Summer of Love riots by Bowser and DC security.
Poor Sund he was the scapegoat for Pelosi, Bowser, and McConnell incompetence.
Facts to your fiction that Trump could have stopped the Jan 6th riots.
Which puts him in good company with Biden, Harris, and every other politician.
so do a lot of his supporters
All you have to do now is prove it.
As well as Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schiff, and, well, EVERY POLITICIAN IN EXISTENCE. But lets ignore those because "Trruuummmmppppp!!!!!!"
The Democrats have really targeted specific voters. They offer generic platitudes and vibes that are designed to appeal to the low information, insecure voter with mental health issues who just want to be told that all their unhappiness and emptiness is caused by the bad man named Trump and if they vote for Mommy Harris, she'll make all their problems go away. Then they project Walz as "america's dad" in their fan pieces that they pass of as journalism. They are infantilizing voters and telling them not to worry about policy or other topics the adults will take care of for them.
Everything will be cheap, or even free and there are no tradeoffs if they vote for her.
Should be an interesting election.
Maybe Harris will do a softball interview before it.
“Should be an interesting election.”
One in which you have avowed you will not take part in.
Interesting then, the hundreds of comments being put forth. A magnanimous PSA? Or maybe, just maybe, Pathetic Self Aggrandizing, as you and the felon seem to share that trait.
Kudos for paying attention!
Keep your Trump comments, I am not interested in them.
Just because someone isn't going to vote for the presidential election, why should they not take the time to be entertained by the campaign leading up to election day?
“Keep your Trump comments, I am not interested in them.”
Keep your trump apologies, they are as meaningless as your non vote.
I believe the expectation is that we all become as equally poutraged as we see others have become.
Not sure what you have been reading, but clearly it isn't my posts. There are no Trump apologies in mine.
My non vote will be just as meaningful as your vote.
The Clown Show is at least mildly entertaining.
“…to be entertained…”
Is that what it has devolved into?
The vote is sacrosanct and is the basis of our democracy. To dismiss it is to dismiss our birthright. That some choose to ignore that, for whatever puerile reason, is in direct contradiction of those facts. A sad thing and that apathy will be our ultimate undoing.
VOTE, either way, but VOTE.
Of course one can choose not to, and if that is the choice, then just shut the fuck up. Staying on the sidelines doesn’t get one in the game…unless it is indeed only entertainment.
I can't vote for someone I think will do harm to the country.
Maybe you should leave the country then since the winner is going to do harm to it, according to you.
That is an ignorant suggestion.
I love my country but hate the idiot that will become President.
Is that hard to grasp?
What was said in 11.2.10 is spot on. I just cannot vote in affirmation of someone who I feel is bad for the country and as I feel both major candidates will be bad for the country I cannot vote for either one of them. I will vote on down-ticket ballots and issues but at this time plan on leaving the presidential slots untouched. That is also allowed with my vote.
Yes I fully understand that in all likelihood one of the two of them will end up winning in November but I refuse to join the crowd and vote against someone. I take solace in the fact that we have had terrible presidents in the past and we're still here as a country, and it's very likely that we will have and survive other terrible presidents in the future. But my vote is my vote and I will vote my decision as is my right.
Perhaps if more put the good of the country first, they would come around.
Would that be more or less meaningful than your primary vote?
I still think you should leave.
Sure, and you can foot the bill for my 4 plus year vacay!
No dice - it must be permanent.
Well, send me a ticket and lease for the Bahamas then.
It's a nice thought but I don't see that coming to fruition. There are too many who continue to vote for a party rather than anything else. Reminds me of an old proverb.
A sheep spends its whole life fearing the wolf, only to be eaten by the Shepard.
What most people fail to understand is that this is how politics is.
Yeah, I am under no delusions about the voting public.
B a a a a!
I could settle for Costa Rica if the Bahamas price tag is too steep.
You surprise me. Thought for sure you’d say mother Russia.
Your mother is Russia?
My condolences.
Why bother. Thanks to anthropogenic global climate change the Bahamas will soon be losing all of those great beaches.
I sincerely doubt it will be in tge next 20 years, so I am good.
Kamala Harris gave a rousing speech full of platitudes, contradictions, and, frankly, false hope. Harris says were not going back. But apparently that doesn't include abortion, Federal Housing Administration subsidies, gun controls, regulating business and the environment, and globalization; we're definitely going back to when those were imposed on the country. It certainly looks like Harris is planning to go back to the policies of FDR, Nixon, and Clinton. Not a very forward looking agenda.
I actually thought it was a pretty good speech for the nominee who was accepting at their party's convention. IMO it was well delivered showing that Harris can give speeches. Yes it was full of platitudes and contradictions, but it hit on the major themes of the convention which was FUN and HOPE. I would not have thought that she would have given any real policy details in such a speech, but it did seem that the absence of some important issues were glaring. Foreign policy was too vapid where I thought there should have been more. And I felt she spent too much time on her childhood, but perhaps she felt it important to let everyone know her beginnings. Problem with that was it doesn't explain her far-left agenda when she was running in 2020 and offered nothing to show why anyone should believe that she's changed (or is the favorite word evolved?).
I agree, Kamala Harris' speech was rousing and well delivered. The red meat sprinkled throughout the speech was pretty standard fare. And presenting a policy agenda as an aspirational vision rather than with specifics is a stump tested winner. Harris was a prosecutor so no one should be surprised that Harris can deliver a persuasive speech; that was a big part of her job.
But the contradictions actually pit Harris' policy visions against each other. Part of Harris' vision was about neighbors watching out for each other (brother's keeper messages are always popular) while at the same time we're supposed to mind our own damned business. Those two visions work against each other so there's something fundamentally unworkable and wrong with Harris' policy vision.
Harris tells us we aren't going back, she will only move the country forward, by going back to Roe v. Wade, by going back to FDR policies like the FHA, by going back to Cold War geopolitics. Kamala Harris, either through deliberate or uneducated ignorance, has told America she intends build the future on the past. Kamala Harris is all about going back.
In spite of the rhetoric, Harris' policy vision was certainly not forward looking.
Hopefully everyone recognized that the whole theme of the DNC convention was about Democrats' appropriating patriotism, America First, and MAGA. Bill Clinton actually turned Joe Biden into the second coming of George Washington and Democrats bought it. It's not likely we'll be hearing much more about the 1619 project anytime soon; at least not until Trump's inauguration for a second term.
I found it interesting that there was little mention in the last two days of the DNC, which I watched live, of China, and NO mention of the 4 years Harris spent in a Montreal high school, up to graduation. Her Canadian experience might well have clued her into a few things, like foreign relations, the benefit of universal health care and an excellent immigration system, both of the latter that might well be intended goals on her part. One learns a lot during the ages of 12 to 16 which are very important formative years and IMO she benefitted from their being in Canada, but then I have to admit that I may be prejudiced about that.
Here is her Westmount (an upscale neighbourhood in Montreal - where Leonard Cohen grew up) High School graduation image and message:
By the way, it's not because she was in a mostly French city and province that her language is so cryptic, it was probably just something universal among teenagers at the time.
Two questions:
1) Did they also televise the GOP convention in China?
2) Is it true that in Montreal people almost demand perfect French be spoken or English if not?
I guess you didn't get the memo. Even serious lifelong republicans are turning on Trump and saying that they'll be voting for Kamala.
I suppose they watched that movie "UNFIT" about Donald's life as a serial criminal and conman.
Seems everybody who ever worked for him has written a book detailing what an ignorant, stupid, evil piece of shit he was and still is.
Only parts and commentary (neither positive nor negative) were included in the CGTN (China Global Television Network English language) news broadcasts. I assume the Chinese media might also have shown parts with subtitles on Chinese TV channels but I never checked to see. However, I had no problem watching the convention in its entirety for the last couple of days on CTV (Canada Television Network) contrary to what some NT members wrongly think that I can only access Chinese TV. Amazing then, isn't it, that with no special service or VPN but just the same as anyone in China I'm also able to watch UNCENSORED npr, CBS News, ABC News, Fox News, USA Today, Rolling Stone, and so many other sources the list would take too long to fill I don't feel deprived.
I have no idea what Montreal people are demanding these days. Even though I always lived in very English Ontario I had to study French in high school and so I assume English is also taught in the French schools in Quebec. It actually is quite possible to survive using just English in Quebec. However there is a chance that if you decide to eat in certain restaurants in Quebec City that when you order the waiter might call you a "Tête Anglaise" (English head), which is not exactly considered a complimentary expression.
Being bilingual in Canada is an advantage if one wants to be a politician or hold a very top position in a major Canadian corporation and necessary to be elevated to the Supreme Court of Canada. Having spent her years between 12 and 16 (to high school graduation) in Montreal, I wonder if Kamala Harris has any conversational French ability.
Yes, it is amazing. I am surprised.
However there is a chance that if you decide to eat in certain restaurants in Quebec City that when you order the waiter might call you a "Tête Anglaise" (English head), which is not exactly considered a complimentary expression.
I know somebody who has been living there for twenty years and learned to speak French to hold a government job. He told me that unless you speak it perfectly those who you are talking to will switch over to English. So, I guess the matter of speaking French correctly is a priority. I just saw an old Robert Shaw movie filmed in Montreal. It was a nice-looking city in the 60's. The movie was not so good.
Just to make a minor clarification, I said "I'm also able to watch UNCENSORED npr etc etc"' I meant on the internet, not TV, just in case the word "watch" might have been misinterpreted. Other than movies, there is only one English language TV channel, the aforementioned CGTN (China Global Television News) that shows a mix of news, current affairs, talking heads, and programming on many current and interesting topics.
Thank you.
That was an important clarification, though it is surprising, nonetheless.
Republican's counter arguments only show they've chased the pigskin without a helmet too often. Hey, GOP old guys, Kamala Harris' pandering over price gouging ain't about prices; it's about Federalizing commerce. Laws concerning price gouging are well established. State governments already regulate price gouging.
Harris is promising to take that authority over commerce away from the states. It's an extension of Alvin Bragg's lawfare to exert authority beyond jurisdiction. Quick, easy, illegal, and unconstitutional -- a proven vote getter among Democrats.
Republicans talking about price controls are actually deliberately hiding what Harris is proposing. It sure looks like the GOP is trying to sell America's soul for a handful of silver, again. Blowing Friedman and Hyek smoke won't rehabilitate the Judas goat of supply-side economics and free trade.
Not to worry. Her campaign has already walked that back. Should be a familiar sight with all the walk backs performed by the White House Press Office.
I wonder how many "explanations" will be coming in the next few months.
That the racist bomb thrower Al Sharpton (who should be more toxic than David Duke given the damage he's caused) paraded the Central Park 5 out their as victims shows just how orwellian the democrats have become. They are unmoored from reality and simply reinvent history to fit their agenda. Next convention Jussie Smollett will be featured as the exemplary victim of white on black racism.
WTF does this weird talking point mean? We have “video on demand” because historically you had to watch whatever the providers were broadcasting at that moment. Now, with video on demand, you can watch what you want to watch, whenever you want to watch it.
So WTF is abortion on demand? Abortion via wi-fi? What would be the alternative? We have to wait until a certain day or time to get an abortion? We have to fill out a government form and apply for it?
Isn’t any medical procedure done “on demand?”
I know politics is often about terrifying people without reason, but this one seems especially dumb.
Just for you sir:
“On demand” is used to mean that a woman should have access to an abortion:
Nor should she otherwise be thwarted in her attempt. The right to abortion on demand could apply to either the entire pregnancy or be limited to a portion of the pregnancy.
Abortion on Demand: A Second Wave Feminist Demand (thoughtco.com)
That is the way it should be, I think.
It doesn't matter to me, but most people don't like the idea of an abortion in the 9th month without any other reason than the desire to do so.
And taxpayer funding for that
That too.
What ever happened to the Hyde Amendment?
it is a very cost effective use of taxpayer funding
Two right-wing ranting points that are lies.
Forced tube tying and sterilization for the sperm donor after the abortion would be an even more effective use.
One and done.
No repeats allowed ever.
Democrats are importing enough illegals to more than make up for future birth losses.
n't like the idea of an abortion in the 9th month without any other reason than the desire to do so.
arent most women showing in the 9th month ?
That is not a good idea and mean
It's eugenics for the 21st century. Makes perfect sense to some.
That century old progressive idea is in the ash heap.
ONE thing we agree on
That never happens though. I'm sure you can provide examples of this happening, correct?
Ok, obvious questions: How many American people, and which ones?
There is an answer. It only applies to people with over $100 million in wealth. According to Fortune magazine, that’s about 20,000 people. Further, these people have to be not paying at least 25% tax on their income already. Even further, it only applies if at least 80% of your wealth is in tradeable assets (i.e., not shares of private startups or real estate). So, basically uber rich hedge fund managers.
But yeah, I expect we’ll keep hearing hysterical claims of a “tax on the American people.”
Here is the problem:
Critics say the proposal to tax unrealized capital gains would stifle innovation. Tech start-ups, for example, often have large unrealized gains in their early days. A tax on these gains would strip significant equity from both the start-up founders and reduce the portfolio of the venture capitalists funding them, Andreessen and Horowitz said on their podcast. “This makes start-ups completely implausible, because why on earth is anybody going to go do this versus going to Google and getting paid a lot of money every year in cash?” Andreessen said.
Other critics say the proposal would create significant administrative hurdles for the government. “It’s very unworkable,” says Erica York, senior economist at the Tax Foundation.
Biden-Harris’ Plan to Tax Unrealized Capital Gains Is a Longshot. It’s Still Ruffling Silicon Valley’s Feathers. (msn.com)
More like, here is the knee jerk hysteria. Let’s stop pretending that the 1% of the 1% of the 1% are the only reason anything ever gets done in this country. They are the class of people least in need of protecting. If you’re going to try to claim that a person with 100 million dollars can’t pay a little more in taxes or the whole fucking economy is going to collapse, I want some proof, not dogma.
How about we try it and see what happens? Because right now, they aren’t paying those taxes, and both our debt and deficit increase every year - even when Trump was president.
Just amazing how so few can influence so many to vote against more than a few, policies, that would benefit so many, as opposed, to benefitting so few, but Trump does surely luv him some uneducated folks supporting him.
The way politics can twist the truth up into long ass ribbons just lying on the grounds that it will scarte the electorate into falling for it, and 'it', asz in bullshit, is just amazing, as saddles are a blazin when Mongo is tossin mung around, cause some want that 'new sheriff' in town, pass the beans...
gaslighting to do
The problem is that unrealized capital gains are not real until they are realized.
A very simple example. You buy a stock like DJT:
Now in this case DJT peaked in April at $72 and is now just below $23.
What happens if this peak had occurred on the last trading day in December? Well, the unrealized gains from DJT would be rather staggering. But if you held that stock, you would have to pay taxes on the exuberantly inflated value of the stock. You would need to come up with actual cash to pay taxes on money you have not received and may never actually realize.
So what happens next year if the stock is now down to $22 per share? The only fair option is that you now get a tax credit on that stock. If not, then you paid taxes on money that you never actually had. So taxing unrealized gains also logically requires giving credit on unrealized losses. Better to stick with taxes on real gains and credits on real losses ... taxing 'on paper' numbers would be a nightmare.
There are many ways to make the playing field a bit more fair (and if you do not know this, the wealthier one is the more options available to you). But we have a problem. Those with BIG money also have bought influence with those who make tax laws. So yes we can do plenty to make things more fair but the foxes are guarding the henhouse. And, by the way, Trump if elected would be the big fox.
and Trump told US this week that he is better looking than Kamala Harris,
so the 'big(fat) fox' who we have no idea how many eggs, or pussys', he grabbed last time when on guard duty, due to the power before people agenda the GOP has adopted due to they suspending the inquiring and releasing of info from what Trump made through all of his business's when he was last potUS, would never LIE about anything involving his worthless wealth and such, cause he's immune he tells US of any wrong doing, even when found GUILTY, in a court of law, as wide open is left ones jaw, but hey, he is only the less evil of two, or so I've been told, by a few....
We are talking about the taxing of Capital gains, in other words: investment.
Do you remember when candidate Obama simply wanted to raise the Capital gains tax?
GIBSON: All right. You have, however, said you would favor an increase in the capital gains tax . As a matter of fact, you said on CNBC, and I quote, “I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton,” which was 28 percent. It’s now 15 percent. That’s almost a doubling, if you went to 28 percent.
But actually, Bill Clinton, in 1997, signed legislation that dropped the capital gains tax to 20 percent.
OBAMA: Right.
GIBSON: And George Bush has taken it down to 15 percent.
OBAMA: Right.
GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down.
So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?
OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.
Obama and Gibson Capital Gains Tax Exchange (taxfoundation.org)
Taxing Capital gains beyond a certain point means less revenue as well as less growth. People are simply not going to take risks and pay excessive taxes on it as well.
Taxing investment is always a bad idea.
We'll find out what it was.
Catering to billionaires is NOT required to have a healthy economy. There are ways to deal with runaway wealth other than an attempt to tax unrealized gains. The basic principle is to go after the exotic loopholes. But, as noted, our government (power) is commingled with aristocracy (money) so there is no clear way to achieve significant reform of our tax laws.
This is America. That wealth built this country.
From the woman who revived England:
"Marxists get up early in the morning to further their cause. We must get up even earlier to defend our freedom."
Are you in favor of the plutocracy and oligarchy ?
If we never try to control the accumulation of great wealth, unlimited wealth, we will live in an oligarchy in practice.
That is why we need to heavily tax great wealth.
How heavily, what is great, Biden’s $400,000 floor?
The word oligarch was used by a public figure recently.
Who was it?
Oh, yes, it was the self-described Socialist Bernie Sanders at the democrat convention.
As far as American citizens having little influence over the policies government adopts, that was never truer that the past 4 years under Joe Biden.
Thanks for the theory.
Yes Vic, but you seem to not recognize that excessive wealth is not always used to help build this nation. That it is often used to shape the laws in favor of the wealthy. That is a bad thing.
Just stop with the Marxist crap, Vic. USA capitalism is not under any threat from 'Marxists'.
Bernie Sanders wants working class people to be able to live good lives.
He is a hero in that regard.
What we really need to do is stop the unbridled government spending that caused inflation and devalued the earnings of hard working Americans.
I beg to differ.
Our problem is not wealth, it is government spending, the printing of money and inflation.
Or, more accurately, the government needs to be more fiscally responsible. They spend borrowed money and rarely do anything to cut wasteful spending. The natural order is disorder and that applies directly to initiatives. It would be interesting to know how much money continues to be wasted and never redirected to productive causes but I would bet it is enormous.
Let me know when he does something to bring down the national debt.
Maybe he can take a lesson from JP Morgan:
"At the beginning of 1895, the country was facing default after its gold reserves evaporated.
But through some legal archaeology JP Morgan located an obscure, Civil War-era statute that would allow he and some fellow international financiers to replenish the Treasury's gold stocks."
The country was saved.
Morgan 1895 Crisis & 1862 Gold Loophole - Business Insider
That is today's history lesson.
Don't view reality as binary. Both are problems. And I did not say that wealth in itself is a problem, I was referring to the insane levels of wealth which are protected by laws bought by said wealth.
Believe it or not, the candidate you hate recently said that he intends to get all the unspent money and redirect it.
Why do people believe what Trump says?? Good grief man. Trump will say anything if he thinks it will get him a vote. He is a pathological liar with no ethics. He cares about one thing, getting elected in order to solve his legal problems.
What law are you referring to?
Because he did what he said in 2016, despite a mountain of resistance and a dirty hoax which the media and FBI perpetuated throughout his term.
Many of those with the power in government are also in the aristocracy and have become very wealthy, especially after they have left government for the private sector.
Were you a Bernie Boy? Biden’s trouncing of Bernie showed that at least in 2020, Dem voters wanted someone more towards the center.
Any such increase in revenue goes directly to the government coffers, where it simply is spent on existing and new government programs....usually by the democrats.
I am not referring to a single law, I am referring to tax laws (plural) which produce things like the carried interest loophole. I was assuming you knew that wealth enables access to legal methods to reduce paying taxes.
Yes.
You are correct in that revenues are wasted but you are incorrect in claiming this is usually by the Ds. That used to be the case, it is no more. There is no real party of fiscal responsibility anymore.
Nothing wrong with investment. Is there some reason the other 99.99% of us can’t take part in that? There comes a point where so much wealth is controlled by so few that it becomes unhealthy for the economy, and the disparity needs to be rectified.
Too many successful businesses have been built without having their financial hands held by Wall Street. I see nothing to convince me that the economy is going to collapse if we increase taxes a little on people who control hundreds and thousands of times the wealth that even upper middle class families might achieve. The super cooperative rich will be just fine. Stop worrying about them.
That’s silly dogma. People have been taking risks - well…forever - without regard to the taxes they might pay just in case they happen to become insanely wealthy.
J.P. Morgan is often labeled as a “robber baron,” a term used to describe powerful 19th-century industrialists and financiers who were perceived to have used unethical methods to amass their wealth 1 2 . Morgan’s influence was vast, spanning railroads, steel, electricity, and banking. He played a significant role in consolidating industries and creating monopolies, which led to accusations of exploiting workers and manipulating markets 1
There was no hoax
before Trump I don't recall 'alternate fax', hoax's, and LIES being so accepted, Buit since, it has rendered too many ignorant or misinformed, and this deformed our current wrong 'right' take on things taken, and the wealth gravitating to the upper upper class, a trend that is kicking our asz we watch the feeble minded never able to find it, plausible, that they have been played, due to what others have purposely missaid
Do you have an IRA or a pension?
There comes a point where so much wealth is controlled by so few that it becomes unhealthy for the economy, and the disparity needs to be rectified.
Unfortunately, there are always some who are more productive or talented than others. Many of them create a lot of jobs.
Too many successful businesses have been built without having their financial hands held by Wall Street. I see nothing to convince me that the economy is going to collapse if we increase taxes a little on people who control hundreds and thousands of times the wealth that even upper middle class families might achieve. The super cooperative rich will be just fine. Stop worrying about them.
The only thing that needs to be stopped is the justification of a Socialist $5 trillion dollar tax scheme.
That’s silly dogma.
That is not only sound economics, but it is morality.
And radical democrats are often labeled as "progressives." They are misnomers.
J.P. Morgan was an innovator who created the most influential financial institutions in the United States. As I pointed out above, he personally organized a group of bankers who pledged their own funds to stabilize the stock market and prevent bank failures. He also orchestrated an important merger that led to the formation of the United States Steel Corporation. At the time that corporation became vital to the nation's growth. Morgan's own company led the way in underwriting securities, which involved guaranteeing the sale of stocks and bonds issued by corporations. He was also a philanthropist. His donations supported the advancement of education and the arts in the United States.
Aside for teaching American children mainly about "slavery" and "colonialization," it may be time to teach our kids about free enterprise.
You are referring to tax deductions.
I was assuming you knew that wealth enables access to legal methods to reduce paying taxes.
Everyone is entitled to various tax deductions. As a matter of fact, 75% of Americans receive refunds each year.
Where's my refund? How to track tax return status through IRS (usatoday.com)
I am referring to clever navigation of laws which yield tax benefits but are only effective/practical/available if one has sufficient wealth.
Yes, Vic, there are tax deductions that are available to everyone and then there are loopholes available to a decreasing few based on wealth.
You are nuh-uh-ing this information.
The average taxpayer cannot afford financial advisors whose firms have access to complex instruments for avoiding / reducing taxation and expensive CPAs who know how to deal with these instruments. You will not see the average taxpayer involved in offshore accounts, myriad types of trusts, QSBS exclusions, depreciation from assets (e.g. real estate), etc. Or even using tax-deductible loans against a portfolio of properties to defer capital gain taxes while the properties increase in value.
In simple terms, the wealthier one is, the more access one has to complex instruments which exploit loopholes (intentional and unintentional) in tax law.
Closing loopholes only requires the will of congress.
Of course. If we had a responsible, altruistic Congress replete with actual statespersons our nation would be in substantially better shape.
That is a great dream, Vic, but dreaming does not change the current reality I have described.
Stop with that. Super rich hedge fund managers and the like are not productive or talented, and they aren’t ”creating jobs.”
Are all taxes socialist? Or just the ones on unfathomably wealthy people?
Exactly, what’s surprising is that so many more graduates go into sales, research or teaching assistants.
Yes, the courage to commit MATH and a President to sign it!
Two things have been proven through. Cutting taxes on the very rich and corporations doesn't grow government revenue and certainly will never reduce deficits. And, that wealth does not "Trickle Down" to the poor. Since 1980 wealth inequality grew to previously unimaginably unfair proportions. M'kay?
Is it? How do you figure?
How many poor and lower middle class students do the big investment firms like Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs in NYC recruit from state colleges in Midwestern farm states?
Coming from old money and have connections has no sway?
GTFOOH!
Those damn fool houses don’t know how much more they would make with DEI.
No, that is not true, though it does illustrate that the best jobs with the highest earning potential almost exclusively only go to those from wealth and influence. That without some efforts to be diverse (DEI) outsiders would never even be given chance. Only because of such efforts are a few exceptions ever made.
You mean they don't represent their constituents? How do they get re-elected?
A $5 trillion dollar tax on corporations and investment will simply drive business to countries that don't have high taxes.
Price controls will drive businesses to countries with cheap labor.
Didn't Nixon try price controls? We got lower prices and lost our manufacturing jobs.
An apathetic, poorly-informed electorate that votes on superficial factors such as party affiliation, name-recognition, single-issues, etc.
Just the ones on the filthy rich.
[deleted][✘]
That’s fine. We just ban them from doing business in the United States.
A thing like this can be made to work, if you give it a honest effort. But conservatives are far too eager to pretend nothing needs fixing whilst they grab their ankles for the super rich.
Excellent.
So awesome and so true.
That may be why those who don't even campaign get votes.
Nobody cares how Harris became the nominee anymore except Trump supporters who complain about everything in the hope that something will stick.
False claim.
You were talking about frivolous voters. The Harris website has zero policies listed.
Voting for Harris would be the epitome of frivolity.
I love the maximum compartmentalization that your posts display. All of the egregious acts of Trump are seemingly tucked into a tesseract and made to appear insignificant, all of the known evils that he has perpetrated reduced and stored neatly inside of the warped space bubble so that they seem smaller than the few unknowns of Harris.
Harris equals something new and I don't think that the people want to go back to "old" Trump, especially with all of his horrible baggage clinging to him.
Either Trump or Harris will be the next PotUS.
Trump is a traitor. His acts after his election loss prove the he is unfit to hold public office. He is not an option.
Harris-Walz is a positive, energetic, youthful team who (unlike Trump) will work for the American people, not for themselves.
I expect that since they are Ds and Harris is liberal that her policies will trend liberal. I will not agree with everything she does, but that is the price I will pay because the alternative is entirely unacceptable.
As for Trump, it is obvious what he is going to do. He will abuse the powers of the presidency to get vengeance on his enemies. He will extemporaneously act in his interests as situations present themselves. He is a loose-cannon, irresponsible, unpresidential, vindictive, a malignant narcissist and the most prolific liar in modern times. And he is the oldest presidential nominee in history with rambling speeches and bizarre tangents (sharks, Hannibal Lector, being better looking than Harris, ...) illustrating that his age is showing.
But you want this scoundrel to be PotUS and the best you can do is whine that Harris has not put forth details of her policies per your requirements. And if she did, all you would do is complain about them.
Focus on the problem. The problem is Trump. Do not enable a traitor access to the most powerful office on the planet.
There is no excuse to vote for Trump. The only excuses are fantastic, wishful thoughts of Trump as some kind of magical force.
Problem is, the big problems that would plague an incumbent do not exist. The economy is in very good shape, the stock market is breaking new records, inflation continues its downward trend, interest rates are coming down, prices are still falling, and the bit Trump talking point of illegal immigration is grossly exaggerated by Trump as is the progress he made on his 1,000 mile wall promise:
Per Pew, the number of illegals in the USA is now about 11 million. This is what matters — how many illegals are actually in the USA . This is less than when Obama was in office and below the maximum of 12.2 million during the Bush administration. Encounters dropped under Trump and then rose during Trump's last year and continued to rise under Biden.
But Trump keeps claiming that it was his wall that kept illegals from getting into our nation (rather than being turned away). He promised a 1,000 mile wall and wound up building less than 100 miles of new wall and fixing 373 miles of bad fencing:
Bottom line, Trump is perpetually full of shit and unfortunately he has a large cult who believe his lies. He will not magically fix our extant problems and our nation is currently in a good state. He has no special powers other than the ability to get people to believe his outrageous lies.
All they care about is Trump "owns the libs" and he hates "woke". As long as that is true he could shoot someone in the middle 5th avenue and not lose a vote.
As I see it, the Trump phenomenon shows that the majority of GOP voters are engaging in a team sport rather than rationally and responsibly doing what is best for the nation. They need their team to win ... even if that means electing Trump as PotUS.
MAGA are like the rabid Oklahoma Sooner fans who never attended a day of college for whom whether the Sooners win or not is the most important thing in their lives. It determines whether they are ecstatically happy or in depth of despair!
She has been part of the current radical administration for 1,400 days. Prior to that she said some very radical things, all of which her campaign claims that she has changed her mind on as an election nears.
Like how Trump now suddenly opposes a national ban on abortion?
The campaign is the only thing that has stated as such, not so much herself.
You see, you are looking at the neeeeeewwwwwwwwww Kamala. This one had nothing to do with the 1400 days of the Biden /old Kamala disaster.
Thing is, her supporters will fall for this sham because, well, most of them are not the brightest of the bunch.
Not long ago it was either Biden or Trump. In a very undemocratic intervention, it became Harris vs Trump.
Harris-Walz is a positive, energetic, youthful team who (unlike Trump) will work for the American people, not for themselves.
Harris-Walz is a progressive team trying to hide what they stand for, which will be a fourth term for the Obama/Biden/Harris combination which has been a poison pill for everything good about this country.
As for Trump, it is obvious what he is going to do.
Yes, exactly what he did in his first term: Put America first, allow American energy to grow, secure our borders, demand fair trade agreements which protect union workers and appoint constitutionalist judges and support local law enforcement.
He will abuse the powers of the presidency to get vengeance on his enemies.
I doubt that, though many of his enemies have broken and abused the law. I only wish I could have that job. Merrick Garland would be busy trying to defend himself on many fronts.
Focus on the problem.
Exactly.
When was Trump ever in favor of a national ban on abortion?
The base of her party knows what she stands for and that is what they'll vote for. It is the Trump haters and those low information voters who have her close in the polls at the current time. So much is at stake, we can only hope that the real Kamala makes an appearance through before the election.
It could be as early as Thursday night.
He wasn't—some just like trying to convince others that it is true. Campaign mis/dis information is all they have to ride on at this point.
And they will continue it in the same fashion they have done it in the past.
Only Trump supporters care that the Ds did not have a second primary.
Not everyone is ultra-conservative. Not everyone views anything done by a D as bad by definition and everything done by an R as good by definition.
The guy tried to steal the election with fraud, coercion, lying, and incitement! Instead of directly acting on the pandemic he spent months claiming that it was like the flu and would go away. He has demonstrated that he cares only about himself. To think that this guy would put America first is delusion.
This is his modus operandi.
That is what the left did via suppression of the Hunter laptop story, the changing of elections laws to get the indifferent democrat voters to vote and Mark Zuckerberg using money to influence state voting and a BS narrative by the media hanging the pandemic on Trump. Based on all that went on Donald Trump is well within his rights to cry FOUL!
You can list everything the Ds did wrong and even include your typical hyperbolic spin and you will not come close to the level of wrongdoings and abysmal character of Trump.
Trump is by far the worst nominee for a major party in US history.
That isn't everything they did.
I'd love to hear you admit that those things were done.
Maybe he had a right to cry "foul" as that is a subjective judgement in general terms as to whether he thought he was being treated fairly (he was), but he went far beyond that. He wanted to invalidate the votes of millions of people. He wanted state officials to go out of bounds of their duties in order to keep him in office. He held conspiratorial meetings with nut cases like Sydney Powell and Michael Flynn in the oval office. He lied, repeatedly and constantly about specific aspects of the 2020 vote count, proven wrong every single time. Trump cannot cite a single specific instance of a vote being stolen from him. Not one.
This is another fundamental failure ... the presumption that I do not recognize failures if done by Ds.
I am against Trump. I am against the current GOP since it is a cult that has (temporarily) destroyed the GOP that we used to have. And even though I dislike both parties, I recognize the need for a rational, organized GOP to counter the Ds (and vice-versa) since our dishonest politicians have effectively worked around the checks & balances in our constitution and all that is left is partisan checks.
Trump is a magnificently horrible nominee. It is irresponsible, irrational, and unpatriotic to vote for him.
And he'll have that right again with all the malfeasance and lawfare being used against him this time around.
Question: Do you think that NY conviction the left hung on him will survive the appeals process?
The presumption is based on you never speaking of the gross malfeasance of the party in power.
I am against Trump.
And what means are out of bounds in stopping him?
Then the presumption is based on my not buying your ridiculous partisan hyperbole.
I am confident today that he will be stopped by the voters.
I am fine with him being stopped by the law but the legal process has thus far shown to grant Trump deference that is well beyond what anyone else would have.
I am convinced that Trump supporters will never recognize Trump's wrongdoing and will always claim that any legal actions are without merit.
Those were FACTS you were given. Most Americans know them.
I am fine with him being stopped by the law
That law wasn't law. I'll put you down for BY ANY MEANS.
Have a good day.
Not serious so you are not taken seriously!
Why should TiG keep conversing with you?
The question is why I should talk to people who won't admit to certain facts.
Alrighty Then! With that I will rest my case.
I have found your comments to be typically based on hyperbole with a kernel of fact. The hyperbole is partisan. It is always D=bad, R=good. If you want me to take your comments seriously then you would need to pen comments that are indeed factual and logical sans partisan spin.
I can understand how people who think communists are taking over the country would want Trump if they thought that was the alternative. They used to call those people John Birchers and they thought JFK and LBJ were communists, not to mention MLK.
Obviously anyone who would consider voting for Trump has some very serious negative beliefs about the Ds. These beliefs are so profound that they believe it better to give the power of the US presidency to an irresponsible loose-cannon malignant narcissist traitor. To a scoundrel who is the only PotUS in our history to use fraud, coercion, lying, and incitement in an attempt to steal a US presidential election. The only PotUS who did not comply with the peaceful transfer of power. A proven con-man who is guaranteed to put himself above the nation.
Hard to imagine what kind of hell a Trump supporter has dreamed up to think voting for the worst (and oldest) nominee in US history is a better choice.
lol - lots of luck with that!
Your posts show an out of touch relationship with the real world, starting with your classification of the current administration as "radical".
If at first you don't succeed, analyze, adapt, and try again. Seems to be a pretty smart way to run a campaign.
BTW, how is the late, great Hannibal Lecter doing these days?
They'll be ready for him 'this time around' when he loses you mean? So, another 1/6 doesn't happen when he loses?
See 16.1.93
Alternative facts?
MAGA isn't even close to most.
‘Yes, exactly what he did in his first term: Put America first, allow American energy to grow, secure our borders, demand fair trade agreements which protect union workers and appoint constitutionalist judges and support local law enforcement’
And this is exactly what they are pissed about but can only cite Jan siiiiiiiiiiiixxx as their boogeyman to hate Trump
‘It could be as early as Thursday night.’
Taped, not live. Will probably be edited to make her look good. It’s gonna require a lot of editing to do that.
I think her handlers told her to bring along her running mate so he can pull her back when she goes off script or starts a word salad.
‘I have found your comments to be typically based on hyperbole with a kernel of fact. The hyperbole is partisan. It is always D=bad, R=good. If you want me to take your comments seriously then you would need to pen comments that are indeed factual and logical sans partisan spin.’
So you won’t admit that what he listed is Democratic wrongdoing.
Sounds like the exact same scenario when you constantly claimed we conservatives would not admit some of what Trump did was wrongdoing, even though we did over and over.
BOY O BOY have the tables turned
That is not the claim he made. He listed items that were 'the left' trying to steal the election. Not only were his claims hyperbole based on a kernel of fact, but they were not an attempt to steal the election.
People are not going to 'admit' to that which is simply not true.
this is from the post you have been refering to
How about explaining why you think those points are hyperbole because everything he has stated is true. They were actions taken to influence an election that could have very well gone the other way if said actions were never taken.
Donald Trump has no rights anymore, he forfeited them on Jan, 6, 2021. It is just all of the foolish people who cannot see it.
‘Donald Trump has no rights anymore, he forfeited them on Jan, 6, 2021’
For those that do not understand hyperbole, meet exhibit one.
He got a sponsor, so skip ahead to 1:40 ish if you don't wish to watch a commercial
Just from the picture it looks like your run of the mill TDS driven Trump hater who would rather live off the government teet than make something useful.
No thanks
That is some impressive presumption.
Thank you. I have never been wrong about them.
Wow. From the general tone of your commentary, I can tell that you have trouble distinguishing fact from fiction.
I wonder if you would care to elucidate on your process of divination?
It really is quite funny, and somebody thought that he was talented enough to sponsor him.
So what. I’m sure any leftist would sponsor a glass of water if there was a D taped to the glass.
Like I said above….I have never been wrong about my presumptions. This is nothing different.