A Steely Liz Cheney, at Harris’s Side, Calls It ‘Our Duty’ to Reject Trump
Category: News & Politics
Via: hallux • 3 months ago • 203 commentsBy: Erica L. Green and Katie Rogers - NYT
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
It was an exercise in unsubtle and unlikely campaign optics: a Democratic vice president who is running for the presidency. A Republican former congresswoman who is the daughter of a staunchly conservative vice president. A small city known as the birthplace of the Republican Party in the middle of a battleground state.
On Thursday, Vice President Kamala Harris and former Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming, the most prominent Republican to endorse her campaign, traveled to Ripon in central Wisconsin where meetings in 1854 helped form the Republican Party. Just a mile away from a one-room schoolhouse where those gatherings were held, the pair tore into former President Donald J. Trump for his role in igniting a riot at the Capitol, and they warned of the threat he poses to democracy should he return to power.
Ms. Cheney said that, in November, putting patriotism ahead of partisanship should not merely be an aspiration — “it is our duty.”
Her remarks, delivered with an air of somber restraint, were as much a public indictment of Mr. Trump as they were an endorsement of Ms. Harris. Calling his candidacy “a threat unlike any we have faced before,” she called on conservatives to join her in an “urgent cause” to elect Ms. Harris and to reject what she called the former president’s “depraved cruelty.”
“I know that she will be a president who will defend the rule of law,” Ms. Cheney said of Ms. Harris, “and I know that she will be a president who can inspire all of our children and, if I might say so, especially our little girls.”
The joint appearance was one of the starkest examples to date of how Ms. Harris has endeavored to pitch herself as a unifying president who values pragmatism over partisanship. Her overarching goal is to win over moderate and independent voters who will be crucial to delivering her a decisive victory.
The event took place at Ripon College, where hundreds of people gathered on a lawn near the campus’s main building, which was adorned with American flags and posters that read: “Country over party.” At several points in the program, the crowd cheered, “Thank you, Liz” and “Ka-ma-la.”
Both women spoke about the significance of the site where the Republican Party’s founding leaders first met, bonding over their opposition to slavery. “Liz Cheney stands in the finest traditions of its leaders,” Ms. Harris said.
The vice president said that Ms. Cheney’s endorsement held “special significance,” and that while the two politicians might not agree on much, they shared a love of country and democratic ideals. Repeating her promise to be a president for all Americans regardless of party, Ms. Harris said she had sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution six times in her career.
“The president of the United States must not look at our country through the narrow lens of ideology or petty partisanship or self-interest,” Ms. Harris said. “The president of the United States must not look at our country as an instrument for their own ambitions. Our nation is not some spoil to be won. The United States of America is the greatest idea humanity ever devised.”
She added, “And so, in the face of those who would endanger our magnificent experiment, people of every party must stand together.”
Ms. Harris’s campaign has usedMs. Cheney’s endorsement, and those of a stream ofother Republicans, in assailing Mr. Trump as a threat to the republic, and in blunting accusations by his campaign that the vice president is a “radical liberal.”
Mr. Trump responded in the early hours of Friday, writing on his social media site that Ms. Cheney was a “low IQ War Hawk” and that she and Ms. Harris were “a pathetic couple” who were “suffering gravely from Trump Derangement Syndrome.”
Steven Cheung, a Trump campaign spokesman, blasted the records of both women afterward. “The both of them are made for each other — proponents of endless wars, killers of Social Security, and enemies of American workers,” he said in a statement.
Ms. Harris’s campaign has soughtto recast her political image as a left-leaning Californianby downplaying or abandoning some of the progressive positions she held when she first ran for president in the 2020 race. During this campaign, she has branded herself a “pragmatist” and a “capitalist,” and has spoken more openly about issues that appeal to the conservative base, like gun ownership.She has also suggested that she would appoint a Republicanto her cabinet, if elected.
In a presidential race that may be won by razor-thin margins in November, Wisconsin appears to be a near tossup between Ms. Harris and Mr. Trump. President Biden won the state by only 20,600 votes in 2020, anda recent pollby The New York Times and Siena College showed Ms. Harris with 49 percent support among likely voters, versus Mr. Trump at 47 percent.
Ms. Harris’s decision to appear alongside Ms. Cheney, a Wisconsin native, signals that her campaign is hoping to appeal to Republican voters who have been repelled by Mr. Trump’s style of politics. The two women agree on little politically beyond their distaste for Mr. Trump. They had next to no relationship when they overlapped in Congress, though they did speak on the phone about Ms. Cheney’s decision to endorse the vice president.
Ms. Cheney was a onetime critic of Ms. Harris. In an August 2020 interview on Fox News, shortly after Mr. Biden chose her as his running mate, Ms. Cheney called Ms. Harris ’s voting record in the Senate “to the left of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.” She added, “It’s very clear, she is a radical liberal.”
But after the Capitol attack, Ms. Cheney set partisan labels aside. She became the top Republican on the House committee that investigated Mr. Trump’s role in the riot. Suddenly an outcast in her party,she later lost her seatto a Trump-backed challenger.
Ms. Cheney’s appearance for Ms. Harris on Thursday was also striking because of the timing: On Wednesday, a 165-page brief from the special counsel, Jack Smith,laid out new evidenceof how Mr. Trump tried to remain in power despite losing the 2020 election.
During her speech, Ms. Cheney brought up the fresh details, including Mr. Trump’s apparent nonchalance when he was implored to ensure the safety of his vice president, Mike Pence, whom rioters had threatened to hang on Jan. 6, 2021.
“So what?” the former president said, according to the brief.
Ms. Cheney told the crowd, “We have a responsibility, all of us, to remind people that our institutions don’t defend themselves.” She added, “We the people defend our institutions.”
Calling Mr. Trump “vindictive,” Ms. Cheney said “any person who would do these things can never be trusted with power.”
Ms. Cheney first said she planned to vote for Ms. Harris at a conference last month in North Carolina. It was a major step in a long turnabout for a staunchly conservative former lawmaker, who is pro-gun, anti-abortion and hawkish on national security issues.
Days later, her father, former Vice President Dick Cheney, said that he would also votefor Ms. Harris.
On Thursday, Ms. Cheney made clear that she had not strayed from her traditional, Republican bona fides. Her campaign work started at age 10, she said, when she helped seal envelopes for President Gerald Ford’s re-election campaign. She cast her first vote for a presidential race in 1984, she went on, and referred to herself as a Reagan Republican.
“I was a Republican even before Donald Trump started spray-tanning,” she jabbed.
Mr. Trump, for his part, held a rally on Thursday in Michigan, where Ms. Harris will campaign on Friday. During his speech, he continued to claim that he won the 2020 election.
Tags
Who is online
539 visitors
The shrews will not be tamed, those days are over.
I've never before witnessed such deafening silence coming from my republican relatives in an election year ...
Bask in it while it lasts.
Good, I hope that is a trend. The key is turnout and hopefully the Trump supporters and GOP partisans (who would never vote for a D) are unenthused.
The top priority is to keep Trump from securing the power of the presidency.
I kind of miss that inside stuff my cousin used to share with me. like the email that was circulated within the GOP insiders telling them not to share anything adverse about john mc cain they might have with anyone in the media. especially poignant to my cousin that went nose to nose with him in a past showing of will. my cousin prevailed.
I agree. current polling is useless and I've always preferred observing and deducing info from non-conventional indicators. I know I've mentioned this before, but it bears repeating. 4 years ago I drove a 3 mile section of beach on the gulf and there wasn't more than a 20' space between trump flags to be found. I recently drove that same 3 mile section just before I left for colorado and the number was less than 10 flags. same state, same beach, same crowd.
The concern is that since Republican voters are so enthralled by their hero. the fact that he is facing a possible defeat, and a defeat in Congress, could energize them to make sure they don't miss casting their ballots. As we can see even on this NT site, they are incorrigible. Even if Trump were to set fire to the White House and Capitol Building, they would still support him.
"Even if Trump were to set fire to the White House and Capitol Building, they would still support him."
He pretty much did, and they still do
trump is a personality magnet for gullible morons ...
The past decade is a prime example of precisely why Democrats need voted out of office. It's all been vindictive behavior because they lost an election to the FNG.
Oh boohoo, the FNG lost to the FOG and he's knitting faster than Madame DeFarge.
And where did I mention any of that?
Aw, such a cute comment!
FNG doesn't stand for fucking new guy?
Glad you liked it, now get lost.
That looks like the only part of my comment your understood. Now what does your comment have to do with the Democrats vindictive attitudes and lawfare we've seen since 2016?
Oh, wait, your trying to distract from that because you can't refute my statement.
Your mistake is having the hubris to think it's worthy of refutation, clean up your own troll shyte and we can discuss something you are capable of like the weather. (here's a hint, it's outside your window)
Liz Cheney is searching for relevance and auditioning for spot in a Harris administration. Maybe Cheney could be the US Ambassador to Palestine?
[✘]
Ah the old guilt by association tripe.
Cheney gives new meaning to the word RINO.
That she does, RINO is what the once reputable party has become.
Cheney represents what the GOP used to be. Trump supporters are RINO relative to the more traditional definition of 'Republican'. Reagan would be aghast that his party has nominated Trump.
And that's a good thing!
Let's not forget that Trump's father was a member of KKK. So if your heaping guilt from parent's actions...
Reagans, Bushes, Romneys and McCains...
Oh My!
Like the Cheneys, they won't vote Trump!
MAGA try to kill Mike Pence? Who Cares?
[deleted]
[✘] liz Cheney, campaigning for trumps reelection.
Clearly that was before Donald incited an attempted insurrection and Harris and the Biden administration DIDN'T "raise taxes, take away guns & health insurance, and explode the size and power of the federal gov’t". She had a change of heart because she finally saw through all the lies that have been pushed by the now Reich-wing Republican party.
Are you aware of the fact that Kamala Harris is herself a gun owner?
Its true . . .
After Donald Trump claimed during their presidential debate that she would "confiscate everybody's gun" if elected, Harris replied by reaffirming that she was a gun owner herself - like her running mate, Tim Walz.
"We’re not taking anyone’s guns away, so stop with the continuous lying about this stuff," she told Trump.
The following week, Harris added that she would be willing to use her gun if an intruder entered her home.
"If somebody breaks into my house, they're getting shot," she said during a livestreamed event with Oprah Winfrey.
Amazing that any patriotic Republican or GOP-leaning voter would not agree with patriotism/country over party, especially given how this principle was described by Liz Cheney in her speech:
[deleted][✘]
Liz suffers from the same thing so many on the left do. A hatred of Trump is the driving force of their life, over party, country and anything else. They are incapable of looking at anything without that bias and have no credibility.
A love of stupidity is the driving force in a lot of MAGA lives.
Sad that the desire to make America great is considered stupid by some. Then again it seems MAGA has no actual definition of who it includes.
America is already great and has been for a long long while, it's the button pushing 'Again' part that is stupid.
Add whiners to who MAGA includes.
Anyone that disagrees with the dems. Got it.
[✘]
And again a comment deriding those opposing Trump and ignoring that Harris is the only person standing in the way of a Trump presidency.
Those who attack efforts to prevent Trump are ipso facto supporting him.
Do you want a traitor who violated his oath of office and the CotUS to have the power of the presidency? If not, then why attack those seeking to stop him?
And when she saw what Trump did after the election loss her position on Trump changed.
Further, once she saw what Cannon and the SCotUS did, I suspect she might have revised her quoted position of 2020.
It is a good for people to change their positions based on current circumstances rather than dogmatically hold to prior beliefs that are wrong.
I call them as I see them. I would rather have integrity than be what I described in the comment.
Maybe you could respond to my comment instead of trying to make it about me
That doesn't change what she said about Harris or her concerns about the damage she will do to the structure of our government. This seems hard to grasp for many progressives, but some people believe the structural damage Harris will do to the country is worse than another 4 years of Trump (who they've seen as President) , and that selling out all your principles to stop Trump is a bad idea. Progressives don't seem to grasp that many non progressives believe having their principle enacted would be the best for the country, so supporting someone who will violate them would be bad for the country. Thus, opposing Harris, even if you don't like Trump, is in fact putting country first.
Well said
Integrity = not running interference for Trump
But it does when it comes to Vance and what he said about Trump ... I see.
This is maddening. Trump lost the 2020 election, and his term in office was almost entirely (like 98%) BEFORE Jan 6th 2021.
"We liked his term in office" is not a reason to vote a known traitor back in office. Trump wanted to and tried to subvert the 2020 election. If that is not disqualifying, why not? He sat and did nothing while the riot was going on. This is not speculation, and it will be testified to by numerous people at his trial. This is total dereliction of duty, and disqualifies him. People remembering him pre-Jan 6th should be ultimately a non factor.
An irrational fear of 'structural damage' is no excuse for giving a loose-cannon, vindictive, traitorous scoundrel the power of the presidency.
Amazing that anyone would even consider allowing Trump to be CiC of the most powerful armed force on the planet and hold the most powerful political office on the planet.
That is ridiculous
Is that all you have?
Do you actually believe that it is an act of integrity to vote for Trump?
[✘]
That is all I need. The comment is ridiculous
Put that right next to the irrational fear that a Trump presidency would be the end of democracy this time.
Now, I know most of our readers here are more than 4 years old, but it seems many just forgot that Trump was president, and if not for COVID, would still be president today.
They also keep screeching that a Trump presidency would bring the end to democracy, but lo and behold, democracy is still here 4 years after his term, so that just shows the irrational thought process demonstrated.
Many of them get upset when Trump brings up the 2020 election and says he needs to stop living in the past, but they are the same ones who want to bring up J6 (the past) and don't realize their hypocrisy.
Thing is, thinking Americans don't care about J6.
[✘]
He's too old for that, the question is who will he hire to pave the slippery road seeing that his history of knowing the 'best people' has been appalling.
I think some of his choices have been good. My issue is he refused to listen to them in too many instances
I don't know but you will find out in a little over 3 months or less.
Deflection. I did not make that point.
Here is the point I made:
Clearly you prefer to give a loose-cannon, vindictive, traitorous scoundrel the power of the presidency because of an irrational fear of 'damage' that a normal D presidency would inflict.
Thanks for letting me know but this is not about me.
That issue will be a constant, his is not the type of ego that diminishes with time.
Denying the clear implication of your comments.
I am sure it wont
It's a better act of integrity than voting for Harris.
The majority of Americans don't consider Trump to be a traitor or believe he could have stopped an unplanned and entirely spontaneous protest, since he was not in contact with any of them.[✘]
Again. Thanks for letting me know this too but it is not about me.
All nonsense. Trump WANTED the "insurrection" to succeed in delaying the electoral count, which is exactly why he did nothing to stop it. Your comments on this are disconnected to reality.
The facts make Trump a traitor, not what a bunch of misinformed people think.
I think the media helped with this because they counted on the weak minded to buy into their narrative that a few hundred knuckleheads almost took down democracy at trump's directive. If a few hundred could destroy democracy we are already screwed, with or without trump
And they were correct.
It was more than 1,000, many of whom are in jail or have already served time.
And many of those will have the charges dropped or expunged from their record
Still no actual threat to democracy no matter how many times those on the left say it.
Anyone who disagrees or tells him no, is OUT.
Yes he is and the only way those white supremacist thugs will get their charges dropped or expunged will be if the former 'president' traitor gets back into the White House.
No he isnt
I would never vote for anyone who doesn't put integrity and principles over party loyalty.
Yes he is
To a great many hard core liberal left Democrats, especially some here on NT, any non Democrats that do not agree with liberal left-wing ideology are all automatically MAGA rats by default. There is no middle ground.
Nope
Exactly. MAGA is the new racist, facist and nazi after they were overused so much they lost all meaning.
It’s the New Democrat normal. Attempt to demonize, delegitimize, dehumanize and minimalize your opponent via all means possible.
It’s childish and sophomoric but consider the source. Emotional, over sensitive sky screamers. Full tantrum babies really …..
Yup
"Make America Great Again" assumes that America was once great-- but is no longer great.
Which begs the question-- when was America truly great?
An intrepid reporter seeks answers-- so he interviews some Trump supporters:
WHEN WAS AMERICA GREAT?
Do you think Trump has a lot of integrity?
oh, the irony ...
opinions vary
lol
…. Oh the denial …..
....Along with the projection....
This is what Cheney and the democrats are supporting.
You are an American citizen who works your entire life, pays taxes to the government, you obey the law and through no fault of your own lose everything you have worked your entire life for due to a hurricane and the government gives you 750 dollars for your loss.
You sneak across the border, contributing nothing to this country and you are provided a 5000 debit card, rent assistance and food stamps to eat off of. This administration is fucked up in their priorities beyond compare.
what a foxtarded comment ...
Trump is a traitor who has blatantly and unabashedly violated the CotUS. Harris is a patriot who will uphold the CotUS.
Of course Harris will favor liberal policies. I prefer limited government, fiscal responsibility, etc. But this election needs to be won by the Democrat because Trump should never be given the power of the USA presidency.
It is Harris or Trump. By any standard of patriotism, nobody should vote for Trump and that means the best use of one's presidential vote in 2024 is for Harris.
If I were that person I would move to Canada.
I just happened to catch this inspiring speech on the radio in my car as she was giving it. I hope more people hear her message of country over partisanship. I also hope more people hear the details of Trump’s falseness and love of himself over country, which she laid out so eloquently.
Sounds like a message given by Joe the uniter. Right before he started slamming republicans (MAGA, Ultra MAGA, new and improved MAGA etc.) calling them a threat to democracy every chance he got.
Sounds like a boxed set left on a stoop for squirrels looking for their kin.
The first thing that come to mind was the Crazy Cat Woman from The Simpsons.
You know it's only a matter of minutes before his childish side comes out. It usually happens just before the dementia kicks in and he turns into a roomba wandering the stage.
Only one candidate suffers dementia...
The obese seventy eight year old one!
I wasn't talking about a candidate. But why let fact get in your way.
Right next to Joe that they left on the stoop after he was no longer useful
When you storm the Capitol, assault police officers, and threaten the lives of the Vice President and Congress - or encourage and enable others to do so - all to prevent the certification of election results, you have earned the title of “threat to democracy.” They brought that shit on themselves. People who behave so abominably do not have the right to whine about being labeled accurately.
Furthermore, there is a world of difference between criticizing someone for the acts I just summarized, and doing them.
Yet what they did never actually was a threat to our democracy and labeling it as such is hyperbole
How do you figure? Are you suggesting the cops should have just gone home? That the VP and Congress should have just gone about their business instead of evacuating? How far do you think that mob should have been allowed to proceed before it became a problem?
Do you actually believe a thousand people with a few guns could have overthrown the United States government?
Trump isnt charged with overthrowing the government, although that is what he tried to do.
There was never a threat to democracy
Nope, not really.
Trying to overthrow the US Government isn't a threat to democracy? Really?
So you agree that’s what they were trying to do, but they were outmatched? That is a poor argument that they were not a threat. A fire is a threat even if you have an extinguisher.
An effort had to be made to stop them, and to protect the elected representatives whose lives were in danger. A democratic process and its lawfully elected agents had to be defended - with force.
Defeating an adversary does not mean they were never a threat. Furthermore, the threat continues. Trump continues insisting the same bullshit he claimed on January 6. He has praised the rioters. Many expect he will pardon them if he is reelected. He has promised to prosecute those who opposed him by adhering to their legal duty.
As much as a gnat is a threat to an elephant.
See 9.1.15
By some counts, mosquitoes kill over a million people every year - to say nothing of how many animals they kill.
"Defeating an adversary does not mean they were never a threat. Furthermore, the threat continues. Trump continues insisting the same bullshit he claimed on January 6. He has praised the rioters. Many expect he will pardon them if he is reelected. He has promised to prosecute those who opposed him by adhering to their legal duty."
Yes, he has been inciting ever since he lost and continues to this day. I'm sick of it.
If Trump had managed to hold onto the Presidency, that would have been a clear defeat of the will of the voters and therefore a direct contravention of democracy. How much more of a threat to democracy does one have to be to get the Trump voters to understand?
The traitor said "Make them riot. Do it."
They understand perfectly. The point is that they approve. Trump cultists have made it clear they don't want democracy. For trump cultists MAGA means Make America Go Away.
The fevered dream of trump cultists.
Only in the minds of reactionary partisans.
That's what I'm referring to. Reactionaries, extreme right wingers, like trump cultists.
So, extreme left wingers aren't reactionary?....
Post edit, but the question still stands.
No. Not as the term is used in contemporary political discourse.
Now that's just funny.
Take it up with the political scientists.
Ha, sure...
No its not.
Maybe approve is a bit strong (or maybe not?). I think for a lot of the voters and supporters of Trump it is more a feeling of not really giving a shit what anyone thinks, so they agree with his attitude. Until he, for whatever the reason de-jure is, chucks them under the bus.
I think that it is closer to the truth to say that they think some humans are better than other humans.
What about Progressive partisans?
I think you mean as she was reading it. She does have a writer that knows how to push the buttons of those who will fall for the bullshit.
Yes, fancy words, logic and common sense!
MAGA cannot compete with that, so they lie.
Ahhh the kumbaya moment............I rest my case
The last democrat that exhibited those was killed in Texas.
That's a good start.
You know how you can pick out the dumbest person in a room. It’s usually the person telling you how smart they are.
Does she? What is that person’s name?
Many people in politics have writers. Their level of involvement in the composition varies. I’m confident you have zero knowledge of whether Cheney wrote the speech 100% on her own, maybe ran it by some folks, or whether someone else did most of the writing. Maybe you can explain why anyone should care, but I doubt it.
Which part of it was bullshit? Please be specific, quoting the speech, and supporting your claims with evidence - if you can. My hopes are not high, though. It has become SOP on the Right to declare everything they don’t like as “fake” or something similar.
Fucking A!
You haven't proven a case to rest.......
'I think you mean' - funny how some think they know what we're thinking
Obviously you're referring to the blithering idiot who said he is "like, very smart" and "a very stable genius".
Just in case anyone needs a reminder, see link:
Nah, I’m talking about all the self appointed liberal geniuses here. And there are many. Know what I mean?
You think trump is a genius. Hilarious!
It's the right wingers on here who proclaim what geniuses they are, ad nauseum. And there are many.
The only impression anyone takes away from your comment is "haters gotta hate".
Your words not mine. Weak sauce, very weak sauce indeed.
Lol. The projection at play in that comment is astronomical. Now that is funny. Yes, absolutely, unequivocally, hilarious.
Wow. The level of denial and profound deviation from normalcy in every aspect of that comment is deeply, darkly abnormal. Very disturbing to any normal observer. Beyond question sad and pathetic.
You know how you can pick out the dumbest person in a room. It’s usually the person telling you how smart they are.
You mean like this guy?
NOBODY KNOWS MORE ABOUT ______________ THAN I DO!
They think he's a genius. It's a fundamental tenet of their cult. And have you also noticed how many of his cultists brag about what geniuses they are, too? Especially the ones who are as dumb as rocks.
lol …. You gonna be here all weekend? No worries though, I never forget to tip my waiters, waitresses or bartenders …..
Yep, classic narcissist. Just like many politicians and NT members right here.
You’re the only one here using that description.
Strange.
Neither do I, but unlike you I actually tip them with money.
I couldn't describe your comments more accurately.
Adam Frankel
But what politician doesn't have a writer?
She certainly has changed her mind....................
Devastating for America is not that bad anymore. Hard to believe hatred of Trump can override everything else in people once considered to be intelligent.
But what about the hatred of various Democratic politicians? Is that also hard to believe Y/N?
Not nearly as prevalent as the total disdain many folks on the left have for people that don't drink the same koolaid
Who has not? The list even for only the living is 8.2 billion.
Do you think it is best to dogmatically hold to beliefs that have been proven wrong or to adjust one's beliefs in accordance with current information?
When Trump attempted to steal the 2020 election, that substantially affected Cheney's view of Trump. It should have substantially affected everyone's view of this traitor. It remains incredible (to me) that anyone would vote for someone who abused the office of the presidency by violating his oath of office and trashing the CotUS in a desperate attempt to disenfranchise the electorate so that he could stay in power after losing a fair election.
Do you honestly think that Cheney was wrong in her assumptions about Harris and that indeed they are no longer true? SMH
It is not Cheney's view of trump being discussed. It is Chaney's view of Harris
Looks like we are back to the "not Trump" reason for voting.......................
I truly believe it is just pure laziness to vote for someone simply to keep someone out of office.
When the person they vote for ends of being a disaster, like Biden/Harris, they have no one but themselves to blame.
They did it with biden and learned nothing from it so doubling down on harris is a no brainer
Makes one wonder if there is anyone bad enough where they would not vote for them even when running against Trump.
The article is about Cheney's view of Trump.
My guess is no one because the hatred for Trump is so great.
On that it is hard to say. Harris is liberal and Cheney is conservative so her position on Harris might be the same. But that is not what I was talking about. As usual, I must always requote myself to illustrate how you, et. al. ignore my words and substitute your own bullshit instead:
In very simple terms, the above notes that Cheney correctly changed her opinion of Trump after he engaged in the traitorous act of, first the first time in US history, attempting to steal a US presidential election and disenfranchise the electorate through fraud, coercion, lying, and incitement.
Biden alone makes this whole argument nonsense. He is, and this has been obvious for well over a year, completely incapable of exercising the powers of the Presidency. An independent counsel deposed him and said he lacked the mental wherewithal to be found criminally liable for his actions. How did the people shouting that Republicans put "party over country" respond?
By doubling down in his support. Calling videos lies. Telling people not to trust their own senses and claiming with a straight face that this shell of a man was capable of being President for another four years. If Biden's polls numbers hadn't tanked, they'd be making the same arguments right now. They'd be telling us that Biden being confused about what storm damage was being discussed last night is "perfectly normal." I'm fully confident that none of the Biden die hards on this site would put party over country and advocate voting for Trump (who is mentally competent to stand trial) over the damaged and incapable Biden.
Funny how the left wants to forget harris complicity in the biden is coherent lie
Jim and I have known each other for 3 presidencies and 2 blabber sites, we give each other a pass on stuff not worth losing a relationship over.
JFK Jr. wasn't a fair trade for Liz Cheney.
Parts of this thread were removed for meta.
Darn, meta kick starts my morning bowl of Mueslix.
But what about the assumptions that haven't changed. . .and are still true?
keeping trump out of the oval office is only the beginning of what needs to happen to him ...
That's a pretty stupid reason for voting for somebody.
Yep. Look where it got us the last 4 years......................
And, by her own admission, she will continue everything.
No, not after suffering through four years of Trump already!
On second thought, make that seventy eight years already...
Do you mean the last four years when the United States was leading the world economically post-Covid under Joe Biden?
Considering the US is doing great that sounds reasonable...
We are doing great. When you compare the US to N. Korea or Venezuela.
High gas prices, sure, but the Murphy station on my way to work has dropped from around 3 bucks to 2.72 in the last 2 weeks
Now I want to know why Kroger is limiting sales of paper products when we make most of those here in the states
No, compared to everywhere the United States is leading the world economically post-Covid. Happy days are here again!
Some people will believe anything.
Depending on the day, we have, in South Carolina where I work, gone from $3.29 down to $2.69 and now back up to $2.84 in the last month and a half.
You've got me except panic buying, like during Covid, cuz the push in the media was we were going to see shortages until the strike was over and people took it that EVERYTHING near and dear to us was going to be hard to get. Here is a shot from my local Food Lion Sunday.........
Only TP left was the more expensive stuff.
The expensive stuff is the best anyway
Presto! Ultra Soft
Charmin Ultra Soft. When you've had as many colonoscopies as I have you become an expert on toilet paper
Quilted Northern is what you see left on the shelf
Do you think that's a flaw in democracy? Do you actually believe people should be questioned about their reasons for their vote -- and if people think a reason is "stupid"-- they shouldn't be allowed to vote?
And who do you think should decide if someone else's reasons are "stupid"?
(Curious minds want to know!!!)
I think it's a pretty stupid reason to vote for somebody.
Sorry Liz. It is not up to you to tell me what my duty is
So if not Liz-- whose duty do you think it is to tell you how to vote?
Trump, Bannon, Jim Jordan? Ron DeSantis? Kevin McCarthy? Kari Lake?
None of the above-- or all of the above?
No one, I have a brain
Neo-Nazis join Lara Trump's boat parade in Jupiter Fla.
[✘]
"a lot of fine people ..."
Not like Liz is in any place to tell anybody anything.