Why Many Might Not Vote for Trump
As of June 2024 biden's approval rating is 37.6 %
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/bi … al-rating/
He is setting records for low presidential approval ratings. The way the liberals are acting, I can see the stress they are feeling about the upcoming election.And yet, Biden is leading Trump in the polls with A or B ratings. Polls that have been off by, on average 8 points against Democrats since Roe. It's not stress you sense, it's excitement to go vote against Trump again.
As of June 11, 2024, it is President Donald Trump leading.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/po … /national/
Valeant: They have lost their judgement. Take heart that they are a shrinking minority.
Something many can agree on...that democracy is the most important issue in 2024.A man that finds it more natural to lie than to tell the truth. And, Trump is stupid enough to actually tell people just how dumb he is...
See link below
https://www.yahoo.com/news/fact-check-t … 08533.htmlWondering what Trump meant when he said migrants are coming in and taking 'black jobs?' Clearly, Trump seems to mean that blacks work the low-income jobs in his view. Not sure he really understands how the black community is going to view that statement, coming from a white man.
Funny, Valeant, the same thought crossed my mind.
Why are undocumented migrants taking OUR jobs? It is not addressed to whites. Are we to presume that the kinds of work migrants do, plucking chickens, vegetables and fruit would be jobs that WE would resent them for taking?
It is divide and conquer and it does not work. If I have any issues with these folks it has nothing to do with my competing with them for jobs.
I have met just a handful of whites in my life that do not harbor these attitudes subconsciously, but they are around and Trump is definitely not one of them.
It is the soft bigotry of lowered expectations.It's funny, but when I first read that little bit I read it as taking jobs that blacks hold, not jobs reserved for blacks. And my immediate reaction was "Of course they are, along with the jobs of whites, Asians and everyone else!")
Perhaps because I don't view the world searching for racist things I can complaint about.I am going to KISS this...
During Trump's Administration how were things going for you in 2019?
Did you feel as if you had more money and felt good about the future?
Were you able to buy groceries or gas and not feel like you were punched in the gut from the cost?
Did you feel like WWIII was right around the corner or did things seem to be getting better?
All you really need to do is compare where things were for you in 2019 to where things are today... if you think things are better now, vote for Biden... if things seem worse now then clearly giving Biden more time to make things even worse is not the answer.And for the rest of us who actually have a memory, we can remember the absolute trainwreck that Biden inherited. We can understand why gas and groceries cost more thanks to a global pandemic that Trump's American isolationism allowed to spread from China.
All you really need to do is to compare today to 2020 and ask yourself if you are better now with someone who believes in science and bipartisan solutions. Shoot, even just compare the amount of things they were able to accomplish through legislation. Infrastructure, for example. Trump told us for four years that we needed it, but got so butthurt because he was impeached for blackmailing Ukraine, that he could not accomplish this. Biden didn't really have an issue finding solutions to the problem and many Republican politicians praise what he has accomplished in their own districts. This is the difference between a leader and a child in way over his head.
Certainly, Ken keeps trying to convince himself that Trump's presidential term only ran for three years. The rest of us can remember how his pulling scientists out of China, then ignoring the pandemic playbook he was left, as well as railing against the basic safety precautions added to the death toll. We can all remember his actions that contributed to many of the issues we're still dealing with today.
Clearly, his base wants to add this to the number of things, especially the many failures, they wish to rewrite about his presidency. For one, I will continue to throw the reality of those omissions right back in their snowflaky little faces whenever they try that BS.
"Perhaps because I don't view the world searching for racist things I can complaint about.
When it comes to MAGA, I don't have to search far.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/shaunharpe … lack-jobs/
While it may not do any good, how about educating yourself about an issue before sounding off?
Why not vote for Trump? I can give you more than 40 reasons - and they are all felonies.
Even Democrats don't believe the case should have been brought against President Donald Trump.
"Cuomo: Trump NY hush money case ‘should have never been brought’
Former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) suggested Friday that the New York hush money case against former President Trump was only brought forward because of his name and White House bid.
Cuomo, in an interview Friday on HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher,” argued that the case should have “never” been brought forward.
“If his name was not Donald Trump and if he wasn’t running for president … I’m the former AG of in New York, [and] I’m telling you that case would’ve never been brought.”
“That’s what is offensive to people, and it should be because if there’s anything left, it’s belief in the justice system,” he added.
Trump was found guilty late last month on all 34 counts of falsifying business records in relation to a payment to an adult film star during his 2016 campaign to buy her silence over an alleged past affair. Trump, who denies the affair, has pledged to appeal the case.
The case was brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg (D), who has been repeatedly accused by Trump and his allies of unfairly targeting him as the presumptive GOP prepares for a rematch against President Biden in November.
Trump’s guilty verdict was unanimous among the 12 jurors, though allies of the former president have tried to pour cold water on its legitimacy, pointing to what they believe was a biased judge and jury selection process.
Cuomo was elected as New York’s attorney general in 2007 and went on to serve as the state’s governor for 11 years. The former governor resigned from office in 2021 after an investigation into sexual harassment allegations and backlash over his COVID-19 pandemic polices. Cuomo has denied the accusations.
The former governor seemingly agreed that an issue exists within the justice system. He warned the Manhattan district attorney’s office against using the system to play politics.
“And you want to talk about a threat to democracy: When you have this country believing you’re playing politics with the justice system and you’re trying to put people in jail or convict them for political reasons, then we have a real problem,” Cuomo said Friday.
Trump currently has a razor-thin lead of 0.6 percentage points over President Biden, per The Hill/Decision Desk HQ’s national polling index.
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-ba … -new-york/
Here is the video of it.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/x1bqzPK7JU8For people who believe we are in a corrupt and unjust system, the fact that he has been persecuted is probably akin to a badge of honor to many people.
The people who feel that "the Swamp' is very real and very un-American are only going to be more supportive of him for it.
More and more people who deal with matters like this (I find this video fascinating) https://x.com/WallStreetApes/status/1824068842622275668 are going to have a hard time remaining in denial and supportive of such an unjust and corrupt system as we have seen in recent years.
Hard working Americans losing everything... while they watch non-Americans being handed so much. The Media no longer covers stories like this, but a growing number of people are being impacted by this Administration's generosity to those who are not American Citizens.
Donald Trump's Medal Of Honor Remarks Spark Anger From Veterans
Donald Trump's remark that the civilian Presidential Medal of Freedom is "better" than the Medal of Honor for military valor has sparked backlash from veterans.
The Republican presidential nominee made the statement on Thursday evening when praising Miriam Adelson, the widow of one of the GOP's former largest donors, Sheldon Adelson.
Miriam Adelson has continued to make substantial donations to Trump's campaigns, and was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2018.
"It's actually much better because everyone [who] gets the Congressional Medal of Honor, they're soldiers," Trump told supporters gathered at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey, on Thursday.
"They're either in very bad shape because they've been hit so many times by bullets or they're dead. She gets it, and she's a healthy, beautiful woman, and they're rated equal."
Military veterans took to social media to criticize Trump over the remarks.
Peter Henlein, an Army veteran, wrote: "F*ck this guy. He says the presidential medal of freedom he gave to one of his billionaire donors is better than the Medal of Honor, which is a the highest military award, given for heroism in battle, often posthumously. Disgusting."
Veterans for Responsible Leadership, a bipartisan super PAC, wrote that Trump thinks the Medal of Honor is "secondary to the medal he gives his billionaire funders. He doesn't care about our military or their sacrifices."
https://twitter.com/kamalahq/status/182 … ediaviewer
YuckDouble check the link. It says 'Page not found'.
"Hmm...this page doesn’t exist. Try searching for something else."
Also, how are you there in Puerto Rico. I hope you are safe and did not encounter devastation of any sort personally.Hi. Everything is ok, thanks! There was flooding and some minor issues.
Here
https://youtube.com/shorts/dUOhtEL4x5Q? … D1kZxCB-d-That is good news you made it through the storm without anything severe. It didn't look like the island itself fared well regarding power. It is good to see you have it.
Yes. That's what I meant by minor issues. Unfortunately, the power issues are business as usual here. Thats why more and more people are getting solar panels. (We do.)
But in general, it wasnt that bad. We're used to storms (and hurricanes).
Thanks!
IF this were true...there would be video of it.
So, I clicked on your link and I got a message it didn't exist.
So, if this did happen, post a link to a video or a story about it the press.I already did. Twice.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/dUOhtEL4x5Q
It is everywhere. Well, I guess not where you find your info.
3, 2, 1...
Another day, another voting bloc that Trump has alienated. This is shaping up to be the biggest blow out in US presidential history.
(But MAGA will keep making excuses for everything he says and does.)
Reminder:
On a European trip as president, Trump refused to go to a cemetery in France to honor American war dead, saying in Kelly’s presence, “Why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers.”
In the statement, Kelly is confirming, on the record, a number of details in a 2020 story in The Atlantic by editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg, including Trump turning to Kelly on Memorial Day 2017, as they stood among those killed in Afghanistan and Iraq in Section 60 at Arlington National Cemetery, and saying, “I don’t get it. What was in it for them?”
“What can I add that has not already been said?” Kelly said, when asked if he wanted to weigh in on his former boss in light of recent comments made by other former Trump officials. “A person that thinks those who defend their country in uniform, or are shot down or seriously wounded in combat, or spend years being tortured as POWs are all ‘suckers’ because ‘there is nothing in it for them.’ A person that did not want to be seen in the presence of military amputees because ‘it doesn’t look good for me.’ A person who demonstrated open contempt for a Gold Star family – for all Gold Star families – on TV during the 2016 campaign, and rants that our most precious heroes who gave their lives in America’s defense are ‘losers’ and wouldn’t visit their graves in France.
Trump of course said in front of a crowd in 2015 that former Vietnam POW Sen. John McCain, an Arizona Republican, was “not a war hero. He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured.”
Yup.
He abhors war, as his whole generation did.
He kept us out of war and would help to solve the world's war problems today if he were in office which he should be ...
and if he was, none of these wars would be going on.
Think about that.JD Vance was asked about the backlash during a campaign stop in Wisconsin to tout the support of local law enforcement and argued Trump was not attempting to denigrate veterans.
"I don’t think him complimenting and saying a nice word about a person who received a Medal of Freedom is in any way denigrating those who receive military honors,” he continued. “They are two different awards. And I think the president was saying some nice things about a person he liked, and that’s a totally reasonable thing to do.”
Let's see.
“That’s the highest award you can get as a civilian. It’s the equivalent of the congressional Medal of Honor, but civilian version,” Trump told attendees.
“It’s actually much better, because everyone who gets the congressional Medal of Honor, that’s soldiers, they’re either in very bad shape because they’ve been hit so many times by bullets, or they’re dead. She gets it, and she’s a healthy, beautiful woman,” Trump said with a chuckle, eliciting applause from the crowd. “And they’re rated equal.”Well, you're right. It did happen. President Donald Trump did say this.
I shared it with some of my fellow veterans. Most of us don't really care. It show his ignorance of military sacrifice.
So what? It won't make me or many other veterans less inclined to vote for President Donald Trump.
Why?
What's the alternative? I'm sure I'm not the only veteran who would be horrified at the incompetent individual the democrats have put forth for president. President Donald Trump has already been president for four years. We know him and the respect and support he has shown toward the military during his time as president.
The biden administration will forever be thought of as the creators of the Afghanistan withdraw debacle. harris was part of this. This is just one thing. I will not go into the absolute insane DEI things in the military.
The dems VP pick rubs many vets the wrong way. I don't care if he served for 24 years. You train to fight in a war. When the time came to use the 24 year investment the US had made in him to fight a war, he retired rather than report to a combat zone. He didn't even talk about it with his senior officers, he simply went around them. I can't tell you how much that disgusts me and many other veterans. Yes, there were many people who did things, sometimes crazy things, to get out of going to an active combat zone. None of them are running for vice president.
Then there is him claiming to be a Command Sergeant Major and not completing the course work. I doubt anyone outside the Army can understand how valued and respected a person is who holds this rank. It is not an easy thing to achieve. Nobody should claim to have achieved this rank unless they have completed everything associated with it.
So, yes, President Donald Trump is ignorant about the Medal of Honor, but, he is MUCH better than the alternative."Well, you're right. It did happen. President Donald Trump did say this.
I shared it with some of my fellow veterans. Most of us don't really care."
But most care about Walz serving 20 years, signing on for four more in reaction to 9/11 and then retiring months before deployment orders came to his unit??"But most care about Walz serving 20 years, signing on for four more in reaction to 9/11 and then retiring months before deployment orders came to his unit??"
Yes, the United States government spent money on him for 24 years to train and prepare him to fight in war. When it was his time to report to a combat zone, he retired instead of going. He left his men instead of leading them in combat. Civilians may never understand how disgusting many vets find this. I am one of them.
The more I read about it the more disgusting I find it. He didn't even speak with his senior officers about it. He filed his paperwork and they found out about it from the civilian equivalent of the HR department.
Then he has the nerve to talk about carrying weapons into combat. Talks about returning from Iraq. Things that make people who served there enraged. It is stolen valor and it's disgusting.
Then, he claims to be a Command Sergeant Major, when he is not. It takes a lot to be a Command Sergeant Major and he didn't finish all of it to keep the rank. He lied about his rank.
Trust me, his unit knew they were being deployed to Iraq long before the official orders came through. There is so much to do to prepare a unit the size of a battalion to deploy overseas. It is usually around 1,000 soldiers.
The logistics of moving men and equipment the size of a battalion can be very challenging. It requires quite a bit of planning.
They had to have been preparing for at least a year before deploying to Iraq. There are preliminary orders and then there are the official orders. When the official orders arrive, the unit needs to be pretty much ready to deploy at that time.
Stolen valor, leaving his unit when they were facing combat, yeah, he is a hard sell to respect.Where do you find that his deployment orders came before his announced retirement? All the information that I have seen, indicates that he retired months before the order for deployment was received.
Pretty sure the order to deploy was before Walz decided to retire.
See, HE isn't given an order for deployment. His UNIT is given an order to deploy. As I said before, from experience, to deploy to a combat takes many months of preparation. A unit the size of a battalion takes a long time to prepare to deploy. After 9/11 ALL Army Reserves and National Guard units were given standby orders. This meant any of those units could have been activated and deployed. He knew, as did the officers and senior enlisted people of his unit that deployment was an eventually.
What he did was called a "backdoor" retirement. He's not the only one to do it, he just the only one who did it and wants to be vice president of the United States.
Tim Walz accused of ‘backdoor’ retirement from military before deployment
National Guard says Kamala Harris’s running mate put in request to retire five months before his unit was told it was going to Iraq
"After the meeting, Mr Julin said Mr Walz asked for a one-on-one discussion and told his superior officer he would be running for Congress but had not been nominated yet.
In March or April of 2005, according to Mr Julin, they had another meeting at Camp Ripley, in which Mr Walz was present, during which they spoke in detail about the Iraq mission.
Mr Julin explained that Mr Walz then told him after that meeting that he had not been nominated and that he was “going forward with the battalion”.
While Mr Walz retired from the military in May, though Mr Julin says he was not informed until June 2005.
“The issue that had come out of this was, first of all, how did Tim Walz quit without discussing [it] with me – because I was his next level of leadership,” said Mr Julin.
“The other issue … was that the individual that approved this was two levels higher than myself in the enlisted corps and should have had Tim Walz come back to me and discuss why he was going forward or not going forward now after he already told me he was going forward.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/politics … -military/
Any one of these incidents used to be enough to end a political career forever. That was back when America was really great because we had some understanding of right and wrong. Any alternative to someone who does this much wrong on a regular basis is better. Those who don't see that either "vote their pocketbook" or have lost their judgement.
'Yes, there were many people who did things, sometimes crazy things, to get out of going to an active combat zone. None of them are running for vice president.'
No, they are running for President. Cadet Bonespurs. The hypocrisy in the above statement is off the charts.One big difference, President Donald Trump never claimed to be something in the military he wasn't.
Again, what is the alternative? harris is extremely unqualified to be president. President Donald Trump has four years of experience.Nice shift of the goalposts when your idol got called out for doing the same exact thing.
Unqualified? A US Senator and four-year Vice President doesn't have the qualifications? Coming from the party that elected a reality television show host, that's a pretty weird claim. But weird is what the party is now, right?
Reminder:
2019
“That was a big day, Medal of Honor. Nothing like the Medal of Honor,” Trump continued. “I wanted one, but they told me I don’t qualify, Woody. I said, ‘Can I give it to myself anyway?’ They said, ‘I don’t think that’s a good idea.’”Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), one of the nation’s largest and oldest veteran advocacy organizations, on Friday condemned former President Trump’s recent statement comparing the Medal of Honor to a presidential award for civilians, calling his remarks “asinine.”
“These asinine comments not only diminish the significance of our nation’s highest award for valor, but also crassly characterized the sacrifices of those who have risked their lives above and beyond the call of duty,” wrote VFW National Commander Al Lipphardt in a statement Friday.I agree. I believe and have heard it from other Vets.
Most Vets I know will still vote for President Donald Trump because the alternative is considered horrible.
Trump doesn't even know where he is...watch this clip of him telling a Pennsylvania crowd that he thinks he's in North Carolina.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xmysq6k_nJUYes, I was in for 10 years.
I know your husband is retired special forces.
I'm sure he knows all about what it means to be a Command Sergeant Major and why it is a terrible thing to claim you achieved that rank when you did not. I wonder how he feels about a man retiring rather than deploying with his unit into a combat zone.I thought that deployment thing was put to bed - that he retired long before any deployment orders were made or even planned.
It doesn't really matter. Many polls show most people don't care about it.
I know you served, Mike. You've earned your right to your opinion. No question.
My husband knows the timeline and is familiar with branches that are not active duty. He has other issues with Democrats! Yeah, it makes for an interesting marriage. Like he says, we agree on the important stuff.Mike and I have had our differences in regards to Ukraine.
For him it is very personal, he has strong ties to Ukraine, I do not. His primary concern is for Ukraine to win, mine is to avoid a new world war (too late) and nuclear escalation (these arguments won't matter then).
But we both recognize the damage this Administration has done, and how things will get significantly worse if it continues under Harris.
We cannot have weak leadership at this time, we cannot afford a President that cannot stand in front of other world leaders and come across as competent, capable... and even dangerous.
I have listened to Vance, I have researched is background, he is leaps and bounds better for the country than 8 years of Harris and Walz.
Vance will not be pushed around on the world stage... neither will Trump.
Harris and Walz will be abused by Putin and Xi and many others... they don't belong on the world stage, that will prove itself out in the debates, if they ever do them.Just watched Joe Biden speak at the DNC and predictably, he repeated the same old lies. I am particularly upset about the Charlottesville lie! He and Harris have nothing of substance and so they lie and they repeat the same old lies about Trump, counting on the way it affects people emotionally! It sickens me:
Although he had already issued a statement, two days after violence broke out in Charlottesville, VA {2017} President Trump made a speech and the following excerpt, was contained within that speech:
"I just met with FBI Director Christopher Wray and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, the Department of Justice has opened a civil rights investigation into the deadly car attack that killed one innocent American and wounded 20 others.
To anyone who acted criminally in this weekend’s racist violence, you will be held fully accountable.
Justice will be delivered.
As I said on Saturday, we condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence. It has no place in America and as I have said many times before, no matter the color of our skin, we all live under the same laws, we all salute the same great flag and we are all made by the same almighty God.
We must love each other, show affection for each other and unite together in condemnation of hatred, bigotry and violence. We must rediscover the bonds of love and loyalty that bring us together as Americans.
Racism is evil and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs; including the KKK, Neo Nazis, white supremacists and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans.
We are a nation founded on the truth, that all of us are created equal.
We are equal in the eyes of our creator, we are equal under the law and we are equal under our Constitution.
Those who spread violence in the name of bigotry strike at the very core of America.
Two days ago, a young American woman, Heather Heyer, was tragically killed. Her death fills us with grief and we send her family our thoughts, our prayers and our love. We also mourn the two Virginia state troopers who died in service to their community, their commonwealth and their country."That is all it is... lies.
In 2016 they took the PEOPLE's choice away from them... the voters wanted Sanders,... the Party wanted Clinton.
In 2020 it was the same thing, Sanders was crushing it, no one wanted Biden... so the Party forced everyone out and told them get behind Biden and they handed him the nomination... and then handed him the 2020 election.
In 2024... there was no Primary, they gave their voters no choice... and then the dumped Biden and told you Harris was the savior you were hoping for, no need to bother with what the voters wanted.
So there you have it... time to dispense with the facade of Democracy, of the people choosing their nominee or their President.
Why waste time listening to what they say... they have proven to be the enemy of American Citizens, willing to involve us in wars that could have been avoided and willing to allow an invasion of migrants that are put on government handouts... they aren't giving you a choice, they are TELLING you this is your nominee/President and you WILL support them or you will be targeted by FBI, IRS, and Party AGs in States like NY.
They have proven they hate the deplorables (American Citizens) if you can't see that, its a choice, the evidence is out there. Plenty of it.Well then, if that's the case...hopefully my HP peeps will visit me in prison, because I will not submit!
Give me Liberty or give me death!
Proud of the lies?
Proud of the adoration of abortion?
Proud of the coronation of Kamala?
All of the above?Proud that our candidate isn't a rapist.
Proud that she'll not try to steal an election if she loses.
Proud that she's currently not indicted for multiple crimes.
Proud that she hasn't cheated on any of her spouses.
Proud that she hasn't confused Nancy Pelosi with Nikki Haley.
Proud that she isn't a convicted felon.
So much to be proud of.Great quotes:
"... if you can't see that, its a choice, the evidence is out there. Plenty of it."
Ken.
"We are a nation founded on the truth, that all of us are created equal.
We are equal in the eyes of our creator, we are equal under the law and we are equal under our Constitution."
abwilliams
"Give me liberty or give me death!"
Patrick HenryI've had trouble getting my head around good people supporting Trump - after all that has happened.
But now, with so many who were on his staff, in his cabinet, who were in the room and saw with their own eyes who he is - how do you cancel all that out and still want to be identified with him?
There is no equivalency to him. No whataboutism comes close.
These are good people. I know them. I live with one of them. I gave birth to one of them. How is this possible?There is a massive difference between appearance and actions. A Jupiter sized planet.
How can you possibly support someone that has consistently lied about inflation, about the border, about crime? How can you support someone that has made every effort to violate our laws and refuses to do his job? That works every day to destroy what we have spent 200 years building? The answer appears to be that he (she) talks nice and doesn't raise feathers - the actions are set aside as irrelevant.
And THERE is the "why" Trump supporters support him. Personally I do not like the man and would very much prefer someone else...just not someone that is out to destroy our country, meaning the likes of Harris. I voted against Clinton, I voted against Biden, and I will likely vote against Harris. Nowhere in there is "I voted for Trump".Because they see what the other side is offering clearly... and realize that we can survive one arrogant ass like Trump.
What we cannot survive is a movement in disguise, whose ultimate goal is the "transformation" of America into something it was founded on opposing.
'How can you possibly support someone that has consistently lied about inflation, about the border, about crime? How can you support someone that has made every effort to violate our laws and refuses to do his job? That works every day to destroy what we have spent 200 years building?'
You just described Trump to a T.No... it was a moderate but accurate view on what has occurred during the last 4 years, as he meant.
Whoever is our next President will be faced dealing with:
War - World War - Russia, North Korea and Iran are the three nations we are at war against now, the number of nations aligning against us will grow, the war has crossed into Russia... far worse, Americans were part of that small incursion, and the damned idiots have given interviews that are all over the internet... nothing like Americans talking about their efforts WITHIN Russia... the response to this fruitless stunt is not going to be pretty.
Dr. Gilbert Doctorow : NATO Invades Russia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6s6k7r0lbs
Economic Hardships - I don't know how bad it will get, but it will be worse than anything we've ever lived through... much of it will depend a lot on who is running the country and how willing they are to tighten their belt on supporting wars, immigrants, and other rip-offs that citizens are paying for via inflation and taxation.
Oregon is now giving $30,000 for new home buyers. The only requirement?
You can't be an American citizen.
https://x.com/EndWokeness/status/1826660499360244031
I suppose with the Democrats running things, we can assume CBDC and a Social Credit system based on DEI will be rolled out regardless.
American CBDC and a Social Credit system based on DEI
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/UzYq9tl0peU
And then all the other topics like Transgender rights trumping Women's rights, and child sex changes and abortion are on the ballot as well.
Who do you want in control dealing with those issues?The usual fearmongering in the first two. You've been predicting an economic collapse for about ten years now. It'll be interesting to see if it happens in your lifetime.
It's not Oregon exactly giving the $30k, but a group funded by Oregon. And when they get challenged in court, that program will be found to be in violation of the law and have to include American citizens.
As for who I want in control of the issues, I'll take the party that doesn't inspire hate crime and acts of domestic terror against their own government and its citizens. The party that does not undermine the courts or elections with obvious lies. The party not led by a rapist and convicted felon. The party whose leader has never bankrupted a company or been found to use fraudulent business practices.
It's a pretty easy answer.My memory is good enough to remember ten years back, I was not talking about economic collapse 10 years ago, I still have some articles around from 5 and 10 years ago showing what I was talking about.
So that is one fabrication disproven... in truth I didn't start worrying about it until 2020 when I saw trillions being given away under the cover of dealing with the 'pandemic' ... trillions that went to Larry Fink's BlackRock. That was just a small red flag that something was wrong.
Anyways... here is an interesting take, not mine, but generally common:
https://x.com/shaneyyricch/status/1826427382947086365
Maybe ten years was long, it just feels that way because you include the economic fearmongering so often in your posts. And I've stopped opening the links you post. After doing a few, they were a waste of time.
Are my posts (links) a waste of time?
Some people enjoy them, I suppose it depends on if you have an open mind, or sense of humor (I admit I shift from the comical to the serious without much tell... leaving it to the reader to figure it out).Some people can go ahead. I just found the few I clicked in the past to be the usual far-right commenters distorting the truth by omitting damning information to their conclusions. It was easy to recognize how one could become radicalized by viewing such material though.
Interesting point.
Perhaps the people who ignore all discredited sources of information and treat what the likes of CNN or MSNBC put out as gospel are themselves radicalized?
So what are you saying you didn't or would not vote at all. But all your comments before
Say you would prefer Trump just my personal take on your comments. But honestly I am so glad I don't live in America especially if trump gets in.One reason might be that women have always been the majority demographic in America. It might just be time for us to be represented in the executive branch.
NOTE: Secretary Clinton got three million more votes but it still was not enough in our system.I agree, exactly why people should support Harris, she is a woman of color.
No other criteria need be considered really.I have zero doubt that she will collect millions of votes for that one reason.
Tens of millions.
Its been a pretty good plan... insert her as VP... dump the dumbass... have her run on essentially positive talking points "we can do it, we are united" with 90 days (less now) or so to go to the actual election.
Ride those good vibes and the desire so many Americans have to have their first woman President, to have change, to have hope.
No policy is really needed in today's day and age... she will get more votes on emotions and hope than she ever could get on policy.
Lets face it, this is not the age where the average voter is well informed or well educated on the political topics of the day.
Just watch some of the interviews they have at these college rallies and other political events... these people can't articulate a coherent and well thought out position on the matter they are there protesting about, let alone anything else of substance.Jordan Klepper often attends Trump rallies and exposes much the same thing. Both sides of the electorate might not be policy experts, but policy doesn't need to be the defining reasoning for their vote. It could be character and candidate traits such as honesty and the ability to work across the aisle that they see as important.
Asking that the electorate have the same policy chops that many of us in here have from researching the topics is not a requirement to exercise their rights. And that might not be a bad thing, because as we see in here, the prognosticating outcomes based on that research often tends to be inaccurate.
I have no doubt millions of people will vote Trump because he is a man and white.
You don't have to think to deeply that he is also a sexist and a racist.
No other criteria need to be considered really.
In fact, the last republican candidate to win the popular vote was Reagan's V.P., George H.W. Bush who lost re-election.
Chants of "USA" and "Bobby" break out as leaders from both the Democratic and Republican sides have united to challenge the oligarchy that has suppressed Americans for [decades].
https://x.com/VigilantFox/status/1827137160694124558
“For the past 16 months, Bobby has run an extraordinary campaign for president of the United States. I know because he also went after me a couple of times. I didn't like it, and I mean this sincerely.”
“Had he been allowed to enter the Democrat primary, he would have easily beaten Joe Biden, but they wouldn't let him in. They put up rules. I've never seen rules like, he had to have 65% of the vote in order to run. You know, little things like that.”
“His candidacy has inspired millions and millions of Americans, raised critical issues that have been too long ignored in this country, and brought together people from across the political spectrum in a positive campaign grounded in the American values of his father, Robert Kennedy, a great man, and his uncle, President John F. Kennedy.
“And I know that they are looking down right now, and they are very, very proud of Bobby. I'm proud of Bobby, you want to know the truth? And I don't think I've ever introduced anyone that got applause like he just got. I must tell you, I don't think it's true. I don't think I've ever introduced anybody. I got applause like that. Amazing.
“Soon after, I was. I can't even believe I have to say this. Nearly assassinated in Pennsylvania last month, Bobby called me to express his best wishes. He noticed firsthand the risks incurred by leaders who stand up to the corrupt political establishment. When you stand up, you bring on some trouble for yourself.
“But you have to do what's right. You have to do what's right for the country. I will tell you, we are both in this to do what's right for the country. That's one thing I can tell.”"But you have to do what's right. You have to do what's right for the country. I will tell you, we are both in this to do what's right for the country. That's one thing I can tell.”
It was electric and for the first time I believe we may have the numbers (if we all show up) that will make it "too big to rig". I hope so. I pray for that for the good of the country and for a bright future for my grandchildren.There's likely a reason that voters were going for RFK Jr. - they couldn't stand Trump but aligned with his anti-vax views. Like the voters that were going for Haley, many are just done with Trump. So, it remains to be seen how many will just 'take their ball and go home' versus how many will actually follow the RFK Jr. endorsement.
Do you think the unfair treatment of him during the primaries influenced RFK Jr's decision to back President Donald Trump? You have to admit the democrat primary was truly a sham. They got rid of biden, installed harris and ignored RFK Jr. and all of his followers. It wasn't something that was fair on any level. I believe democrats have better candidates than harris they could put forward.
I agree Mike. They shut RFK out in order to promote Biden. Then pushed Biden out, in order to install Harris. ???
They did not want a repeat of Sanders in 2016 and 2020... only this time with RFK Jr.
It really is as simple as that.
They can't get a majority in America to support their positions, their "transformation", their corruption and collusion with big $$$, so they lie.
They rig their primaries, prop a stooge up and say... here, vote for this person, they will bring you the Hope and Change you want and need.
They crush anyone within the Party not willing to toe the line, or sideline them, or ignore them (RFK Jr. ... Sanders... Gabbard) ... in the states they do control they have a 104% voter registration and Mail In Ballots, to ensure the rest.
Mississippi, 8 other states, sue Biden administration for get-out-the-vote executive order
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol … 794191007/
Republican National Committee sues Michigan over voter rolls
Mar 14, 2024 · The RNC claims that Michigan's active-voter registration rates far exceed the nation's average and are in fact "impossibly high" in some counties.
https://www.wzzm13.com/article/news/pol … 7bdcaf4a84
2 days ago · TEXAS - The Texas Attorney General's Office has opened an investigation after receiving reports that organizations operating in Texas may be illegally registering noncitizens to vote .
https://www.fox26houston.com/news/texas … gistration
LaRose refers evidence of alleged non-citizen voter registrations
https://highlandcountypress.com/headlin … #gsc.tab=0
They do everything they can to ensure the election is not decided by American Citizens. Every trick in the book.A sham? Biden is an incumbent and chose to run for re-election. Name one party that did not support an incumbent over any challengers. It's probably very rare. RFK Jr. has more policies that align with the GOP than with Democrats. Between Biden being an incumbent and RFK's campaign a clear assister for Trump's, it's not surprising Democrats wanted no part of him.
And 'they' didn't get rid of Biden. Biden got rid of himself. Harris is in the right place at the right time as the best option to replace him.Yes, a sham. How many millions of people voted for Biden to be their candidate...to have the party remove Biden and turn their votes to Harris?
And Democrats talk of Trump killing democracy! What the party did with Clinton was deplorable, but this makes that look like child's play.However, harris has never received a single democrat primary vote for president. Yes, they got rid of biden. He was determined to represent the democrat party, until his disastrous debate. It clearly revealed his significant cognitive decline. biden kept on saying he wasn't going to leave. They didn't care about the poll numbers. Then, the huge donors to the democrat part began to leave. When the money was impacted, that is when they spoke to him and all of a sudden he dropped out of the race. Prior to that he fully intended to continue to continue to run for office.
'Harris has never received a single democrat primary vote for president.' Because she wasn't running for president during this primary and honestly, who cares about 2020. And there has never been a candidate who won a primary and then stepped away after the primaries had finished.
Your claim about 'they got rid of Biden' is as accurate as your former claims that Trump won in 2020. There is just not proof of either. Yes, they spoke to Biden, but the choice was always his on whether to continue on or bow out. The right cannot deny that Biden, an experienced politician, might have just seen the writing on the wall and did what was best for the country and his party. Well, the right can, because we have seen the denial of more obvious things from the right in recent years.As I said, when the money started to go away, Joe had to go.
"Why Biden finally quit
The Saturday night decision that ended Biden’s reelection campaign.
For 23 days, President Joe Biden insisted on pushing forward with his reelection bid in the face of calls from Democratic lawmakers and donors for him to step aside.
And then, almost on a dime, things changed.
Early Saturday, Biden told senior aides it was “full steam ahead” for the campaign. But by later that evening, he had changed his mind following a long discussion with his two closest aides.
Steve Ricchetti, who’s been with Biden since his days in the Senate, drove to see the president at his house on the Delaware shore on Friday. Mike Donilon arrived on Saturday. The two men, both of whom had been by Biden’s side during key decisions about whether to seek the presidency in 2016 and 2020, sat at a distance from the president, still testing positive for Covid, and presented damning new information in a meeting that would hasten the end of Biden’s political career.
In addition to presenting new concerns from lawmakers and updates on a fundraising operation that had slowed considerably, they carried the campaign’s own polls, which came back this week and showed his path to victory in November was gone, according to five people familiar with the matter, who, like others interviewed for this article, were granted anonymity to discuss private conversations. Biden asked several questions during the exchange."
The bigger question is why they ignored his cognitive decline for so long. It was painfully OBVIOUS to Americans and news agencies around the world. The democrat party STILL, let this cognitively declining individual participate in a primary. They should have talked to him long before the primary.
I have to ask the question if the democrat party actually believed their own deluded thinking that there was nothing wrong with joe biden. It took a debate to show the entire world how he was in bad shape. This didn't happen over night. It was something pretty cold done by the democrats to an elderly man, as well as the country.
The democrats didn't care about his health or well-being. They only cared about using him no matter what his cognitive decline.
What a shame.It says a lot about the people making the decisions, that they allowed an obviously failing aged man take those trips to Italy and France to make a spectacle of himself for all the world leaders to see, in the past year.
I believe it was always in the cards, they were propping him up, they were able to get over on the Democrat's voters who wanted a Primary.
They would not have been able to get away with having no primary if they admitted he was incompetent in 2023. They would have had to put Harris forward to compete against RFK Jr. and others.
The Party wanted nothing to do with the voters having an opportunity to choose... the voters failed them in 2016 and 2020... both times the voters were choosing Sanders over the chosen Party nominee.
They weren't going to give the voters an opportunity to do so again... Biden was so unpopular by 2023 that just about anyone could have beaten him in a Primary.
There is one thing I like about this, after Harris is handed the reigns in January I expect the 'Hounds of Hell' are going to be unleashed on Trump and his most ardent supporters... including the likes of Musk, confiscating and seizing everything they own, dumping them in jail.
Dems have been stating for three years now that is the threat of what will happen if Trump gets elected... I notice the things they fearmonger that Trump will do, is indeed what they DO do.
Like when in 2015-2016 they fearmongered over and over that Trump would start WWIII.
All Trump did was have the most peaceful term of any president in decades.
It was the Biden Administration that has coaxed WWIII into existence.
Now they are fearmongering that Trump will be rounding his opposition up, and becoming a dictator.
Well, lets just say... I expect trends to continue.
But the good thing about that is we will have no more serious divisiveness in America... it will literally be illegalized, there will be censorship just like the UK has on speech and internet activities.
Opposition to the Party will be silenced and stripped of wealth and power, what went on in NY Courts against Trump (and others) is the dry run for what will become commonplace against those trying to stem the tide of 'transformation'.
The Establishment will be stronger than ever... it will use the escalating conflicts worldwide to be far more draconian that they would have been able to get away with even 20 years ago.So, are the democrats delusional, evil or both?
Things are so murky Mike you can't tell one from the other.
Government money goes to NGOs the UN and other entities that do not put America the Nation or American citizens first.
Those NGOs the UN and other entities then put pressure on Companies, Media, and our Politicians to do things that are not in the best interests of America the Nation or its citizens.
Corporations and International Organizations and other powerful entities put pressure, lobby, or otherwise gain the favor of politicians in Congress and throughout DC.
Then there is the power of the Pentagon and MIC, interwoven with the NSA, CIA and FBI... none of the positions held within any of these agencies are elected, they are all selected and can be lifelong positions.
Then there are external outside forces, like the CCP and Russia.
Then there is the fact that our Universities have been taken over by Socialism, Social Justice, Post-Post-Modern ideology that has helped program the minds of millions of Americans.
So... you tell me?
Every thing you said here is true - as far as we know.
Democrats might have bent the rules - OH NO! Republicans have never done that - as long as you don't count absconding with two Supreme Court seats (if not three)!
'The bigger question is why they ignored his cognitive decline for so long. It was painfully OBVIOUS to Americans and news agencies around the world. The democrat party STILL, let this cognitively declining individual participate in a primary. They should have talked to him long before the primary. I have to ask the question if the democrat party actually believed their own deluded thinking that there was nothing wrong with joe biden. It took a debate to show the entire world how he was in bad shape. This didn't happen over night. It was something pretty cold done by the democrats to an elderly man, as well as the country.
The democrats didn't care about his health or well-being. They only cared about using him no matter what his cognitive decline. What a shame.'
Not necessarily ignored, just not a decider when his opponent was also showing the same signs. And as the current president, he had earned the right to give it a go. If he thought he was up to it, and holding his own in multiple primetime moments like the state of the union addresses, he deserved the benefit of the doubt.
And many people were concerned about him being the nominee, but he had beaten Trump once before, Trump had been showing the same signs of age-related memory gaffes, and Biden's allies were still on board. It took the debate to cause the support to wane and reality to set in for Biden. It's not a shame to allow Biden to make the right choice, one that puts country ahead of himself. It'll only add to his legacy. It's a choice that Trump will not make, despite the country clearly turning against him now for many of the same reasons that they turned against Biden. The country is ready for someone other than either of these two. The real shame is that the Republican Party doesn't have the backbone to confront Trump about this reality, nor would Trump do the right thing and step aside for the next generation of GOP candidates." his opponent was also showing the same signs"
I guess we watched different debates. Biden was clearly experiencing cognitive decline. It was made real as the whole world was able to see it for themselves.
The ONLY reason the democrats removed biden was because their big doners were pulling out. That's it. If the doners were onboard with biden, he'd still be in the race.Trump did fine in the debate, spewing his usual lies about reality. Nothing out of the ordinary. But there have been multiple senior moments like when he couldn't discern between Nancy Pelosi and Nikki Haley during the primary as one example.
And it wasn't just the donors* that were leaving Biden, it was the voters as well. That was the bigger issue since Biden was sitting on so much cash in his coffers and only three months left in the election. When the voters started jumping ship, and the pathway to victory for Biden ended, the leaders of the party laid out that reality for Biden. And then Biden chose to leave the race - he was not removed.
Question - if you really believe that Biden was removed, why did they let him speak at the Convention? If he was 'forced out' as the right claims, wouldn't he likely have had an axe to grind and could not have been trusted in that situation? From a logic standpoint, the forced out and let him speak at the convention themes do not mesh at all.
Sort of like Biden is a criminal mastermind who stole the 2020 election by conspiring with multiple GOP Attorney Generals, all from his basement - and during the 2020 election, Biden is suffering from dementia. Far-right conspiracies usually lack a lot in the logic department. The 'forced out' theme is just the latest that we have seen."he was not removed"
We'll disagree on this one.
biden suffers from serious cognitive decline. Those in the democrat party knew way before this debate he had serious health issues. This much was clear to the world. The democrat party was just delusional about the reality of biden. They let it go too far and he shouldn't have been let to seek another term. 81-years-old and suffering serious cognitive decline. This is the best the democrats have?
Now, they're running one of the most unpopular vice presidents to ever hold the office. But, the popaganda mainstream media is trying to give her a makeover. Denying things she said, when she was recorded on video saying them. She has had so many recent changes of views on things.
All of the problems democrats have had with their primary they brought on themselves. They deserve everything they're experiencing right now.'They deserve everything they're experiencing right now.'
Well, that we can agree on. And what the Democrats are experiencing is excitement, a massive jump in the polls, record fundraising, and tons of volunteers for someone the party is excited to vote for - instead of settling for a stubborn incumbent who can't realize his time has passed. We'll leave that feeling to the GOP and watch them hemorrhage voters who can't bring themselves to vote for a mentally-declining senior citizen with massive corruption issues.
And the thing is, it's not a party's decision to decide who runs and who doesn't. We can agree that Biden shouldn't have run in the first place, but I blame Biden more than the party. The party just stood behind him as they always do with an incumbent. And they went along with his endorsement because it is the logical choice - a former US Senator and Vice President who already had access to the campaign funding because she was already on the ticket.
You think that we have problems. I disagree with you there. Our party can now fight the democracy fight with a former prosecutor. We can fight the body autonomy fight with a woman leading the way. We can fight the mental-fitness fight with someone who does not confuse Nancy Pelosi with Nikki Haley.
The Democrats are united with Harris. We have a candidate Independents can now get behind and never-trumpers can feel comfortable with (maybe not on policy, but certainly on character). it appears that the GOP is the one with the problems now.If things are so great...why are so many democrats now supporting President Donald Trump?
RFK Jr., Tulsi Gabbard just to name two of them and they're big names.
What the democrat don't have is a candidate who is confident in her ideas enough to do interviews with the press or hold a press conference.
democrats have an illusion of a candidate...not a real candidate who can defend positions on issues to the American public. She is all smoke and mirrors.100%
And they only need to keep the act going for 70 more days... after that the illusion can wear off, it will be too late for America to wake up to reality.harris refuses to own the past 3 1/2 years.
Skynews in Australia did a good story on this situation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkYCKsyBcNoTulsi Gabbard and RFK Jr. have aligned with Trump.
If you have paid any attention to my posts at all, you know that of any politician, Gabbard has my support and trust more than any other.
Not many people will torpedo their political careers to say and do what it right, she has worlds more credibility than any of the swamp creatures that have existed in DC for decades screwing over the American people for profit and power.Gabbard is a very nice endorsement, no doubt, but I have to give it to RFK...a Kennedy endorsing the Republican candidate!? His sister has disowned him. Sad really that a freakin' political party has that much power over people!
I would argue neither RFK or Gabbard have been Democrats for a long time now. They aren't big names in our party at all.
Meanwhile, you have Kinzinger, Duncan, Luttig, Weld, Whitman, and just recently in an unprecedented move, 238 Republicans who previously worked for former President George W. Bush, the late Sen. John McCain, and Sen. Mitt Romney have endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris for president.
And you listed one former Democratic member of Congress who is endorsing Trump. Here is the list of former GOP members of Congress endorsing Harris:
Rod Chandler of Washington
Tom Coleman of Missouri
Dave Emery of Maine
Wayne Gilchrest of Maryland
Jim Greenwood of Pennsylvania
John LeBoutillier of New York
Susan Molinari of New York
Jack Quinn of New York
Denver Riggleman of Virginia
Claudine Schneider of Rhode Island
Christopher Shays of Connecticut
Peter Smith of Vermont
Alan Steelman of Texas
David Trott of Michigan
Joe Walsh of Illinois
So, that's 16 to 1, when you count Kinzinger in the group.
And Harris can easily defend positions like freedom from the government going into a woman's doctor's office or democracy. Those questions are easy.If it's so easy for harris to defend her position on issues, why doesn't she?
Why is harris so afraid to speak to the American people through the press?
I think the emphasis on the people you listed should be on "former." The people you listed either didn't run for reelection because of a lack of support or were voted out. That goes double for Kinzinger.
Romney didn't run for reelection to the senate because he couldn't win. He didn't have the support of the Republican party. McCain, always considered a RINO. George Bush has NO power in the Republican party. So, not surprised by their STAFF supporting harris.
I do believe a person who was running for president for the democrat party and getting votes turning and endorsing President Donald Trump is incredible. When you add the Kennedy name and legacy with the democrat party, it's huge.
Tulsi Gabbard is another big name democrat to turn to President Donald Trump.Because she is speaking to the American people through her successful rallies in the key states. She's only been the nominee for a month, and in that time, she had to select a running mate and participate in a convention. There have been pressing issues than sitting down with the press.
And for us on the left, here is her main policy:
As for Gabbard and RFK, the only people who think of them as Democrats these days are the right. The entire Kennedy family have come out against him. McCain was the party nominee in 2008 and Romney in 2012. They aren't RINO's to millions of Republicans. The real RINO's are the Trump supporters, as it's the MAGA party now and not the Republican Party."Because she is speaking to the American people through her successful rallies in the key states."
She is lost without a teleprompter.
harris can't talk to reporters or do interviews.
What is to be expected from one of the most unpopular vice presidents since Dan Quayle?That PIC is a brilliant retort...
I don't buy it, but in the absence of policy being put forth a simplistic push back like that might just work on many voters.
How did the LATE McCain endorse Harris?
Why would the guy (Bush) that gave us the WMD lie and 20+ years of war in Afghanistan and Iraq endorsing Harris be considered a good thing?
And Romney... well, he is pretty much always been an unusual guy... former Mass Governor who lives in Utah and all. No real surprise. Poor guy, disliked by the Dems except when he is convenient to drag out for stunts like this, and disliked by his own Party and his own people.What I wrote: ...in an unprecedented move, 238 Republicans who previously worked for former President George W. Bush, the late Sen. John McCain, and Sen. Mitt Romney have endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris for president.
Reading. It's not for everyone.So... they didn't endorse Harris... some of their lackeys do?
So... people with little or no noteworthiness, typical DC lifers perhaps?
Swamp creatures supporting the swamp in other words?
I'm not sure it wasn't all part of the master plan. Maybe I'm just getting too cynical. But it sure worked out well for Democrats, didn't it?
Here's a thought...
Since Biden is no longer seeking re-election, and Biden is Garland's boss, is there still a conflict of interest for Garland? Couldn't he just refile the case in Florida with anyone from the DOJ, especially since it was never tried and double jeopardy does not attach."... a stubborn incumbent who can't realize his time has passed."
and did you appreciate him when he was in office?
Can he bring peace and prosperity a second time?
Many have hope that he can, based on very sound policies. What else do they have, knowing that the Left has been taken over by those who would turn us into their slaves?
They offer hope, change and Joy-Joy. Let's follow them gleefully over the cliff into the ocean:
The cold, cold ocean of Marxism.
Those who support The Left at this point do not appreciate what the Constitution of the United States holds for us.
"We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."The New York Times is reporting that in his new book, At War With Ourselves, former National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster wrote that Trump was often outmaneuvered by world leaders who used flattery to take advantage of him. This was particularly true with Russian President Vladimir Putin. In 2018, McMaster described how he once saw Trump writing a complimentary letter to Putin to go with a copy of a New York Post article in which he called Trump a "good listener" while criticizing the American political system.
"Like a child with his Christmas wish list, the leader of the free world asked McMaster to send it to the Kremlin. It was especially bad timing: Evidence was coming to light that Putin had directed an assassination on British soil," the Times' Nicolas Niarchos wrote in his review of the book. "McMaster did not forward the note, later explaining to an infuriated Trump that his letter would 'reinforce the narrative that you are somehow in the Kremlin’s pocket.'"
McMaster wrote that foreign leaders treated the former president like a "chump" in their various interactions with him. During a 2017 trip across Asia, the former national security advisor recalled how he warned his boss to not let Chinese President Xi Jinping trick him into agreeing with policies that would benefit China and/or harm the U.S. or its allies. However, Trump wound up agreeing with Xi that military exercises in South Korea were a "waste of time" and that China had a case to annex Japanese territory.
"[Xi] ate our lunch," McMaster wrote in a note to then-White House chief of staff John Kelly.
"Trump’s anxieties and insecurities rendered him vulnerable," McMaster wrote in the book.
This from those that served in his administration. Sorry, but I'm sticking with someone that Russia and China cannot manipulate.Well, that is one person's opinion.
The opinion of a person in need of selling a book he's written.
John Bolton wrote even worse things about President Donald Trump in his book.
When you want to sell books you must have in it things people want to read. This is what the left wants to read. He's playing to the market.And who is that exactly?
Biden, who single handedly, in under 4 years, got two allies to shift allegiance over to China (UAE and Saudi) and who pushed Russia into their arms?
Harris, who is so comfortable handling facts and conflict that she hasn't made a single appearance on any News show where facts or conflict may be an issue?
There may be plenty of articles and books that may be hit pieces on Trump... no shock there.
What is important is that TWO people of character... TWO prominent people who have shown they are willing to stand up and fight for what is best for Americans have sided with Trump.
Tulsi Gabbard and RFK Jr.
That is worth more than a mountain's worth of names of suck-ups and corrupt insiders that are siding with the establishment shill.Yeah, it's been a general theme that the people that worked for Trump thought he was a disaster internationally and one of the dumbest men on the planet.
RFK Jr. is hardly prominent - an outcast to his family and an anti-vax conspiracy nut job that we Dems think is a joke. Gabbard just seems bitter that she wasn't handed the nomination, so she decided to leave the party and spend the rest of her life bashing it.
And what these mountains of GOP endorsements for Harris are doing is giving Not-Trump Republicans a permission structure to vote for her. All those Nikki Haley voters that continued to vote for her in the primaries up to six weeks after she left the race - anywhere from 10-20% of the GOP - can feel good about voting for Harris when so many other Republicans are doing the same.
And Conservative Geoff Duncan put it best for this group of people:
“If Republicans are being intellectually honest with ourselves, our party is not civil or conservative. It’s chaotic and crazy. And the only thing left to do is dump Trump. These days our party acts more like a cult, a cult worshiping a felonious thug. Let me be clear to my Republican friends at home: If you vote for Kamala Harris in 2024 you’re not a Democrat, you’re a patriot.”Valeant you are a smart guy, you do yourself a disservice when you denigrate Gabbard in a way that is so obviously false.
Gabbard was tossed out of the Democratic Party for directly confronting Harris and Biden with their policies and their actions (stating facts) and most importantly NOT being a warmonger and NOT supporting the American Hegemony efforts on the global stage and NOT wanting war.Similar sentiment was espoused prior to 1776 and the Declaration of Independence.
There were many people in support of the King and staying as colonies of the UK.
There are many today willing to throw away their freedoms and liberties in support of the 'transformation' that America is undergoing today.
The motivations for those in the public eye to choose Harris is understandable, at best they will canceled if they do not, at worst they will be prosecuted and their livelihoods, their assets and their freedom will be forfeit if they do not and Harris wins.
That has been the messaging of the last four years... conform or go to jail, whether you are the actual former President or whether you are a former mayor of NY or a billionaire who bought Twitter. No one is safe, no one is untouchable, no one will be allowed to speak against the 'transformation' that is to come.'That has been the messaging of the last four years... conform or go to jail, whether you are the actual former President or whether you are a former mayor of NY.'
Actually, the message has been 'if you commit crimes to get elected or try to overturn and American election, you will go to jail.' Because some people aren't enslaved to the illegality of Trump and his campaign staff.
Simple question, Ken. Did Trump break any laws in 2016 that helped get him elected?I don't know... did Clinton... did Biden?
Clearly Harris' nomination is already on thin ice, who knows what laws will be broken. I guess it doesn't matter when your Party has control and decides who gets prosecuted and who doesn't, what statutes can be ignored, what laws can be rewritten to suit your needs, etc.You don't know? You always claim to be this really informed person on politics. Instead, that was a really weird deflection away from a very straight-forward question. But it's what we see - intelligent people doing all they can to avoid giving the obvious answer that would criticize Trump in any way. Even when the answer is so obvious and has been proven.
"Even when the answer is so obvious and has been proven."
How?With mountains of evidence and witness testimony under oath. Under oath, you know - that thing Trump refuses to do.
I'm sure your information is as valid as Morning Joe's 20 minute dissertation that Biden is sharper than he's ever been.
After all, if they really had mountains of evidence and witness testimony, under oath, that would stand up to public scrutiny and in court, then Trump would be in jail already.My information? Try public information given in a court of law. And it did stand up in court where Trump was found guilty by a unanimous jury.
The question was 'did Trump break any laws in 2016 to help him get elected?'. It's a very simple yes or no question.
The Democratic National Convention's rules only state that, "Delegates must, in all good conscience, reflect the sentiments of those who elected them."
Since Harris was on the winning Biden ticket in 2020, along with the fact that no one else decided to challenge her and the incredible enthusiasm that's being shown for her, most certainly tells us that the majority of Dems support her nomination.
There is nothing unconstitutional or illegal in any way in terms of her nomination. In no way is her nomination "on thin ice"harris wasn't elected based on a primary. She was installed. The delegates were going to vote for biden for president, not harris. harris has never had any votes for president from a democrat.
It was not an open process. It was a closed process. If it was...RFK Jr. may not have put his support to President Donald Trump.Who says she needs to be selected through a primary? You're ignoring the DNC rules. There are actually rules for the exact scenario. And let's be clear, the Constitution is silent on party nominations.
We have delegates and most of those delegates were pledged to Biden because that's who people voted for. Actually, they voted for a Biden Harris ticket.. Once Biden DROPPED OUT,, it became their job to represent the people once again. And they coalesced around Harris. If that wasn't a good representation of their voters will, I guess we'll find out in November. Current signs indicate that the majority of voters are happy with what their delegates have done on their behalf.
Every metric we have available is indicative of broad, effectively unanimous Democratic support for Harris. She has raised big beautiful campaign funds, the likes of which have never been seen before and she did it very quickly... I think Trump is more than a little jealous.
RFK JR? He was running as an independent so he was irrelevant.The deception on the American people is the real issue.
They knew Biden had serious and deteriorating issues long before he dropped out.
They deliberately deceived America... they did not trust Americans enough to tell them that Biden was not going to run again because of health issues and that they were going to have a primary consisting of Harris, RFK Jr, and anyone else that wanted to run.
So they propped Biden up, until it was too late to have a real Primary, too late to let Americans choose who they wanted to represent them.
Once there was no time left, they had a nice early debate against Trump, so that they could all act surprised by Biden's performance, then presented Harris as the person that would defeat big-bad Trump.
That is what she is running on... Joy... and keeping Trump from becoming President.
Wow... I'm so glad there are no real issues out there that Americans need to concern themselves about... other than keeping Trump out of the Presidency and learning to enjoy the Joy a Harris Administration will bring.'...serious and deteriorating issues?' He was having senior moments associated with his age. The same kinds that Trump has been having. Is the GOP deceiving America too?
And it wasn't 'they' that propped Biden up. Biden chose to run and they did what they always do, supported the incumbent. In the same way the GOP is behind their mentally-deficient old man.
As for Harris, she is running on freedom, especially freedom for women to keep the GOP out of their doctor's offices. She is running on democracy, because the last election was nearly stolen by the loser - who got himself indicted for the crimes associated with that attempted theft. She is running on changing asylum laws - something the current administration was willing to do, but were thwarted by the GOP nominee for personal reasons.
There are plenty of issues that Harris is running on, and each one of them is damning for the GOP nominee - hence why his supporters cannot acknowledge any of them. They are programmed to not acknowledge his failures or weaknesses (such as his age and deteriorating mental state).
'It was not an open process. It was a closed process. If it was...RFK Jr. may not have put his support to President Donald Trump.'
Well, that's not true. After Biden chose not to accept the nomination, anyone could have thrown their hat in the ring. Where was RFK? He chose not to."anyone could have thrown their hat in the ring"
That is simply not true. The leaders of the democrat party got biden to get out of the race. They installed harris and convinced the delegates to support her.
It was a closed process. Rank and file democrats did not have a choice but to accept harris.'They installed harris and convinced the delegates to support her.'
Any proof to corroborate that statement? Because many were considering entering the race, the media was speculating who might want to get in, but they all took a look at the landscape, and chose to endorse Harris. Even Joe Manchin decided against it. That's very telling."That's very telling."
It tells me people in the democrat party knew better than to challenge the decision of the leaders of the party.
There was no race...it was a coronation. harris has never gotten one single democrat primary vote for president. That is a fact."Coronation". Good choice of terminology - I like it.
Consider Julian Assange and what happened to him for bringing forth the corruption within the Administration and with the DNC at that time.
There was a time, decades ago, when his acts would have been lauded, reporters would have been all over it... consider how things shook out for Nixon in the 70s ... then consider how things went for Clinton and Assange.
Now fast forward to Elon Musk buying Twitter and exposing the Twitter files, proving the Hunter Biden laptop was known to be real all along, proving the FBI was directly conspiring against the sitting President.
Nothing.
No one held accountable for it.
Now the reporters, the media, in lockstep with the Party, turns on Elon Musk and begins a character assassination effort, while government agencies across the board begin investigations into Twitter, Tesla, etc. to harass Musk.
Pretty big changes IMO in the punishment vs reward scenario for getting caught cheating from the 1970s to the 2020s... don'tcha think?'Now fast forward to Elon Musk buying Twitter and exposing the Twitter files, proving the Hunter Biden laptop was known to be real all along, proving the FBI was directly conspiring against the sitting President.'
Except Giuliani did not have the laptop - he had a copy of the hard drive of that laptop. Meaning, that someone with known ties to Russian oligarchs was in possession of something where the chain of custody was now in question. So, it was legitimate to question the validity of the copy when it originated with someone who was under active investigation for acting as a foreign agent.
Or they couldn't get a campaign up and running in such a short time - whereas Harris was already part of the Biden/Harris campaign.
But the primary votes argument is just a red herring. None of the other candidates who were considering actually jumping in would have gotten a primary vote either - Shapiro, Whitmer, Newsom, Manchin. What you say as a 'coronation' is just a unique way of achieving a nomination from a scenario that has never happened before.
The voters and the delegates of the party clearly see Harris as the best option after such a late withdrawal from Biden, and the delegates heard every other elected official line up behind Harris. Only the right is making an issue of it. The left is thrilled to have a younger candidate with both Senatorial and Vice-Presidential experience."None of the other candidates who were considering actually jumping in would have gotten a primary vote either - Shapiro, Whitmer, Newsom, Manchin."
Since it wasn't an open primary...we'll never know how many votes they would have gotten. harris never had to debate a single person to get her nomination. She never had to explain her position to the public on any issue. That's the reason she has no policies...she never had to develop any and defend them.
She has adopted President Donald Trump's policy of no taxes on tips as well as finishing the wall on the southern border and being pro fracking.
Maybe she is a secret follower of President Donald Trump.'Since it wasn't an open primary...we'll never know how many votes they would have gotten.' There really wasn't time to do a whole new primary, now was there?
And she has plenty of policy, the right just can't admit it because most of her policy is damning to Trump.Is it damming to Trump or is it copying Trump, there seems to be a debate on the matter.
Some is aligning with Trump's...others are clearly damning* to Trump like his stance on women's body autonomy and democracy.
Trump's stance on women's body autonomy - you mean like women may not murder children? That autonomy?
Trump's stance on democracy - you mean like elections shall proceed as designed and rules not changed to benefit one (or more) candidates...like Democrats did for Harris?If you change the meaning of the word children to something new, which we often see in these forums. We see the word fetus changed to baby, and now fetus to children. I'll be buying dictionaries for all the MAGA folk in here as they seem needed.
And body autonomy as in a state not being able to force a life-threatening medical procedure on any person, even if it means saving another's life.
There's plenty of precedent to back up that stance.
The rules did not change for Harris. The rules that existed just hadn't needed to be used previously as a candidate had never dropped out of a race this late in an election. But, if MAGA folk ever bothered to read the DNC rules, they would know that this is the process. Instead, they choose to invent things and live in their alternate realities while the rest of us mock them for the ignorance they display."But, if MAGA folk ever bothered to read the DNC rules, they would know that this is the process."
Here is a link to the DNC 2024 Presidential Nominating Process.
https://democrats.org/2024-delegate-selection-process/
I've read it and don't see the procedure described in NBC and other news outlets. I couldn't find if there is an addendum to it anywhere on line.The Democratic National Committee (DNC) rules include a provision often referred to as the “good conscience” clause. This clause is found in Rule 13(J) and states:
"Delegates elected to the national convention pledged to a presidential candidate shall in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them"
This means that while delegates are generally expected to support the candidate they are pledged to, they are ultimately free to vote according to their own conscience, especially if they believe it reflects the will of the voters who elected them. (It's right there on page 15 of the link that was shared, but unable to be understood, apparently).
According to the Democratic Party’s rules, Edward B. Foley (the director of the election law program at Ohio State University) said, “the presidential preference primaries determined who the convention delegates are; the primary voters did not directly choose the party’s nominee. Biden’s now having voluntarily withdrawn from the race before the delegates nominated him based on his status as presumptive nominee as a result of the primaries, the delegates are free pursuant to the party’s own rules to choose a different person as their nominee.
“Moreover, political parties have the constitutional right to determine the procedure by which they select their nominees, as repeatedly confirmed by the Supreme Court,” Foley said, citing the Supreme Court cases Democratic Party of United States v. Wisconsin ex rel. La Follette and California Democratic Party v. Jones."Delegates elected to the national convention pledged to a presidential candidate shall in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them"
There is no way a delegate could in "good conscience" reflect the sentiments of those who elected them unless there is a way in place for them to know the sentiments of those who elected them.
That is what primary elections are used to determine.
There is no such thing in place.
Again, proves the point that harris was installed as a presidential against the wishes of many democrats.
Nobody had an opportunity to debate her. The last time harris did participate in a presidential primary debate Tulsi Gabbard destroyed her and then harris dropped out.
That is why she has no policy positions other than those she takes from President Donald Trump.
As expected, a choice to deny reality. We see it all too often in here. Primary elections are one way...and polls after primaries have been held are another. Local endorsements is a third. The endorsement of the original candidate is a fourth.
And there are some policy positions that overlap between candidates. There usually are. Just because you deny the existence of her other policies doesn't really mean they exist. Like we see from the above posts, could be you're just not aware of the basic information.She has changed quite a few of her policy positions.
harris changed many of her views on issues once she got the democrat nomination and realized she was way too far to the left to win the election.True. And Trump changes as well, like with abortion. He realized bragging about removing a woman's right to choose was way too far to the right for mainstream America. It's not rocket science to shed progressive and regressive policy positions during a presidential campaign.
The two biggest issues are the economy and the border. President Donald Trump leads decisively on both of those issued. More Americans trust President Donald Trump to resolve these problem.
The left has to start owning that harris was in the White House for the past 31/2 years and the problems with the economy and the border are problems because of her policies.Her policies? Since when does a VP have a policy agenda of their own? What was the policy agenda of Pence and how successful was he? Lol. What are the actual responsibilities, duties of the vice president?
Most importantly, do they include policy making, legislative action? What are the channels that a vice president in Acts his or her "policies" specifically.The left doesn't have to own that the problems with the economy are because of their policies. Many of the problems with the economy came from the disastrous last year of the Trump term. Global inflation was from broken supply chains in 2020. Job losses during the same time. Businesses closing, same thing. Central American economies were crushed because of that pandemic and people decided to come migrate here for the opportunities that America can provide.
America has been recovering for the entirety of the Biden term and leads the world on that front. And when presented with a bipartisan effort to try new solutions at the border, Trump tanked the deal.
So, no, there is plenty of ownership to go around and Trump is equally as culpable for the problems in both the economy and immigration that the country currently faces."Trump is equally as culpable for the problems in both the economy and immigration"
President Donald Trump has not been in office for 3 1/2 years. The economy and immigration are owned by the biden administration and only the biden administration.Oh, so right after he left office, all the problems from the pandemic just mysteriously disappeared!
All the businesses immediately reopened. All the jobs were rehired right there in January of 2021. All the oil production he helped to shut down in April of 2020 was able to ramp right back up immediately. No one else kept dying because he told his followers that he got the vaccine.
What everyone was predicting was a major recession. Which the Biden administration was able to avoid. And what we got was global inflation - everywhere on the planet - thanks to all the businesses that shut down, as well as the virus still running rampant in China, who is a major supplier of goods worldwide.
And even when not the actual president, Trump directed his allies to hurt America by preventing solutions to the country's problems. Being President isn't the only criteria for doing damage to the United States.The biden/harris administration owns the last 3 1/2 years and everything that goes with it.
The economy, the border and everything else.
They were in charge and responsible.
Nobody else.Yeah, and over here in the real world, people understand what led up to the issues we are facing today and that both administrations have culpability for those problems. In the real world, we're not so cultish to ignore our own leader's contributions to those problems. But, with MAGA, they have been programmed for the last nine years to ignore any failures, faults, and criminality of their party leader. It'd just be sad if they hadn't become so dangerous and executed multiple domestic terror attacks on their own nation.
If that's the case...then democrats have been in charge 12 of the last 16 years...so democrats really are the ones to blame for the current problems facing the nation.
Except, Democrats left Trump a strong economy and no pandemic after 2016. Trump left an economy in shambles and the job of getting people vaccinated from a pandemic that he let reach our shores to his predecessor. Odd that you can't remember that. Well, not odd as I explained in the post before your last one.
Do YOU remember the outraged screams when Trump tried denying entry when coming from China? But blame him anyway for it reaching our shores - in fact, might as well blame him for it reaching every country on earth. Because he's a Ban Man anyway, right?
Do YOU remember who he tried to deny entry? Just Asians...as if Americans wouldn't also be carrying the virus when coming from an area where the virus was prevalent. So, his program was called out for its obvious racism and for clearly being ineffective from stopping Americans carrying the virus from coming into the country.
And yeah, I do place some blame on him for paring down our CDC staff in China from 47 (8 Americans and 39 Chinese) people to just 14 (3 Americans and 11 Chinese). Included in that is the reduction of the Global Health Protection program that saw the largest reduction in U.S. staff. That program went from four Americans and 10 Chinese staff down to no Americans and five Chinese.Rather difficult to deny entry to an American that has not committed a crime, don't you know? Libs wouldn't even let him deny Chinese - not a chance in the world they would let him ban Americans.
And no, it was not racism, no matter how much liberals claim it was. That little tidbit was just another way to get at Trump, without resorting to truth, honesty or ethics. Just twisted lies without basis...which repeated often enough to the right people become their truth.
Personally I was glad to be out of the Global Health Protection - just like so many international groups it is little more than a way to bash America while taking our money.Hard to deny entry? Not when they are coming from a pandemic hotspot. If he denied all travel, maybe he would have had a chance. But just denying certain nationalities was the usual xenophobia he is known for.
And that statement about the Global Health Protection really puts on full display a lack of understanding about what they do. Trump decided to do some cost-cutting in a group whose mission is to identify health threats, stop outbreaks from becoming epidemics, and save lives. And guess what happened right after he did that - a global epidemic happened. Coincidence? I think not.How did we go from "racist" to denying "nationalities"? Is it because it never did have anything to do with race or racism, just with who lived close to the disease?
You may think not, but I'm positive his cost cutting had nothing to do with the advent of a new, mutated disease in some animals. Or are you claiming it was man-made in the lab AND that the GHP would have stopped them from doing that?If it had to do with who lived close to the disease, then the Americans who were there would have been denied entry or at least isolated. Thanks for making my point for me.
Your positivity doesn't really align with what happened. And considering there was testing being done on coronaviruses in labs in China, I do support the lab leak theory. And the GHP might not have 'stopped' them, but could have provided the necessary support for safer research as that was part of their mission.
Is/was Harris not the candidate? Did the delegates ignore their "instructions" to vote for Biden and change to Harris?
It's not "proof" of installing Harris, just very strong evidence. It IS "proof" that delegates were convinced to cast their Biden vote for Harris.
How is Trump going to pay for the agenda he's campaigning on? Well to be fair, he's not exactly campaigning on it but the agenda someone wrote down for him.
According to nonpartisan estimates, Harris is proposing to spend about $2 trillion and raise $5 trillion in tax revenues over a decade. Trump is calling for about $5 trillion in tax breaks and spending while raising less than $3 trillion in revenue through tariffs.
"Hands down, VP Harris is being much more fiscally disciplined than President Trump,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics."
Zandi agreed with that estimate, saying the new Harris plans would total $1.5 trillion to a high end of $2 trillion, before the offsets.
“So at the very least, she should have about $3 trillion in deficit reduction over the 10-year budget horizon,” he said. “I can’t recall a deficit reduction package that comes even close to that.”
Asked Friday in Las Vegas how he (Trump)would pay for his plans, Trump told reporters: “Growth. We’re going to have tremendous growth. We’re going to have tremendous growth.”. Oh yes big beautiful growth, right? Like we've never seen before? And let me guess, it's all going to happen very quickly....
Goldwein said that’s not a serious proposition.
Tremendous growth sounds like a great idea! I don’t know why we didn’t do that in all the previous administrations,” he said. “But no, you’re not going to grow your way out of this.”. Goldwein added that Trump’s tariffs and mass deportation policies could shrink growth." Oops.
Zandi said that the Trump 2017 tax cut “did lift growth in terms of corporate investments,” but it “didn’t come close to paying for itself” — and that extending them would add more red ink.
“There’s no way he’s going to get that kind of growth,” he said. “The deficit-financed tax cuts just don’t pay for themselves.”
https://www.yahoo.com/news/harris-campa … 49311.htmlSo we either believe Harris, lying through her teeth about what will be spent and how she will take more from people, or we believe Trump with his grandiose plans that are very unlikely to come to fruition.
What a choice!
"why are so many democrats now supporting President Donald Trump?"
Two.
Two is not "so many".
Have you seen the list of Republicans who worked for Trump - not just random Republicans - who aren't just endorsing Harris but are warning the country not to put him back in office because of the dangers he imposes?More than "Two".
https://youtu.be/26jQvHHvhY0?si=dTnTcRNcDvq_UMmG
Washington Post writer Catherine Rampell on the double standard of Trump's policies:
Nearly all of Trump’s major economic policies would worsen inflation (mass deportations, devaluing the dollar, politicizing the Federal Reserve, imposing new global tariffs of 10 percent or higher)," she wrote, adding that Trump embracing the Republican "policy bible" of Project 2025 is electoral kryptonite. "Of 28 major Trump proposals YouGov asked about in June (on both economic and noneconomic issues), only six were favored by most respondents. For example, 6 in 10 Americans oppose his proposals to cut corporate taxes and to abolish the Education Department."
"The Republican presidential nominee often promises fantastical outcomes, without any plausible mechanism for how, as president, he would deliver them," she wrote. "Most recently, Trump promised to cut prices, with energy prices specifically falling by 50 percent. How? No explanation necessary. He simply declares it will happen, and the media and his allies amplify his claims."
Rampell noted that when Trump does actually does discuss policy, it's usually accompanied by "bureaucratic pageantry." One example she cited was his promise to "sign an executive order directing every Cabinet secretary and agency head to use every tool and authority at their disposal to defeat inflation and bring consumer prices rapidly down," calling for "results within the first 100 days, or much sooner."
"[A] preposterous promise on a 100-day timeline is still preposterous. (Arguably more so.) Yet seemingly, the entire Republican Party — and much of the media — have chosen to treat such nonsense as though it were a Very Serious, Big-Brained policy treatise," she wrote.
"There’s always been a temptation for politicians to under-plan and overpromise, to pledge outcomes without detailing the inputs," she wrote. "But just as Trump has lowered the bar for politicians’ character and ethics, he’s degraded our expectations for governing, too."This is a current democrat US Senator.
"Key senator reportedly behind Harris' rise to power withholds his endorsement for president
Jon Tester said his focus this year will be on his own re-election bid
Montana's vulnerable Sen. Jon Tester will not be making an endorsement in the presidential election where Vice President Kamala Harris is running as the Democratic nominee, despite reportedly playing a role in her recruitment to the Senate.
Tester previously served as chair of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) from 2015 to 2017, leading the efforts of the campaign arm to elect Democrats to the chamber when Harris first announced her senatorial aspirations.
After Harris launched her California Senate bid, the Los Angeles Times reported in January 2015 that, according to an adviser, Tester was one of the players encouraging her to run.
Despite his previous support for Harris, Tester said he will not be making an endorsement in this year's race because he will be focusing on his own re-election bid."
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/vulner … ntial-race"What is to be expected from one of the most unpopular vice presidents since Dan Quayle?" And we know this - how?
Being VP is like being in the witness protection program. POTUS and his staff don't want you to be known very well. You are not the star. If you disagree, you keep it to yourself. This is why she is taking the time to let the voters get to know her, where does she stand on the issues, how will she handle the press, what is her leadership style?But she's not "taking the time". All that she has to say is, "I accept the nomination", and the Dems come running and rallying behind her.
Her popularity was low, no doubt. But you know who set a record for low favorability during a four-year term? You guessed it, Donald Trump. So, comparing favorability ratings really doesn't do much for the right.
Disgusting, ugh.
Political Photo Opp at Arlington National Cemetery
"Federal law prohibits political campaign or election-related activities within Army National Military Cemeteries, to include photographers, content creators or any other persons attending for purposes, or in direct support of a partisan political candidate's campaign," according to the statement. "Arlington National Cemetery reinforced and widely shared this law and its prohibitions with all participants."How Dare HE!!!
Go to a cemetery to honor someone and have pictures taken!!!
Its against the law... lock him up!!!I put out 13 flags, is that disgusting?
The 13 were remembered all over the Nation, and throughout social media --- is that disgusting?
No, "disgusting" is the Administration that caused their deaths. Disgusting is the President who repeatedly checked his watch when their bodies were returned to the States. Disgusting is an M.I.A. current Administration in all matters which truly matter!
Yup. No respect. There's always an excuse.
Considering that Hunter's personal life had nothing to with the allegations that the Trump Campaign was lobbing at Biden, breaking the chain of custody on the evidence they were planning to present was a concern for the intelligence community. Especially after the campaign had openly colluded with the Russians in 2016 by having Manafort secretly meet with the Russians and pass them campaign strategy and internal polling data.
"Why many might not vote for Trump"
Donald Trump shared more than a dozen posts on his social media network Wednesday that call for the trial or jailing of House lawmakers who investigated the attack on the U.S. Capitol, special counsel Jack Smith and others, along with images that reference the QAnon conspiracy theory.
Trump reposted a doctored image that was made to look like President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in orange prison jumpsuits, among other political figures, and a lewd post about Harris and Clinton that referenced a sex act. One post seemed to suggest former President Barack Obama should be tried in a military court.
Some of the other posts Trump shared included phrases circulated among followers of QAnon, the pro-Trump conspiracy theory, including “Nothing can stop what is coming,” “Hold the line” and “WWG1WGA”, which is an initialism for “Where we go one, we go all.”
SMHWhy many might not vote for Trump?
Add the Evangelical folks to the mix. Trump's hold over them seems to be slipping.
This from Pastor Ben Marsh. He is echoing others in the Evangelical circle.
"People who did not grow up in evangelical-political spaces have no idea how disorienting it is to be told for 30 years
A. You could not vote for a morally bad person
B. You had to vote for a pro-life candidate
Only to now be told you have to vote for a pro-choice felon."
Yep, it's a disconnect. Will evangelicals start to jump ship? Have they already? Trump cannot afford any defections. His rhetoric on "reproductive rights" has gotten him into hot water.
https://x.com/PastorBenMarsh/status/1827322341786829269You mean not vote for him in order to vote for the PRO-any time-any place-for-any-reason, AOD: Abortion On Demand Harris?
You know, wilderness did his best to shoo me away from this topic, but I am that pesky fly that one must swat to get rid of.But hasn't the pro-life justification for supporting Trump fallen apart?.
"Trump, who described himself as “strongly pro-choice” in the 1990s, including support for so-called partial-birth abortion, has returned to his socially liberal ways."
“My Administration will be great for women and their reproductive rights,” he recently posted on Truth Social.
He has called the Florida heartbeat bill "too harsh" and a "terrible mistake" He refuses to say if he will vote for the Florida abortion amendment. Why not proudly announce his position?
What conservative uses the term "reproductive rights"?
Reproductive rights are legal rights that protect people's ability to make decisions about their bodies and their ability to reproduce. Including the freedom of individuals to control decisions regarding abortion. Why would a conservative use this language?
Yet Trump is embracing pro-choice, left language. Just pandering? He has essentially taken the pro-life plank or stance away from the Republican party.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi … nt/679622/So Harris et al can do it, but not Trump?
Harris has always been pro-choice. Trump bragged about overturning Roe v Wade but now he wants to distance himself from the extreme bans that have happened as a result? He wants to criticize DeSantis 6 week ban? He can't have it both ways.
I'm sorry, I must have missed it. What was the question? But yes, a vote for Harris is a vote for Reproductive Rights. But a vote for Trump? well he says he will be "great" for women's Reproductive Rights also.... I'm confused. The evangelicals are confused. We are all confused by his leftist language. With Trump at the helm, the Republican party has basically abandoned the pro-life stance. I'm not sure how else to view it. I imagine that many people in Florida would like to hear him loudly proclaiming his opposition to the abortion Amendment but he is choosing to stay silent. He even criticized the governor's heartbeat bill.
So confused. Women have the complete right to reproduce themselves (given that they can find a sperm donor). They have the complete right to NOT reproduce - it is their choice whether to reproduce or not.
I assume that your "reproductive rights" does not mean that a woman can demand sperm from any man on the planet. That leaves that your "reproductive rights", although a complete misnomer, actually means that a woman has the right to kill children (at least her own) at will. Do I have it right? Is that what "reproductive rights" actually means, regardless of what the words say?Reproductive rights are commonly thought of as legal rights and freedoms of women as individuals to control and make decisions relating to reproduction and childbearing, especially with regard to contraception and abortion.
Maybe someone would like to weigh in on what Trump means when he says he will be great for women's Reproductive Rights. Is his definition of the terminology different than what is commonly accepted? After all, he's the one that made the statement and chose to use the language. The phrase has had a standard connotation for decades.
He sure has angered the anti-abortion folks though.
The founder of the anti-abortion group Live Action, speaking on her podcast on Friday, criticized Trump for trying to “ingratiate himself with those that are pro-abortion” with his use of the phrase.
Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life Action, said on X that the Truth Social post had “understandably upset many within the pro-life movement.” National Review editor Philip Klein wrote that, in the battle over abortion, it “increasingly looks like Trump is joining the other side.”
Earlier this year, Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, expressed disappointment with Trump’s position of leaving abortion to the states. In a post on X this weekend, Dannenfelser reacted to Trump’s recent comments, saying, “The cause is way bigger and younger than Donald Trump. It will shape the GOP beyond this Trump moment.”
I could go on and on. Is Trump even pro-life anymore?Tiptoeing around the subject, are we?
Again, the only thing I can think of is that women have an innate right to murder their (probably unborn) children and don't like having it taken away. Yes?
I doubt that Trump recognizes a woman's right to kill an unborn baby, so no, he won't be taking that stance. You would have to ask him just what "reproductive rights" mean, just as I am asking you. Will you give a better answer than Trump would?
abwilliams: A private citizen may put out as many flags at a national cemetery as she likes. Once she is a candidate for public office she can not. It's against the law.
Related Discussions
- 54
Trump Supporters Storm Capitol Building at Trump's Urging.
by Allen Donald 4 years ago
This is your President:a man who claims fraud in the 2016 election and organizes a committee to find fraud which fails and disbands.a man who again claims fraud in the 2020 election before the election even happens and does not commit to the peaceful transfer of power.a man who claims fraud after...
- 41
Did Trump and his Team Set a Trap for the Democrats and Deep State?
by The Minstrel 5 years ago
I don't know about you, but the wagon wheels on this impeachment iniative are starting to come off. The recent challenge by Trump for Pelosi to bring the impeachment inquiry to a house vote is a win-win move. If it comes to a vote and they decide not to impeach, then we go back to waiting for the...
- 92
Kamala Harris will win 2024 Election
by Ken Burgess 8 months ago
Prior to the Debate... and then Assassination attempt... and then Biden stepping down...My evaluation of how things were trending weeks ago led me to believe that (fair election or not) the Democrats were going to win the election... as I have often noted on here before:Women make up 52% or more of...
- 31
Trump's Economy Is Amazing - Why Would Anyone Vote Against It?
by Ralph Schwartz 6 years ago
The U.S. economy added 250,000 jobs in October and the unemployment rate held steady at 3.7 percent, according to Labor Department figures released Friday. Once again the numbers are stronger than estimates; Economists had predicted the economy would add 190,000 jobs and the unemployment rate...
- 29
When are Trump Supporters Going to Realize They've Been Conned?
by Allen Donald 4 years ago
It's no fun when somebody takes advantage of you. It's exceedingly hard to admit when somebody has sold you something that turns out not to work. It's also hard to admit when somebody tells you something, insisting it's true, and it turns out to be totally false.There are literally millions of...
- 34
Don't Give Trump Credit for the Success of the Biden Economy
by Willowarbor 7 months ago
Trump will inherit "the strongest economy in modern history," "an economy primed for growth," "booming markets and solid growth," an economy that is "pretty damn good," and investments "flowing" to "rural and manufacturing communities."In...