RLLD

I think this is a distraction. First and foremost, I remember when people tried to pretend that Bush was purposely not heling people during Katrina.....that was a focking lie, and suggesting that the current admin is not helping is also a focking lie..... we need to stop the lying. Now, if you have a bone to pick.....it will be with the level of ineptitude the pervades ALL government agencies. Not just FEMA.....all of them,,,,,

I think polling is a tricky business. I am not sure we can really trust any of it......

I think we can better understand now why they were not having her do interviews. They clearly knew she was a mess and made an effort to shield her, as long as the press was able to tout her and sell her to the public. That they are doing this now suggests they have some internal polling and they are perhaps just a little desperate. They keep trotting her out, she keeps confirming who she is, which is an empty and vacuous person. Its a tough spot to be in

Venice is OK, sorta tourist-laden though. Maybe just visit St Marks sq, then move on. Verona is a short trip down the railway and is a nice laid back place. I prefer Umbria but Tuscany is nice. Florence is ok, the Ufizi is worth a visit. I much prefer the hill towns in Tuscany and Umbria to the urban settings Depending on when you are there, Sienna will hold the Palio, its a crazy event you should try

Well, she is not. We already know she us underperforming based on historical factors. Which is why they are pulling Obama into it. Right now she is not likely to win, but of course anything is possible. The DOJ and press are doing everything they can, to include assassination attempts, so as we get closer will they get more desperate?

There is a way for Harris to win this thing, but it would be rather unpalatable. All she has to do is admit the absolutely disaster that Biden was, declare herself separate from it and lie profusely about not doing the same stuff; which of course she will, because she is just as focking stupid as any other Democrat. If she throws Biden under the bus and pretends she will be better, she could win this.

More common ground, I hope your position also extends to your neighbors and small businesses in the area, since they have no bearing on any complaint you might have.

Thats great, I guess.... NOW......then......should we riot.....burn.....loot......march......or otherwise complain about these statistically insignificant things?

Well, uhm.....I did that earlier....like what....four or five posts ago? So yeahhhhh, thanks for confirming you can read, I guess.... NOW......then......should we riot.....burn.....loot......march......or otherwise complain about these statistically insignificant things?

So then we have concurrence. We now agree that we need not worry about decrying the impacts of the trannies on women.....and we need not worry about the impacts of policing on the AA community, since both are statistically insignificant. NOW......then......should we riot.....burn.....loot......march......or otherwise complain about these statistically insignificant things?

Are you able to answer my question? so then we also have common ground that the police are not the real problem for the African American community?

Hmmm, ok, so then we also have common ground that the police are not the real problem for the African American community?

Nope, I already accepted YOUR premise.....that something statistically insignificant should not be elevated, we have common ground. Now, you were only too happy to trot this out since your desire was to protect the position of the trannies.....so.....if someone also wants to leverage your approach, but instead call it out where it might tend to refute your argument toward African Americans.....since that is what your logic is doing.....are you willing to stand by that logic? OR......could it be true.....that you only use it when it benefits YOUR preferred social agenda, but where that same logic might tend to imperil your other social agenda.....well, then it cant be used?

Correct. We have to wait until later, presumably after the election of course, for the actual numbers to be provided.

Please clarify your usage of scope. Expand on this term so that we can better understand how it should be considered. And allow me to clarify, your moral gymnastics need to start here. This is where your hypocrisy will have to be defended.

I thought the absolute unsuitability of Joe Biden in this role has already been established. Do we really need to talk about it further?

These people, other than the criminals we now know these countries dumped on us, are no threat to the majority of Americans at all. In fact, they are likely very hard working and bring a culture of achieving with them. They will work hard, suffer the early challenges and not cry about facing hardships, we should welcome this. Their main threat is to the lower classes, as these folks step up and engage they will succeed and deliver. Want to venture any guesses as to who might be disproportionately harmed?

Was there an actual impact to the market? Would you concur that the mere threat drove pricing adjustments upward?

Well no, you just told us that we should not worry about a problem that is statistically insignificant....so then....lets have people who worry too much about immigration problems silence themselves (since you think it should not be raised) and instead address the more statistically relevant source of danger to their daughters. African Americans can do the same. We all win because all the complaining about stupid stuff goes away, right?

Thats not what I am doing here, and MDC knows it. See he will use this line of logic where it suits him, then refuse to apply it where it might tend to prevent him from holding on to one of his little positions that is indefensible when proper logic is used. So lets see if he refuses to use it still.

Great, so then if something is statistically low in terms of probability, we should not elevate it up to be some sort of problem, maybe then by extension we should instead talk about the problem that is statistically more important? And this philosophy would then apply to all situations, right?

I am less inclined to have you question me, until you answer my question. Now, lets start again... Should I be more worried about regular white males because they are statistically more likely to harm my daughter than a tranny, as you seem to have suggested?

So then, your position is that if something is statistically small......that we should not worry about it? I might be able to get behind that position, if you are then also willing to apply that logic elsewhere......are you?

When men pretend to be women, and invade their space, they threaten women in a variety of ways. There is a reason for separate in areas such as sport, by way of example. A man who wants to play dress up and pretend to be a woman should be treated with dignity of course. We should be as kind to them as we would to someone with Downs Syndrome. So placate them if you want, play along wit their charade.....but when it comes to allowing them into spaces reserved for real women, no.....we should not do that....that is a threat to women.

What if "you" are not threatened, but consider the allowance for gender dysphoric men to be legitimized a threat to your daughters?