squistion

Can you share some of the drugs you are taking?

No if they made the bet, then didn't pay up, that is welching. You have to lose a bet and not pay to be a welcher and they never agreed to bet with you (you can't unilateraly accept an open offer to everybody and make it binding).

If OldMaid never agreed to the bet then they are not a "Welcher" A "Welcher" is someone who loses a bet and then doesn't pay.

You think they would have learned from 2022. Remember the predictions of a red wave or a red tsunami that didn't happen?

And to make matters worse, they were to do a "both sides" presentation (as if the candidates were of roughly equal merit). The L.A. Times has a 50+ year history of endorsing a candidate for President. If not for the recent ownership change of the paper, it would have again.

He seems to have seriously deteriorated mentally in the last two months. He has always rambled, but now he can't stay focused at all and is increasingly incoherent at rallies, even in friendly interview situations like Fox.

No. you are wrong.There is not one documeted case of that happening in Springfield. Not one. The woman who started it all and reported her Haitian neighbors to the police for stealing her cat, found the feline, "Miss Sassy" in her basement a few days later and apologized to the neighbors. J.D. Vance says that some of his constituients have also reported cats and dogs being stolen/eaten, but has refused to disclose any details to authorities or to reporters.

OK. Bye Bye!

You keep insulting my intelligence and it is getting rather tiresome. If you can't be more respectful I will put you on ignore.

Smart enough to know that is what will happen if Trump has US troops and The National Guard rounding up millions of people to put in detention camps and deported. A lot of innocent people who are here legally will get caught up in the sweep.

https://www.cato.org/commentary/illegal-immigration-isnt-invasion Illegal Immigration Isn’t an “Invasion” The Constitution requires the federal government to protect against an “invasion”—what every court that has reviewed the question has interpreted to mean an “armed hostility from another political entity.” James Madison labeled invasion a “foreign hostility” or attack by one state on another, and the Constitutional Convention debates connected the power to repel invasions with the power to raise armies. All the widely used English dictionaries from the Founding confirm this understanding, and of course, the other uses of invasion in the Constitution have the same meaning. Using the word invasion as a substitute for illegal migration is both offensive to anyone who’s lived through a real one and insulting to the intelligence of everyone else. If you can’t tell the difference between 100,000 Germans arriving in Paris at the head of an army in 1940, and 100,000 Germans arriving in Paris today as tourists, it’s time to crack open a history book, not opine on immigration policy. Perhaps because they know the comparison to an invasion is so weak, nativists like former President Donald Trump also promulgate the risible conspiracy theory that foreign governments are “sending” the immigrants here. Migration across the border may involve violations of U.S. laws, but the comparison to an invasion ends there. Border crossers aren’t coming to overthrow the government or take over the Capitol (unlike a few nativists this year). Indeed, it’s the U.S. government that is attempting to assail the migrants, not the other way around. People crossing the border actively try to avoid conflict with U.S. authorities either by 1) evading detection and peacefully moving to their destinations, or 2) intentionally seeking out U.S. agents to submit to the government’s legal procedures. Reporting from the frontlines of this supposed conquest, The Wall Street Journal described how some invaders were inquiring for directions to the closest “immigration office.” An “invasion” isn’t just an overstatement. It’s a completely unserious attempt to demand extraordinary, military-style measures to stop completely mundane actions like walking around a closed port of entry to file asylum paperwork or violating international labor market regulations in order to fill one of the 10 million job openings in this country.

No it isn't. He didn't lose any right wing supporters for the Access Hollywood tape saying he liked to grab women by the so the MAGA crowd won't care about this either even if they see the video.

Poor Marco doesn't grasp that many people who are legal citizens but have his skin color and speak with a Spanish accent will be rounded up in the detention sweeps too if they are not carrying proof of citizenship with them.

He stopped wars with France? Mon Dieu!

There is no confirmation that he did.

With his supporerters it won't, even with an explicit video.

No it isn't which I why I asked for a link.

Link?

Yes he was talking about McCain and also gave his exact opinion for the record of those that had been a POW.

That is not apparent from the context of the entire exchange in the video.