jerryskids

My point, boyo, is that Trump felt good after that first debate because there was no way he could have felt otherwise. He and his team know it will be different on CNN with a live opponent. Every independent did not say he was awful, that's your feelz. If I had said that, you would keep quoting it for weeks.

He faced a dead guy in the CNN one. And Vox told you he got humiliated. Independents seem less impressed with her word salads.

No, he was throwing out a red herring about Trump's infidelity in a discussion about Kamala being a tyrannical boss.

Kamala banged her way into her career. Her husband shtupped the nanny while married to his first wife.

He turned down a CNN debate? What, was HuffPo not available? Kamala doesn't have the guts to face Trump on a neutral field. She is tough though -- she'll shoot intruders, and world tyrants fear her.

I'm just funnin' with Tim who thinks Word Salad Harris answered 2/3 of the questions.

So why can't she answer it? I mean, she already had the question prior to the debate, and has been asked it again since.

I should have specified the economy, if that's your point. She can't answer it.

Can't you just feel the joy, boyo?

Red herring wut? Does Kamala think people are better off now than they were 4 years ago?

Too bad you missed the last debate.

but but... Kamala is going to tax the rich, and they'll just pay it! Because that has been attempted by every liberal administration in world history and has a 0 for 8216234692 success rate, but by golly, it will work this time! I've said here multiple times in the past that the rich have smarter and more incentivized finance people than the IRS, and always find ways around new taxes. The onus of paying for all the leftist boondoggles fall on the middle class.

Harris' ad for white dudes. Not just dudes, white dudes. OMG, this may be the worst ad I've ever seen. Do they honestly think this is going to bring real men over to their side? Technically, it's from a Harris/Walz aligned PAC, so I guess she has that out.

One idea: I'm watching Three Body Problem, and they just started work on a spaceship propelled by successive nuclear explosions and a nuclear sail to accelerate it to 1% of the speed of light, to reach an alien race approaching earth. Seems plausible. We can put them all on that spaceship.

Obviously, since it isn't practical to capture them all, the right thing to do is to not try to capture any of them. Duh.

That's a really good question. You would think these guys go through some shiot hole airports which have tougher security than we do, as well.

Also, do you know what else encouraged the 1/6 mob? Three months in 2020 when angry BLM protesters rioted, looted, destroyed property including federal buildings and police stations, and took over large parts of major cities, and nobody did a damn thing to stop them. I would say they got a good lesson in what to do when you are unhappy. But muh Capitol is totally different!

You don't think the country will be better prepared to handle an angry mob that got out of hand, this time around?

I was going to post this. Also, one possible unintended consequence is that CC companies will be less inclined to extend credit to higher-risk people. IMO, that would probably be good for those people, but they wouldn't like it.

It's a good question. Word is that they pagers were planted for some future war with Hezbollah, but that a few people were getting suspicious about them, so they decided to use them or lose them. The walkie talkies were similarly planted, and I presume Israel figured Hezbollah would inspect them as well. The missiles though... maybe Israel decided that the "future war" is now.

Thanks, didn't know that. I'll pull up the lyrics and give it a listen. Wake Me Up When September Ends by Green Day is about Billie Joe Armstrong's dad dying of throat cancer on a day early in September. I've mentioned it here before in another thread. Having had throat cancer myself, that hit close to home.

You can have your whataboutism, Trump's rhetoric is dangerous, too. Happy? It's just sad that in a thread (and the MSDNC) where we are discussing the second assassination attempt on Trump in two months, we're arguing that the issue is Trump's rhetoric.

Is it dangerous to question why life-long establishment politicians (and political adjacent people) on both sides say Trump is too dangerous? Or is it better to just believe it?

It seems we're moving the "danger" goalposts from assassination attempts to believing things you don't like. I don't feel like litigating 1/6 again: one person's mob that got out of hand is another persons "they tried to guillotine Mike Pence$#@!" I'll merely say that it is not a danger to question election results, especially with the unique weirdness of the last election, any more than it is a danger to question the source of Covid or the safety of the Vax or the source of a laptop.

So, nothing on my actual post. Thanks for the pseud discussion, it was enlightening. Goodnight.