jerryskids

Congrats, there is not a single word above that represents reality. Quite impressive. But hey, prove me that Kamala is not vapid. Tell me a position that she has personally stated as the presidential candidate. Bonus points if you can point to a journalist who questioned her on it.

Well, yeah, but the difference is that we had 4 years of Trump, and other than the final Covid year, he did a pretty good job. Nobody would have done a good job that year, although low-intelligence posters here include that year in things like spending. All of this talk about giving free money to people is just window dressing to get them to vote for her. By and large that requires congressional approval, which she won't get (and she'll blame on the Right, who are the adults in the room on such a topic).. Unless they figure out a way to get rid of the filibuster, in which case we are royally focked. I also worry about foreign policy. Presidents have an outsized influence on this, since many things don't require congressional approval. Trump showed that he could keep tyrants at bay. Kamala has zero experience other than doubling down on Biden/Obama's policy of licking the taints of Iran and China, which is an abject failure.

I've lost track of how many days since Kamala was anointed the nominee with no democratic process, maybe 38?, with still no interviews, tough questions, or answering to who is actually running the country. It's all good though. Joy! Forward!

Great post, summarizes the situation. Kamala is a vapid vacuum where eloquence goes to die, but she is not Trump. The DNC is doing a masterful job, along with their MSM lap dogs, of keeping her from speaking off script... basically ever. But hey, the job of an election is to win an election. If enough people think a vapid vacuum should run the free world, that's who we get.

Back in the day, I could be quite a d1ck here. I probably still am, but nothing like back then. Then again, this place was different back then: @squistion would have curled up into a ball and sobbed after 10 minutes of reading, let alone posting and seeing the responses. I don't mean to get all "get off my lawn" for the good old days, but some posters here would have been eviscerated 15-20 years ago.

Killing fracking? Killing private health care? Bullying social media companies into censorship?

What exactly about the Democrats appeals to you "centrists?" Open borders? Medically transing kids? Printing trillions for free stuff to buy votes? Soviet-era grocery policy?

Well buddy, I am intelligent, and you don't seem to be. Taking posts and doing grade school word replacements doesn't make you intelligent. My guess, giving you the benefit of the doubt, is that you are somewhere on the autism spectrum. You clearly don't understand chat board interaction. But I think your heart is in the right place.

That was awesome.

I just described this thread to my wife. Me: "There is a thread about the band Oasis." Her: "The band who?" They were completely not on our radar when the first two albums came out in 94-95, and we were in our 20s, just married, no kids, listening to music, so they should have been. I played some of each of the top 5 streams from Spotify: other than Wonderwall {which got an "oh yeah, whatever" reaction), we didn't even recognize the other songs. Slow, not musical... maybe they write awesome lyrics? Putting these two albums in the top 5 all time, with one at #1, is a traveshamockery of music.

Just got back from my cruise. How much do we owe, and where is this pole? I looked at ESPN and the board here.

Interesting. I flew out of Vancouver yesterday and our flight was delayed two hours for some amorphous "airport limitations," I wonder if it came from SeaTac? Also, I was sitting near an Alaska flight to Seattle where the gate agent kept coming up with new, creative excuses for their flight being delayed.

Wow, that's whack! Never heard of that. My first reaction is to remove the junk food from your house. After seeing someone who knows more than I do, of course. Good luck.

I just got back from a cruise to find seafoam bumping 2 week old comments of mine. Hey seafoam, I know you think these types of responses are clever, but doe you think actually intelligent people agree?

She was a smoke show

He says he has me on ignore, because I called him an idiot once. I only did that because he was being an idiot. Imagine being on a chat bored like this and being so easily offended. He must have a masochistic streak.

My master class comment was not for you but for @zsasz,our resident centrist who hates anything right of Mao.

on a micro level, you are essentially inflating the price of those starter homes by 25K. As I've often said regarding liberal policies: beware the unintended consequences. But if you are not printing money/borrowing for it, and instead moving it from some some other bucket, I agree that it is not going to cause macro-level inflation. If you think they are going to tax the rich to pay for it... well, that is 0 for 826314738921 in the history of the world, because the rich always have better and smarter people to avoid such taxes. But perhaps this time... it will be different?

It's all good, same to you and enjoyed the chat. Finishing up packing to fly to Vancouver tonight, for our Alaska cruise starting Sunday.

At the risk of interrupting the "master class" you are putting on... Inflation is the result of a reduction in buying power for your currency. Spending in and of itself doesn't cause inflation. If you don't print more money, but rather move around where that money is spent, that shouldn't cause net inflation. If you print more money to do any of the things you listed, or to give $25K to homebuyers, or pass the $2T Inflation Increase Act, then that causes inflation.

Did she answer any unscripted questions from the 20-ish people in attendance?

Is this the centrist position? Fun fact: If you think one party is the most useful idiots in the past 100 years, you aren't centrist, you are a neck-deep sycophant of the other party. Centrists see some benefits of both sides, hence "centrist." The logic of this should go without saying, but I have my doubts that you'll get it.

If only we had an example from recent history of helping people to buy houses who couldn't afford to pay their mortgage. I swear, the epitaph of the Left is 'Next time it will be different$#@!"

Wood!

First, your premise is a red herring, as I said nothing about medical interventions. That being said, your post is odd, because after your opening statement, you spend the rest of it defending exactly what you disavow. But getting to your red herring: I actually philosophically agree with you... if we didn't have the problem I mentioned -- a society which encourages vs. merely accepts trans. If we had had this discussion 15 years ago, I'd agree with you. But in that time, we've built more than 100 for-profit gender clinics. Do you think such a clinic is in the business of telling a confused child that they aren't trans? We have political lobbying groups pretending to be medical groups (AMA, APA) which say medical interventions for kids are just fine. We eagerly give a shy, confused teenage girl testosterone and, shockingly, she feels more confident. Leftist parents who feel they are winning some sort of virtue signaling olympics by interpreting any sign that's not 100% traditional boy/girl that their kid is trans? I could go on, but hopefully my position is clear.