jerryskids

Small children had Hezbullah terrorist pagers?

MSM devouring guppy, certainly. Maybe others.

Interesting. I'm 57 and my oldest (son) is 28. When he turns 29 in April, he will be more than half my age for the first time. I'm getting younger!

We talk about "terror," but man, Israel is doing some serious mind focks lately. Between this and offing that dood in the middle of Iran, the bad guys are probably afraid to take a dump these days for fear of exploding toilets.

Do you have a link to the polls which add in a "hidden Trump voter" factor? I absolutely believe it is a factor, but I'd like to know how they add it to their polls. Many social circles, and social media circles, would ostracize you if you openly supported Trump. Young men in particular are not going to tell their GFs that they are voting for Trump. This clearly impacts the polls, which while they claim to be anonymous, many people choose not to risk it. Supporting Trump is like Fight Club. Rule 1: you don't talk about voting for Trump. The amount of such hidden voters, well, that is the question.

I think this is where our resident liberals come in and tell us that nobody wants socialism, even though every college kid (presumably voting age) in this video initially said they prefer socialism.

If he wanted me to respond to the rest of his content, he shouldn't have led with that. But since you asked... The specific topic at hand is that the moderators admitted that they came loaded for Trump bear. That makes them not moderators. They clearly had specific rebukes planned for specific statements. Of Trump only, of course. One can debate what exactly the role of the moderators is. I would argue little to no fact checking. But if you are going to get involved in fact checking, do it on both candidates. They not only did zero fact checks on Harris, they let her set up that "very fine people" bit for what seemed like a solid minute. And the points they checked were questionable. As @zsaszpointed out, Trump's response to the eating pets rebuke was poor (I saw it on TV? Cmon, man). What he should have said was, "my running mate, JD Vance, is a senator from Ohio, and he has received numerous reports of this happening." But the point is, this is a contested enough topic with info still being collected that it doesn't warrant a "fact check." Similarly on abortion, there absolutely are states that abort up to term, and the former governor of Virginia said what Trump said. It was a bad look to jump in, but the moderators seemed intent on Harris getting a big win on the abortion topic. A second are of bias is push back, or lack thereof. I think that a moderator should push for an answer if they ask a specific question. They did zero of this with Harris. They specifically asked her if she thought people were better off today, she word saladed for a few minutes, but never answered. A third, and more insidious, area of bias is in the way the moderators asked questions. For instance, after Harris babbled about Afghanistan, Muir turned to Trump and said, "President Trump, your response to the allegation about your negotiation with the Taliban." What? A moderator shouldn't do that. A moderator should say, "President Trump, your response," or "President Trump, you have two minutes to respond." If Trump were a seasoned debater her would have put Muir in his place, but the moderators knew that Trump would chase whatever shiny object they put in front of him. Speaking of time, was there even a clock? I don't recall any time limits. It was an interesting fact that Sean mentioned that Trump spoke for over 5 minutes longer. Not surprising, having watched it. This hurts Trump IMO, because he gets into rambling Trump mode. Whether this was by design or not, I can't say.

Like, when you came into the end of my moral relativism thread which had a lot of good discussions with various posters, said you stopped reading the OP, drew your own simple conclusions, and proceeded to insult me for a few pages?

Because they think the MSM is honest in telling them that Trump is going to be a dictator, despite his 4 years as president which proved otherwise. HTH

He was asked it by Hannity because low-intelligence people had accused him of it. Is this a trick question?

This is disappointing for a centrist like yourself.

It's entirely clear what he is saying here, which is he'll do some executive orders. For a person who claims to research stuff, I'm surprised you don't know this. Feel free to apologize, there really isn't another intelligent response.

Still debunked, centrist.

Really? Dictator on day one? I usually consider people who say this to be special needs. It has been thoroughly debunked by "fact checkers" which would rather not have to do it.

I like that prayer as well.

Very centrist straw men. Thoughts on what I actually asked?

Thanks. Wondering what our resident centrists think, like @Sean Mooney, @zsasz, @TimHauck?

Where are we here, it isn't happening?

Squissy claims to have me on ignore, so he won't learn that there is nothing "scientific" about Scientific American anymore. It has become a woke Leftist mouthpiece.

Well, a few things. One, you and I fundamentally disagree on Trump's motives. IMO his primary motivation is his narcissistic ego, not money. Trump doesn't need more money. But he feeds off of the adulation of others. Two, there weren't a lot of other people auditioning for the role of DC outsider / pot stirrer. Pretty much everyone else running is a lifer politician. Three, when you get someone who is not a seasoned politician, that person is likely to be, how should I say it... rough around the edges? It's part of the package for such a person. Four, the more the Left hates and attacks him, the stronger he becomes and the more his fans support him. Because that hatred and attack is evidence that the swamp doesn't like him, which is what they want. If the Left really wanted to take away his power, they would ignore him, like Freddy Kruger. Somehow, they haven't figured this out.

Living in (former) Pac-12 country, I've seen a bit of Williams, Nix, Penix, and Daniels (ASU). Daniels absolutely sucked here, but that's probably because Herm Edwards is the worst talent developer ever. Williams looked kinda meh when I watched him last season, but I haven't seen enough of the good stuff that has people fawning over him. Penix doesn't seem to have an NFL arm IMO. I think Nix might end up the best of that bunch.

I actually have very high empathy -- I have often said that it was probably the biggest quality which helped me be successful in sales negotiations. If you are as empathetic as you say, then you realize that the vast majority of the poor conservatives you hold with disdain want jobs to support their family, not other people's money. You would also understand why they like Trump. These folks used to be in your party, but you abandoned them, starting with Obama. A lot of them were racist then as they are now, but you hear it now because the Left seems to actively want to flood the country with people from south of the border. Regarding the posters here, sure, a few of them are racist, and a few of them say stupid stuff, but that doesn't mean that everyone who supports Trump's policies is a xenophobic idiot.

Pfft. NSFW language and gore

It's sympathy, not empathy. Lefties probably have more sympathy -- it's why you think black people need your charity, for instance. Well, not YOUR charity, but taxes from other people, since conservatives give significantly more to charities. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34429211/#:~:text=Our meta-analysis results suggest,giving varies under different scenarios.