[** Official President Joe Biden Thread **]

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

27 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Link

Fock him and fock all these people who want to shout out to the world today how this is all Biden's fault.......where were YOU last year.......the year before......the year before????

WE were all here, calling out the obvious.....what was easy for anyone to see.....while people like this POS were part of the lie....

NOW......they want to castigate an old man with no real cognitive ability..... fock them.....

Just to play devil's advocate for a minute- none of us here know what Biden was like in private meetings or what his leadership style was like behind the scenes in 2024 versus like 2022 or 2020 or anything like that. Yes there were some things he said in public where you scratched your head a little but I'd also argue that stringing together long cogent arguments was never a major strong suit of his. I'd also wager that some of his advisors were saying to themselves "Well Trump goes  off on these weird tangents too at times and it never seems to hurt him..."

But when the debate happened you had 90-120 minutes of Biden out there on live TV stumbling through words and thoughts and sounding off and at that point no matter what he was behind the scenes- the public perception was now going to be Biden on that June 27th night. And you 100% weren't going to recover from that- especially when everything coming out of the debate in the media was not centered around answers of either candidate. It was all around "So, what's wrong with Biden"

Now if Biden was like that behind the scenes and they turned a blind eye- that's on them in every way. If there was a gap between his private self and public image- then yeah it's a little murkier and makes sense why maybe they were trying to play out the string

[RLLD 4,186]

1 minute ago, Sean Mooney said:

Just to play devil's advocate for a minute- none of us here know what Biden was like in private meetings or what his leadership style was like behind the scenes in 2024 versus like 2022 or 2020 or anything like that. Yes there were some things he said in public where you scratched your head a little but I'd also argue that stringing together long cogent arguments was never a major strong suit of his. I'd also wager that some of his advisors were saying to themselves "Well Trump goes  off on these weird tangents too at times and it never seems to hurt him..."

But when the debate happened you had 90-120 minutes of Biden out there on live TV stumbling through words and thoughts and sounding off and at that point no matter what he was behind the scenes- the public perception was now going to be Biden on that June 27th night. And you 100% weren't going to recover from that- especially when everything coming out of the debate in the media was not centered around answers of either candidate. It was all around "So, what's wrong with Biden"

Now if Biden was like that behind the scenes and they turned a blind eye- that's on them in every way. If there was a gap between his private self and public image- then yeah it's a little murkier and makes sense why maybe they were trying to play out the string

Your apparent assertion that those of us who were saying this over the years were somehow perhaps "just lucky" in "guessing" the truth,  does not resonate for me.

We did know.  We said it over and over.  And apparently, there were some Democrats who at least say they knew...... which makes sense.  If we set aside our political bias, of course it was apparent.

My issue is less with them ignoring it, lying about it then....so much as stepping out NOW and saying they knew and holding him accountable.

When they bothered to care......and only because their power was threatened......they sure were able to move him right on out.......

So I say to these people again.....FOCK YOU ALL.....

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

This is an interesting piece from CNN looking at some of the turmoil that was within the Harris campaign from like September on. For those that don't want to read the article there is a pretty hilarious picture almost at the bottom of two people watching the results of the night at Howard university. It looks like a kid throwing a temper tantrum with the dad giving a "what can you do" face:

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/11/06/politics/harris-campaign-went-wrong/index.html

 

A few notes though:

 

Quote

 

“What, if anything, would you have done something differently than President Biden during the past four years?” co-host of ABC’s “The View” Sunny Hostin asked Harris, looking to give her a set for her to spike over the net.

“There is not a thing that comes to mind,” she said.

Even Harris realized she had a problem, trying to adjust a moment later by saying she would put a Republican in her Cabinet.

Aides didn’t wait until Harris was off the set to start trying to clean it up. A Democrat who had spoken with her told CNN at the time that she didn’t want to name her differences with President Joe Biden – including a higher capital gains tax rate, a bigger child tax credit and a tougher border policy – because she thought it would look disloyal to the man who had picked her as his running mate and then stepped aside for her.

 

 

 

Quote

 

And those tensions manifested from almost the start of this short campaign, in the internal wrangling over who Harris should pick as her running mate. The case for Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro was strong, and not just because Harris’ brother-in-law Tony West was telling her they looked like the future of the Democratic Party together, and that the popular governor would make sure she won Pennsylvania. Right-wing media types weren’t the only ones who noticed how much Shapiro had made himself into an Obama clone, as much a Jewish guy from the Philadelphia suburbs could be: The Obama alumni suddenly rushing onto her campaign were pushing for Shapiro.

Harris liked Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, though. She liked his line about Republicans being weird. She liked the way he came off as easy and unassuming. She liked the way they’d gotten along in their interview, including his very open stress that he would mess up in a debate with Trump’s running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vance. And she liked the way Walz had been so deferential to however she would define the job for him.

 

 

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

3 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Your apparent assertion that those of us who were saying this over the years were somehow perhaps "just lucky" in "guessing" the truth,  does not resonate for me.

We did know.  We said it over and over.  And apparently, there were some Democrats who at least say they knew...... which makes sense.  If we set aside our political bias, of course it was apparent.

That is a weird take on what I said. 

Again- what knowledge do you have about how he was in private meetings? And why are we assuming that what is being said now by Democrats is not just trying to play Monday Morning Quarterback on the race?

 

[listen2me 23 1,840]

7 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Just to play devil's advocate for a minute- none of us here know what Biden was like in private meetings or what his leadership style was like behind the scenes in 2024 versus like 2022 or 2020 or anything like that. Yes there were some things he said in public where you scratched your head a little but I'd also argue that stringing together long cogent arguments was never a major strong suit of his. I'd also wager that some of his advisors were saying to themselves "Well Trump goes  off on these weird tangents too at times and it never seems to hurt him..."

But when the debate happened you had 90-120 minutes of Biden out there on live TV stumbling through words and thoughts and sounding off and at that point no matter what he was behind the scenes- the public perception was now going to be Biden on that June 27th night. And you 100% weren't going to recover from that- especially when everything coming out of the debate in the media was not centered around answers of either candidate. It was all around "So, what's wrong with Biden"

Now if Biden was like that behind the scenes and they turned a blind eye- that's on them in every way. If there was a gap between his private self and public image- then yeah it's a little murkier and makes sense why maybe they were trying to play out the string

Scratched your head a little bit?  The guy is at a total loss.  Imagine how much handling has to be done JUST to get him to the level hes been at in the public eye!  Which still looks terrible. 

It was glaringly apparent to anyone with any sense in the world.  No one can be that dense.  The lateness to the party I just chalk up delusion/burying head in sand.  

[RLLD 4,186]

2 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

That is a weird take on what I said. 

Again- what knowledge do you have about how he was in private meetings? And why are we assuming that what is being said now by Democrats is not just trying to play Monday Morning Quarterback on the race?

 

We called it out......we stated clearly what was happening....and the Democrats and the media gaslit us.....and admit as much today.....this should bother you...rather than defend it, you should have a serious issue with these people coming out today and saying they knew all along....

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

7 minutes ago, RLLD said:

We called it out......we stated clearly what was happening....and the Democrats and the media gaslit us.....and admit as much today.....this should bother you...rather than defend it, you should have a serious issue with these people coming out today and saying they knew all along....

I'm not defending it. 

I also find it curious that we are always supposed to think Democrats are lying to us but now they aren't. A handful of people are speaking on this and I would argue they are trying to cover their tracks and deflect away from their own mistakes. Biden isn't the future of the party. Biden may not survive through next year. He is an easy target at this point. 

Also- lots of MAGA people here "call things out" that ultimately aren't true. I think at this point though you are just fundamentally ignoring what I am saying to fill the narrative agenda you want to have on this. 

And lastly- a few people here on the left have indicated they think Trump is in cognitive decline- there is a whole thread about it somewhere...if 2 or 3 years from now we have Trump having a mental breakdown in public and the liberals here start victory lapping "I told you so" type stuff I look forward to you saying "Yup I should've listened to you."

[RLLD 4,186]

1 minute ago, Sean Mooney said:

I'm not defending it. 

I also find it curious that we are always supposed to think Democrats are lying to us but now they aren't. A handful of people are speaking on this and I would argue they are trying to cover their tracks and deflect away from their own mistakes. Biden isn't the future of the party. Biden may not survive through next year. He is an easy target at this point. 

Also- lots of MAGA p looeople here "call things out" that ultimately aren't true. I think at this point though you are just fundamentally ignoring what I am saying to fill the narrative agenda you want to have on this. 

And lastly- a few people here on the left have indicated they think Trump is in cognitive decline- there is a whole thread about it somewhere...if 2 or 3 years from now we have Trump having a mental breakdown in public and the liberals here start victory lapping "I told you so" type stuff I look forward to you saying "Yup I should've listened to you."

Well, when you deal in reality instead of political gamesmanship, and then suddenly the people who were lying join reality......I guess you either assume they finally get it.....or are now lying in the opposite direction.

So if someone lies to you for years saying the sky is red, and they finally look up and say, "oh my, the sky is blue.....".....at that point you can say yes.....yes it is you finally see it properly.....you are no longer lying about it.....

And I say again, fock all those people who either ignored it or actively hid it.....for all those years....and now suddenly want to point their little fingers at a dementia-laden old man, and make it HIS fault all the sudden....fock them....

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,301]

the only way they could get Kamala the pawn out of the way was to let her prove to be a failed candidate.  Had Biden dropped out a year ago, RFK wins the primary

so they needed to force him out, so that they could go without a primary and force Kamala on the Demoncrats

now when they skip her in 2028, its based, and they can't be called racist, mysoginists

the best candidates they have are all white men, and thats not allowed unless there is nothing else

 

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

17 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Well, when you deal in reality instead of political gamesmanship, and then suddenly the people who were lying join reality......I guess you either assume they finally get it.....or are now lying in the opposite direction.

So if someone lies to you for years saying the sky is red, and they finally look up and say, "oh my, the sky is blue.....".....at that point you can say yes.....yes it is you finally see it properly.....you are no longer lying about it.....

And I say again, fock all those people who either ignored it or actively hid it.....for all those years....and now suddenly want to point their little fingers at a dementia-laden old man, and make it HIS fault all the sudden....fock them....

It can also be true in that they look up see the sky blue and then say "Well we were saying all along...." Gaslighting works in a few different ways.

Here are the facts we know- we know how Biden looked in some interviews, we know how he looked in the debate on June 27th.

Here is what we don't know- what was Biden like behind the scenes. 

What we know now following Tuesday's election is there is fingerpointing at Biden

You take it to mean "The democrats finally came around to my way of thinking and should be castigated for how they are treating Biden 

I take it to mean: "They are doing everything they can to not blame themselves for running a shitty campaign and Biden is the scapegoat."

[RLLD 4,186]

1 minute ago, Sean Mooney said:

It can also be true in that they look up see the sky blue and then say "Well we were saying all along...." Gaslighting works in a few different ways.

Here are the facts we know- we know how Biden looked in some interviews, we know how he looked in the debate on June 27th.

Here is what we don't know- what was Biden like behind the scenes. 

What we know now following Tuesday's election is there is fingerpointing at Biden

You take it to mean "The democrats finally came around to my way of thinking and should be castigated for how they are treating Biden 

I take it to mean: "They are doing everything they can to not blame themselves for running a shitty campaign and Biden is the scapegoat."

Here is the important distinction.   Today, we seem to all agree on the state of Biden.   We look back now and say.....yeah, that was all true.

Self reflection should now result for those who refused to accept it then.  So....... self-reflect if you ignored it then, ,because it seems plausible that your decision-making paradigm is flawed.

If your take away from this is simply their are unable to blame themselves, then you have not hit the "aha" moment required to move past that flawed paradigm

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

4 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Here is the important distinction.   Today, we seem to all agree on the state of Biden.   We look back now and say.....yeah, that was all true.

Self reflection should now result for those who refused to accept it then.  So....... self-reflect if you ignored it then, ,because it seems plausible that your decision-making paradigm is flawed.

If your take away from this is simply their are unable to blame themselves, then you have not hit the "aha" moment required to move past that flawed paradigm

Again- you are blissfully ignoring what I am saying because you want my opinion to be against yours so you can argue it. Additionally- you are taking the Democrats at the word now after months of saying we should not- the only thing that has changed is you got the result you wanted. That is a flawed decision-making paradigm. 

So answer this simple question to start and we can move on from there: what knowledge are you privy to about how Biden was behind closed doors in private meetings?

[RLLD 4,186]

1 minute ago, Sean Mooney said:

Again- you are blissfully ignoring what I am saying because you want my opinion to be against yours so you can argue it. Additionally- you are taking the Democrats at the word now after months of saying we should not- the only thing that has changed is you got the result you wanted. That is a flawed decision-making paradigm. 

So answer this simple question to start and we can move on from there: what knowledge are you privy to about how Biden was behind closed doors in private meetings?

Eventually you will get there, I honestly believe this.  You seem smart enough to get there. Right now is not the time.  All good brother.

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

8 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Eventually you will get there, I honestly believe this.  You seem smart enough to get there. Right now is not the time.  All good brother.

You missed the question:

So answer this simple question to start and we can move on from there: what knowledge are you privy to about how Biden was behind closed doors in private meetings?

[RLLD 4,186]

1 minute ago, Sean Mooney said:

You missed the question:

So answer this simple question to start and we can move on from there: what knowledge are you privy to about how Biden was behind closed doors in private meetings?

Your attempt here, to pretend that one had to be in closed door private meetings to arrive at the conclusion we did.....and which now everyone else joins in on.....is meritless....

Fabricating some requirement for the conclusion which was true, and which everyone now admits since their access to political power is no longer predicated on that lie......is just not going to sell.

Move past it.   Look back, accept that you were lied to, believed that lie, and now need to change how you ingest information moving forward.....that is how you win....

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

2 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Your attempt here, to pretend that one had to be in closed door private meetings to arrive at the conclusion we did.....and which now everyone else joins in on.....is meritless....

Fabricating some requirement for the conclusion which was true, and which everyone now admits since their access to political power is no longer predicated on that lie......is just not going to sell.

Move past it.   Look back, accept that you were lied to, believed that lie, and now need to change how you ingest information moving forward.....that is how you win....

That is a long way to avoid answering the question. I can rightly assume then that the answer is nothing. You have no knowledge you are privy to about how Biden was behind closed doors.

Unless you want to change your answer?

 

[RLLD 4,186]

Just now, Sean Mooney said:

That is a long way to avoid answering the question. I can rightly assume then that the answer is nothing. You have no knowledge you are privy to about how Biden was behind closed doors.

Unless you want to change your answer?

 

I was not in closed door meetings.....so when I asserted he was having mental issues because of what I observed, I was wrong.....I mean, think about what you are trying to do here.....

Its time to stop this......stop lying to yourself.  Stop defending and protecting him. Its over.

I.....as well as many others......noted he had cognitive decline.......now evvvvvverrrryyyyone admits that was true.....    pretending one had to be in a closed door meeting to make that assessment is not a defense......c'mon..... 

[Strike 5,362]

1 hour ago, Sean Mooney said:

That is a weird take on what I said. 

Again- what knowledge do you have about how he was in private meetings? And why are we assuming that what is being said now by Democrats is not just trying to play Monday Morning Quarterback on the race?

 

Many MSM reporters have acknowledged they were aware of Bidens decline for years before the debate but purposely didnt report it.  It was well known.  Do your own research.  The only weird take here is you pretending that Biden is a bumbling fool in public but a focking lucid genius in private.  Back in the 80's SNL did a skit like that about Reagan.  It was funny but no one believes it was actually true.

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

11 minutes ago, RLLD said:

I was not in closed door meetings.....so when I asserted he was having mental issues because of what I observed, I was wrong.....I mean, think about what you are trying to do here.....

Its time to stop this......stop lying to yourself.  Stop defending and protecting him. Its over.

I.....as well as many others......noted he had cognitive decline.......now evvvvvverrrryyyyone admits that was true.....    pretending one had to be in a closed door meeting to make that assessment is not a defense......c'mon..... 

You are trying to assign meaning to what I am saying without understanding what I wrote or even knowing ultimately what my position is. I have not jumped to any conclusions about what you are saying- I'd appreciate the same courtesy if you want to actually have a discussion. 

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

2 minutes ago, Strike said:

Many MSM reporters have acknowledged they were aware of Bidens decline for years before the debate but purposely didnt report it.  It was well known.  Do your own research.  The only weird take here is you pretending that Biden is a bumbling fool in public but a focking lucid genius in private.  Back in the 80's SNL did a skit like that about Reagan.  It was funny but no one believes it was actually true.

Where did I say that?

Also, what articles do you have that show they purposely weren't reporting it? I've seen articles that talk about stuff related to it but I'm curious what more you have

[RLLD 4,186]

1 minute ago, Sean Mooney said:

You are trying to assign meaning to what I am saying without understanding what I wrote or even knowing ultimately what my position is. I have not jumped to any conclusions about what you are saying- I'd appreciate the same courtesy if you want to actually have a discussion. 

I guess I am just not getting your point 

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

6 minutes ago, RLLD said:

I guess I am just not getting your point 

Well at least you are being honest now. 

[RLLD 4,186]

Just now, Sean Mooney said:

Well at least you are being honest now. 

Implying I am not honest is not much of a tactic here, if were are in your words "being honest" all the sudden, you have some apologizing to do.  Everything I have stated has been not merely honest, but based in fact....hence the landslide victory against the Democrats.....who lie about anything and everything.

So, yeah, for now....continue to not accept that they lied to you if you prefer, but they did, and they admit it now....

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

12 minutes ago, Strike said:

Many MSM reporters have acknowledged they were aware of Bidens decline for years before the debate but purposely didnt report it.  It was well known.  Do your own research.  The only weird take here is you pretending that Biden is a bumbling fool in public but a focking lucid genius in private.  Back in the 80's SNL did a skit like that about Reagan.  It was funny but no one believes it was actually true.

This article also seems to throw a lot of stuff out there that flies in the face of your assertion that the MSM reporters were purposely not reporting it as "noted liberal papers" The New York Times and Washington Post mentioned it a lot:

 

https://www.thebulwark.com/p/did-the-media-hide-bidens-aging

[Strike 5,362]

5 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

This article also seems to throw a lot of stuff out there that flies in the face of your assertion that the MSM reporters were purposely not reporting it as "noted liberal papers" The New York Times and Washington Post mentioned it a lot:

 

https://www.thebulwark.com/p/did-the-media-hide-bidens-aging

1) never heard of that site.

2). Sounds like lots of excuses.

3) was written just a couple weeks after the debate.

Again, do some REAL research.  Or.dont.  Not my problem if you choose ignorance over data and facts.

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

20 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Implying I am not honest is not much of a tactic here, if were are in your words "being honest" all the sudden, you have some apologizing to do.  Everything I have stated has been not merely honest, but based in fact....hence the landslide victory against the Democrats.....who lie about anything and everything.

So, yeah, for now....continue to not accept that they lied to you if you prefer, but they did, and they admit it now....

Look I will try to be as clear about this as possible with the hopes you will stop obfuscating the point and ask for clarifications if you need more before immediately jumping to assuming my conclusion. 

Nowhere have I said Biden didn't have verbal gaffes. Nowhere did I say he was good in the debate with Trump. The only question I asked is- what were the people in the Democrat party seeing behind the scenes. Were they seeing someone privately that differed from what they were seeing publicly? Because even in some of Biden's "bad" press conferences- he was having solid moments. The Christian Science Monitor noted this in speaking about a press conference he did in July after the debate- you might remember the one from the scenarios mentioned:

Quote

"On Thursday, the president stood alone and took questions for more than 50 minutes. He made a few noticeable flubs – referring to Kamala Harris as “Vice President Trump,” just as earlier that day he called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy “President Putin,” before immediately correcting himself. But he also showed a strong command of foreign policy, giving in-depth, nuanced answers."

Now as I said earlier- if the Democrats behind the scenes were seeing a similar Biden- who was bad at times and good at times (sometimes in the same meetings) I can understand why they tried to hang on. It does not mean they were right for doing so, but I can understand the thinking as warped as it is. If Biden was completely unable to have good moments in public AND was like that behind the scenes as well then yes it is completely idiotic they hung on to him.  And no I put very little value in what people here said because the most ardent MAGA people here make roughly 100 proclamations a week and hitting on 2 of them doesn't make them a prognosticator. It makes them a broken clock right twice a day. 

That puts us to where we are now with Democrats coming out against Biden. You seem to want to say (and correct me if I'm wrong)- "even though the Democrats are always wrong and we should never believe them, but I believe them now because it fits what I want them to be or say." I view it as "This is a bunch of idiots trying to divert away from the awful campaign they ran." I come to that conclusion because I always assume politicians and political parties are lying to me.

Hidden in both of those conclusions is- Biden is no use to them anymore so they are okay pointing the finger. 

[RLLD 4,186]

6 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Look I will try to be as clear about this as possible with the hopes you will stop obfuscating the point and ask for clarifications if you need more before immediately jumping to assuming my conclusion. 

Nowhere have I said Biden didn't have verbal gaffes. Nowhere did I say he was good in the debate with Trump. The only question I asked is- what were the people in the Democrat party seeing behind the scenes. Were they seeing someone privately that differed from what they were seeing publicly? Because even in some of Biden's "bad" press conferences- he was having solid moments. The Christian Science Monitor noted this in speaking about a press conference he did in July after the debate- you might remember the one from the scenarios mentioned:

Now as I said earlier- if the Democrats behind the scenes were seeing a similar Biden- who was bad at times and good at times (sometimes in the same meetings) I can understand why they tried to hang on. It does not mean they were right for doing so, but I can understand the thinking as warped as it is. If Biden was completely unable to have good moments in public AND was like that behind the scenes as well then yes it is completely idiotic they hung on to him.  And no I put very little value in what people here said because the most ardent MAGA people here make roughly 100 proclamations a week and hitting on 2 of them doesn't make them a prognosticator. It makes them a broken clock right twice a day. 

That puts us to where we are now with Democrats coming out against Biden. You seem to want to say (and correct me if I'm wrong)- "even though the Democrats are always wrong and we should never believe them, but I believe them now because it fits what I want them to be or say." I view it as "This is a bunch of idiots trying to divert away from the awful campaign they ran." I come to that conclusion because I always assume politicians and political parties are lying to me.

Hidden in both of those conclusions is- Biden is no use to them anymore so they are okay pointing the finger. 

Wait a minute, why is this about "you"?   

No....no sir...this is not about you.

This is about the people who lied.   We know they lied because they are telling us today that they lied.  That in and of itself is not surprising, nor out and out "bad".  In fact those lies delayed things and helped Harris lose.....for that I am grateful.

No.....my position remains.....that these people who lied about Biden and NOW.....want to CASTIGATE BIDEN ( just a few months ago were lauding him for leaving)    THOSE PEOPLE.....can go fock themselves..

I see no reason for you to apply this to yourself......so maybe for today, lets not make it about you.....

 

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

12 minutes ago, Strike said:

1) never heard of that site.

2). Sounds like lots of excuses.

3) was written just a couple weeks after the debate.

Again, do some REAL research.  Or.dont.  Not my problem if you choose ignorance over data and facts.

1.) Cool. It's been around for 6 years. 

2.) Excuses for what? It is saying the media was reporting on Biden's mental acuity and offers many examples.

3.) Again cool. It also presents an example of MSNBC chyron trying to hide some stuff about Trump. It provides examples and mentions from, and links to, articles written by the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, NBC News, and NPR from September of 2022. It talks about a column from 2023 in the Times. It mentions writings from February of 2024 in the Post and Times. It talks about a piece written in 2023 about Biden in the Times and how it led to the Times being bashed so much a reporter at Politico stepped in with his own essay criticizing the pushback as false. I can seemingly rightly assume you didn't actually read the piece.

Again, I did some research and showed examples of what I've seen. Now what you got?

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

8 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Wait a minute, why is this about "you"?   

No....no sir...this is not about you.

This is about the people who lied.   We know they lied because they are telling us today that they lied.  That in and of itself is not surprising, nor out and out "bad".  In fact those lies delayed things and helped Harris lose.....for that I am grateful.

No.....my position remains.....that these people who lied about Biden and NOW.....want to CASTIGATE BIDEN ( just a few months ago were lauding him for leaving)    THOSE PEOPLE.....can go fock themselves..

I see no reason for you to apply this to yourself......so maybe for today, lets not make it about you.....

 

Quote

this should bother you...rather than defend it, you should have a serious issue with these people coming out today and saying they knew all along..

Quote

self-reflect if you ignored it then, ,because it seems plausible that your decision-making paradigm is flawed.

Quote

If your take away from this is simply their are unable to blame themselves, then you have not hit the "aha" moment required to move past that flawed paradigm

Quote

Eventually you will get there, I honestly believe this.  You seem smart enough to get there. Right now is not the time.

Quote

Look back, accept that you were lied to, believed that lie, and now need to change how you ingest information moving forward.....that is how you win....

 

I mean I wasn't the one saying this in the thread....this all seems to be directly making it about me. Do you want to rethink some of these direct statements?

[Strike 5,362]

7 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

1.) Cool. It's been around for 6 years. 

2.) Excuses for what? It is saying the media was reporting on Biden's mental acuity and offers many examples.

3.) Again cool. It also presents an example of MSNBC chyron trying to hide some stuff about Trump. It provides examples and mentions from, and links to, articles written by the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, NBC News, and NPR from September of 2022. It talks about a column from 2023 in the Times. It mentions writings from February of 2024 in the Post and Times. It talks about a piece written in 2023 about Biden in the Times and how it led to the Times being bashed so much a reporter at Politico stepped in with his own essay criticizing the pushback as false. I can seemingly rightly assume you didn't actually read the piece.

Again, I did some research and showed examples of what I've seen. Now what you got?

https://www.google.com/search?q=media admits biden decline&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-1-m

[RLLD 4,186]

1 minute ago, Sean Mooney said:

 

I mean I wasn't the one saying this in the thread....this all seems to be directly making it about me. Do you want to rethink some of these direct statements?

So then.....you insert yourself, I reply to that act......and the when I assure you its not actually about you,.......you return to my replies where you inserted yourself and make it my fault....

Could you BE any more of a liberal  

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

9 minutes ago, RLLD said:

This is about the people who lied.   We know they lied because they are telling us today that they lied.  That in and of itself is not surprising, nor out and out "bad".  In fact those lies delayed things and helped Harris lose.....for that I am grateful.

No.....my position remains.....that these people who lied about Biden and NOW.....want to CASTIGATE BIDEN ( just a few months ago were lauding him for leaving)    THOSE PEOPLE.....can go fock themselves..

 

 

See this is what you are missing about what I've been saying all morning. I also say those people can go fock themselves.

You think they can because they were lying the whole time. I'm saying perhaps they weren't lying the whole time- perhaps they were seeing something we weren't, perhaps they were delusional- and instead are lying right now.

In both of those scenarios (mine or yours) they are lying because it is advantageous to them to be lying at this point considering Biden is done as a political entity after January 20th,2025. 

[RLLD 4,186]

1 minute ago, Sean Mooney said:

See this is what you are missing about what I've been saying all morning. I also say those people can go fock themselves.

You think they can because they were lying the whole time. I'm saying perhaps they weren't lying the whole time- perhaps they were seeing something we weren't, perhaps they were delusional- and instead are lying right now.

In both of those scenarios (mine or yours) they are lying because it is advantageous to them to be lying at this point considering Biden is done as a political entity after January 20th,2025. 

Fair enough.   This was my point all along.   I respect those who continue to stand by Biden more than those who now want to go after him.  But only a little more.......

 

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

2 minutes ago, Strike said:

https://www.google.com/search?q=media admits biden decline&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-1-m

I gave you an article that points to a number of pieces written before the debate that talk about Biden decline. You say "That article was written after the debate" and then you give me a Google search where the first few pages (at least) are from after the debate as well. 

2 minutes ago, RLLD said:

So then.....you insert yourself, I reply to that act......and the when I assure you its not actually about you,.......you return to my replies where you inserted yourself and make it my fault....

Could you BE any more of a liberal  

Dude- you were directly addressing me in those comments using "you." And then after delivering 5 comments that are directly addressing me and saying "you need to self reflect," "your decision making is wrong" "you seem smart," "you need to change how you take in information to win" you say "Well this isn't about you."

Do you not see how big of a condescending douche you come off in that? Not to mention when we are reaching the same conclusion...

[RLLD 4,186]

Just now, Sean Mooney said:

I gave you an article that points to a number of pieces written before the debate that talk about Biden decline. You say "That article was written after the debate" and then you give me a Google search where the first few pages (at least) are from after the debate as well. 

Dude- you were directly addressing me in those comments using "you." And then after delivering 5 comments that are directly addressing me and saying "you need to self reflect," "your decision making is wrong" "you seem smart," "you need to change how you take in information to win" you say "Well this isn't about you."

Do you not see how big of a condescending douche you come off in that? Not to mention when we are reaching the same conclusion...

I was not addressing you.  I was addressing the people who performed the acts I described.  YOU...decided to reply and insert yourself.....that was YOUR decision.

[Strike 5,362]

3 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

I gave you an article that points to a number of pieces written before the debate that talk about Biden decline. You say "That article was written after the debate" and then you give me a Google search where the first few pages (at least) are from after the debate as well. 

Dude- you were directly addressing me in those comments using "you." And then after delivering 5 comments that are directly addressing me and saying "you need to self reflect," "your decision making is wrong" "you seem smart," "you need to change how you take in information to win" you say "Well this isn't about you."

Do you not see how big of a condescending douche you come off in that? Not to mention when we are reaching the same conclusion...

I didn't complain because your article was written after the debate.  Go reread my comment and see if you can figure out what I was saying.  Aren't you a teacher or something? 

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

1 minute ago, RLLD said:

I was not addressing you.  I was addressing the people who performed the acts I described.  YOU...decided to reply and insert yourself.....that was YOUR decision.

When you say this:

Quote

If your take away from this is simply their are unable to blame themselves, then you have not hit the "aha" moment required to move past that flawed paradigm

and this:

Quote

Eventually you will get there, I honestly believe this.  You seem smart enough to get there. Right now is not the time.  All good brother.

that is not about the people performing the acts. that is directed at me. I'm not "inserting myself into it" And it is bullsh!t that you want to try and pretend different. Maybe you can have plausible deniability on the others, but these two are targeted. 

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

5 minutes ago, Strike said:

I didn't complain because your article was written after the debate.  Go reread my comment and see if you can figure out what I was saying.  Aren't you a teacher or something? 

This is what you said:

Quote

 

1) never heard of that site.

2). Sounds like lots of excuses.

3) was written just a couple weeks after the debate.

Again, do some REAL research.  Or.dont.  Not my problem if you choose ignorance over data and facts.

 

 

The article I linked to was in response to:

Quote

Many MSM reporters have acknowledged they were aware of Bidens decline for years before the debate but purposely didnt report it.  

I gave you an article that shows many times it was reported- well before the debate.

Maybe you want to rethink what you are saying?

[RLLD 4,186]

14 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

When you say this:

and this:

that is not about the people performing the acts. that is directed at me. I'm not "inserting myself into it" And it is bullsh!t that you want to try and pretend different. Maybe you can have plausible deniability on the others, but these two are targeted. 

No it was not, and making it about you is conflating two separate elements.  "I" was speaking not toward you, but toward the others....."you" stepped in and demonstrated that "you" were not getting it....."I" called this element out....and then YOU proceeded to make it all about YOU....instead of staying on topic.

Unless......YOU are in the group to which I am referring, it is not about YOU......until .....YOU step in and try to deflect from it, or reframe it, or explain it......and then I respond to YOUR actions....

NOW we have established that there are two parts.   My original stance and assertion and then my response to your attempts to distract from it.....TWO pieces.....

[Sean Mooney 1,962]

6 minutes ago, RLLD said:

No it was not, and making it about you is conflating two separate elements.  "I" was speaking not toward you, but toward the others....."you" stepped in and demonstrated that "you" were not getting it....."I" called this element out....and then YOU proceeded to make it all about YOU....instead of staying on topic.

Unless......YOU are in the group to which I am referring, it is not about YOU......until .....YOU step in and try to deflect from it, or reframe it, or explain it......and then I respond to YOUR actions....

NOW we have established that there are two parts.   My original stance and assertion and then my response to your attempts to distract from it.....TWO pieces.....

I do not believe you are being truthful. I think you know you are not as well but do not want to cede ground.