Trump goes where no other candidate is willing to go and calls out Kamala for identity politics

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Euronymous2625

Post your wet-naps.

Isn't that what they've already been doing?

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: DBCowboy

No. When you continue a pattern of being noticeably more aggressive towards female journalists, particularly black, female, journalists, you get labeled as racist and misogynistic.

If he was really so bad, you guys wouldn't need to constantly be making things up. And it's not like it's just one or two things here and there, I mean it's just non-stop made up nonsense. And this is made up nonsense.

Everyone, including you, knows he trashes "journalists" that irk him no matter what they look like. It has nothing to do with gender or skin color. That's made up, and not only that but it's extremely obviously and transparently made up. None one but the most braindead bottom 5% of Democrat bootlickers believes this kind of fake nonsense anymore. You're actually hurting your cause because everyone else knows you're lying. And people naturally start to ask, "Why do they have to constantly lie about the man?"

But you have no rational arguments, as usual for you, so lying is what you'll continue to do.

At some point, we will hopefully realize that collectively we have to ask more from our candidates in all parties.

and yes that was the appeal of Trump he wasn't Beltway DC the same old, same old mixed with the American voter getting caught up in demographic categories and their candidates being celebrities instead of civil servants.

a reply to: putnam6

Between Desantis, Haley, Ramaswamy, Burgum and Trump, Trump won.


Like it or not, there was a primary process for one set of people.

Meanwhile RFK, Sanders just...exist.

originally posted by: Imhere
Always thought it would be hilarious if we saw a Trump/Gabbard vs Biden/Harris showdown.

Would have been epic. Harris would panic. Probably a legit Trump/Gabbard landslide in that scenario.

After the assassination attempt, I really thought Trump should have picked Gabbard. I don't believe in alot of her positions, but she dismantles Democrat bull# like few others can, and it would have been a really interesting play to lean into the unity push and run a unity ticket with Republican Trump and moderate Independent Gabbard, both ex Democrats, and leave the Dems to pick up the fringe lunatic left-wing extremist vote.

Vance did not seem like a very good choice to me. I have no problem with him, he's just kinda meh. Doesn't seem to add much to the ticket. They're saying he'll help in the Rust Belt. It doesn't look like it so far, but it's still early.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: wAnchorofCarp

On a good day there's like 10 active members on here. How can you argue that most of the older members haven't left?

I'm not arguing that, you are.

I'm saying that by being the youngest member here that there is still a larger older user contingent.

originally posted by: marg6043

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: wAnchorofCarp

Whoooosh...

Says the poster who is confused on why Kamala is suddenly ditching her Indian heritage....

That is because it did not bring her enough support in 2016, soo time to switch to black now, she thinks most brown people are idiots, that is very disrespectful, I am brown, I am offended.

Be patient Marg.

There's still plenty of time for her, how another user put it, "Caribbean" heritage to shine through. Maybe you'll get a chance to be pandered to!

originally posted by: Euronymous2625

originally posted by: RazorV66

Super original. I will sign out of this site, and never come back, if you can show me a moment in which I was offended or emotional.

Promise?

But please don't really leave. I get so much entertainment and enlightenment dissecting all your guys BS.

originally posted by: fringeofthefringe

No other candidate is willing to go into an environment that is considered hostile. Does this help Trump's candidacy or hurt it?

Trump also asks why Kamala was Indian heritage for many years and then changes and becomes an Africa-American candidate. Is Trump right to ask this question?

President Trump: "She was always of Indian heritage and she was only promoting heritage. I didn't know she was black until a number of years ago when she happened to turn black. Now she wants to be known as black... all of a sudden she became a black person."

Seems like a good question if you see how she identified as an Asian when in San Francisco
Video included in link

Don't you know the old saying, it is a woman's right and responsibility to change her mind. She can identify as black now because it is her right to if she wants to.

Isn't promoting yourself by using your race...racist? I am an American, not a person of color. A person of color includes people of all colors, white is a color too, so are all the other shades of people's skin.

Seems like the Democrats promoting we owe the blacks extra rights because their ancestors could have been slaves is racist. My ancestors immigrated here after slavery was already outlawed, We did not prosper by slavory, but we did prosper here because those who came here from many countries stole the land from the Native Americans that were here, killing many of them. Slaves benefit-ted the people of that time and the kids of those who got rich off of slavory, including some of our politicians who benefited by slavery.

Just because we get paid to work does not mean we are not slaves to society. But we all need to work symbiotically so we can keep the society we have. Right now way too many people make a living doing nothing or work making or promoting things we really do not need...but people have been led to believe we need things we don't.

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: wAnchorofCarp

On a good day there's like 10 active members on here. How can you argue that most of the older members haven't left?

I'm not arguing that, you are.

I'm saying that by being the youngest member here that there is still a larger older user contingent.

Many of us newer members are actually legacy members who got purged in the fairly recent leftist rogue administration temper tantrum.

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: Justoneman

You're implying this site is the site of my enemies? I've been here since before 2004 when I finally registered. ATS has never been my enemies.

Just because it's been over run with a bit of insanity, it's still ATS. There are still people here that adhere to the way ATS is meant to be.

I am the newest poster on this page at 9 years.......

I don't think it's the site that changed Frogs.....

What changed is most of our Democrat members lost their #ing minds after Trump won in 2016 and gradually left. They quite simply couldn't handle it and quit. And now the few that are left constantly whine about the site being a right-wing echo chamber as if it's our fault most of their allies rage-quit because reality was scaring them.

a reply to: CarlLaFong

I'm aware of who most new/old members are.

Not all though. But in this thread anyway.

a reply to: YourFaceAgain

And where did they go?



....Reddit lol

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: putnam6

Between Desantis, Haley, Ramaswamy, Burgum and Trump, Trump won.


Like it or not, there was a primary process for one set of people.

Meanwhile RFK, Sanders just...exist.

Democrats don't believe in democracy. They get told who their candidate is, and they're seemingly just fine with it. They haven't got to pick their candidate since Obama in 2008.

a reply to: YourFaceAgain

As another member here says, the D's will do anything and everything to win an election, even stoop to new lows.

Anything but...run a better candidate.

a reply to: wAnchorofCarp

It's fairly obvious that Biden immediately endorsed Harris in order to get revenge on Obama and Pelosi for their coup by threatening to 25th him if he didn't leave voluntarily.

a reply to: CarlLaFong

Does the quick endorsement from the Clintons also support this notion?

The lagging of the Obamas lend more credit to it for sure.

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: CarlLaFong

Does the quick endorsement from the Clintons also support this notion?

The lagging of the Obamas lend more credit to it for sure.

Pelosi and the Obamas know Harris can't win...they had another candidate in mind for the DNC convention.
Dementia Joe probably actually thought Kamala could win...and would reflect well on his legacy.

a reply to: CarlLaFong

I like the idea of him tossing a grenade into the party that wanted to 25th him.

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: CarlLaFong

Does the quick endorsement from the Clintons also support this notion?

The lagging of the Obamas lend more credit to it for sure.

Pelosi and the Obamas know Harris can't win...they had another candidate in mind for the DNC convention.
Dementia Joe probably actually thought Kamala could win...and would reflect well on his legacy.

Or he just doesn't care and wanted to screw them. He's all about himself. If he's not on the ticket, I doubt he gives a damn whether the Democrats win or lose.

Although, unfortunately, the media are going all in on Harris. I don't think it's all that certain that she can't win.