The debate. Who wins?

I'm not very political but I was watching the debate shaking my head - Trump comes off like he means what he says That Harris chick is just spouting what she thinks people want to hear you can actually see the lies leave her mouth.

Now the News will be preaching poles say oh inflation is down oh more jobs oh interest rates are down etc.....

How dumb is the American voter to believe the same spill over and over, I'm surprised they have not been shouting Healthcare .

Looks like Biden watched the debate

originally posted by: Annee

She is not president yet.

When she is — you can start the countdown.

No. Her countdown started the minute she entered politics.
That's when her 'proving herself' started.
She is 60 years old and her boyfriend, Willie Brown, got her appointed to political office 30 years ago.
Again .. she doesn't start proving herself after getting elected.
That's like 'you have to pass the bill in order to find out what is in the bill'.
That's hogwash.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

But I also can’t get a fully automatic or suppressed without special licensing. So it’s not as absolute as you say.

And this is wrong, according to the Constitution.

There isn't an "except these items" in the 2nd amendment and further clarification lies within the Federalist Papers as to exactly how the 2a was meant to be used by the People.


While I appreciate a middle of the road voice and uncomfortable facts as they apply to sides, I feel it is important for you to hear this. Your middle ground shifts with the Overton Window. And lumping in people with sides, and removing them from sides dependent upon what point you're trying to make isn't really a great way to ground a perspective.

No hate, or derision here, just an honest assertion.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: Annee

Kamala is in office, she is saddling herself with
the dictator image, . . .

Your opinion.

Not mine.

Thank you captain obvious.

I've come to the conclusion that when you repeat this NPC response that it is equivalent to "I have no response to what you said."

Again — I am anti-Trump. That’s it. I want him gone.

I am not pro anyone.

However — Kamala deserves a chance to prove herself.

Annee she's had the chance to prove herself . To prove her Character .

She's failed miserably . I'm not just talking about her 4 years in the White House to this point .

Kamala Proved who she really was when she accepted the 'Democratic Nomination ' . She didn't Run , She was not voted in by the people . She was put in place because of her access to the DNC War Chest .

If Kamala had a single authentic bone in her body , If she gave a damn about " Democracy " she would have ran in the Primary as just another candidate . She would have showed the American people that she has integrity and honor .

But no once again she was handed her position in life . Which is why she has the demeanor of an entitled child and they treat her as such .

She's earned nothing , She's done nothing and she could have .

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: Annee

3.5 years isn't enough proof?

She is not president yet.

When she is — you can start the countdown.

She's been the vice president....for over three years

Regardless, it's not like you'll have a negative opinion as your logic and rationale are utterly broken and inconsistent.

This is yet just another example.

I actually have no opinion on Kamala as VP.

Which past VP has played any significant role in the presidency?

It’s more like they’re a background shadow.

If she’s elected president — she deserves the right to prove herself.

originally posted by: andy06shake
What did Trump do to prove himself aside from a bit of reality TV and being a landlord?

Not a whole lot that you would want a POTUS to prove themselves with before being elected.

He was a highly successful businessman and he had policies that people wanted.

He had an attitude that people wanted in a POTUS as well. People were tired of the politicians.

That's it. He had none of the Washington DC experience that someone should have, none of the executive experience of running a state, none of the international experience, none of the accomplishments other than economic with a major business .. none of it.

originally posted by: Annee
If she’s elected president — she deserves the right to prove herself.

Again ... she is supposed to prove herself BEFORE she gets elected to the office. Saying 'hey lets elect this person and then see if they can actually do the job' is insane. She has had 30 years in politics to prove herself. If she hasn't done it by now, then she's not intelligent enough and not capable enough for the job.

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

I think you missed her point.

Facts, truth, reality don't need to apply to her and she justified it plainly. "anti-Trump."

Rational, logical people use a set of standards, values etc to guide them. A culmination of facts that lead them to a truth. When it comes to Trump, Annee need not have those things because her truth is validated by her irrational hatred.

But she's in plentiful company.....

a reply to: wAnchorofCarp

No hate detected.

Although, I wouldn’t classify myself as middle of the road.

I have strong political beliefs, I just try to understand where people are coming from, and that gets clouded in the hyperbolic discourse we see today. So I try to view things as honestly as I can.

I don’t think America will end if either gets elected, I slightly prefer Trump but it’s no secret I don’t like or support him. If he or Kamala wins, we might have a little bit rougher of a time, but our lives won’t be super different. Things still have to pass congress and senate, so we can disregard most of their extreme talking points they’re using for the election.

Duly noted on lumping people in with sides though, I should be more attentive to that. I like viewing things issue by issue and know other people do too, including partisans.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: Annee

3.5 years isn't enough proof?

She is not president yet.

When she is — you can start the countdown.

She's been the vice president....for over three years

Regardless, it's not like you'll have a negative opinion as your logic and rationale are utterly broken and inconsistent.

This is yet just another example.

I actually have no opinion on Kamala as VP.

Which past VP has played any significant role in the presidency?

It’s more like they’re a background shadow.

If she’s elected president — she deserves the right to prove herself.

One thing you're really good at Annee.

Is consistently and accurately making my points for me.

I appreciate that, and it is a valuable service.

originally posted by: Ravenwatcher
Trump comes off like he means what he says . . .

What exactly does he say?

He talks around a subject.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Appreciate the dialog.

I think America is ending. Can Trump save it is the question I ask.

The lawfare and the unequal application of laws and justice ensure that. When we got to a point where we made carve outs for the political class is when it started. These people, and yes even Trump, should be held to a MUCH higher standard and scrutiny.

Like I always say, if EVERY plotitician was held to the exact same standard as Trump has been held to, I'd have no problem with it.

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Appreciate the dialog.

I think America is ending. Can Trump save it is the question I ask.

The lawfare and the unequal application of laws and justice ensure that. When we got to a point where we made carve outs for the political class is when it started. These people, and yes even Trump, should be held to a MUCH higher standard and scrutiny.

Like I always say, if EVERY plotitician was held to the exact same standard as Trump has been held to, I'd have no problem with it.

America started ending when Movie stars and like became able to influence elections - Taylor Swift has 8 million SWIFTYS and endorsed Harris I call that election interference and should be against the law how do we know she wasn't paid ?.

a reply to: Ravenwatcher

I have a different perspective on that.

Why are people so uninformed and reliant on popular culture characters to inform them of who they should vote for?

I feel the same way about news and media as well.

Why are people so dumb to trust a Maddow or a Hannity?

a reply to: Ravenwatcher

Anyone who relies on an entertainer, or a TV political commentator, to tell them how to vote ... they shouldn't be voting. Unfortunately, they get to vote. Stupid is as stupid does.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Was Trump not an "entertainer" and " TV political commentator" of sorts before he became POTUS?

As to who should be able to vote.

Surely that should be everyone eligible, including stupid people?

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: FlyersFan

Was Trump not an "entertainer" and " TV political commentator" of sorts before he became POTUS?

As to who should be able to vote.

Surely that should be everyone eligible, including stupid people?

Trump never influenced an Election with his star power doubt he could of anyway ---- Ronald Reagan was a Movie star but still no social media fans to influence.

I wonder who the Island Boys are going to endorse ??

a reply to: Ravenwatcher

So is that a yes then?

Edit:

I wonder what the Island Boys opinion is ??

Whats that?