I traditionally have a thread heading to the election, here we go.
Get out the popcorn for this one.
Quote
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is expected to formally announce next week he is running for president in 2024, NBC News reported Thursday, citing two sources familiar with the matter.
The governor's official entry into the Republican primary field will put him head-to-head with former President Donald Trump, the party's current frontrunner for the nomination. Trump has already spent months treating DeSantis as his primary campaign rival, thrashing him with torrents of criticism over his gubernatorial record, his political skills and his personality.
Nah... we already know that you believe Trump even when he isfound guilty. We don't have to wait.
Evidence that Trump tried to get Clinton jailed is gas lighting?
On that point. Was Trump able to get Clinton "investigated/jailed"? It seems more like he tried to get her investigated. Something people do all the time.
No. Because the criminal justice system is independent of the POTUS. A president can't just say " put that person in jail" the way you want people to think he can to create fear.
So "Trump wants to jail people" is just a way to create fear when in reality he couldn't do that just by saying so. Another failing political tactic by democrats. Whole they twits laws to find reasons to charge Trump.
Ypu think that doesn't instill fear in people. If Trump can be investigated so rigorously, what stops normal citizens from the same fate?
Nah... we already know that you believe Trump even when he isfound guilty. We don't have to wait.
Evidence that Trump tried to get Clinton jailed is gas lighting?
Galighting by asking
toomuchbaloney said:
If Trump was convicted of rape in court you would defend him and criticize the process as a political persecution just like you did when he was found liable for sexual abuse or fraud or multiple felonies.
I doubt that you would find any sexual assault claim against Trump to be credible.
Perhaps the other member can discuss the next time the family get together if I would defend Trump if he raped someone? When they ate fin8shed joking about "raping man boys" on stage?
Oh really? How much time shall I give to consider that Trump wouldn't lose a vote if he raped a boy on stage? Or that conservative politicians talk about genitals to manipulate their voters? Shall I spend time pondering the validity of the Mango Mussolini nickname?
And these thoughts coming from folks who continually dismiss Trump voters as brainless cult followers who value his Hitler-like attributes.
I appreciate how much consideration you've given my pov over the years, and I look forward to hearing your thoughts on the above.
Actually, I'm quite familiar with both the real and the fake conservative points of view. It's where I started out: in a far-right conservative (as in John Birch Society) household in a rigidly conservative Catholic family. After one parent finished ranting at the dinner table about fluoridated drinking water, the other would regale us with tales about how she could smell the negros in the balcony at mass every Sunday. All this before dutifully reciting the rosary every evening.
Half my education occurred in sister school (iykyk), including the beginnings of my post-high school education. I've monitored the conservative zeitgeist since the days of Bill Buckley, through the first civil rights battles and the start of the southern strategy, Reagan's union busting and mythical welfare queens and Newt Gingrich's contract with America. I watched Rush Limbaugh morph from a serious (if wrong-headed) advocate for conservative principles into a hypocritical junky taking pot-shots at libruls because it helped the ratings. Fake conservatives have been pretty much stuck there ever since.
As a radical gay pagan single mom of a biracial son and a trans grandson, I'm VERY aware of the conservative POV, including the Christian theocrats, violent fascists, and the ethically flexible capitalists that fund them all. Being able to see them coming is a matter of survival. Deliberate ignorance of their existence, as you are deliberately ignorant of the so-called far left landscape, is NOT an evolutionary advantage.
As for my "thoughts on the above", they are simply this: you get back what you put out. Conservatives started this race to the bottom. If all you have to offer to a discussion is snark, then that's what you get back.
Actually, I'm quite familiar with both the real and the fake conservative points of view. It's where I started out: in a far-right conservative (as in John Birch Society) household in a rigidly conservative Catholic family. After one parent finished ranting at the dinner table about fluoridated drinking water, the other would regale us with tales about how she could smell the negros in the balcony at mass every Sunday. All this before dutifully reciting the rosary every evening.
Half my education occurred in sister school (iykyk), including the beginnings of my post-high school education. I've monitored the conservative zeitgeist since the days of Bill Buckley, through the first civil rights battles and the start of the southern strategy, Reagan's union busting and mythical welfare queens and Newt Gingrich's contract with America. I watched Rush Limbaugh morph from a serious (if wrong-headed) advocate for conservative principles into a hypocritical junky taking pot-shots at libruls because it helped the ratings. Fake conservatives have been pretty much stuck there ever since.
As a radical gay pagan single mom of a biracial son and a trans grandson, I'm VERY aware of the conservative POV, including the Christian theocrats, violent fascists, and the ethically flexible capitalists that fund them all. Being able to see them coming is a matter of survival. Deliberate ignorance of their existence, as you are deliberately ignorant of the so-called far left landscape, is NOT an evolutionary advantage.
As for my "thoughts on the above", they are simply this: you get back what you put out. Conservatives started this race to the bottom of marketing spin ... don't complain when someone else does it better.
That's all very interesting, but has nothing to do with you with your comment to me and my reply.
Except that you proved me right in that I waste too much time here.
Actually, I'm quite familiar with both the real and the fake conservative points of view. It's where I started out: in a far-right conservative (as in John Birch Society) household in a rigidly conservative Catholic family. After one parent finished ranting at the dinner table about fluoridated drinking water, the other would regale us with tales about how she could smell the negros in the balcony at mass every Sunday. All this before dutifully reciting the rosary every evening.
Half my education occurred in sister school (iykyk), including the beginnings of my post-high school education. I've monitored the conservative zeitgeist since the days of Bill Buckley, through the first civil rights battles and the start of the southern strategy, Reagan's union busting and mythical welfare queens and Newt Gingrich's contract with America. I watched Rush Limbaugh morph from a serious (if wrong-headed) advocate for conservative principles into a hypocritical junky taking pot-shots at libruls because it helped the ratings. Fake conservatives have been pretty much stuck there ever since.
As a radical gay pagan single mom of a biracial son and a trans grandson, I'm VERY aware of the conservative POV, including the Christian theocrats, violent fascists, and the ethically flexible capitalists that fund them all. Being able to see them coming is a matter of survival. Deliberate ignorance of their existence, as you are deliberately ignorant of the so-called far left landscape, is NOT an evolutionary advantage.
As for my "thoughts on the above", they are simply this: you get back what you put out. Conservatives started this race to the bottom of marketing spin ... don't complain when someone else does it better.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Crusades said:
On that point. Was Trump able to get Clinton "investigated/jailed"? It seems more like he tried to get her investigated. Something people do all the time.
No. Because the criminal justice system is independent of the POTUS. A president can't just say " put that person in jail" the way you want people to think he can to create fear.
So "Trump wants to jail people" is just a way to create fear when in reality he couldn't do that just by saying so. Another failing political tactic by democrats. Whole they twits laws to find reasons to charge Trump.
Ypu think that doesn't instill fear in people. If Trump can be investigated so rigorously, what stops normal citizens from the same fate?
Another democrat failure.
He wasn't able then, team Trump won't make that mistake again. That's why there's a focus on loyalty for Trump's next administration.
The independence of the DOJ changes under Project 2025. Trump already tried to take control of it in his first administration. Of course he will do that again, only this time he will know that he must have loyalists in those key positions.
Indeed, what stops the FBI from investigating a citizen who plots to overthrow the government?
Crusades said:
Galighting by asking
Perhaps the other member can discuss the next time the family get together if I would defend Trump if he raped someone? When they ate fin8shed joking about "raping man boys" on stage?
Nah... it's not gas lighting to ask about something that really happened.
...The Phoenix Fire Department was able to open the mailbox and extinguish the fire and the Postal Inspector took possession of the damaged ballots and miscellaneous mail, police said.
Phoenix police initially said that approximately 20 electoral ballots were damaged, though the Arizona Secretary of State's Office later said it believes the fire only destroyed five ballots while warning that the final figure could still change.
Glad they arrested a subject. Mailboxes in Philly suburb have opening narrowed to just permit 2 envelopes being dropped in, years ago after cyanide poisoning and previous mailbombs.
"This is just one instance in a pattern of people trying to sow doubt and mistrust in our elections," said City Commissioner Seth Bluestein (R).
Quote
A Republican elections official in Philadelphia called out Elon Musk on Wednesday for spreading "disinformation" by retweeting a false claim that a Center City social services organization was involved in widespread ballot harvesting.
Late Tuesday evening, Musk — the SpaceX founder who has been using his wealth and influence to help former President Donald Trump win Pennsylvania in the fast-approaching election — retweeted a post stating that Broad Street Love has "5,200 voters" at its address and implied that the nongovernmental organization was involved in harvesting thousands of votes in 2020.
"Homeless Services NGOs harvested hundreds of thousands of mail-in ballots from transients in 2020. This single-site NGO in Philly has thousands alone,” wrote the user @fentasyl, above a screen grab from Broad Street Love's website describing how it provides a mailing address for unhoused people, which helps them obtain identification, search for jobs, receive benefits, establish permanent residency, and vote....
"Hi, @elonmusk,” Bluestein wrote on X on Wednesday. "The post you shared is spreading disinformation. 1. There are not 5,200 people registered to vote from that address. 2. In the 2020 General fewer than 150 ballots were mailed to that address, most of which were not returned.”...
Glad they arrested a subject. Mailboxes in Philly suburb have opening narrowed to just permit 2 envelopes being dropped in, years ago after cyanide poising and previous mailbombs.
We should expect all manner of shenanigans from Trump's most radicalized devotees.
Crusades
1,655 Posts
On that point. Was Trump able to get Clinton "investigated/jailed"? It seems more like he tried to get her investigated. Something people do all the time.
No. Because the criminal justice system is independent of the POTUS. A president can't just say " put that person in jail" the way you want people to think he can to create fear.
So "Trump wants to jail people" is just a way to create fear when in reality he couldn't do that just by saying so. Another failing political tactic by democrats. Whole they twits laws to find reasons to charge Trump.
Ypu think that doesn't instill fear in people. If Trump can be investigated so rigorously, what stops normal citizens from the same fate?
Another democrat failure.