Trump made a small mistake and said "West Virginia" instead of "Virginia." Kamala had the opportunity to correct him, but she's too dumb, and didn't.
Kamala was asked "Is the country better now than it was 4 years ago?" Her response was "We have record-high inflation," which equates to "No."
Kamala used projection by saying that "Trump divides people by race," because that is absolutely 100% what Democrats, including herself, do every day.
Trump prevailed in the debate. He proved what a liar Kamala ia and he did it effortlessly. When you're chosen by God to do a task, you prevail.
Aaron Thomas wrote to All <=-
Trump made a small mistake and said "West Virginia" instead of
"Virginia." Kamala had the opportunity to correct him, but she's too
dumb, and didn't.
Kamala didn't speak with her Foghorn Leghorn accent, proving that she
was just being a fake b***h at her speech in Detroit.
Kamala used projection by saying that "Trump divides people by race," because that is absolutely 100% what Democrats, including herself, do every day.
Kamala didn't answer a single question that was presented to her. All
she did was react childishly to everything Trump said.
Kamala said "I'll reunite this deeply divided country," but that's the same thing that Biden said when he took office, and he didn't do it!
Trump told Kamala "If you're going to close the border, stop wasting
time and go do it right now." But she refused! And the border is still open!
Kamala said "I'll reunite this deeply divided country," but that's th same thing that Biden said when he took office, and he didn't do it!
And it give us even more evidence (as if we needed it), that these
people are pathological liars.
Trump told Kamala "If you're going to close the border, stop wasting time and go do it right now." But she refused! And the border is stil open!
Bernie Sanders admitted on camera that she will say anything to get elected.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
In reality, there's no way to "unite the country" because we have the freedom to support one party or the other. We can "unite the states,"
but that's already been done. I think Harris/Biden are trying to use flowery words to attract idiots, which has always been their best
policy.
He's right, and he's also right to be bitter. He's the one who should
be on the ballot (not her.)
It's safe to assume that the world's elite
would rather bank on gender and skin color than on democracy and
primary results.
In reality, there's no way to "unite the country" because we have the freedom
In reality, there's no way to "unite the country" because we have the freedom to support one party or the other. We can "unite the states," but that's already been done. I think Harris/Biden are trying to use flowery words to attract idiots, which has always been their best policy.
We used to be united in that we all (pretty much) wanted the same thing. The big difference in parties was how to accomplish it.
Today you have the Leftists who want to destroy the country and everyone else wanting to preserve it. So, ya, there's no way to "unite the country" because the Left doesn't want to unite. Everything else is
just a symptom of that.
He's right, and he's also right to be bitter. He's the one who should be on the ballot (not her.)
But he would lose. Bernie's a useless, stupid Communist. But he's at least honest about it.
It's safe to assume that the world's elite
would rather bank on gender and skin color than on democracy and primary results.
Well, class warfare didn't work out. Even Marx was disappointed that the workers didn't rise up. He didn't understand that a "rising tide lifts all boats". But that was mostly because Marx never worked in his life.
In reality, there's no way to "unite the country" because we have the fr
Maybe not, but we used to be a lot more united than we are now. IMHO, it is another symptom of the internet/social media age.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
That's a good point. But they were too dumb to ask Biden "How you gonna
do that?"
We have to bend on some stuff to unite with the left because the left never will. They're still demanding a magic wand that promises to "fix everything."
But will this be enough? It should be. The only talking point any
leftists have had in the past few years is abortion (they are a bunch
of Mr Garrisons.)
But he would lose. Bernie's a useless, stupid Communist. But he's at least honest about it.
Don't you think he would stand a better chance of winning than Kamala?
I believe he got 2nd place in the decennial Democrats' primary.
Well, class warfare didn't work out. Even Marx was disappointed that the workers didn't rise up. He didn't understand that a "rising tide lifts all boats". But that was mostly because Marx never worked in his life.
This explains why so many leftists admire him so much.
We have to bend on some stuff to unite with the left because the left never will. They're still demanding a magic wand that promises to "fi everything."
Bending is how we ended up in this situation. We, as a country, need to decide what we will not bend on. Anyone who doesn't like that is free
to leave. This isn't North Korea.
Yes, Bernie has a better chance than Kamala, but no chance against
Trump. People do not want socialism.
Yup. I've seen this among many groups time and time again. They don't want the socialist-type leaders pushed out because they will have to actually work and certainly won't make the money that their inflated
egos think they should.
I first recognized this way back in the 1990's when Perot Systems (remember Ross Perot) was looking at taking over the Post Office. The postal workers paniced and protested something horrible. Because under Perot, most would be fired and the rest would have to actually put in a full day's work every day. They can't have that.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
We don't have to bend, but we may need our candidate to bend a little
in order to get some needed votes.
We can try to convince leftists (and moderates) to help us but that's
hard to accomplish.
It would be easier if our candidate bends a little
for them now on something(s) that are less of a big deal. (Anything to save the country even if it can only be saved for 4 years.)
Based on what I've seen, Kamala is just as big of a socialist as
Bernie. All the Democrats are down with Socialism.
Good point. Too many people want to live a low budget lifestyle because they think that's better than working for a better life, and Democrats
are threatening to force it on all of us.
He should have kept it quiet until after the election. We would have
been better off with him instead of George HW.
It would be easier if our candidate bends a little
for them now on something(s) that are less of a big deal. (Anything t save the country even if it can only be saved for 4 years.)
But bend on what? The Left has already pushed their side so far left
that there
is no longer common ground.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
You're right. I was thinking that we could bend on abortion, like reinstate roe v wade, but what would we ask them to do in exchange for that?
There's dozens of things that we need them to bend on,
That's why Joe was full of it when he said it and that's why Kamala is full of it when she says it. We have the right to be divided on issues
and there's no shame in it. Nobody's gonna "unite the country" unless
they impose socialism on us and make it illegal for us to be divided on issues.
But all Roe vs. Wade did was make abortion legal at the federal level.
It was nothing more than a ploy for the Elitists to have the Federal
Gov't control everything. And it should never have been allowed to
stand in the first place.
Striking down Roe vs. Wade did nothing more than push the decision down
to the states where it belonged in the first place.
There's no middle ground here. There's no compromise with these people.
You're right. I was thinking that we could bend on abortion, like reinstate roe
v wade, but what would we ask them to do in exchange for that?
You know that, and I know that. But the dummies are hypnotized by the narrative that they need federal approval for ______. Since properly educating them is futile, my thought was that we could give them back their rights to infanticide in exchange for them supporting our
candidate (but of course there's not enough in the deal for them because our list of demands is much higher than theirs.)
You're right. I was thinking that we could bend on abortion, like reinsta >roe
v wade, but what would we ask them to do in exchange for that?
Close the border?
You know that, and I know that. But the dummies are hypnotized by the narrative that they need federal approval for ______. Since properly educating them is futile, my thought was that we could give them back their rights to infanticide in exchange for them supporting our candidate (but of course there's not enough in the deal for them beca our list of demands is much higher than theirs.)
A funny thought occurred to me that one could fill in the blank with anything to do with guns, and it reads pretty much the same from the
other side of the aisle.
You know that, and I know that. But the dummies are hypnotized b narrative that they need federal approval for ______. Since prop educating them is futile, my thought was that we could give them their rights to infanticide in exchange for them supporting our candidate (but of course there's not enough in the deal for them our list of demands is much higher than theirs.)
A funny thought occurred to me that one could fill in the blank with anything to do with guns, and it reads pretty much the same from the other side of the aisle.
I wouldn't mind if guns weren't federally protected and were left for the states to decide. Then if I didn't like my state's gun laws then I could just move to a different state. Lots of people are leaving my state already because they don't like the laws.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
You know that, and I know that. But the dummies are hypnotized by the narrative that they need federal approval for abortion.
Since properly
educating them is futile, my thought was that we could give them back their rights to infanticide in exchange for them supporting our
candidate (but of course there's not enough in the deal for them
because our list of demands is much higher than theirs.)
This is true and I didn't realize it until we had this discussion. If
we give them their federal rights to infanticide back, then they'll
start crying about something else stupid. There's no such thing as a productive conversation with a leftist because they don't recognize
their own ignorance, even when it's explained to them politely.
Randall Schad wrote to Aaron Thomas <=-
You would be in the very distinct minority, I believe. If that's your position, and you would accept an amendment or repeal of 2A, I have to respect that.
You're right. I was thinking that we could bend on abortion, like reinst
roe
v wade, but what would we ask them to do in exchange for that?
Close the border?
Yea but we have lots of needs, not just to close the border. We also need the existing illegals to be detected, located, and deported. We also need tons of other things. But notice how the only thing those lunatics want is just the right to abortion. That's all they care about, because that's how they've been
trained.
Striking down Roe vs. Wade did nothing more than push the decision down to the states where it belonged in the first place.
Exactly. The more stuff that gets handled by the states, the more freedom we all have in general.
The lefties should see it the same way with abortion. If your state don't allo
it, and you need one, then go to another state to get it. Just like with fireworks and with cheap smokes.
Since properly
educating them is futile, my thought was that we could give them back their rights to infanticide in exchange for them supporting our candidate (but of course there's not enough in the deal for them because our list of demands is much higher than theirs.)
I think a more humane thing to do is simply let the meritocracy loose. Then these people will be spending their time hard at work at their minimum-wage job (since that's the only kind they can do). No more free time to blocks roads "protesting" and no more money to funnel to
socialist candidates.
Close the border?
Yea but we have lots of needs, not just to close the border. We also nee existing illegals to be detected, located, and deported. We also need to other things. But notice how the only thing those lunatics want is just right to abortion. That's all they care about, because that's how they'v been
trained.
I don't think that is all they want but, even assuming it is, I am sure there is a laundry list of things we could counter with. Pick the most important one and go with that one.
Randall Schad wrote to Aaron Thomas <=-
You would be in the very distinct minority, I believe. If that's your position, and you would accept an amendment or repeal of 2A, I have t respect that.
The first 10 Amendments can't be repealed. They are not items granting
us rights. They are statements of the rights that we have as human beings.
Exactly. The more stuff that gets handled by the states, the more freedo all have in general.
That depends on what state you live in, and what freedoms are most important to you.
The lefties should see it the same way with abortion. If your state don' allo
it, and you need one, then go to another state to get it. Just like with fireworks and with cheap smokes.
Fireworks and cheap smokes are not medical procedures. You don't have to necessarily worry about overnight accomodations, who will drive you back, or any physical complications...
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
What do you mean by let meritocracy loose? That's another thing that we have to fight the Democrats on; they aren't into meritocracy.
What do you mean by let meritocracy loose? That's another thing that have to fight the Democrats on; they aren't into meritocracy.
The Elitists have been pushing against meritocracy for decades.
Unions - since they do not promote the best.
The concept of "seniority" instead of choosing the best person.
Minimum wage.
And lately, DEI.
oFireworks and cheap smokes are not medical procedures. You don't have
ack,necessarily worry about overnight accomodations, who will drive you
rocedureor any physical complications...
But those are issues that everyone faces when they need a lifesaving
For example, anyone having a brain aneurysm in Binghamton faces theossibilit
of death while being helicopter-flown to Albany for the surgery. This is because we don't have that kind of surgeon here in Binghamton.
But since there are so many other threats looming, I won't get fixated onhis
issue. Instead, I'll join the plight of the people who want to live in a country that requires id for entry, for the greater good.
Are people going to judge you for needing aneurysm surgery? Will you
need to travel possibly multiple states away to get the surgery?
OTOH, will you get a helicopter ride if you want/need an abortion?
But since there are so many other threats looming, I won't get fixated ohis
issue. Instead, I'll join the plight of the people who want to live in a country that requires id for entry, for the greater good.
Sounds like a better plan.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
That would be a good deal: We give them abortion, and in exchange they give us a closed border, deportation of all illegals, and equality the Martin Luther King way.
| Sysop: | deepend |
|---|---|
| Location: | Calgary, Alberta |
| Users: | 253 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 14:53:35 |
| Calls: | 1,646 |
| Files: | 3,994 |
| Messages: | 387,903 |