D

Dude#1279435

Audioholic Spartan
I don't think it's because Kamala is a woman or racism, but a good analysis of why the right might hate Walz. The right needs this type of analysis. In the end, I think it's because he projects happiness, a trait not at all existent in the Trump era. (Mind you I'm not a poster child of happiness.)
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
I think his opposition to early voting is similarly irrational.
Considering the very high rate of early voting it's likely not that advantageous of Trump to disparage early voters. In 2020 it was 64% early voting but then there was also COVID-19.
Since he lost the last election, perhaps in his mind, 2 + 2 = early voters are bad for him. All very rational. :D
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
I finally filled out my ballot. Tomorrow I'll go drop it off.

I can now officially ignore all election related ads, fund raisers, and propaganda. Truth be told, I've been ignoring this for months. November 5th can't come soon enough.
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
I'm waiting for drumphy to work 30 minutes at McDonalds....that is a weird rant he's got going on that one, too. Mental illness is evident.
 
BoredSysAdmin

BoredSysAdmin

Audioholic Slumlord
J.D Vance leaked dossier:
fun reading. spoiler alert - they did poor job hiding some of his real estate details, as links to county auditor still show all the details :)
 
davidscott

davidscott

Audioholic Spartan
Not good choices either way IMHO. But I won't vote for a conman, grifter, convicted felon, sexual predator, seditionist, etc. Cmon people this guy is the worst of the worst.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
Today is Tuesday, October 1. Five long weeks remain until Election Day.

This time, we all know that Election Day won't settle anything as long as The Orange Peril's teams of lawyers, MAGA hordes, and US Supreme Court are willing to interfere.

Does any one want to place a bet that this won't happen?
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Spartan
Today is Tuesday, October 1. Five long weeks remain until Election Day.

This time, we all know that Election Day won't settle anything as long as The Orange Peril's teams of lawyers, MAGA hordes, and US Supreme Court are willing to interfere.

Does any one want to place a bet that this won't happen?
All of the three parts or just some of them?

I guess that, given what we've seen so far, a combination of Trump lawyers and the Supreme Court interfering is not unlikely. I'm much more sceptical that we'll see another insurrection as many of those behind it (lower levels) have faced real consequences for their actions on that day and that sends a message as well as taking out the ones most prone to this type of violence.

The lower courts have consistently slapped down Trump lawyers claims of "election fraud" in the 2020 election over 60 times, but then we have your US Supreme Courts that has a chequered track record, especially the immunity they gave the US President (Trump really, and practising sloth to his advantage).

Perhaps President Biden can give orders of firing a few well placed HIMARS, as Commander in Chief fulfilling his core duties. :rolleyes: And just in case he can promise and give pardons as well, another "core" duty I gather.
 
Last edited:
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
All of the three parts or just some of them?

I guess that, given what we've seen so far, a combination of Trump lawyers and the Supreme Court interfering is not unlikely. I'm much more sceptical that we'll see another insurrection as many of those behind it (lower levels) have faced real consequences for their actions on that day and that sends a message as well as taking out the ones most prone to this type of violence.

The lower courts have consistently slapped down Trump lawyers claims of "election fraud" in the 2020 election over 60 times, but then we have your US Supreme Courts that has a chequered track record, especially the immunity they gave the US President (Trump really, and practising sloth to his advantage).

Perhaps President Biden can give orders of firing a few well placed HIMARS, as Commander in Chief fulfilling his core duties. :rolleyes: And just in case he can promise and give pardons as well, another "core" duty I gather.
Unlike 4 years ago, Washington will be an armed camp. A month early isn’t too soon. Maybe 50,000 National Guard troops with weapons. This is, of course, if the MAGA hordes are fool enough to try the same thing again, but with 10-fold more people.

The Supreme Court is another matter. Maybe they’ll respond if angry mobs with pitchforks & torches march on the Supreme Court building. They would have to be taken into protective custody.

Just wondering.
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
...

Does any one want to place a bet that this won't happen?
I can afford 1cent. :D :D :D

I picked one up in a parking lot a few days ago. But cannot afford, really unwilling to mail it to the winner. :)
 
D

Dude#1279435

Audioholic Spartan
I left out the last few paragraphs as it went into Trump and Fox complaints.


>>>CBS News did not sit idly on the sidelines.

Moderators Norah O'Donnell and Margaret Brennan facilitated a substantive vice presidential debate between J.D. Vance and Tim Walz on Tuesday night, while also interjecting with necessary fact-checks during the high-stakes political showdown.

By clearly — and authoritatively — stating the facts on issues such as climate change and immigration, O'Donnell and Brennan ensured that reality was not warped by Vance, much to the GOP candidate's displeasure. After Brennan fact-checked Vance on the Haitian migrants in Springfield, Vance even complained.

"The rules were that you guys weren’t going to fact check," Vance claimed.

The written rules, however, did not appear to address fact checking. Nevertheless, ahead of the debate, CBS News had initially signaled O'Donnell and Brennan would perhaps avoid doing so in real-time, instead placing the onus on the candidates to fact-check each other. That led to widespread condemnation of CBS News, including from former anchor Dan Rather, who wrote a piece zinging the Tiffany Network.

But, as I reported Monday, CBS News had in fact left open the possibility that the moderators would step in and establish a baseline of truth. When the lights turned on and the cameras started rolling Tuesday night, O’Donnell and Brennan ultimately made the prudent editorial choice to correct the record on issues of significance.

While the fact-checks were effective, the debate wasn’t necessarily perfect. As The New Yorker’s Susan Glasser pointed out, “The conceit of this CBS debate is that this is just a normal policy election, two guys shooting the poop about housing starts and health care financing.”

“Misses the moment pretty dramatically,” Glasser added.
Indeed, the crucial issue of democracy and the January 6 insurrection was relegated to the latter half of the Vance-Walz face-off. And when Vance misled the public on election denialism and declined to say whether Donald Trump lost the 2020 election, O’Donnell and Brennan opted to stay silent.<<<
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
I left out the last few paragraphs as it went into Trump and Fox complaints.


>>>CBS News did not sit idly on the sidelines.

Moderators Norah O'Donnell and Margaret Brennan facilitated a substantive vice presidential debate between J.D. Vance and Tim Walz on Tuesday night, while also interjecting with necessary fact-checks during the high-stakes political showdown.

By clearly — and authoritatively — stating the facts on issues such as climate change and immigration, O'Donnell and Brennan ensured that reality was not warped by Vance, much to the GOP candidate's displeasure. After Brennan fact-checked Vance on the Haitian migrants in Springfield, Vance even complained.

"The rules were that you guys weren’t going to fact check," Vance claimed.

The written rules, however, did not appear to address fact checking. Nevertheless, ahead of the debate, CBS News had initially signaled O'Donnell and Brennan would perhaps avoid doing so in real-time, instead placing the onus on the candidates to fact-check each other. That led to widespread condemnation of CBS News, including from former anchor Dan Rather, who wrote a piece zinging the Tiffany Network.

But, as I reported Monday, CBS News had in fact left open the possibility that the moderators would step in and establish a baseline of truth. When the lights turned on and the cameras started rolling Tuesday night, O’Donnell and Brennan ultimately made the prudent editorial choice to correct the record on issues of significance.

While the fact-checks were effective, the debate wasn’t necessarily perfect. As The New Yorker’s Susan Glasser pointed out, “The conceit of this CBS debate is that this is just a normal policy election, two guys shooting the poop about housing starts and health care financing.”

“Misses the moment pretty dramatically,” Glasser added.
Indeed, the crucial issue of democracy and the January 6 insurrection was relegated to the latter half of the Vance-Walz face-off. And when Vance misled the public on election denialism and declined to say whether Donald Trump lost the 2020 election, O’Donnell and Brennan opted to stay silent.<<<
What? You mean CBS should not have exposed the lies from Vance? :eek:;):D:D:D And he has the audacity to complain that he was caught lying?
Super job, CBS
 
D

Dude#1279435

Audioholic Spartan
If Vance goes goth with the eyeliner, that will bring in the young vote. :cool:
 
D

Dude#1279435

Audioholic Spartan
Chuck Schumer and Soros are putting a lot of money into the Democrat race.

I always LOL when Soros is part of the conspiracy. If it was someone other than Cruz for Republicans, they win TX by 20 pts. Cruz comes across to me as one of the bigger cartoons of the GOP.
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top