View Full Version : Let the debate begin?
I think Harris could stop that sort of thing if she would speak to reporters without a script in hand. I don't think she's done that yet and it doesn't look like she will anytime soon. That's why I think she'll never agree to a debate considering how terribly she fared in 2020. I know she says she's ready and waiting for Trump on ABC but she knows he won't go there due to a lawsuit and if he should change his mind she can always fall back on refusing to debate a convicted felon. I think she's channelling Nancy Pelosi's "We won't know what's in it until we pass it", only this time we won't know her unscripted thoughts until we elect her.
It looks like I was wrong! I just read that Trump today agreed to the ABC debate on Sep 10th as well as two others, one on Fox and one on NBC. Harris then told reporters that she was looking forward to the ABC debate but apparently hasn't agreed to the two additional ones. Maybe she's waiting to see how the first one goes.
Maybe a debate at Folsom Prison?
I'm still not convinced though whether Trump faked things to get out of his obligations.
Biden received 5 deferments due to asthma. Does he still have asthma? Trump also received 5 deferments, 4 for college and one for bad feet.
I read somewhere that during the Vietnam era roughly 60% of potential draftees sought deferment for one reason or another. As a Vietnam era vet myself, I can't recall actually knowing anyone who succeeded in getting one, certainly none of the thousands of young men I served with.
That wasn't it at all. He's getting a lot of justifiable grief for 'stolen valor', wherein he is on record on numerous occasions talking about carrying weapons of war in war, when he actually never did. It's a big no no to imply combat service when you've never been in a combat zone.
I suppose one could quibble about whether serving in the military defending a foreign base that isn’t in a war zone counts for how Walz described it. And from the maga point of view that’s undoubtedly preferable to trying to defend their wildly unpopular project 2025 agenda.
Biden received 5 deferments due to asthma. Does he still have asthma? Trump also received 5 deferments, 4 for college and one for bad feet.
I read somewhere that during the Vietnam era roughly 60% of potential draftees sought deferment for one reason or another. As a Vietnam era vet myself, I can't recall actually knowing anyone who succeeded in getting one, certainly none of the thousands of young men I served with.
I guess none of their daddies were as rich as trump’s. From what I’ve read bone spurs are degenerative if not treated. I wonder what treatment he received since 50 subsequent years of golf would seem to show that in fact he hasn’t had them for that time. We’ll never know of course because like everything else in trump’s life he will never actually be honest with us. Or present receipts to verify anything.
I suppose one could quibble about whether serving in the military defending a foreign base that isn’t in a war zone counts for how Walz described it.
Well, in that case I carried weapons of war while defending bases in Indiana and Alaska during the Vietnam era. Does that make me a combat vet?
Regardless of your approval, I would never imply so.
gimmethesimplelife
8-8-24, 9:50pm
I have not been paying the riveted attention to their antics that you have. There is something about name calling Republicans “Weird” which I find funny in a middle school dopey way but I don’t know the origin of this latest name calling campaign. Makes me want to print up a t-shirt “Proud for being weird.”
i’m just glad they took the ancient incompetent old person in the White House off the table for the next election. I will not forgive them for selling him as a viable candidate. If he had stepped out of the race when he should have, I would be more likely to vote Democratic for president. But the lying liars who lied to us about Biden need not be rewarded. Even though we knew just due to his chronological age he was not fit for 4 more years, I did not realize the extent of his incapacity. I feel personally betrayed.
I don’t know if that sense of betrayal will abate by November. That said, I find Harris to be the basic B Democrat and not especially objectionable. Ldahl, please note I am avoiding Charlie Cooke in all things Harris. I really dont want to know the gory details about her if I end up voting for her.No snark, IL, OK? I have not been paying riveted attention - DH has. I don't have time for riveted attention these days but DH does. He's having a rough time finding work and has taken to keeping the house spotless and cooking meals for myself, himself, and my cousin that I co-own with. So DH is now my news source. I'm so so so lucky sometimes I still don't believe it. Rob
Well, in that case I carried weapons of war while defending bases in Indiana and Alaska during the Vietnam era. Does that make me a combat vet?
Regardless of your approval, I would never imply so.
I’m not in the habit of denigrating vets for their service the way trump is. I suppose in Republican minds my father’s service in Germany during the early 50’s is also ‘lesser’?
I suppose in Republican minds my father’s service in Germany during the early 50’s is also ‘lesser’?
Nope, regardless of how you always group us all together according to your own bias, we are not a stereotype.
Plus, I've not heard of anyone referring to Walz's service, or anyone else's for that matter, as "lesser", did I miss something?
iris lilies
8-8-24, 10:28pm
No snark, IL, OK? I have not been paying riveted attention - DH has. I don't have time for riveted attention these days but DH does. He's having a rough time finding work and has taken to keeping the house spotless and cooking meals for myself, himself, and my cousin that I co-own with. So DH is now my news source. I'm so so so lucky sometimes I still don't believe it. Rob
That is nice that your DH is keeping house. It’s Great to come home to a clean house and prepared meals when you’re working lots and lots of hours.
frugal-one
8-8-24, 11:05pm
I have not been paying the riveted attention to their antics that you have. There is something about name calling Republicans “Weird” which I find funny in a middle school dopey way but I don’t know the origin of this latest name calling campaign. Makes me want to print up a t-shirt “Proud for being weird.”
i’m just glad they took the ancient incompetent old person in the White House off the table for the next election. I will not forgive them for selling him as a viable candidate. If he had stepped out of the race when he should have, I would be more likely to vote Democratic for president. But the lying liars who lied to us about Biden need not be rewarded. Even though we knew just due to his chronological age he was not fit for 4 more years, I did not realize the extent of his incapacity. I feel personally betrayed.
I don’t know if that sense of betrayal will abate by November. That said, I find Harris to be the basic B Democrat and not especially objectionable. Ldahl, please note I am avoiding Charlie Cooke in all things Harris. I really dont want to know the gory details about her if I end up voting for her.
Funny you should comment on that…. trump said something like 30,000 lies while president and just recently while on stage for a short while with Biden was fact-checked and found to have spewed 3,000+ untruths. trump is the ultimate “lying liar”!
frugal-one
8-8-24, 11:08pm
Biden received 5 deferments due to asthma. Does he still have asthma? Trump also received 5 deferments, 4 for college and one for bad feet.
I read somewhere that during the Vietnam era roughly 60% of potential draftees sought deferment for one reason or another. As a Vietnam era vet myself, I can't recall actually knowing anyone who succeeded in getting one, certainly none of the thousands of young men I served with.
When asked trump could not rememer which foot had bones spurs ..
Nope, regardless of how you always group us all together according to your own bias, we are not a stereotype.
Plus, I've not heard of anyone referring to Walz's service, or anyone else's for that matter, as "lesser", did I miss something?
Vance has falsely accused Walz of quitting to avoid going to Iraq while talking up his Iraq service that didn’t involve and wasn’t going to involve combat.
Vance reminds me of Grover Dill from A Christmas Story.
Vance has falsely accused Walz of quitting to avoid going to Iraq while talking up his Iraq service that didn’t involve and wasn’t going to involve combat.
I think that was a small group of senior NCO's who served with Walz who made that accusation. It was then repeated by many news organizations, commentators and apparently Vance. Who really knows if it's true or false?
Brianna Keilar had a something to say about the "swiftboating" of Walz and Vance--how denigrating anyone's military service diminishes everyone's military service. I thought she stated it very well.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/09/politics/video/keilar-military-service-vance-walz-cnc-digvid
Brianna Keilar had a something to say about the "swiftboating" of Walz and Vance--how denigrating anyone's military service diminishes everyone's military service. I thought she stated it very well.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/09/politics/video/keilar-military-service-vance-walz-cnc-digvid
I wholeheartedly agree with her.
I agree with her too. So why is Vance questioning Walt’s service. Is he just a dick? I don’t get it.
I agree with her too. So why is Vance questioning Walt’s service. Is he just a dick? I don’t get it.
Military members don't take stolen valor lightly, if Walz hadn't repeatedly implied he had carried weapons of war in war zones the story of his fellow senior NCO's claims that he retired to avoid being sent to one wouldn't have gotten as much traction as it did and we wouldn't be talking about it now.
I agree with her too.
I think she did a pretty good job of cleaning up the mess she previously made when she suggested on air that Vance shouldn't be repeating others claims when his role as a combat correspondent in Iraq didn't actually put him into combat, even if he was in a combat zone.
Sometimes you have to re-fill the holes you've dug.
The percentage of Americans with a DD-214 is small and rapidly shrinking as the Vietnam generation passes from the scene. A small percentage of that could claim to be combat veterans. While not rising to Dick Blumenthal’s level of valor theft, making ambiguous statements about carrying weapons of war in war and hoping people draw certain conclusions is not particularly honorable. But 24 years in the National Guard or four years in the active USMC, even without a Homeric service record, strike me as more of a commitment than most are willing to make.
I’m hoping the current flap over service records will caution the image engineers of both campaigns against exaggerated claims that drift into truly despicable territory. We can then get back to the hillbilly made good and DFL candidate from Lake Woebegone narratives.
The odd thing is he made the comment as part of a discussion around gun control laws. His point would have been just as well made if he’d said more accurately ‘weapons of war like I carried during my time in the national guard’. Or ‘…carried during my deployment with the national guard.’
But whatever. The swift boat asshole has not succeeded in swift boating a second democratic candidate. Which would be remarkable if he’d succeeded given that the head of the ticket he’s working for is a draft dodger who thinks veterans are suckers and losers.
This is the kind of thing I dislike. He allows the interviewer to say he served in Afghanistan without correcting her. Just nods in acknowledgment.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c5127896/user-clip-walz-nods-afghanistan-vet-description
I think Harris could stop that sort of thing if she would speak to reporters without a script in hand. I don't think she's done that yet and it doesn't look like she will anytime soon. That's why I think she'll never agree to a debate considering how terribly she fared in 2020. I know she says she's ready and waiting for Trump on ABC but she knows he won't go there due to a lawsuit and if he should change his mind she can always fall back on refusing to debate a convicted felon. I think she's channelling Nancy Pelosi's "We won't know what's in it until we pass it", only this time we won't know her unscripted thoughts until we elect her.
It looks like I was wrong! I just read that Trump today agreed to the ABC debate on Sep 10th as well as two others, one on Fox and one on NBC. Harris then told reporters that she was looking forward to the ABC debate but apparently hasn't agreed to the two additional ones. Maybe she's waiting to see how the first one goes.
Just an update on debate strategy. Since my last post on the subject Trump went through a period of suggesting he didn't want to be held to the same rules as the earlier Biden debate which featured closed mic's, no audience and no pre-written notes. The Harris campaign responded that the previous rules must still apply to the upcoming ABC debate and Trump's desire to change them showed just how frightened he was to debate a strong, knowledgeable woman. They also flat out refused an opportunity to debate on Fox and would not commit to one on NBC, ones which Trump did commit to.
In the last day or so Trump has agreed to the rules for the ABC debate which the Harris campaign required, so now they are reversing their previous insistence and saying that mic's must be open at all times and pre-written notes must be allowed. I've always believed that the last thing Harris wants is to repeat her terrible debate performance from the previous election cycle and wondered how she would extricate herself from that particular nightmare this time around, all while blaming her lack of cooperation on her opponent. While there's still two weeks to go I think we're seeing a possible debate killer in the making.
Harris is going to have to come up with a pretty convincing excuse if she doesn't want to end up with egg on her face. Trump seems pretty open to about anything. I suspect there is more to the story and the finger pointing isn't over. The whole thing could be an act to garner publicity, with both sides playing.
I see where Donald is offering pieces of the suit he wore during the debate with his Donald trading card collection. A possible year 2075 RoadShow find?
Former President Trump (https://thehill.com/people/donald-trump/)is offering parts of the suit he wore during a debate with President Biden (https://thehill.com/people/joe-biden/)to supporters who purchase a new series of digital trading cards.
The Republican presidential nominee announced the new trading card collection Tuesday in a video posted on Truth Social (https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/113034481955481796). The new card batch, dubbed the “America First Collection,” includes 50 new images of Trump.
Harris is going to have to come up with a pretty convincing excuse if she doesn't want to end up with egg on her face. Trump seems pretty open to about anything. I suspect there is more to the story and the finger pointing isn't over. The whole thing could be an act to garner publicity, with both sides playing.
I see where Donald is offering pieces of the suit he wore during the debate with his Donald trading card collection. A possible year 2075 RoadShow find?
Former President Trump (https://thehill.com/people/donald-trump/)is offering parts of the suit he wore during a debate with President Biden (https://thehill.com/people/joe-biden/)to supporters who purchase a new series of digital trading cards.
The Republican presidential nominee announced the new trading card collection Tuesday in a video posted on Truth Social (https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/113034481955481796). The new card batch, dubbed the “America First Collection,” includes 50 new images of Trump.
That is so strange. I have a rosary that contains part of a cassock Padre Pio wore (a third class relic) that means a lot to me and brought me a lot of comfort when my mother was dying. I certainly hope he is not going in that direction with his suit.
That is so strange. I have a rosary that contains part of a cassock Padre Pio wore (a third class relic) that means a lot to me and brought me a lot of comfort when my mother was dying. I certainly hope he is not going in that direction with his suit.
haha! That's funny... So now Trump thinks fragments of his clothing are going to be sacred relics (or at least lucrative ones!)
HappyHiker
8-30-24, 4:51pm
haha! That's funny... So now Trump thinks fragments of his clothing are going to be sacred relics (or at least lucrative ones!)
omg, I just threw up a little bit in my mouth...gag me....
iris lilies
8-30-24, 6:03pm
haha! That's funny... So now Trump thinks fragments of his clothing are going to be sacred relics (or at least lucrative ones!)
It IS funny.But it doesn’t make me throw up.
sometimes things can be taken as funny whether or not they are intended as such.
Saw today that John McCain’s son is going to vote for Harris. The republican party is no longer getting his vote. Made me wonder previously what changed the minds of LDahl, Alan and others here to decide that they no longer endorsed trump? Early on no matter what trump did was ok and then not so. What was the tipping point?
Saw today that John McCain’s son is going to vote for Harris. The republican party is no longer getting his vote.
I don't think he's ever been a Republican. CNN says he had been a registered Independent for years until recently changing his voter registration to Democrat. I'm guessing that was done prior to his state's primary.
Made me wonder previously what changed the minds of LDahl, Alan and others here to decide that they no longer endorsed trump? I can't speak for LDAHL or others but I've never endorsed Trump as I've always believed my party of choice had better candidates for the job. I didn't endorse him in 2016, 2020 or now, although I will admit I've spent an awful lot of time here responding to things Trump haters have posted in an effort to provide a differing, hopefully rational point of view on whatever Trump or Republican Party related subject or claim you or JP1 or whomever may make. I'll continue to do that whenever I think it's appropriate, I find the fact it get's me labeled as a Trumpie to be amusing.
Early on no matter what trump did was ok and then not so. What was the tipping point?Speaking for myself, there's never been a tipping point, I have always believed that Trump's personality and narcissism is off-putting and have consistently cautioned Democrats and their media allies to temper their continuous criticism of him and his supporters since it simply makes non Democrats want to vote for him as a way of peacefully poking you in the eye.
As for me, I vote Republican not because I'm enamored with a particular candidate, but because I've never seen a Democratic candidate that reflects my mixture of conservative/classical liberal/libertarian leaning values. Unfortunately, that sort of candidate can certainly never survive in the Democratic Party, or the current Republican Party either for that matter, but we do what we must in hopes of a better tomorrow.
It looks as though Harris has relented to have the microphones muted, which has been a sticking point. Why she wanted them to be unmuted for the whole debate is curious. My best guess is that Donald would not be able to restrain flapping his jib and making a fool of himself. It does seem like a good rule to keep things more civil.
I don't think he's ever been a Republican. CNN says he had been a registered Independent for years until recently changing his voter registration to Democrat. I'm guessing that was done prior to his state's primary.
I can't speak for LDAHL or others but I've never endorsed Trump as I've always believed my party of choice had better candidates for the job. I didn't endorse him in 2016, 2020 or now, although I will admit I've spent an awful lot of time here responding to things Trump haters have posted in an effort to provide a differing, hopefully rational point of view on whatever Trump or Republican Party related subject or claim you or JP1 or whomever may make. I'll continue to do that whenever I think it's appropriate, I find the fact it get's me labeled as a Trumpie to be amusing.
Speaking for myself, there's never been a tipping point, I have always believed that Trump's personality and narcissism is off-putting and have consistently cautioned Democrats and their media allies to temper their continuous criticism of him and his supporters since it simply makes non Democrats want to vote for him as a way of peacefully poking you in the eye.
As for me, I vote Republican not because I'm enamored with a particular candidate, but because I've never seen a Democratic candidate that reflects my mixture of conservative/classical liberal/libertarian leaning values. Unfortunately, that sort of candidate can certainly never survive in the Democratic Party, or the current Republican Party either for that matter, but we do what we must in hopes of a better tomorrow.
So, basically, in doing so… you endorse trump.
It looks as though Harris has relented to have the microphones muted, which has been a sticking point. Why she wanted them to be unmuted for the whole debate is curious. My best guess is that Donald would not be able to restrain flapping his jib and making a fool of himself. It does seem like a good rule to keep things more civil.
Reverse psychology?
So, basically, in doing so… you endorse trump.
LOL, it's a little more complicated than that. Philosophically, I've never believed he is a Republican but rather a disillusioned old style Democrat with an outsized ego.
I find it amusing that trump apparently donated to Kamala’s attorney general campaign back in the day.
And I’m not surprised to see that in addition to McCain’s son and many Republican leaders Liz Cheney has announced her support for Harris. It seems that a significant number of non Maga republicans think a full repudiation of Maga is the only way to get their party back.
https://www.simplelivingforum.net/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by frugal-one https://www.simplelivingforum.net/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (https://www.simplelivingforum.net/showthread.php?p=438360#post438360)
Saw today that John McCain’s son is going to vote for Harris. The republican party is no longer getting his vote.
And I’m not surprised to see that in addition to McCain’s son and many Republican leaders Liz Cheney has announced her support for Harris.
Political disagreements are as common as the family variety. Besides Tim Walz's brother being "100% opposed to my brother's politics", Newsweek is reporting (https://www.newsweek.com/tim-walz-family-support-donald-trump-2024-election-1948797) his extended family in Nebraska seem to prefer Trump.
I'm surprised you guys didn't mention it.
https://d.newsweek.com/en/full/2464358/walz-family.jpg?w=1200&f=c7f15c0a1fbdc897e376d2ff3a561ce9
https://www.simplelivingforum.net/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by frugal-one https://www.simplelivingforum.net/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (https://www.simplelivingforum.net/showthread.php?p=438360#post438360)
Saw today that John McCain’s son is going to vote for Harris. The republican party is no longer getting his vote.
Political disagreements are as common as the family variety. Besides Tim Walz's brother being "100% opposed to my brother's politics", his extended family in Nebraska seem to prefer Trump.
I'm surprised you guys didn't mention it.
https://d.newsweek.com/en/full/2464358/walz-family.jpg?w=1200&f=c7f15c0a1fbdc897e376d2ff3a561ce9
Family members opposing their family candidate is no surprise. Just look at the Kennedy family members that oppose wacko RFK Jr. I was talking about actual politicians and other people who have worked in government. To be fair trump has RFK and that other weirdo Tulsi Gabbard supporting him. I suppose if he’s really trying to emphasize ‘weird’ he’s doing great.
Family members opposing their family candidate is no surprise. Just look at the Kennedy family members that oppose wacko RFK Jr. I was talking about actual politicians and other people who have worked in government.
Oh, you must have thrown me off by mentioning McCain's son.
To be fair trump has RFK and that other weirdo Tulsi Gabbard supporting him.
What's weird about Tulsi Gabbard? And what do you think about her being placed on the TSA Terror Watch List the day after criticizing Harris on TV? I can't think of any reason for that to happen to a former Democrat, Congresswoman and current Lt Col in the Army with several combat zone deployments. Can you?
iris lilies
9-4-24, 10:51pm
Oh, you must have thrown me off by mentioning McCain's son.
What's weird about Tulsi Gabbard? And what do you think about her being placed on the TSA Terror Watch List the day after criticizing Harris on TV? I can't think of any reason for that to happen to a former Democrat, Congresswoman and current Lt Col in the Army with several combat zone deployments. Can you?
yeah, that was my immediate question too, why is Tulsi G weird?
is it entirely because she didnt drinkmthe Koolaid?
Ellen, I didn’t know she’d been placed on the TSA terror watchlist. That is…seemingly unseemingly.
Ellen, I didn’t know she’d been placed on the TSA terror watchlist. That is…seemingly unseemingly.
Yes, the Quiet Skies Program which is a suspected terrorist watchlist. She and her family have been subjected to enhanced searches and surveillance by up to 3 Air Marshalls on each of the last 8 or so flights she's been on, without any prior notification or explanation from TSA. Weird huh?
https://www.simplelivingforum.net/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by frugal-one https://www.simplelivingforum.net/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (https://www.simplelivingforum.net/showthread.php?p=438360#post438360)
Saw today that John McCain’s son is going to vote for Harris. The republican party is no longer getting his vote.
Political disagreements are as common as the family variety. Besides Tim Walz's brother being "100% opposed to my brother's politics", Newsweek is reporting (https://www.newsweek.com/tim-walz-family-support-donald-trump-2024-election-1948797) his extended family in Nebraska seem to prefer Trump.
I'm surprised you guys didn't mention it.
https://d.newsweek.com/en/full/2464358/walz-family.jpg?w=1200&f=c7f15c0a1fbdc897e376d2ff3a561ce9
Incorrect apostrophe use. Can’t take them seriously
What's weird about Tulsi Gabbard?
yeah, that was my immediate question too, why is Tulsi G weird?
I assume that neither of you finds JD Vance weird either.
So, basically, in doing so… you endorse trump.
I know you have had trouble making the distinction, but it is possible to support the Republican Party without supporting Trump. You can dislike Burger King without swearing off cheeseburgers.
I, for one, can’t support Trump and never did. But that doesn’t obligate me to vote for Democratic candidates I find every bit as objectionable (often for similar reasons).
I assume that neither of you finds JD Vance weird either.
I don't know about IL but I never got the memo instructing Democrats to refer to all perceived opponents as 'weird'. I have noticed that virtually all Democratic talking heads have started doing so without explanation why. Can you clear that up for me?
I don't know about IL but I never got the memo instructing Democrats to refer to all perceived opponents as 'weird'. I have noticed that virtually all Democratic talking heads have started doing so without explanation why. Can you clear that up for me?
It’s like they were all assimilated by the same hive mind simultaneously. Cut “fascist” and paste “weird”.
Not to say there isn’t a weird element out there. Brain worms, fake bear crime scenes and decapitated whales strike me as legitimately weird.
I think they're all weird, GOP and dems alike to different degrees. But Trump is looney toons and JD is downright creepy.
I know you have had trouble making the distinction, but it is possible to support the Republican Party without supporting Trump. You can dislike Burger King without swearing off cheeseburgers.
The Republican Party that I was a member of and supported most of my adult life seems to have vanished. What's left isn't really the same thing these days.
https://buttonmuseum.org/sites/default/files/styles/medium/public/PO-i-like-ike-3-button_busy_beaver_button_museum.png?itok=4SZwbovm
I don't know about IL but I never got the memo instructing Democrats to refer to all perceived opponents as 'weird'. I have noticed that virtually all Democratic talking heads have started doing so without explanation why. Can you clear that up for me?
I know you’ll find this difficult, if not impossible, to believe but he’s said an awful lot of creepy things about people who chose not to or aren’t able to have children. I would’ve gone with creepy instead of Walz’s weird but weird seems to have caught on so most likely (actually it’s almost certain that he does) Walz has better political instincts than I do. After all I’m just a childless cat man.
He’s also said stuff that indicates he doesn’t have a clue how federal income taxes are currently structured and he hasn’t voted on or for bills that would further things he claims to support, like lower taxes for families with children. This part isn’t particularly weird, it’s just an indication that he’s all talk and no action.
LOL, it's a little more complicated than that. Philosophically, I've never believed he is a Republican but rather a disillusioned old style Democrat with an outsized ego.
No matter, he is running as a republication and you endorsed that ideology.
I know you have had trouble making the distinction, but it is possible to support the Republican Party without supporting Trump. You can dislike Burger King without swearing off cheeseburgers.
I, for one, can’t support Trump and never did. But that doesn’t obligate me to vote for Democratic candidates I find every bit as objectionable (often for similar reasons).
What you don't seem to get is that trump IS the republican party now.
No matter, he is running as a republication and you endorsed that ideology.
Oh yes, I've always been and will always be a republicationator. I'm unapologetic about my desire for smaller government and greater personal liberty and while my party has been slowly inching towards a Democratic themed governing philosophy I still find Republicanism to be the better of two bad choices. The Democratic Party's social fascism tendencies on top of their desire to control rather than serve the populace scares me.
What you don't seem to get is that trump IS the republican party now.
If one looks at all the republicans who have come out in favor of Harris it’s clear that actually there are two classes of republicans now. If Harris wins the civil war within the Republican Party is going to be epic.
Personally I hope that the Liz Cheney branch wins. Even though I find pretty much all of her policy positions awful. But if she is the 2028 Republican nominee I will trust that the country still exists even if she wins. If the traitor half of the party wins I’m way less confident.
If one looks at all the republicans who have come out in favor of Harris it’s clear that actually there are two classes of republicans now. If Harris wins the civil war within the Republican Party is going to be epic.
Personally I hope that the Liz Cheney branch wins. Even though I find pretty much all of her policy positions awful. But if she is the 2028 Republican nominee I will trust that the country still exists even if she wins. If the traitor half of the party wins I’m way less confident.
I am also a Liz Cheney fan, and would be happy to vote for her.
What you don't seem to get is that trump IS the republican party now.
You know who thinks like you? Donald Trump.
iris lilies
9-6-24, 11:39am
You know who thinks like you? Donald Trump.
haha, yep!
You know who thinks like you? Donald Trump.
He has good reason to think that way. After all he’s been the party’s nominee three presidential elections in a row. And apparently holds the power to veto bipartisan legislation as evidenced by the border bill.
Trump is in his own party of old people with mental problems, but in some ways he does represent the traditional GOP, which is basically lower taxes for the wealthy and big business, deregulation of government regulations, and downsizing or decentralizing of the federal government. Trump has his own nefarious ways, but the dems have not given much of an alternative for those measures and represent their own traditional values. Among my conservative friends, the numbers of which seem to have diminished in the Trump era, I often hear that they don't like Trump, but like his policies. Or in my words, the end justifies the means, what ever they are.
It would be nice if Cheney got an appointment in the Harris administration if things turn out that way.
frugal-one
9-6-24, 10:45pm
Oh yes, I've always been and will always be a republicationator. I'm unapologetic about my desire for smaller government and greater personal liberty and while my party has been slowly inching towards a Democratic themed governing philosophy I still find Republicanism to be the better of two bad choices. The Democratic Party's social fascism tendencies on top of their desire to control rather than serve the populace scares me.
What a joke!
frugal-one
9-6-24, 10:46pm
haha, yep!
Read #307
frugal-one
9-6-24, 10:47pm
You know who thinks like you? Donald Trump.
You are fooling yourself if you think otherwise! See post #307
Oh yes, I've always been and will always be a republicationator. I'm unapologetic about my desire for smaller government and greater personal liberty and while my party has been slowly inching towards a Democratic themed governing philosophy I still find Republicanism to be the better of two bad choices. The Democratic Party's social fascism tendencies on top of their desire to control rather than serve the populace scares me.
I would rebuild both parties from scratch if I had the chance. Or, preferrably throw them both out, as well as our economic system. If I could trust all human beings, I would become an anarchist. But unfortunately, while most of us don't need Nanny G., a lot of us are too dangerous to trust with our own kind for the common good.
Trump is in his own party of old people with mental problems, but in some ways he does represent the traditional GOP, which is basically lower taxes for the wealthy and big business, deregulation of government regulations, and downsizing or decentralizing of the federal government. Trump has his own nefarious ways, but the dems have not given much of an alternative for those measures and represent their own traditional values. Among my conservative friends, the numbers of which seem to have diminished in the Trump era, I often hear that they don't like Trump, but like his policies. Or in my words, the end justifies the means, what ever they are.
It would be nice if Cheney got an appointment in the Harris administration if things turn out that way.
Trump is no conservative. He is a philosophically unmoored opportunist. He’s not interested in small government. He just thinks he can direct big government more effectively because he’s so much smarter than everyone else. He’s not interested in free markets. He thinks prosperity can be managed through industrial policy and trade wars. He is as contemptuous of constitutional limits on executive power as any recent Democratic president, and is every bit as eager to pander using taxpayer money.
Contrary to the more perfervid rhetoric of the left, he’s no Hitler. But he’s sure as Hell no Reagan.
I would rebuild both parties from scratch if I had the chance. Or, preferrably throw them both out, as well as our economic system. If I could trust all human beings, I would become an anarchist. But unfortunately, while most of us don't need Nanny G., a lot of us are too dangerous to trust with our own kind for the common good.
OK. We know what you are against. But what are you for?
And yet the mainstream media has only been wringing their hands over another candidate's possible mental decline.
Questioner:
“If you win in November,” a panelist asked, “can you commit to prioritizing legislation to make child care affordable and if so, what specific piece of legislation will you advance?”
Trump's response:
“Well, I would do that, and we’re sitting down — you know, I was, uh, somebody, we had Sen. Marco Rubio [(R-Fla.)] and my daughter, Ivanka, was so, uh, impactful on that issue. It’s a very important issue.
But I think when you talk about the kind of numbers that I’m talking about, that — because child care is child care. It’s, couldn’t — you know, it’s something, you have to have it. In this country, you have to have it.
But when you talk about those numbers compared to the kind of numbers that I’m talking about by taxing foreign nations at levels that they’re not used to but they’ll get used to it very quickly. And it’s not going to stop them from doing business with us, but they’ll have a very substantial tax when they send product into our country.
Those numbers are so much bigger than any numbers that we’re talking about, including child care, that it’s gonna take care. We’re gonna have — I, I look forward to having no deficits within a fairly short period of time. Coupled with, uh, the reductions that I told you about on waste and fraud and all of the other things that are going on in our country — because I have to say with child care, I want to stay with child care, but those numbers are small relative to the kind of economic numbers that I’m talking about, including growth.
But growth also headed up by what the plan is that I just, uh, that I just told you about. We’re gonna be taking in trillions of dollars, and as much as child care is talked about as being expensive, it’s, relatively speaking, not very expensive compared to the kind of numbers we’ll be taking in.
We’re going to make this into an incredible country that can afford to take care of its people and then we’ll worry about the rest of the world. Let’s help other people. But we’re gonna take care of our country first. This is about America first. It’s about: Make America great again. We have to do it, because right now we’re a failing nation. So we’ll take care of it. Thank you. Very good question.”
Watching the debate. Kamala is highly amused at Orange Man and it’s entertaining to watch her.
iris lilies
9-10-24, 10:10pm
Watching the debate. Kamala is highly amused at Orange Man and it’s entertaining to watch her.
I’m not watching it, but if she can pull that off for the entire debate, subtleytreating him like a joke, that’s probably a good tactical stance.
be respectful but amused, Kamala.
She tossed out something I wasn’t aware of. That we currently have no soldiers in war zones, for the first time in this century.
She tossed out something I wasn’t aware of. That we currently have no soldiers in war zones, for the first time in this century.
I wasn’t aware of that either.
Jonathan Karl is a mediocre journalist. Post debate Vance is claiming that Harris doesn’t have a plan for making groceries affordable and instead of asking Vance what the (nonexistent) trump plan for that is he went on a random aside question.
The memes about the absurd ‘pets being eaten’ claim by weirdo trump are writing themselves. My personal favorite is the one that looks like the Gadsden's flag except with a kitten saying ‘don’t snack on me’
All of the reports I'm seeing say that Harris had a much better debate performance and Trump espoused his usual numerous falsehoods and was mostly on the defense ("they're eating dogs" could become famous). I've got to hand it to David Muir for calling him out on a few things. It probably won't be long before the polls make their guesses as to whether it changed any voter's minds.
She tossed out something I wasn’t aware of. That we currently have no soldiers in war zones, for the first time in this century.
What about the forces in Syria, Iraq or the Red Sea?
I’m hearing Kamala is willing to do another debate but Orange Man isn’t.
I’m hearing Kamala is willing to do another debate but Orange Man isn’t.
In the words of Gomer Pyle, "Surprise, surprise."
What about the forces in Syria, Iraq or the Red Sea?
These, as well as Libya and Yemen are designated as war zones by DOD. We have troops in all of those zones and actually had troops killed or injured in several of them as recently as this year. You'd think she would know that, or if not the moderators would have fact-checked her. Weird!
The NYT in their list of fact checks says it "needs context". It is a bit misleading, but hardly stands up to Don's multiple bizarre fabrications. It's something I've heard Biden claim and the moderators or Don could have be prepared and caught it. What is true is that no US troops are in an all-out war like the ones in Iraq or Afghanistan. It get sketchy after that. NPR called it technically true.
What is true is that no US troops are in an all-out war like the ones in Iraq or Afghanistan. It get sketchy after that. NPR called it technically true.
I’m sure that will come as a great comfort to the people taking fire. We can just refer them to NPR.
All of the reports I'm seeing say that Harris had a much better debate performance and Trump espoused his usual numerous falsehoods and was mostly on the defense ("they're eating dogs" could become famous). I've got to hand it to David Muir for calling him out on a few things. It probably won't be long before the polls make their guesses as to whether it changed any voter's minds.
Trump certainly beclowned himself several times, allowing himself to be baited into incoherence. Harris didn’t turn in a very impressive performance either, but had the benefit of low expectations and friendly moderation. I don’t think i learned anything new about either candidate.
I’m sure that will come as a great comfort to the people taking fire. We can just refer them to NPR.
I imagine Hannity has a different take than NPR. I suspect we have troops in many countries around the world. I suppose the "needs context" term relates to combat troops actively engaged in fighting, rather than a defensive or advisory purpose, but it is semantics. There were actually a number of Harris claims that were rather shady. Unlike the eating dogs, or the worst inflation ever in our history, or Harris supports legal abortions into the 7th month or later even after birth, or millions and millions of people are pouring into our country monthly. Which were outright bizarre fabrications.
The election will not be to pick the perfect politician, only the better of the two. Harris plays the political game of wordsmithing, Donald just makes stuff up. Drudge says this is the end for Trump.
I imagine Hannity has a different take than NPR. I suspect we have troops in many countries around the world. I suppose the "needs context" term relates to combat troops actively engaged in fighting, rather than a defensive or advisory purpose, but it is semantics. There were actually a number of Harris claims that were rather shady. Unlike the eating dogs, or the worst inflation ever in our history, or Harris supports legal abortions into the 7th month or later even after birth, or millions and millions of people are pouring into our country monthly. Which were outright bizarre fabrications.
The election will not be to pick the perfect politician, only the better of the two. Harris plays the political game of wordsmithing, Donald just makes stuff up. Drudge says this is the end for Trump.
That may all be true. But if she’s elected, Harris should arrange some remedial training with the DoD on the definition of “war zone”. It might reduce her level of obfuscation (I mean “wordsmithing”).
That may all be true. But if she’s elected, Harris should arrange some remedial training with the DoD on the definition of “war zone”. It might reduce her level of obfuscation (I mean “wordsmithing”).
And maybe it will be a scientific breakthrough to figure out how you can have an abortion after birth. Or the new Haitian best seller, "How to Wok Your Dog". It’s all relative.
The election will not be to pick the perfect politician, only the better of the two. Harris plays the political game of wordsmithing, Donald just makes stuff up. Drudge says this is the end for Trump.
As Donald Rumsfeld might say "You go to the polls with the candidate you have, not the candidate you might want or wish to have at a later time."
And given that 63% of people in the CNN post-debate poll think Harris clearly won (assuming that the core Maga base aren't likely to admit that then pretty much everyone who isn't in that group thgought she won), and Harris brought in a remarkable $21m on ActBlue in post debate fundraising I'd say the democrats have about as strong of a candidate to beat trump as is possible.
The thing that most fascinates me at this point is that the people who identify as republican but hate trump seem bitterly angry that the democrats didn't serve up a candidate that they would consider perfect in every way. As if it was our job to find them a candidate they found acceptable after their party failed them so completely. Our job was to find a candidate that could beat that pathetic dude that believes every absurd thing he saw on tv last night as he was rage "socialing". Not to help the disaffected republicans find an alternative to the loser their party's base voters adore. Maybe those disaffected republicans need to grow the eff up and take back their party instead of whining as much as sad sack trump does. Presenting themselves as the party of whiny moaners isn't a good look for anyone in the republican party.
iris lilies
9-12-24, 10:36am
The thing that most fascinates me at this point is that the people who identify as republican but hate trump seem bitterly angry that the democrats didn't serve up a candidate that they would consider perfect in every way. As if it was our job..
.
It WAS your damned job to appoint a candidate who was not incapacitated by old age. Ya’ll went to the precipice with Biden and would have continued on with him if he had not agreed to a debate. His hubris is huge. Your party’s ability to deceive with the message “old Joe is perfectly fine” exceeds even his delusion. I feel duped and lied to, and I was considering voting for him before his astonishing debate performance.
As for picking a candidate I would like, I said often “anyone but Biden who isnt ancient.” Ok, we now have a shiny new one in Kamala. That’s fine. I purposely am not reading much about her, I prefer to maintain the veil of ignorance about her, and I can’t hate the fact that Walz is a midwesterner who looks like everyone’s suburban dad. I am superficial in this regard.
But I likely will not vote for Harris/Walz given her role in deceiving me about the President’s competency. My state will go for Trump anyway.
There are people on the Right who think a vote for Harris would have a purgative effect on the GOP. David French, for one. I tend to think Harris/Walz would be too bitter an emetic to swallow.
I don’t agree with the argument that Harris is a slightly imperfect candidate who represents a sort of good deal on a scratch and dent sale. I think Harris 2.0 is a product of the same people who sold the Biden lie and are trying to sell Project 2025 as a sort of “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”. They put me in mind of what Bill Buckley said: “I won’t insult your intelligence by implying you believe what you just said”.
I think that in 2025 we are more likely to get the old Harris back than the media construct we’re seeing now. I’m more worried about the long term damage she would do than the chaos Trump might create.
So my plan is to vote for Chase Oliver for president and Republican down-ticket. And I will hope for four years of gridlock.
Even though I support Democratic Socialists like Bernie Sanders, as I've said elsewhere, I am not in favor of some of the government handouts being touted these days, like down payments for home buyers and student loan forgiveness--(although I kind of support that because of their usurious loan structures--I consider partial forgiveness to be relief from the crazy interest Sallie and Freddie charged in the past.
To me, there are systemic flaws at this point that need to be fixed in order eliminate the need for handouts to make people feel they are living prosperously. Some of these handouts are unsustainable band-aids. That is my problem with Kamala's "opportunity economy." I think the biggest systemic flaw is the wealth inequality gap that has decimated the middle class but that's a whole other topic.
LDAHL, believe it or not, I think Chase Oliver seems reasonable for people who really can't find themselves voting for either candidate.
iris lilies
9-12-24, 3:11pm
Rolling Stone says about Chase:
“He wants you to be able to get an abortion and buy a rocket launcher.”
haha, sign me up!
Rolling Stone says about Chase:
“He wants you to be able to get an abortion and buy a rocket launcher.”
haha, sign me up!
To be perfectly fair, you can buy a rocket launcher right now, in most states.
The ammunition though, that requires a bit of pain-in-the-ass paperwork and an expensive BATF/NFA tax stamp for each round, so it's not a hobby for the middle class. Umm, I've heard.
iris lilies
9-12-24, 3:29pm
To be perfectly fair, you can buy a rocket launcher right now, in most states.
The ammunition though, that requires a bit of pain-in-the-ass paperwork and an expensive BATF/NFA tax stamp for each round, so it's not a hobby for the middle class. Umm, I've heard.
Maybe he would make that ammo process simpler. Sign me up.
Maybe he would make that ammo process simpler. Sign me up.
It would certainly reduce the yearly operational cost of my yacht.
It looks like Don has declined a third debate on the basis that two successful debates should be enough. The poll of the day shows Harris got a pretty good bump after the debate.
My Trump/Harris moment in the debate was when Muir asked about climate change. Kamala gave a well thought out presentation of recounting recent weather extremes and disasters and how getting insurance in some areas was getting grossly expensive or impossible due to a changing climate. Then how Biden's build back better plan had created thousands of manufacturing jobs while at the same time encouraging a green energy economy. She acknowledged the need for diverse energy sources and seemed to have backed off the no fracking issues. And that she's been endorsed by the United Auto Workers Union. (I suppose all could be fact checked)
When it was Donald's turn he said there were actually 10,000 manufacturing jobs lost under Biden and went on a rant about how China is destroying our country and that was basically it. No mention of climate change one way or another. (Not too un similar to his mystery vulgarities about the Ukraine war).
But maybe the pet comment was the best.
frugal-one
9-12-24, 9:13pm
There are people on the Right who think a vote for Harris would have a purgative effect on the GOP. David French, for one. I tend to think Harris/Walz would be too bitter an emetic to swallow.
I don’t agree with the argument that Harris is a slightly imperfect candidate who represents a sort of good deal on a scratch and dent sale. I think Harris 2.0 is a product of the same people who sold the Biden lie and are trying to sell Project 2025 as a sort of “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”. They put me in mind of what Bill Buckley said: “I won’t insult your intelligence by implying you believe what you just said”.
I think that in 2025 we are more likely to get the old Harris back than the media construct we’re seeing now. I’m more worried about the long term damage she would do than the chaos Trump might create.
So my plan is to vote for Chase Oliver for president and Republican down-ticket. And I will hope for four years of gridlock.
Then don’t bitch if trump and his ilk wins and we have a world like Orban or his other authoritarian buddies maintain!
Then don’t bitch if trump and his ilk wins and we have a world like Orban or his other authoritarian buddies maintain!
Hysterical rants to the contrary, I don’t believe either a Trump or Harris victory will signal the end of the Republic.
It WAS your damned job to appoint a candidate who was not incapacitated by old age. Ya’ll went to the precipice with Biden and would have continued on with him if he had not agreed to a debate. His hubris is huge. Your party’s ability to deceive with the message “old Joe is perfectly fine” exceeds even his delusion. I feel duped and lied to, and I was considering voting for him before his astonishing debate performance.
As for picking a candidate I would like, I said often “anyone but Biden who isnt ancient.” Ok, we now have a shiny new one in Kamala. That’s fine. I purposely am not reading much about her, I prefer to maintain the veil of ignorance about her, and I can’t hate the fact that Walz is a midwesterner who looks like everyone’s suburban dad. I am superficial in this regard.
But I likely will not vote for Harris/Walz given her role in deceiving me about the President’s competency. My state will go for Trump anyway.
I’m fascinated at this perspective. Although I don’t especially care since you live in a blood red state where old cat ladies are judged accordingly.
I am curious though, were you as concerned and angry about Reagan as his brain failed? And how Nancy protected him through the end of his presidency?
Hysterical rants to the contrary, I don’t believe either a Trump or Harris victory will signal the end of the Republic.
As someone doing money management for decades, I find the chances that a Trump victory will cause serious disruptions to be non-zero, and reaching to the level of significance, and as I have mentioned previously, have already deployed the assets under management to account for this chance.
I do not have similar concerns with Harris.
If I'm wrong, I'll lose a little upside. If I'm right, I'll avoid a serious downside.
gimmethesimplelife
9-13-24, 12:01pm
I am so proud of Kamala Harris. She mopped the kitchen floor with Trump's sorry behind. It was so gratifying to see her take aim and reduce DJT to the foolish flailing train wreck his is. Perhaps there is hope to kick the can down the road for another four free of Authoritarian Dictatorship, giving us all time to devise escape plans - the issues that allowed DJT to rise to power have not been addressed and are going nowhere. This problem severely reduces the long term viability of this citizenship - but if Harris wins there's four years to devise escape plans. Let's hope for a Harris win. Rob
iris lilies
9-13-24, 12:22pm
I am so proud of Kamala Harris. She mopped the kitchen floor with Trump's sorry behind. It was so gratifying to see her take aim and reduce DJT to the foolish flailing train wreck his is. Perhaps there is hope to kick the can down the road for another four free of Authoritarian Dictatorship, giving us all time to devise escape plans - the issues that allowed DJT to rise to power have not been addressed and are going nowhere. This problem severely reduces the long term viability of this citizenship - but if Harris wins there's four years to devise escape plans. Let's hope for a Harris win. Rob
how is your escape plan coming? When is launch day?
how is your escape plan coming? When is launch day?
I was wondering that as well. I've been reading about the escape goal for the past 15 years or so but don't recall any solid updates mentioned. Bring us up to speed Rob, we're curious.
gimmethesimplelife
9-13-24, 6:43pm
I was wondering that as well. I've been reading about the escape goal for the past 15 years or so but don't recall any solid updates mentioned. Bring us up to speed Rob, we're curious.We are thinking interestingly enough of Peru and also Chile. Argentina is interesting in that it's only two years to citizenship and a passport but there are many issues that need to be sorted out there. Mexico is probably the easiest bet. Rob
What an ugly, hateful man JD Vance is. Spreading ugly stories about immigrants that he knows to be false is simply dispicable.
Today on CNN's "State of the Union." he said "If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that's what I'm going to do."
As a person of Jewish descent, both of them continuing to double-down on this abhorrent lie chills me to the bone. What's next, a 21st century Kristallnacht? I have this disquiting fear (hopefully unfounded) that homes and business will get destroyed and people will end up getting killed if this continues.
Then I read on CNBC that "The Trump campaign is organizing a visit to Springfield, a source familiar with the matter told NBC News on Sunday. Former GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, now a surrogate for the Trump campaign, also announced Sunday that he would host a town hall in Springfield on Thursday." Along with the white supremicist gangs that have been perpetuating this crap as well, what could possibly go wrong?"
frugal-one
9-15-24, 7:41pm
As someone doing money management for decades, I find the chances that a Trump victory will cause serious disruptions to be non-zero, and reaching to the level of significance, and as I have mentioned previously, have already deployed the assets under management to account for this chance.
I do not have similar concerns with Harris.
If I'm wrong, I'll lose a little upside. If I'm right, I'll avoid a serious downside.
Care to clarify how you have deployed the assets under management?
gimmethesimplelife
9-15-24, 7:52pm
As a person of Jewish descent, both of their them continuing to double-down on this abhorrent lie chills me to the bone. What's next, a 21st century Kristallnacht? I have this disquiting fear (hopefully unfounded) that homes and business will get destroyed and people will end up getting killed if this continues.
Then I read on CNBC that "The Trump campaign is organizing a visit to Springfield, a source familiar with the matter told NBC News on Sunday. Former GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, now a surrogate for the Trump campaign, also announced Sunday that he would host a town hall in Springfield on Thursday." Along with the white supremicist gangs that have been perpetuating this crap as well, what could possibly go wrong?"Yes. I didn't want to post it as I am no stranger to controversy on this board.....but I am afraid of this turning into a Kristallnacht situation myself. These over the top BS lies to me are the most offensive words out of his mouth yet. I just wish he'd go away Rob
early morning
9-16-24, 1:36pm
I spend a fair amount of time in Springfield. I am not afraid of the Haitians - indeed, they are the least of my worries. I am becoming much more leery of white men in general. And that's a damn shame, because MOST OF THEM ARE FINE! But even if the Haitians WERE doing anything to "cats and dogs" which from all realistic accounts they are not - how would that justify the bomb threats? Schools and public buildings are closed. Colleges are online for classes. This is insane! What is WRONG with people?? And don't start with the "but the left..." NO. Just NO. I am so sick of this BS.
As a purported Christian, JD Vance should be sorely ashamed of what he is doing - he sickens me. The more I hear from him, the more I doubt that he wrote any part of "his" best-seller. Or maybe Kennedy's brain-worm has reproduced??
Yes, the bomb threats and stuff are just so over the top.
As a purported Christian, JD Vance should be sorely ashamed of what he is doing - he sickens me. The more I hear from him, the more I doubt that he wrote any part of "his" best-seller. Or maybe Kennedy's brain-worm has reproduced??
I can imagine telling children that not only is it ok to lie in order to get your way, but it may get you to be Vice President or even President some day.
Teach your children well...
catherine
9-19-24, 11:09am
Even though I support Democratic Socialists like Bernie Sanders, as I've said elsewhere, I am not in favor of some of the government handouts being touted these days, like down payments for home buyers and student loan forgiveness--(although I kind of support that because of their usurious loan structures--I consider partial forgiveness to be relief from the crazy interest Sallie and Freddie charged in the past.
To me, there are systemic flaws at this point that need to be fixed in order eliminate the need for handouts to make people feel they are living prosperously. Some of these handouts are unsustainable band-aids. That is my problem with Kamala's "opportunity economy." I think the biggest systemic flaw is the wealth inequality gap that has decimated the middle class but that's a whole other topic.
Just to add to this, I don't believe everyone is entitled to loan forgiveness or home ownership because those are choices. You can go to an expensive college, or not. Living in a rental is not going to significantly compromise your quality of life.
However, I do believe that because poor health for the most part is "unearned," universal healthcare is an entitlement I can support. Not just for those of us who unfortunately have to access healthcare and endure the costs, but because we all suffer from a truly dysfunctional system. Here is an article in MedPage Today (https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2024/sep/mirror-mirror-2024) that highlights the sorry state of the "greatest nation in the world" falling behind 9 other countries in quality of healthcare.
Conclusion: The U.S. continues to be in a class by itself in the underperformance of its health care sector. While the other nine countries differ in the details of their systems and in their performance on domains, unlike the U.S., they all have found a way to meet their residents’ most basic health care needs, including universal coverage.
littlebittybobby
9-27-24, 12:10am
okay----The Media is fine with Bomb Threats. It gives them more NEWS to report about how DANGEROUS those right-wingers really are. But you know what? I would not be surprised if the anonymous threats were made by deranged left-wing fanatics under the guise of being right-wingers, so The Media can report it as such! See how that works? Right now, even the most smug demmmacrats are jittery and wound very tight, because it doesn't look good for Harris. It won't be a slam-dunk, like dey say in bassabaw. I've seen definite signs of this in my test group---dems i'm on semi-good terms with. normally jovial, now nervous & moody. See? But yeah-- Be careful around them. yup. They may swat you.
It looks like CBS will be offering some sort of real time fact checking for the VP debate. The story I got is that during the debate they will display a QR code you can scan and it will then show fact check comments from their 20 political experts. Probably a little overdone on the immediacy of things, but a novel idea.
I do like the fact checks. The NYT usually does a pretty good bipartisan job of that. I think I'd only do the QR thing if I really doubted the veracity of a claim on either side.
iris lilies
9-30-24, 3:32pm
Yes, the bomb threats and stuff are just so over the top.
I just ran across an old article that said there were 5 U.S. bomb threats a day in the 1970’s.
early morning
10-1-24, 9:46am
Five bomb threats a day - in the whole country? In this instance, we're talking at least 5 a day in ONE CITY. And a fairly small city, at that. Not sure what you're saying, really - that the bomb threats Springfield Ohio had to deal with weren't over the top? Just looking for clarification here....
iris lilies
10-1-24, 10:01am
Five bomb threats a day - in the whole country? In this instance, we're talking at least 5 a day in ONE CITY. And a fairly small city, at that. Not sure what you're saying, really - that the bomb threats Springfield Ohio had to deal with weren't over the top? Just looking for clarification here....
Five bomb threat a day and one small city is a lot, you are right
I have absolutely no idea how many there were in the 1970's but I do recall a stretch of the spring in ninth grade when we had 1-2 a week.
I managed to watch the whole thing. Vance is a slick talker and probably made a good impression based on that. I think his sort of friendly behavior was orchestrated to contrast with Trump and prove the GOP is human. He did it well, but was probably an act to some degree. The fact checkers I've seen give Vance more demerits that Waltz, but he did not go off the rails like Trump tends to do. Many of his arguments circled back to immigration as the root cause of all evil.
Waltz did adequately, but was probably outdone by Vance by what I'd guess as public perception. It's easy to look good in a debate if the truth isn't too important. The critical point for me was he pinned Vance down to climate change denial and the big election lie. He could have done better, but adequate.
They are saying the debate doesn't really matter in terms of votes, but maybe just a small amount can make a difference. With Trump's age it's not too much of a stretch to imagine Vance as a GOP leader.
My take.
catherine
10-2-24, 11:07am
I watched the whole thing, too. Right away, I saw that Waltz was not comfortable up there, at least for the first couple of questions. He looked nervous, and he frequently paused momentarily as if he were searching for the right word.. OTOH, Vance was the debate club king. He was very polished in terms of delivery.
However, Walz got increasing comfortable, but still did less well than Vance in terms of debate "points"--Pundits are saying that he really came into his own with the direct question: Do you think Trump lost the 2020 election? and when Vance danced around it, Waltz said, "Well, that's a damning non-answer." If he had started the debate with that posture, I think the debate performance between the two would have been much more even, or Walz could have won it, given the number of lies and mischaracterizations Vance was spewing.
That's my take.
On a related note, while I was watching, I recalled that both of these men are "one heartbeat away" from being President (depending upon who wins, of course). I'm not sure I'm totally comfortable with either one being President--neither has enough experience or authority. But I imagine J.D. Vance is more vulnerable to actually being in that position than Walz is.
iris lilies
10-2-24, 11:18am
I did not watch these debates, any of them, but for the bits highly publicized after the fact. I expected both of these guys to do well .
My general impression about Vance is that he would be an OK candidate if he were not under the mantle of Trump. I don’t know how much of his ridiculous utterings (as represented by headline news) is really Vance or just a VP candidate being attack Dog, or—-headline news. I think that’s their job, the VPs. The thing is, with Trump in the lead role, no one needs an attack dog.
I think I would like a Vance/DeSantis ticket Very much.
Dave Ramsey has an interview out with President Trump. Dave was adamant they would not sling mud at the other candidates as he wants to talk about policy issues especially the economy. So I will probably listen to that. Ramsey has not interviewed Kamala Harris because the Harris campaign has ot agreed to an interview.
Dave was adamant they would not sling mud at the other candidates as he wants to talk about policy issues especially the economy. So I will probably listen to that. Ramsey has not interviewed Kamala Harris because the Harris campaign has agreed to an interview.
Can you clarify, confused here:
Do you mean Dave would not sling mud or Donald Trump would not sling mud? Did you mean Ramsey has not interviewed KH because the Harris campaign has not agreed?
Five bomb threats a day - in the whole country? In this instance, we're talking at least 5 a day in ONE CITY. And a fairly small city, at that. Not sure what you're saying, really - that the bomb threats Springfield Ohio had to deal with weren't over the top? Just looking for clarification here....
Not five bomb threats. Five actual bombings.
https://time.com/4501670/bombings-of-america-burrough/
It’s one reason I have trouble taking all those “most divisive times ever” claims seriously. I just compare the bombers of the seventies with the internet trolls of the 2020s.
iris lilies
10-2-24, 12:16pm
Can you clarify, confused here:
Do you mean Dave would not sling mud or Donald Trump would not sling mud? Did you mean Ramsey has not interviewed KH because the Harris campaign has not agreed?
you are right, the Harris campaign has NOT agreed to an interview. I fixed my post.
Dave does not want Trump slinging on at the other side. That is something I’m going to look for in this interview, how will Dave Ramsey stop that from happening?
I watched the whole thing, too. Right away, I saw that Waltz was not comfortable up there, at least for the first couple of questions. He looked nervous, and he frequently paused momentarily as if he were searching for the right word.. OTOH, Vance was the debate club king. He was very polished in terms of delivery.
However, Walz got increasing comfortable, but still did less well than Vance in terms of debate "points"--Pundits are saying that he really came into his own with the direct question: Do you think Trump lost the 2020 election? and when Vance danced around it, Waltz said, "Well, that's a damning non-answer." If he had started the debate with that posture, I think the debate performance between the two would have been much more even, or Walz could have won it, given the number of lies and mischaracterizations Vance was spewing.
That's my take.
On a related note, while I was watching, I recalled that both of these men are "one heartbeat away" from being President (depending upon who wins, of course). I'm not sure I'm totally comfortable with either one being President--neither has enough experience or authority. But I imagine J.D. Vance is more vulnerable to actually being in that position than Walz is.
I heard the VP debate described as “shockingly polite and substantive”.
catherine
10-2-24, 12:48pm
I heard the VP debate described as “shockingly polite and substantive”.
Absolutely. How many times did I hear "I actually agree with Senator Vance, but.." and "I think Tim and I share common ground here but.." They pledged support for each other when personal experiences come up, and they shook hands with congenial taps on the shoulders and elbows.
It was shockingly respectful, and from a policy perspective, yes, much, much more substantive than theh presidential debate in the past. Some called it "boring" for that reason, but I'll take boring after being incredibly anxious throughout most of the other debates I've seen lately.
Dave Ramsey has an interview out with President Trump. Dave was adamant they would not sling mud at the other candidates as he wants to talk about policy issues especially the economy. So I will probably listen to that. Ramsey has not interviewed Kamala Harris because the Harris campaign has ot agreed to an interview.
I see Trump has pulled out of an interview with 60 minutes and has turned down another debate. It might be best for him to keep a low profile.
I'd be interested in hearing how Trump will reduce the national debt. It wasn't exactly his strong point last time around.
frugal-one
10-2-24, 1:35pm
IMO.... the majority of questions answered by Vance were related to immigration. EVERYTHING, according to him, is because of the immigration problem. When asked if trump lost the election his comment was to look to the future. Would not answer the question. Hasn't he only been a senator for 2 years? His lack of experience would definitely be a major problem if the aged trump is dead or more infirmed.
I was worried about Walz but think he did better than expected. He, at least, tried to answer the questions.
iris lilies
10-2-24, 1:42pm
IMO.... the majority of questions answered by Vance were related to immigration. EVERYTHING, according to him, is because of the immigration problem. When asked if trump lost the election his comment was to look to the future. Would not answer the question. Hasn't he only been a senator for 2 years? His lack of experience would definitely be a major problem if the aged trump is dead or more infirmed.
I was worried about Walz but think he did better than expected. He, at least, tried to answer the questions.
Barak Obama was a U.S. senator for only 3 years before he became President.Does one more year make all the difference?
Barak Obama was a U.S. senator for only 3 years before he became President.Does one more year make all the difference?
Barack Obama was 47 years old when he assumed office, 7 years older than Vance is now. Plus he had more political experience in general--he worked within the system of community organizing and state legislature since he left law school. He think he had more political maturity than Vance.
I can't believe Dave Ramsey is interviewing Trump! What platform? I'd actually watch that.
iris lilies
10-2-24, 7:55pm
I can't believe Dave Ramsey is interviewing Trump! What platform? I'd actually watch that.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UD0ZOogTW5w
is playing on Ramsey channels wherever you get the Ramsey show. I watch it on YouTube, I also listen on Spotify
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UD0ZOogTW5w
is playing on Ramsey channels wherever you get the Ramsey show. I watch it on YouTube, I also listen on Spotify
I watched it.. I almost turned it off when he started talking "drill, baby, drill" but I was committed to watching it with an open mind.. I don't know why, frankly.. I knew Dave would be a big fan. He's very conservative, and very Republican, so the tenor was as if he had invited the minister to lunch. Very friendly, and less than half of the the time devoted to policy. The rest was general friendly conversation about golf courses (Trump's course in Scotland) and the evils of drugs, alcohol and cigarettes. I know you know what it was about, IL. I providing a synopsis for others.
IMO.... the majority of questions answered by Vance were related to immigration. EVERYTHING, according to him, is because of the immigration problem.
I thought so, too. 60 minutes had a feature on the Fentanyl crisis a couple of weeks ago. The border authorities they interviewed said that 90 percent of the Fentanyl entering the US from Mexico comes through regular legal busy ports of entry. Sort of makes sense since so many vehicles come through the busy ports and they can't check everything. And that two thirds of border crossing arrests are Americans paid by the cartels. No doubt there is other drug smuggling and probably mules swimming the Rio Grande, but until the main cause of the problem is correctly identified it's less likely to be solved. I could add drug smuggling illegal aliens to the list of major GOP deceptions.
https://www.cbs.com/shows/video/8gTVLgOKNBJpNvsoWlJ_4cFhfkCQSZ3N/
It’s not surprising that he circled everything back to immigration. Trump has long thought immigration was his path to winning the election. That’s why he’s vetoed the bipartisan immigration bill.
The interesting thing I learned from this debate is that for Magas it’s some sort of alpha move to be a whiny bitch. I thought it was a major cuck move when Vance whined about being called a liar by the female moderator but apparently in Maga world that’s viewed as an alpha move for some reason.
iris lilies
10-3-24, 8:58am
I watched it.. I almost turned it off when he started talking "drill, baby, drill" but I was committed to watching it with an open mind.. I don't know why, frankly.. I knew Dave would be a big fan. He's very conservative, and very Republican, so the tenor was as if he had invited the minister to lunch. Very friendly, and less than half of the the time devoted to policy. The rest was general friendly conversation about golf courses (Trump's course in Scotland) and the evils of drugs, alcohol and cigarettes. I know you know what it was about, IL. I providing a synopsis for others.
I haven’t watched it actually. I probably will.
frugal-one
10-3-24, 4:59pm
Your take? At the end of the debate, Vance was criticizing Democrats (according to him) for wanting to pass laws against misinformation saying this was curtailing freedom of speech. Vance admitted his words about Haitians eating cats and dogs was untrue and a way to get attention and look what a problem that caused Springfield!
iris lilies
10-3-24, 5:51pm
Your take? At the end of the debate, Vance was criticizing Democrats (according to him) for wanting to pass laws against misinformation saying this was curtailing freedom of speech. Vance admitted his words about Haitians eating cats and dogs was untrue and a way to get attention and look what a problem that caused Springfield!
Yes frugal-one, that may be my number one complaint about Democrats “wanting to pass laws against misinformation “in several actions with big tech, and then their aborted and ridiculous Ministry of Misinformation or whatever it was called. These attempts to tamp free speech are chilling.
frugal-one
10-3-24, 9:20pm
You didn’t really answer what I was asking IL. Should people who knowingly tell lies that cause unbearable pain or malaise get away with it? Should there be some way to curb these unscrupulous types? Is this really the voice of free speech or perversion?
You didn’t really answer what I was asking IL. Should people who knowingly tell lies that cause unbearable pain or malaise get away with it? Should there be some way to curb these unscrupulous types? Is this really the voice of free speech or perversion?
Judging from Vance’s indignation at being called out during the debate as a liar it seems that republicans do in fact consider free speech to mean ‘free from the blowback that arises when one is a liar liar whose pants are on fire.’
Judging from Vance’s indignation at being called out during the debate as a liar it seems that republicans do in fact consider free speech to mean ‘free from the blowback that arises when one is a liar liar whose pants are on fire.’
I think that context and nuance are important to anyone wishing to correctly assess "facts". When you're not allowed to discuss that nuance, there's probably a reason and quite often it's to prevent people from understanding. Lack of free speech is the perfect way to protect a preferred narrative and I think that's what you saw during the debate.
iris lilies
10-3-24, 10:25pm
You didn’t really answer what I was asking IL. Should people who knowingly tell lies that cause unbearable pain or malaise get away with it? Should there be some way to curb these unscrupulous types? Is this really the voice of free speech or perversion?
Tell me what consequences you want to see when people lie.
Rachel Maddow lied about Covid issues. Anthony Fauci lied about Covid issues. Their audiences were huge and no doubt caused at least some people “pain.” What should be, in your justice system, their punishment? Joe Biden lied when he was running for a 2nd term because he had said he would stay only 4 years.
I do not think either Rachel or Tony Fauci or President Joe should experience the heavy hand of law, they get enough pushback in the public square.
I think that context and nuance are important to anyone wishing to correctly assess "facts". When you're not allowed to discuss that nuance, there's probably a reason and quite often it's to prevent people from understanding. Lack of free speech is the perfect way to protect a preferred narrative and I think that's what you saw during the debate.
Thanks for your random whatever. I won’t even pretend to understand.
frugal-one
10-3-24, 11:22pm
IL …Did you fact check all the “lies”? By your own admission you do not watch the new so wonder where you get your information? BTW I don’t have an answer to the question I posed earlier other than those who intentionally lie to cause problems should be vilified (ie saying Haitians are eating pets). To me, this is not free speech …
Rachel Maddow lied about Covid issues. Anthony Fauci lied about Covid issues. Their audiences were huge and no doubt caused at least some people “pain.” What should be, in your justice system, their punishment? Joe Biden lied when he was running for a 2nd term because he had said he would stay only 4 years.
Is it a lie when you say or espouse something you believe to be true at the time, but turns out wrong, compared to knowing something isn't true and being intentionally deceptive? Are they both lies.
In a away we are a nation of deceivers, or at least I can get that impression after watching network TV ads.
I think the VP debate is a good example of how difficult regulating “the truth” can be. Margaret Brennan inserts herself into the debate by attacking Vance’s characterization of Haitian immigrants, Vance responds by pointing out that “temporary protected status” is a fig leaf category used to launder immigration statistics. Brennan makes a sneering comment and shuts off his microphone. The Washington Post editorial board calls her behavior ridiculous. Is there anyone completely right or wrong here?
For myself, I think we’d do more harm than good trying to create institutions to certify and enforce “truth” for the masses. What panel of epistocratic experts could we trust for that purpose? The people who told us Joe Biden was in great mental shape? Who said Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian trickery? The people who claimed the election was stolen?
Whose credentials would you trust to man the ramparts against lies, damned lies and biased fact-checking? None that I can think of. My hope is that any attempt to create government approved truth meets with the derision it deserves.
iris lilies
10-4-24, 10:21am
I think the VP debate is a good example of how difficult regulating “the truth” can be. Margaret Brennan inserts herself into the debate by attacking Vance’s characterization of Haitian immigrants, Vance responds by pointing out that “temporary protected status” is a fig leaf category used to launder immigration statistics. Brennan makes a sneering comment and shuts off his microphone. The Washington Post editorial board calls her behavior ridiculous. Is there anyone completely right or wrong here?
For myself, I think we’d do more harm than good trying to create institutions to certify and enforce “truth” for the masses. What panel of epistocratic experts could we trust for that purpose? The people who told us Joe Biden was in great mental shape? Who said Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian trickery? The people who claimed the election was stolen?
Whose credentials would you trust to man the ramparts against lies, damned lies and biased fact-checking? None that I can think of. My hope is that any attempt to create government approved truth meets with the derision it deserves.
Exactly! about determining Truth with a capital T.
And I didn’t even know about the widespread immigration system use of “temporary protected status” until this debate.
Maybe TPS can be used responsibly, maybe it *Is* often used responsibly. But again, maybe not depending on the situation and it puts a new meaning on “legal” immigration.
Which circles back to my thought last week that maybe “legal” immigration isn't the answer if our government can easily flip a switch to redefine “legal.” This ties to the riots in the UK about immigration…governments are not limiting immigration in ways citizens wish they would.
iris lilies
10-4-24, 11:59am
I watched it.. I almost turned it off when he started talking "drill, baby, drill" but I was committed to watching it with an open mind.. I don't know why, frankly.. I knew Dave would be a big fan. He's very conservative, and very Republican, so the tenor was as if he had invited the minister to lunch. Very friendly, and less than half of the the time devoted to policy. The rest was general friendly conversation about golf courses (Trump's course in Scotland) and the evils of drugs, alcohol and cigarettes. I know you know what it was about, IL. I providing a synopsis for others.
I watched this Ramsey interview yesterday. It did not instill confidence in me in any way. MAYBE the only Trump bit I liked was his plan to lower business tax on those who manufacture their product in the U.S.
frugal-one
10-4-24, 9:08pm
Tell me what consequences you want to see when people lie.
Rachel Maddow lied about Covid issues. Anthony Fauci lied about Covid issues. Their audiences were huge and no doubt caused at least some people “pain.” What should be, in your justice system, their punishment? Joe Biden lied when he was running for a 2nd term because he had said he would stay only 4 years.
I do not think either Rachel or Tony Fauci or President Joe should experience the heavy hand of law, they get enough pushback in the public square.
I guess I should have said earlier that I don’t believe Fauci lied about covid issues because there was not a manual explaining what to expect or know. Fauci gave what he thought was sound advice and then science proved in some cases to be wrong. That is not lying IMO. He did not knowingly go out of his way to purposely cause pain or malaise. Nor do I feel Biden lied when he decided to run for a second term. He changed his mind after seeing the threat trump posed. We all have had times when we changed our mind because a situation has changed. And, I have no idea what you are referring to regarding Rachel?
frugal-one
10-4-24, 9:15pm
I think the VP debate is a good example of how difficult regulating “the truth” can be. Margaret Brennan inserts herself into the debate by attacking Vance’s characterization of Haitian immigrants, Vance responds by pointing out that “temporary protected status” is a fig leaf category used to launder immigration statistics. Brennan makes a sneering comment and shuts off his microphone. The Washington Post editorial board calls her behavior ridiculous. Is there anyone completely right or wrong here?
For myself, I think we’d do more harm than good trying to create institutions to certify and enforce “truth” for the masses. What panel of epistocratic experts could we trust for that purpose? The people who told us Joe Biden was in great mental shape? Who said Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian trickery? The people who claimed the election was stolen?
Whose credentials would you trust to man the ramparts against lies, damned lies and biased fact-checking? None that I can think of. My hope is that any attempt to create government approved truth meets with the derision it deserves.
Vance said he gave an alternative truth (ie lie) when he stated Haitians were eating pets. He is a liar. He shows his credentials are not worthy of consideration! trump has been shown to have committed over 30,000 proven lies. Neither can ever be trusted. Based on their previous history, everything out of their mouths needs to be scrutinized and fact checked IMO. It shows what the republican party has become by endorsing these two to be their representatives?
The Haitian immigrants are here LEGALLY. there is no other way to describe them. You can argue about whether the way they came here was appropriate but you CAN NOT say they came here illegally. **** Vance and the ugly horse he rode in on. Side note you also can’t make up BS about them eating pets if they aren’t eating pets. That's just weird. But weird tracks for a loser like jd Vance.
gimmethesimplelife
10-5-24, 6:16pm
The Haitian immigrants are here LEGALLY. there is no other way to describe them. You can argue about whether the way they came here was appropriate but you CAN NOT say they came here illegally. **** Vance and the ugly horse he rode in on. Side note you also can’t make up BS about them eating pets if they aren’t eating pets. That's just weird. But weird tracks for a loser like jd Vance.+ 10,000. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
10-5-24, 6:18pm
Vance said he gave an alternative truth (ie lie) when he stated Haitians were eating pets. He is a liar. He shows his credentials are not worthy of consideration! trump has been shown to have committed over 30,000 proven lies. Neither can ever be trusted. Based on their previous history, everything out of their mouths needs to be scrutinized and fact checked IMO. It shows what the republican party has become by endorsing these two to be their representatives?It's clear to me going forward that the GOP wishes to position itself as the enemy of the people it deems less than worthy of existence. Austria in 1938 much? Rob
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.