What's new
By:

The Biden Administration and All Things Politics

Rubashov said:
Unfortunately they're not a threat to anything, they're just a holding space, they really need to be looking a tearing down the far right with the FBI as soon as possible.
Click to expand...

For sure. Incredible that it hasn't happened yet. Dems have been playing softball. The FBI should have arrested The Rapist on Jan 6.
 
Red said:
Well, I do believe actually assassinating Trump would make matters far, far worse in this country. So it’s good he was not killed. I can understand people willing to say that, though, because the anger from both sides is off the charts altogether. So I cannot very well act surprised with any “wish he had not missed” reactions. If pressed, many likely won’t back down, but others would likely admit, “well, yeah, maybe I shouldn’t say such a thing”. So much anger, I’m not surprised by what people say in anger. On both sides.

We’re already in a cold civil war. For most of my life, politics was often described as “the art of compromise”. That’s long gone now, we are already engaged in a cold civil war. Prefer words to gunshots.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Trump dying of a heart attack or by any other manner would immediately give us a reset. It would give cultists who feel trapped an out. A gunman acting alone wouldn't set off riots or the like. There are those who would engage in conspiracy theories but I think things would become much more normal almost instantly.
 
Al-O-Meter said:
Tell me again how many votes Kamala got to become the nominee? Of the candidates on the ballot, Kamala is the only one to have actually quashed democracy.
Click to expand...
Seems more like the Democrats we’re thinking on their feet, in a one time unexpected event, and we’re overwhelmingly supported by the Democratic electorate…

“WASHINGTON (AP) — Vice President Kamala Harris appears to have energized Democrats in the early days of her candidacy, with the surge in warm feelings extending across multiple groups, including some key Democratic constituencies that had been especially tepid about President Joe Biden, a new poll shows.

About 8 in 10 Democrats say they would be somewhat or very satisfied if Harris became the Democratic nominee for president, according to the survey from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, which was conducted after Biden withdrew from the race.

In a separate AP-NORC poll, taken before Biden dropped out but after his debate against Republican former President Donald Trump, only about 4 in 10 Democrats said they were somewhat or very satisfied that he was the Democratic Party’s likely nominee for president.
str8line said:
I disagree. Trump dying of a heart attack or by any other manner would immediately give us a reset. It would give cultists who feel trapped an out. A gunman acting alone wouldn't set off riots or the like. There are those who would engage in conspiracy theories but I think things would become much more normal almost instantly of a heart attack is somewhat different than being blown away by an AK-47.
Click to expand...
Dying of a heart attack is a little different than being blown away by an AK-47.
 
Al-O-Meter said:
Tell me again how many votes Kamala got to become the nominee? Of the candidates on the ballot, Kamala is the only one to have actually quashed democracy.
Click to expand...
apnews.com

About 8 in 10 Democrats are satisfied with Harris in stark shift after Biden drops out: AP-NORC poll

Vice President Kamala Harris appears to have energized Democrats in the early days of her candidacy, with the surge in warm feelings extending across multiple groups, including some key Democratic constituencies that had been tepid about President Joe Biden.
apnews.com apnews.com

Tell us, if you’re able, how Trump attempting to prevent Biden from being certified in 2020 was democratic. And no, Harris did not quash democracy. Unlike the GOP, who were simply too terrified of their candidate, and too willing to put their party above their nation when their candidate attempted to overturn the election, the Democrats were flexible, and willing to think on their feet. Apparently to the overwhelming approval of the Democratic electorate.
 
Last edited:
Red said:
Dying of a heart attack is a little different than being blown away by an AK-47.
Click to expand...

If it's a lone insane gunman I think the outcome is the same except for some QAnons engaging in their inevitable conspiracies.
 
str8line said:
Were Trumptards going to vote in a democrat primary? The way I see it the ones who should be complaining are the dems and they seem ok with it.
Click to expand...
Yes, it was a one time situation demanding a response. Democrats are rightly concerned about authoritarianism in America. I’m sure there are Biden supporters who did not like what happen. But according to those who don’t like it, the correct response would be: “even though it’s pretty clear now that we likely are far less likely to win the 2024 election, even while we are convinced a Trump victory would constitute an existential crisis, we must adhere to what our constitutes said in the primaries, even if current polling tells us our constitutes are begging us to pick someone else, and quickly! Our constituents are panicking and begging us to do something. Let us wisely ignore them”.
 
str8line said:
If it's a lone insane gunman I think the outcome is the same except for some QAnons engaging in their inevitable conspiracies.
Click to expand...
Which they would do even if trump died of a heart attack. Somehow, to them, if trump died of a heart attack it would be the fault of the deep state leftist Marxist satanists

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
str8line said:
If it's a lone insane gunman I think the outcome is the same except for some QAnons engaging in their inevitable conspiracies.
Click to expand...
Well, I would have to disagree, given our present climate. Some in MAGA would come up with conspiracies that Trump was given something to produce a heart attack. Certainly Democrats would be blamed. But, I do not believe the response would be the same. Not even remotely close, IMHO….
 
Mongoose said:

View: https://x.com/MaxBlumenthal/status/1835698197030646241
Click to expand...

Going with random meeting of an associate? Okay.

www.theguardian.com

Donald Trump used Jeffrey Epstein’s former jet for campaign appearances

The ex-president used the late convicted sex offender’s plane after his own jet developed engine problems
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

The ex-president used the late convicted sex offender’s plane after his own jet developed engine problems


Donald Trump used a plane that was once owned by Jeffrey Epstein, the late disgraced financier and convicted sex offender, to fly to several presidential campaign events last weekend, it has been revealed.

The former president flew on a Gulfstream G-550 jet whose previous ownership was subsequently traced to Epstein after Trump’s own private plane – a Boeing 757 known colloquially as Trump Force One – encountered engine troubles.


The former Epstein jet was emblazoned with the slogan “Trump 2024” for the duration of the ex-president’s use.
Click to expand...

We can do this all day, but I trust you get the point. Conspiracy serves no purpose.
 
TheStormofWar said:
That'd be a large part of it, sure, but only insomuch as it was the mechanism for the fulfillment of daily needs of the populace. The removal of daily struggle for basic requirements for a people bent on governing themselves due to their perpetual and relative wealth when compared to their global neighbors would eventually have this effect anyway because people no longer have a reason to think beyond their daily requirements to sustain their livelihood. Think late-period Imperial Rome when they couldn't even ****bothered about the Visigoths. Not that Rome was capitalistic, but same concept where people just no longer... care.

We're pretty much talking about the same thing.
Click to expand...

Dunno where you're living but a lot of people I know are worried about keeping a roof over their heads.
 
Red said:
Seems more like the Democrats we’re thinking on their feet, in a one time unexpected event, and we’re overwhelmingly supported by the Democratic electorate…
Click to expand...
Are you talking about the 2020 election where they changed all the rules using the one time unexpected event of the COVID pandemic for justification? Or are you talking about the 2024 election where they changed all the rules using the one time unexpected event of Joe Biden being old for justification? I can't fault the Democrats for not thinking on their feet but there do seem to be a lot of one time unexpected events lately and the solution always seems to be emergency alterations to the procedures of voting in a way that gives the Democrats an advantage they didn't have before.

When it comes to protecting democracy, the democrats seem to have embraced the old adage "we had to destroy the village to save it".
 
str8line said:
I wasn't happy about it and figured there was enough time to get the public involved in the decision somehow, but I understood it. What would you have suggested?
Click to expand...
Nearly every nation on earth who democratically elects their nation's leader has an election season shorter than the one Kamala Harris is in. We, with our year's long campaigns, are the odd ones. There was plenty of time, and many such as Nancy Pelosi wanted an open process. A choice was made between honoring a democratic process and being assured of the result they wanted. The powers that be went with being assured of the result they wanted. It is what it is, but I think you forfeit the ability to do that and still claim the other side is the threat to democracy.
 
Al-O-Meter said:
Nearly every nation on earth who democratically elects their nation's leader has an election season shorter than the one Kamala Harris is in. We, with our year's long campaigns, are the odd ones. There was plenty of time, and many such as Nancy Pelosi wanted an open process. A choice was made between honoring a democratic process and being assured of the result they wanted. The powers that be went with being assured of the result they wanted. It is what it is, but I think you forfeit the ability to do that and still claim the other side is the threat to democracy.
Click to expand...
So you think that because the democrats are a threat to democracy, that means trump can not be a threat to democracy? Strange logic there.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top