What's new

The Biden Administration and All Things Politics

Kamala might have a Republican House and Senate to deal with so why never-Kamala? Which policies of hers are your least favorite?
This:

View: https://x.com/jeremykauffman/status/1835782658091102608?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ


For saying most likely this:

View: https://x.com/jeremykauffman/status/1835649337574957477?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ

Because she is this:

View: https://x.com/endtribalism/status/1833560861845426259?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ


I will never vote for a far left extremist, which she is. 2 big ones: Wants to regulate speech, wants gun buybacks.

View: https://x.com/endtribalism/status/1831717581868171648?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ




View: https://x.com/catholicvote/status/1829707200979484955?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ


You guys are anti Trump, I get that. I really do. I just can’t with good faith vote for either of these options. Doesn’t mean I can’t agree with both of them on certain policies. I will side more with Trump on economy and immigration and I will side more with Kamala on social programs.

Again my vote doesn’t really matter in Florida anyway.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: PJF
Even Hillary is getting on the fun to jail Americans for “misinformation”.

When I say extremists, this is a prime example, just happened an hour ago.


View: https://x.com/nataliegwinters/status/1835858099598397594?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ

I mean if we regulate speech, maybe everyone of these people should be in jail:

View: https://x.com/collinrugg/status/1835765305316184142?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ

I so wish Hillary would go the **** away. Who is she? Why is her voice relevant? Because she covered for her pedo, sex abusing husband? Why do people talk to her?
 
Even Hillary is getting on the fun to jail Americans for “misinformation”.

When I say extremists, this is a prime example, just happened an hour ago.


View: https://x.com/nataliegwinters/status/1835858099598397594?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ

I mean if we regulate speech, maybe everyone of these people should be in jail:

View: https://x.com/collinrugg/status/1835765305316184142?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ

Ahh, good old doubelespeak, quick cuts, absolute false assumptions, and quirky edits.

Go touch grass homie, you are veering into Political Jazz Fan territory with all the ExTwitter posts.
 
Did you watch the video?
I did and it keeps getting funnier. How often has Trump castigated and castrated his surrogates on talking points? At least twice a day. So like I said, where a scalpel works well (and is proven to be effective), Trump wants to take us back to good old Thomas Jefferson-style of economics. Hence
michael%20jordan%20laughing%20gif.gif
 
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".
If the Democrat’s response to Biden’s debate performance was “OK, we’re gonna lose in all likelihood, but how bad could a second Trump presidency be”? I’d be both surprised and disappointed. Pissed as well I’m sure. Engaged in a present moment that includes the possibility of an angry authoritarian bent on retribution returning to the Oval Office, I’ll be damned if our response should be to accept that outcome as inevitable. There are two fundamental political realities at the moment.

One sees Trump as having attempted to overturn the 2020 election. Many feel, I certainly do, that a man who undertakes an effort to steal a presidential election should never be allowed to run for that office again. Are we out of our minds allowing him to do so?

The other political reality subscribes to the Big Lie. Donald Trump was elected president in 2020. He must regain that office. He promises to exact retribution to all who have tried, and are still trying, to hold him to account for trying to steal the 2020 election.

Now, me, I would regard all this as an extraordinary situation demanding a response that will help prevent an outcome that is not right: put the man who tried to prevent a peaceful transfer of power back into power, with the increased degree of immunity the Supreme Court allows him now.

All your “but…but…democracy!” is coming from a man who loves to remind us we don’t live in a democracy. Or “how dare the Democrats try to do everything they can to prevent our cult leader from assuming power?”. Are we expected to take such an interpretation seriously? Sometimes you have to do things a little different to prevent a disastrous outcome. The Democratic electorate are excited with their candidate.

The whiners who have no problem with Trump trying to steal one election don’t have any standing with me. We’re in a situation that calls for acting in the best interest of our nation. Democrats want that best interest to result. Republicans want to return the man who tried to overthrow the government. This sure isn’t difficult to understand at all…..
 
Last edited:
Ahh, good old doubelespeak, quick cuts, absolute false assumptions, and quirky edits.

Go touch grass homie, you are veering into Political Jazz Fan territory with all the ExTwitter posts.
Literally a no response. Just like your other post. You don’t watch the videos, you just want to respond with disagreement. You can’t debate about free speech so you just name call and try to shame. At least Thriller put in a detailed response about his views on free speech. If you’re going to respond, put in effort.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PJF
Literally a no response. Just like your other post. You don’t watch the videos, you just want to respond with disagreement. You can’t debate about free speech so you just name call and try to shame. At least Thriller put in a detailed response about his views on free speech. If you’re going to respond, put in effort.
Literally no response as I gave you one. As I said, go touch grass homie.

That said, you want something a bit more substantial? Okay (courtesy of str8line):
NEW: Donald Trump said there could be political violence if he loses in November.

Time: “Donald Trump Says Political Violence ‘Depends’ on ‘Fairness’ of 2024 Election”

Edward-Isaac Dovere, CNN: “Many people have lost American presidential elections over the last 230 years – Trump is the only one to say about violence if he loses ‘it depends.’”

Shane Goldmacher, New York Times: “Trump does not dismiss the possibility of political violence around the election. ‘If we don’t win, you know, it depends,’ he tells TIME. ‘It always depends on the fairness of the election.’”

Trump also continued to praise and promise pardons for violent January 6 rioters – who he calls “hostages” and “patriots.”


Time: “Trump also tells TIME he might pardon the more than 800 men and women charged in connection with the Jan. 6 attack, most of whom have pleaded guilty. The assault left more than 140 law enforcement officers injured and sent lawmakers into hiding. More than 120 people have been accused of using a deadly or dangerous weapon or causing serious bodily injury to an officer, and members of extremist groups were found guilty of seditious conspiracy.

“Trump has sought to recast the insurrectionist riot as an act of patriotism. ‘I call them the J-6 patriots,’ Trump tells TIME. When asked whether he would consider pardoning every one of them, he says: ‘Yes, absolutely.’”

Washington Post: “Former president Donald Trump on Thursday praised and embraced a woman convicted of defying police orders on the U.S. Capitol grounds on Jan. 6, 2021. … Trump has steadily escalated his advocacy for people charged in the Capitol riot, including by pledging to pardon them if he returns to the White House, praising them as patriots, participating in a recording with Jan. 6 prisoners singing the national anthem, and playing it at his first rally of the 2024 campaign last month.”

The Hill: “Trump describes imprisoned Jan. 6 rioters as ‘hostages’”

Washington Post: “Trump vows pardons, government apology to Capitol rioters if elected”

NBC News: “Former President Donald Trump promised Wednesday night that if he is elected he will pardon a ‘large portion’ of the people convicted of federal offenses for their participation in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.”

Trump: “January 6, it was the largest crowd I’ve ever spoken to. And they were there proud, they were there with love in their heart. That was an unbelievable — and it was a beautiful day.”

Business Insider: “Then-President Donald Trump didn’t want to specifically call for the Justice Department to prosecute January 6 rioters or forcefully condemn those who stormed the Capitol as unrepresentative of the MAGA movement.”

NBC News: “Trump spoke at a fundraiser for Jan. 6 defendants”

Trump is only ramping up his extreme and dangerous rhetoric – he has already promised a “bloodbath” if he loses this election and vowed to be a “dictator on day one” if he wins.

NBC News: “Trump says there will be a ‘bloodbath’ if he loses the election”

Rolling Stone: “Trump Says There Will Be a ‘Bloodbath’ and Elections Will End if He Isn’t Reelected”

New York Times: “Trump Defends His Warning of a ‘Blood Bath for the Country’”

The Atlantic: “Trump Says He’ll Be a Dictator on ‘Day One’”

Associated Press: “Trump declines to rule out abusing power to seek retribution if he returns to the White House”

Washington Post: “Trump calls political enemies ‘vermin,’ echoing dictators Hitler, Mussolini”

The Guardian: “Donald Trump says he will lock up his political enemies if he is president again.”

Forbes: “Trump said of his relationships with dictators, ‘the tougher and meaner they are, the better I get along with them,’ which he insisted is ‘not a bad thing.’

“‘The easy ones,’ Trump said, referring to America’s allies, ‘I maybe don’t like as much or don’t get along with as much.’”

The Atlantic: “Late Friday night, the former president of the United States—and a leading candidate to be the next president—insinuated that America’s top general deserves to be put to death. That extraordinary sentence would be unthinkable in any other rich democracy. But Donald Trump, on his social-media network, Truth Social, wrote that Mark Milley’s phone call to reassure China in the aftermath of the storming of the Capitol on January 6, 2021, was ‘an act so egregious that, in times gone by, the punishment would have been DEATH.’”
 
Last edited:
I did and it keeps getting funnier. How often has Trump castigated and castrated his surrogates on talking points? At least twice a day. So like I said, where a scalpel works well (and is proven to be effective), Trump wants to take us back to good old Thomas Jefferson-style of economics. Hence
michael%20jordan%20laughing%20gif.gif
Another no response, just “Trump”, nothing about the original clip I posted stating this is a great explanation of Tariff’s.

He says the same thing you said:
“There's a difference between a surgical use of them which helps in some cases. Trump wants to use a sledgehammer.”

Not in the exact phrase but the same concept.

Yet you just post a laughing meme. I would recommend next time to actually take time to watch a clip that has been presented before you post. Then it would help you not look like a fool when you post a response.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PJF
Another no response, just “Trump”, nothing about the original clip I posted stating this is a great explanation of Tariff’s.

He says the same thing you said:
“There's a difference between a surgical use of them which helps in some cases. Trump wants to use a sledgehammer.”

Not in the exact phrase but the same concept.

Yet you just post a laughing meme. I would recommend next time to actually take time to watch a clip that has been presented before you post. Then it would help you not look like a fool when you post a response.
I gave you a response with how Trump is going to use it. Might I suggest reading comprehension classes if you don't get that?
 
I gave you a response with how Trump is going to use it. Might I suggest reading comprehension classes if you don't get that?
Then look at my original post and see what I had to say about tariffs. See if you can take off your Trump blinders and you use your reading comprehension to see I wasn’t talking about Trump, I was talking about the use of Tariffs. I even said both administrations could use them this way and help Americans out.

So again, you just responded to argue, because of “Trump”, when in reality you (your own words), me and the Trump surrogate have the same philosophy on how to use tariffs.

It would have been a lot easier to watch the clip, read my post and try to not hate me because some times I like Trumps policies and bash on Kamala; then respond yeah I agree with this too.
 
Then look at my original post and see what I had to say about tariffs. See if you can take off your Trump blinders and you use your reading comprehension to see I wasn’t talking about Trump, I was talking about the use of Tariffs. I even said both administrations could use them this way and help Americans out.

So again, you just responded to argue, because of “Trump”, when in reality you (your own words), me and the Trump surrogate have the same philosophy on how to use tariffs.

It would have been a lot easier to watch the clip, read my post and try to not hate me because some times I like Trumps policies and bash on Kamala; then respond yeah I agree with this too.
It's not Trump blinders. It's a simple statement of fact. A flat a-bomb of a tariff helps no one except if they are looking for increased prices and unemployment.


Trade analysts are warning that new tariffs threatened by former President Donald Trump, which he doubled down on during Tuesday night’s presidential debate, will create inflationary pressures in the supply chain and ripple through the broader economy.

Trump defended his trade policy during the debate, dismissing concerns that blanket tariffs of up to 20% on all imports and additional tariffs of 60% to 100% on goods from China will lead to higher consumer prices.


Judah Levine, head of research for Freightos, says if history is any guide, additional tariffs will fuel ocean freight rates. During the first Trump administration, as importers rushed to move goods into the country before tariffs went into effect, ocean container rates from Asia to the U.S. West Coast started rising sharply in July 2018, and doubled by mid-November, according to Freightos data.
Frankly, if you think that such a blanket tariff helps anyone, you are drunk. You should know better than that. Trump should be campaigning on ending inflationary pressures once and for all, not looking to increase them.

So again, if you don't get any of that, then that's on you.

So again, on Trump's proposal:
200w.gif
 
It's not Trump blinders. It's a simple statement of fact. A flat a-bomb of a tariff helps no one except if they are looking for increased prices and unemployment.



Frankly, if you think that such a blanket tariff helps anyone, you are drunk. You should know better than that. Trump should be campaigning on ending inflationary pressures once and for all, not looking to increase them.

So again, if you don't get any of that, then that's on you.

So again, on Trump's proposal:
200w.gif
Last post on this from me. The clip has nothing to do with a blanket 20% tariff. I want nothing to do with a blanket 20% tariff, you don’t want a blanket 20% tariff.

You still have not watched the clip.

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TRUMP!

I never said anything about Trump other than this clip had a Trump surrogate in it.

Not talking about Trump at all. No Trump.

I’m talking about the strategic use of tariffs that either administration can use to help the American people and businesses.

No Trump…still not talking about Trump, again no Trump in any of this. Never had it, not even now. Not about Trump.
 
This:

View: https://x.com/jeremykauffman/status/1835782658091102608?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ


For saying most likely this:

View: https://x.com/jeremykauffman/status/1835649337574957477?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ

Because she is this:

View: https://x.com/endtribalism/status/1833560861845426259?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ


I will never vote for a far left extremist, which she is. 2 big ones: Wants to regulate speech, wants gun buybacks.

View: https://x.com/endtribalism/status/1831717581868171648?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ




View: https://x.com/catholicvote/status/1829707200979484955?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ


You guys are anti Trump, I get that. I really do. I just can’t with good faith vote for either of these options. Doesn’t mean I can’t agree with both of them on certain policies. I will side more with Trump on economy and immigration and I will side more with Kamala on social programs.

Again my vote doesn’t really matter in Florida anyway.
Why does wanting to regulate free speech or gun buy backs make her a far left extremist?



Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
Even Hillary is getting on the fun to jail Americans for “misinformation”.

When I say extremists, this is a prime example, just happened an hour ago.


View: https://x.com/nataliegwinters/status/1835858099598397594?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ

I mean if we regulate speech, maybe everyone of these people should be in jail:

View: https://x.com/collinrugg/status/1835765305316184142?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ
Oh don't worry. Trump just wants to jail those who simply criticize him (even if the criticism is accurate true information) and according to Bill Barr, trumps AG, trump also just wants to execute people who upset him.


Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top