Jump to content
Head Coach Openings 2024 ×
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $2,716 of $3,600 target

Open Club  ·  46 members  ·  Free

OOB v2.0

2020 Presidential Election thread


Muda69

Recommended Posts

The Biden Protection Racket

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/10/the-biden-protection-racket/

Quote

Joe Biden is the most cosseted presidential candidate in memory.

He’s run a minimalist campaign that’s avoided the press as much as possible, while the press hasn’t been braying for more access and answers, but eager to avoid anything that could be discomfiting to the campaign.

Never before have the media been so openly fearful of asking or reporting something that might hurt a presidential candidate. What are supposed to be the animating values of our adversarial press — informing the public, getting answers, holding the powerful to account — have all been subordinated to the protection racket that is coverage of Joe Biden.

Even the lowest common denominator of news — simply being interesting — has been tossed aside. Boring and uneventful is the new newsworthy.

This presumably isn’t how they teach it in journalism school, but no one has had trouble adjusting.

The tendency reached a new level in the media’s handling of New York Post reports on emails obtained from a laptop that Hunter Biden reportedly left off at a Delaware computer-repair shop.

Here was a story with enough mysteries and plot lines to keep a couple of newsrooms busy. Are the emails, putting Hunter Biden’s sleazy overseas business dealings in a more sinister light, legitimate? Did Hunter really take the laptop to the shop and forget about it? And, more important, what do the emails say about what Joe Biden knows or should have known about Hunter’s work that depended so heavily on proximity to the vice president?

Instead, the press has been uninterested at best and hostile at worst. It’s the opposite of a feeding frenzy. The media have deployed their bomb-disposal units for fear that a potentially explosive story might detonate.

What Biden has to say about the emails is inherently of interest. Yet he wasn’t asked about it at his ABC News town hall last week. Never mind that his response would have made headlines afterward, and the clip would have been shown in every TV segment about the debate.

Subsequently, CBS reporter Bo Erickson betrayed his profession by asking Biden his response to the Post story on a tarmac. He got slammed by Biden: “I have no response, it’s another smear campaign, right up your alley, those are the questions you always ask.”

No one rallied to Erickson’s defense. Instead, respectable figures on the center-left shamed Erickson for having asked a politician an unwelcome question — which, the day before yesterday, would have been considered Journalism 101.

Much of the press has pronounced the Post story debunked without doing any work to debunk it, and believes as a matter of faith that it is Russian disinformation. Rather, the focus has been reporting on how the Post reported the story, as the press works to discredit media outlets that don’t toe the correct political line — you know, just like Woodward and Bernstein did during Watergate.

This tendency toward “anti-reporting” has long characterized Biden coverage. The New York Times took 19 days to cover Tara Reade’s sexual-assault allegation against him, not wanting to burden its readers with information about a newsworthy charge too quickly.

The media have dutifully pushed back against the idea that Biden wants to ban fracking, even though Biden himself has said at times that he wants to ban fracking. Any Biden misstep is quickly explained away. The press doesn’t seem to mind that the campaign is prone to declare “lids” — or the end of the candidate’s public day — early and often.

Why would the press want more access to a candidate it isn’t covering so much as carefully shielding from scrutiny with the finish line of November 3 in sight?

Usually, the media love candidates who make good copy, who provide drama and color. In their hatred and fear of President Donald Trump, though, they’ve thrown in their lot with the dull and meandering Joe Biden, bringing to the effort all the complacency and pointed incuriosity it can muster.

Agreed.  The unabashedly liberal MSM is treating Mr. Biden with kids gloves at a level they never extended to Mr. Obama and Ms. Clinton during their presidential election runs.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.tmz.com/2020/10/21/barack-obama-stumps-joe-biden-philadelphia-bullhorn-streets/

"Barack Obama stumps using a bullhorn on the streets of Philly"  is the headline in every news story - Like he's really out there and folks are piling in to hear "44" speak, and he's really stirring up the Biden excitement out there........

Watch the video, when it pans you can see he is literally using a bullhorm talking to about 10 people.......and an eight year old.....

Yeah, I'm not buying it.....

 

 

 

 

Edited by swordfish
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump Won the Debate—But Won Bigly the Post-Debate

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/trump-won-the-debate-but-won-bigly-the-post-debate/

Quote

There was a low bar for Joe Biden in the first debate, given his cognitive challenges. Because he exceeded that pessimism, he won momentum. 

In opposite fashion, there was similarly an expectation that a disruptive Donald Trump would turn off the audience by the sort of interruptions and bullying that characterized the first debate. 

He did not do that. He instead let a cocky Biden sound off, and thus more or less tie himself into knots on a host of topics, but most critically on gas and oil. So likewise Trump will gain momentum by exceeding those prognoses. 

But far more importantly, the back-and-forth repartee will not matter other than Trump went toe to toe, but in a tough, dignified manner and beat Biden on points. Biden did not go blank — although he seemed to come close, often especially in the last 20 minutes. Had the debate gone another 30 minutes, his occasional lapses could have become chronic.

What instead counts most are the days after.  The debate take-aways, the news clips, the post facto fact checks, and the soundbites to be used in ads over the next ten days all favor Trump. In this regard, Biden did poorly and will suffer continual bleeding in the swing states. 

We will know that because by the weekend Biden will be out of his basement and trying to reboot his campaign and actually be forced to campaign. 

So we are going to hear over the next week that Biden simply denied the factual evidence of the Hunter Biden laptop computer, the emails, the cell phones, and the testimonies from some of the relevant players as a concocted smear, a Russian disinformation attack. That denial is clearly a lie. It is absolutely unsupportable. And Biden will have to drop that false claim.  

Biden will suffer for unequivocally denying what is now a demonstrable fact: there is evidence that his family ran a systematic shake-down operation to peddle inside access and influence for millions of foreign dollars in profits. In the debate, Biden seemed bewildered why anyone could ever conclude the obvious.

 

Biden lied about his “super-predator” quote. Ditto his flat-out untruth about his opposition to the Trump travel ban and the border cages, and his denial of prior opposition to fracking.

Usually Trump is accused more of exaggerations and fabrications; in this debate Biden will be far more fact checked.

Again, Biden’s sloppy and confused talk on the Green New Deal will not play well in swing states like Pennsylvania and Ohio. Voters there know that his abstractions of “transitioning” out of fossil fuels or banning fracking but just on federal lands is a euphemism for renewing the Obama-Biden war on pipelines and gas and oil production. So Biden now has gone full-circle: last year bragging about banning fracking and ending fossil fuels, then in the general campaign denying that, and now reaffirming it.

Biden also hurt himself with his base, by blaming Obama for not getting more crime reform for drug sentencing while accusing Bernie Sanders of pushing a socialist health plan and suggesting his own opposition to it had boosted him over his leftwing rivals in the primaries (perhaps true, but not wise to ensure the base turns out). 

Americans know by now that treatments are improving on COVID-19, that death rates are declining, and that it is true that about 99.8 percent of the infected under 65 will survive the virus. Trump did well in pointing all that out.

So gloomy scenarios of 200,000 more dead by New Year’s, or of more national lockdowns, and no vaccination until mid-year 2021 are both unlikely and too doom-and-gloom a scenario for most Americans. 

Voters will more likely agree with Trump that they are going to get through and “live” with the virus rather than Biden’s pessimistic forecast of “dying” with it. Trump was right to say that the lockdowns are cumulatively likely to have killed or injured more than the virus itself.

Biden’s immigration meandering will turn off voters by his siding with those who illegally cross the border, are caught, and then released and do not show up for trial (he lied about this too in saying that they almost all show up for their hearings). 

Trump, then, after four years in the White House, nonetheless successfully returned to his role as the outsider cleanser of Biden’s Augean insider stables. His theme was can-do Americanism, Biden’s was timidity and caution and worries that there is little hope anywhere to be found, an attitude consistent with his own hibernation. 

Final thoughts on the debate: The moderator Kristen Welker was far better than the prior debate and town-hall moderators, in avoiding the scripted stuff like the Charlottesville distortions and ‘when did you stop beating your wife’ questions. That said, she interrupted Trump far more than she did Biden, and focused more on Biden-friendly questions.

But most importantly, Trump kept his cool, was deferential to Welker, and was tough but not cruel to Biden.

The final question is not whether Trump won and will be seen to have won bigly by next week, but to what degree Biden’s suicidal talk of ending fossil fuels and denial of the Hunter Biden evidence that cannot be denied implode his campaign early next week or not until Election Day.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Disdain 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/7/2020 at 9:11 AM, Muda69 said:

The VP Debate Is Mike Pence’s Final Audition for 2024

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/10/vice-presidential-debate-mike-pence-final-audition-for-2024/

I may watch this debate.  There shouldn't be the foolishness that occurred in last week's Presidential debate.

And I wonder should Mr. Trump lose in November what will Mr. Pence do for the next four years?  Campaign?

  

Mike Pence's political career will be over starting Jan 20 2021. 

He won't have a snowballs chance in hell to win the GOP nomination in 2024. 

He'll be even easier to attack then Trump. 

He'll be killed for all the failures of the Trump presidency, as governor in Indiana and you'll see his trash record as a house rep. 

The GOP's best chance (dumbest choices) would be Josh Hawley from Missouri, Rick Scott from Florida or Tom Cotton from Arkansas. 

The least likely (but best choices) would be to try to get Larry Hogan (Maryland), Charlie Baker (Massachusetts), Phil Scott (Vermont) or Chris Sununu (New Hampshire).. Those guys are moderate Republican's who poll well with Independents and moderate dems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/20/2020 at 10:34 AM, DE said:

All states are swing states this election.

Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisana, ME-2, Missouri, Montana, Mississippi, Nebraska (NE 1, 2 and 3), North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming will go to Trump

California, Oregon,Washington,  New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado, Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Virginia, Minnesota, Hawaii, Illinois, New York, New Jersey, Maryland and Delaware will go to Biden. 

 

Wisconsin, Pennsylvania,Michigan, Arizona, Texas, Georgia, North Carolina, Iowa, Ohio and Florida are what they consider "toss ups" 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/19/2020 at 6:43 PM, DanteEstonia said:

You also live in rural Indiana...

He's a region rat. 

On 10/22/2020 at 7:33 PM, DE said:

The "Big Guy" and his family are imploding.

I pray for his health and that he is able to get through this debate.

Drip, drip,

BQQM!

Imploding? Hahaha. There's a better chance that Trump ends up in Prison then anyone in Biden's family. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/12/2020 at 11:23 AM, Muda69 said:

That depends on your point of view, and your definition of "American".

Members of the uni-party like yourself just want to grow the size of and scope of government until it controls virtually everything, along with a national debt that will cripple the futures of our children and grandchildren. 

 

I was born in Winamac Indiana at 10:45 pm Saturday October 3rd 1987. 

Im a 5th generation hook born in America. 

My mom was a 5th generation frazier born in America. 

Im an American. 

His point is invalid. Be better muda. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, TheStatGuy said:

Mike Pence's political career will be over starting Jan 20 2021. 

He won't have a snowballs chance in hell to win the GOP nomination in 2024. 

He'll be even easier to attack then Trump. 

He'll be killed for all the failures of the Trump presidency, as governor in Indiana and you'll see his trash record as a house rep. 

The GOP's best chance (dumbest choices) would be Josh Hawley from Missouri, Rick Scott from Florida or Tom Cotton from Arkansas. 

The least likely (but best choices) would be to try to get Larry Hogan (Maryland), Charlie Baker (Massachusetts), Phil Scott (Vermont) or Chris Sununu (New Hampshire).. Those guys are moderate Republican's who poll well with Independents and moderate dems.

The article never said it would be a particularly successful audition.

5 hours ago, TheStatGuy said:

I was born in Winamac Indiana at 10:45 pm Saturday October 3rd 1987. 

Im a 5th generation hook born in America. 

My mom was a 5th generation frazier born in America. 

Im an American. 

His point is invalid. Be better muda. 

 

If you say so.  And sorry, I don't know what a 'hook' or 'frazier' is.

And why do you so blindly support virtually unlimited growth and power of the federal government?

 

 

 

Edited by Muda69
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I  encourage everyone to vote early for this election if possible.   I vote this past Saturday at the Clinton County courthouse and was in and out in about 15 minutes.   Easy peasy.

No standing in line on November 3rd.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Republicans And Democrats Will Never Deliver Peace

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/republicans-and-democrats-will-never-deliver-peace/

Quote

The 2016 Republican presidential primary debates revealed a sea change. From 2008 to 2012, then-congressman Ron Paul was routinely booed for his criticism of America’s foreign policy. It was even common to hear Republican office holders, commentators, and activists say they “agreed with Ron Paul on everything but foreign policy.” Yet in 2016, candidate Donald Trump was cheered for calling the Iraq war the biggest blunder in American history.

One would have thought Trump’s victory would have resulted in a major reduction of America’s military presence in the Middle East and Afghanistan. However, three years and 10 months after President Trump was sworn into office, at least 3,000 troops will remain in Iraq at the end of the year if Trump’s troop reductions go into effect. How many troops will remain in Afghanistan depends on how successful the military-industrial complex, and their allies on Capitol Hill and in the media, are at undermining Trump.

Meanwhile, the U.S. is still supporting Saudi Arabia’s vicious war against Yemen, which has created a humanitarian crisis. We still have approximately 700 troops in Syria. Trump kicked off the new year by provoking hostility with Iran when he ordered the assassination of Iranian leader Qassem Soleimani. He has poked at both China and Russia.

How did a candidate who was elected in part on a promise of no more useless, endless wars wind up keeping the warfare machine humming along?

Partly because, even at his best, Trump is far from being a consistent non-interventionist. Even as he railed against the endless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, candidate Trump rattled sabers at Tehran by pledging to withdraw the U.S. from the Iran nuclear deal.

Trump also called for dramatically increasing the military budget, repeating the lie that Obama had decimated the military. But U.S. military spending has continually gone up, not down.

Trump has been more successful at stirring up hostilities with Iran than at withdrawing from Afghanistan and Iraq. The biggest reason his actions have not matched his campaign rhetoric is that the entire foreign policy infrastructure in D.C. is controlled by pro-war factions. Even a truly non-interventionist Republican or Democrat would likely fail to roll back America’s military presence overseas.

The House versions of the fiscal year 2021 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) contained provisions designed to block Trump from fulfilling his promise to withdraw troops from Afghanistan.

This provision was championed by Wyoming Republican Representative Elizabeth Cheney, daughter of famed hawk and former vice president Dick Cheney. Representative Cheney is not some backbencher. She is the third-ranking Republican in the House. Cheney was joined in supporting this amendment by Democratic Representative Jason Crow of Colorado. The amendment easily passed the House Armed Services Committee by a vote of 45-11. Only eight Republicans voted to support their president’s efforts to end America’s endless war. Even more discouraging, only two Republicans, Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Representative Mo Brooks of Alabama, voted for an amendment to the NDAA offered on the House floor to establish a plan to end the war in Afghanistan. Libertarian Representative Justin Amash also voted for the amendment.

The Senate’s version of the NDAA warned against a “precipitous” withdrawal from Afghanistan. It also expressed concerns about closing any U.S. base located in Europe without offering an alternative, thus putting a monkey wrench in President Trump’s attempt to draw down the number of American troops in Germany.

Even worse, the Senate rejected an amendment by Senator Rand Paul to withdraw troops from Afghanistan. Paul’s measure failed by a vote of 60-33.

For all the often-justified handwringing over how the Republican Party has become a “cult of Trump,” the sad truth is, for most Republican representatives and senators, devotion to Trump stops at the water’s edge.

One reason for the GOP’s fidelity to the warfare state is the military-industrial complex’s outsized influence on Capitol Hill. For starters, the defense industry donated $27 million to political campaigns in 2016.

But the main reason military contractors wield clout with many federal lawmakers is their business model. Instead of manufacturing a complete product at one plant, they make components at various plants spread across the country. This means that many representatives and senators have a vested interest in supporting a large military budget—and thus an interventionist foreign policy—because those weapons produce high-paying jobs in their districts and states.

Too many conservative Republicans, who usually denounce stimulus spending bills, claim that throwing money at failed weapons projects like the F-35 creates jobs and helps grow the economy. The truth is that money heaped on the Pentagon creates less than half the number of jobs that the same amount would create if spent by the taxpayers who had earned it.

The defense industry also maintains its influence through generous donations to D.C.-based think thanks. Recipients of these funds produce research papers, op-eds, congressional testimony, and presentations given to congressional staffers that promote an interventionist foreign policy beneficial to their donors’ bottom lines.

Defense contractors’ support for think tanks is not limited to conservatives. Center-left think tanks and foreign policy scholars also receive funding.

This enables the defense industry to control both sides of the foreign policy debate, no matter the election results. The military-industrial complex wins while U.S. troops fight and die in unnecessary, unconstitutional wars. Taxpayers who fund these wars are saddled with debt and high taxes.

And defense contractors are not the only ones funding pro-defense D.C. think tanks. Foreign governments also provide money in exchange for justification of U.S. interventions on behalf of their countries.

The funding given to pro-war think tanks breeds pro-war political operatives who fill presidentially appointed civil service positions and congressional staffs. This is why President Trump has staffed his administration with neocons like John Bolton, who spend their careers promoting the disastrous foreign policy that Trump had promised to reverse.

The Democratic Party is just as welded to the warfare state as are the Republicans, as was shown by the bipartisan effort in Congress to stop President Trump from withdrawing most of the troops from Afghanistan. Further evidence is provided by the presidency of Democrat Barack Obama. His opposition to the Iraq war was a major reason he bested uber-hawks Hillary Clinton and John McCain in 2008. Yet Obama expanded America’s military presence around the world and infamously made a “kill list” of individuals—including American citizens—subject to summary execution without due process.

The modern Democrats’ love for the war party was also shown by their attacks on Representative Tulsi Gabbard for meeting with Syrian President Bashar-al-Assad. By the logic of Gabbard’s critics, John F. Kennedy should never have negotiated a peaceful end to the Cuban missile crisis. They were willing to attack her, even though she’s a down-the-line progressive and a mixed-race military veteran who would seem an ideal presidential candidate for the Democrats.

The Democratic Party is now fielding presidential and vice-presidential candidates who are all in with the war party. Joe Biden was an instigator of the Iraqi war. Senator Kamala Harris recruited her for­eign pol­i­cy advi­sors for her presidential bid from the Center for a New American Security, which has long pushed Democrats to embrace war.

While I am grateful for pro-liberty, antiwar Republicans such as Rand Paul, Thomas Massie, and, of course, former congressman and 1988 LP presidential candidate Dr. Ron Paul, the fact is that the war party is too embedded in the infrastructure of the two major parties and the D.C. establishment. Neither Republicans nor Democrats will change our disastrous foreign policy.

If we are to adopt a policy of peace, antiwar activists must work outside the two-party system. We should be guided by independent think tanks that are free of the corrosive influence of the military-industrial complex, citizen groups that pressure elected officials to stand up to the warfare state, and alternative parties that are not beholden to the military-industrial complex.

As the Libertarian nominee for president, I am proud to build on the work of former Libertarian presidential candidates Ron Paul and the late Harry Browne to bring the message of peace, prosperity, and liberty to the American people. As I campaign from coast to coast, the reception I have gotten convinces me that the majority of Americans want peace.

If I am elected, I will begin to bring troops home from the Middle East on day one of my presidency. As a member of a party that is not beholden to any part of the military establishment, I will not budge under pressure from the military-industrial-think-tank-media complex. Instead of seeking a “benevolent global hegemony,” I will make America like a giant Switzerland: armed and neutral. Furthermore, I will remove barriers to free trade with all nations, which will reinforce peaceful relations.

Republicans and Democrats cannot deliver peace because they are loyal to special interests that benefit from continual war.

Libertarians, who have been fiercely committed to a non-interventionist policy throughout their party’s 49-year existence, stand ready and eager to deliver the peace and neutrality that Americans want and need.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Democrats’ Contempt for the Will of the Voters: https://spectator.org/biden-voters-contempt/

Quote

The most important passage in George Orwell’s iconic and prescient novel 1984 is O’Brien’s chilling explanation to protagonist Winston Smith concerning the Party’s motives: “We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power.” It is no exaggeration to say this has become the raison d’être of the Democratic Party. Consequently, it’s imperative to remember that the electorate itself is the true target of Democratic attacks on President Trump. This is why its current presidential nominee calls his supporters “Chumps.” It is why the failed 2016 Democratic nominee recently described them as “cowards and spineless enablers.”

 

Trump is the voice of a nationwide voter rebellion against the ruling class, and the Democrats know the revolt can’t be crushed until he is silenced. They want the proles to return to our roles as obedient servants of Beltway bureaucrats and politicians. This is what they mean by “returning to normalcy.” But they know this will never happen as long as Trump is in a position to implement policies and appoint officials favored by the despised voters. Even as this is being written, the Democrats are decrying the confirmation of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, despite broad public approval of her record. As Majority Leader Mitch McConnell phrased it on the floor of the Senate:

It is supremely ironic that our Democratic colleagues delivered through a temper tantrum what they should have delivered through a fair appraisal: a unanimous endorsement. All last week, the legal brilliance and judicial temperament that our nation deserves in a Supreme Court justice were on display.… I anticipate we will have a new Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. That is what the American people want.… Clear majorities of Americans want Judge Barrett confirmed.

Democratic contempt for the electorate is such that the ironic talking point they deployed against Judge Barrett’s confirmation was, “Let the voters decide.” In other words, ignore the 63 million Americans who cast their ballots for Trump in 2016 — largely based on a pledge to appoint judges who would interpret the law rather than legislate from the bench. They also threaten to flout the will of voters by “packing the Court.” If they win control of Congress and the White House, they will expand the number of justices to create a permanent leftist majority on the Court. A New York Times poll shows only 27 percent of voters support this scheme. Legal scholar Jonathan Turley writes that it would wreck the Court:

Joe Biden has been asked if he supports these calls to pack the Supreme Court and has refused to answer.… These moves would obliterate an institution that has over history preserved the stability and continuity of our country. The Supreme Court has performed this vital role based on its legitimacy and authority with Americans that will surely evaporate if Democrats pack the bench…. What is left behind is not principle but raw power, and both the Supreme Court and the country will be the worse for it.

Or, as Orwell phrased it in 1984, “No one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means, it is an end.… The object of power is power.” If it seems farfetched that even the Democrats would govern in such a cynical fashion, consider that less than a year ago, they impeached the president pursuant to ridiculous charges — despite the consistent failure of the Democrats to convince a majority of voters that such drastic action was appropriate. Or, if you’re a real masochist, think about the two-year Mueller investigation into an implausible conspiracy theory and its embarrassing collapse. Both of these burlesques were clear abuses of power without regard to the will of the electorate.

And no discussion of Democratic contempt for the voters would be complete without at least a passing reference to their repeated attempts to exploit COVID-19 to pass leftist wish lists full of provisions that have nothing to do with the pandemic, including federalizing elections by mandating mail-in voting, eliminating voter ID laws, and removing restrictions on ballot harvesting. They have also used their COVID relief bills in attempts to defund the police, funnel (more) money to Planned Parenthood, bail out Democrat-run cities and states for pre-pandemic mismanagement, move back deadlines for the census, mandate enhanced banking  services for cannabis distributors, ad infinitum.

It goes without saying, of course, that such skullduggery is always accompanied by absurd calumnies concerning Trump’s character. It never seems to occur to allegedly “savvy” politicians that gratuitously accusing Trump of racism, corruption, and insanity insults the intelligence of his supporters. People like Hillary Clinton don’t seem to realize that, even when they resist calling them “deplorable,” these voters understand she regards them as peasants. Joe Biden doesn’t get that telling voters they are “full of sh-t” or calling them damn liars isn’t an effective campaign strategy. Nor is telling African-Americans, “If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.”

The Democratic Party and the ruling class it represents have nothing but contempt for the electorate, and their attempts to get rid of Trump are about nothing more than disfranchising the “chumps” who voted for him. Their actions since January 2017 have made it clear that they are, like O’Brien in 1984, motivated by power for the sake of power. They don’t care about social justice, equality, saving the planet, ending systemic racism, or any of the other causes they use to manipulate the voters they despise. For them, power is not a means to an end. It is the end. That is precisely why they must be deprived of it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/2/2020 at 3:23 PM, swordfish said:

120559752_10207478187308462_3115923529353920181_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=cTEqIUuKRMwAX_ee_Bp&_nc_oc=AQlO4mV8ugy0MOVBl07GyRZgNZ2LUG-EiiiTMbOxLyBy8Hi7-A3zWcaqElr1fZJGtzg&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-2.xx&oh=7e64d9e40880962b9cfb2e918f37f0b9&oe=5F9CEF6C

President Trump pardoned Duke Tanner, a local NWI man, that was convicted under Biden's crime bill.  Check out Tanner's message on social media platforms if you'd like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/25/2020 at 3:36 AM, TheStatGuy said:

Mike Pence's political career will be over starting Jan 20 2021. 

He won't have a snowballs chance in hell to win the GOP nomination in 2024. 

He'll be even easier to attack then Trump. 

He'll be killed for all the failures of the Trump presidency, as governor in Indiana and you'll see his trash record as a house rep. 

The GOP's best chance (dumbest choices) would be Josh Hawley from Missouri, Rick Scott from Florida or Tom Cotton from Arkansas. 

The least likely (but best choices) would be to try to get Larry Hogan (Maryland), Charlie Baker (Massachusetts), Phil Scott (Vermont) or Chris Sununu (New Hampshire).. Those guys are moderate Republican's who poll well with Independents and moderate dems.

Democrat exposing their playbook right here folks.  That is ALL they do.

5 hours ago, swordfish said:

So far, I am a "Deplorable" "Chump" "Pimp".......  (Hillary, Biden, Sharpton)

Dont forget what obama called us....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DE said:

Democrat exposing their playbook right here folks.  That is ALL they do.

Dont forget what obama called us....

What are you blabbing about? I didn't expose anything. Its what both parties do or do you not pay attention?

On 10/25/2020 at 10:38 AM, Muda69 said:

The article never said it would be a particularly successful audition.

If you say so.  And sorry, I don't know what a 'hook' or 'frazier' is.

And why do you so blindly support virtually unlimited growth and power of the federal government?

 

 

 

My last name is Hook? My moms maiden name is Frazier? Not that hard to realize that by my post. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, DanteEstonia said:

 

If the shoe fits...

The tolerant left.  🙂

1 hour ago, TheStatGuy said:

What are you blabbing about? I didn't expose anything. Its what both parties do or do you not pay attention?

My last name is Hook? My moms maiden name is Frazier? Not that hard to realize that by my post. 

Facts.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...