We often wonder why the MSM run cover for the Dems? Because a helluva lot of them are married to someone in the Administration. Case in point. Dana Bash. She’s one of the CNN moderators hosting next weeks debate. She’s married to Jeremy Bash. Former CIA guy under Obama and one of the 51 signees of the Hunter Biden laptop letter. How could she possibly be seen as an impartial participant?
POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
Listen to yourself. Think about what you're arguing. That the Bill of Rights doesn't constrain the states. So they're free to infringe on them all they want. You're advocating for taking rights away from people in the same post you call someone Adolf. Get a grip man.
Tommy in the political thread is making for great reading.
I don’t care what anyone says, I have a few of the “Anyone but Biden 2024” Tshirts and my family crack up at them.
Regardless that’s how I feel, and I truly believe if Trump wasn’t on the other side less dems would give a damn and wouldn’t show up because their choice is dumpster water.
I don’t care what anyone says, I have a few of the “Anyone but Biden 2024” Tshirts and my family crack up at them.
Regardless that’s how I feel, and I truly believe if Trump wasn’t on the other side less dems would give a damn and wouldn’t show up because their choice is dumpster water.
In other words, those you are afraid to speak, your crap was wrong. You cited a case that says nothing of the application of the First Amendment to the states after you puffed that the original intent of the First Amendment was for it to apply to the states. But, as I and freaking Wikipedia knew, it was not until the SCOTUS held that the 14th Amendment made applicable the First Amendment to the states in the early 20th century.
Yeah, it’s convenient now that you have been shown to be grossly incorrect that you say “regardless” and act as if your ignorance is of no consequence.
We shall see on that, as I make no predictions, but will say that Gorsuch has already questioned in a manner that could suggest a change. We’ll wait and see. Regardless, your pompous ass was wrong.
While we wait, your lying crap is old and tired. You are dismissed.
Actually, I think he is suggesting that your “separation” interpretation is not constitutional, but a fabrication of an activist court and that freedom from government was not the power you wish to see the government have. That an establishment of religion does not mean that the religion of secularism is the religion of government. Time shall tell. But, history shows that your version was not how the clause was originally construed, historian.
In today's edition of 'Everything is Racist'.
Of course milk is racist. It's white.
Go look up what went on in Iowa.
Wrong. On all counts. That's not what he was arguing, that's exactly what the First means, secularism is not a religion but the absence of it, and the application has always been under debate.
Last edited:
I’m sorry the education system failed you so badly that you don’t even realize Haley got 24% MORE in a closed primary AFTER Iowa…making your “argument” even less relevant.
Id love to know who they cited as their experts lol.
Hey man, im on your side. But what I said happened in Iowa happened.
What's education have to do with anything? I don't spend my life working in politics like you. Hell I'm not here to even be right just to talk shit most of the time.
Been around long enough to remember edge roasting your ass inside tbk's version of gyero yrs ago.
Romney loving neocons are the only ones who show up to vote for her. The others I dunno.
I'm still not convinced Biden will be on the ballot come November anyway.
What's education have to do with anything? I don't spend my life working in politics like you. Hell I'm not here to even be right just to talk shit most of the time.
Been around long enough to remember edge roasting your ass inside tbk's version of gyero yrs ago.
Romney loving neocons are the only ones who show up to vote for her. The others I dunno.
I'm still not convinced Biden will be on the ballot come November anyway.
The education comment was a joke.
I’d like to have a witty comeback for the TBK GYERO blast, but I try as I might…no recollection of you.
I’d like to have a witty comeback for the TBK GYERO blast, but I try as I might…no recollection of you.
But still....New Hampshire is unique for various reasons, like cultural and being tiny, such that it doesn't make sense really to extrapolate what you do. The R party alays had a strong never-Trump contingent: it was always gonna be 70-30 or 60-40 wherever, and in a tiny state primary where you're only talking a couple hundred thousnad votes, a few thousand democrat voters easily produce the 44% you hanged your hopes on.
The idea was then take that momentum on, which didn't happen, couldn't happen, because like it or not, Trump is too enthusiastically supported in spite of the valiant efforts of the
Did not know this.
If I were Trump, I would make it a priority to specifically point this out during the debate so that everyone in the world watching becomes aware of this, and then ask her directly why her husband signed that letter when we now know the FBI always knew the laptop was legitimate.
None of them would have run against Biden though. Of course Haley would beat Biden if she did. Status quo for the moneyed interest, with less unelected trannies controlling a mentally incompetent figurehead.
lol at Scott
The name "Shitcago" exists for a reason.
Lol.
Thanks for that breakdown of NH demographics and your idea of strategy.
Which presidential race Super PAC were you national director for again?
And Haley would be terrible for the country. I’d rather democrats just continue destroying the country than put someone with an R next to their name to do it.
Need someone to blow up Washington, and Trump is the only one who has potential (even though he failed miserably last time).
Need someone to blow up Washington, and Trump is the only one who has potential (even though he failed miserably last time).
Nikki Haley?
Lol... she might be better than Biden by about .000001%.
Edit: .000000000000000000000001%
Lol... she might be better than Biden by about .000001%.
Edit: .000000000000000000000001%
Ok, since you are such an expert. Why don't you explain to me how this says nothing other than perhaps an indictment on your education?
The entire new England area is its own animal because they somehow avoid all the problems of the rest of the country. Its an entire region of basically homogeneous make up and people either of wealth or working.
Very little homeless. Virtually no illegals. Very low crime, which is why biden can go to the beach without secret service (which alone tells you alot about the area).
So it makes total sense to me why they vote dem while also being pretty conservative people. They dont have all the problems of the rest of the country, so they don't have a problem with how things are going. Plus most every dem candidate is someone from their backyard who they or their family literally knew personally.
Thanks for typing that out... I'm lazy and will just say 'cultural."
It's great that you're an experrt, but This chit isn't rocket science tommy4uk.
Ok, sorry I just skim most of the time, but there's a very fundamental problem with the crux of your point.
Namely, Iowa was a larger field of candidates, where NH was just down to two. Of course she had a huge bump as the never-Trump or non-Trump vote had to go somehwere else.
The idea was than to parlay that in to winning her home state, then the nomination. It's not rocket science.
I also completely understand the no-Trump R vote, and am sympathetic. But I disagree completely that you stand any chance otherwise.
You may work in the field, but don't come on here acting as if your word is gospel. Some of us also "know people" pretty high up in the political ranks and also follow the topic backwards and forwards. If you want to contribute to the convo with your opinions, then great, but cease w/ I'm right 100% of the time takes......because you're not.
Similar threads
