ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
Uh, the GAZANS (there are no such things as "Palestinians") elected Hamas with an OVERWHELMING majority. So what have the GAZANS done to "deserve freedom and equality just like everyone else?" The GAZANS OVERWHELMINGLY hate the Jews and OVERWHELMINGLY support Hamas and its efforts to drive the Jews "from the river to the sea." You made an assertion but you haven't bothered to substantiate WHY the GAZANS "deserve" any such thing.

Any "solution" that DOESN'T include REMOVING Hamas from the face of the earth COMPLETELY is an unacceptable solution, since Hamas is bent on EXTERMINATING the Jews.
What about the West Bank? And East Jerusalem? Palestinians there are being maimed and killed too. Did they vote for Hamas like the "GAZANS"?
 
Or Maher is the same ignorant lefty he’s always been, opining on topics he doesn’t know anything about or understand, but you guys have shifted so far left that seems reasonable in comparison to your normal shit.
Does this have anything to do with my post about the entire panel shifting political sides? His guests didn't switch sides along with him. He just got new ones. Like I said Ava Navarro herself used to be the lone voice of conservatism on a panel of liberals. Now literally the same person is supposed to be the lone voice of liberalism surrounded by conservatives.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Caveman Catfan
GTbMclaXQAA-0we
 
"My and Kamala's economic agenda" - You see what he's doing? Trump needs to get in front and start blasting her before Joe gets any semblance of cover for her.

I read that and thought the people in charge of Biden’s X account were trying to sabotage her.

The democrat candidate needs to be able to run from the Biden admin’s disastrous border invasion supports, and terrible economy for the middle class. That’s why I’m not yet 100% sold Kamala is going to be the candidate.
 
Look at how much the show has shifted over the years. Used to be a liberal hub with one lone, token moderate conservative on the panel to be the punching bag. Now it's literally completely flipped, with all solid conservatives and one lone, former Republican who switched because she was turned off by Donald Trump representing the entire left. Ana Navarro being the voice to defend progressives is beyond laughable. 90s Maher vs current Maher is such an interesting case study of descent.
Descent? Or the fact he has held fast in his beliefs (whether I or anyone else agrees with them or not) and everything in society around him has moved further to the left. He's held fast in pointing out how the woke mindset has infiltrated and how his party has become a bunch of lunatics pushing nonsense. His panels and guests reflect that. Maher hasn't become a conservative, he's still has TDS. Megyn Kelley owned his ass over that. Not falling over the cliff with the rest of the liberal lemmings in the media doesn't equal his program being in a descent.
 
This is just factually incorrect. An idea never posited until the modern era. Here you have Ignatius of Antioch (who knew and learned from St John) writing around the year 110:

“See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. […] Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. […] Whatsoever [the bishop] shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.”

There are an almost limitless supply of other pre-Constantine references to "the Church" and meaning it explicitly in the way in which I am referring to the Church. I mean, Our Lord himself creates the Church by ordaining the Apostles and placing Peter over them. "Feed my sheep." "What you bind on Earth is bound in Heaven...". etc.



Perhaps we're talking past each other to a certain extent. I am not saying Jews can never be accepted into the Church or that they lost salvation simply by once being Jews. You are correct in that we are all grafted into the vine and should claim no special privilege for having been grated on. And I definitely do not suppose that anyone being grafted in "takes the spot" of someone else.

What I am saying is that rejecting Christ, which Jews must do or else they are no longer Jews, means that you cannot be grafted on. That is the absolute bare minimum for being seen as a good servant of Our Lord. Again, they can be grafted on at any moment by abandoning Talmudic Judaism and accepting authentic Christian teaching. I am not claiming they are cast out and can never return. But they actually have to accept Our Lord for that return to happen. As of now, that is not the case and probably won't be until the end, if you accept that interpretation of Revelation.

To head off the old covenant still being in place argument, I must ask how a Jew today can ever faithfully uphold the covenant without a Temple? Why would God allow the Temple to be destroyed if he expected the Jews to still faithfully follow the Mosaic Law? Isn't it much more reasonable to see the destruction of the Temple (and it's never having been rebuilt for 2000 years) as a sign from God that the old covenant can no longer be fulfilled by humans. The only way is through Our Lord Jesus Christ
This is a lie. Jews don’t lose their Jewishness. Once a jew always a jew. If a jew accepts Christ then it’s just a jew who accepts Christ. They aren’t excommunicated. Then the more I read I see antisemitism all throughout your post.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Stan the caddy
Vance's best attribute, IMO, besides probably being a good debater, is that he has been tremendous on TV defending Trump and Republican policies in general. He is very smart and skilled, and there is really no one better on MTP or similar shows to put out to answer questions. But, that is a far different skill than being able to go out and campaign nationally for office. Maybe he will get better "on the stump".
Vance is awful. Worst decision trump could have made. They need to boot him from the ticket or lose.
 
Sadly, Maher is a rare voice of occasional reason the left has to listen to. Most of his takes are awful/leftist, but at least he said things like Islam is violent and far worse than Christianity. Kimmel or Colbert are just democrat propagandist all the time, Maher at least has some brain cells working.
Something Liberals hate is when their own has a mind of their own and doesn't toe the party line.
 
He won his seat, yes, but underperformed dramatically -- shades of Mike Pence -- and he's widely disliked in the state.
What's underperformed? Won 53-47 in a open seat contest. Congressional Pub candidates underperformed across the board in 2022.

Just how is he widely disliked? Liked very well in East Palestine.
 

ing the suggestions of various party leaders, Nixon found that Rockefeller and Reagan were tied, Connally was third and Ford last. However, among members of Congress, including such Democrats as Sen. Mike Mansfield of Montana, the majority leader, and House Speaker Carl Albert of Oklahoma, Ford came in first.

“They were the ones who would have to approve the man I nominated,” Nixon noted. As Albert later asserted, “We gave Nixon no choice but Ford.”
 
Holy Crap! You sure support some GD perverts.

In first, male October 7 survivor recounts rape at hands of Hamas terrorists


‘They pin you to the ground, you try to resist, they take off your clothes, laugh at you, humiliate you, spit at you,’ survivor says, recounting ‘very difficult’ assault​


Supposedly, Hamas still has American hostages SINCE OCTOBER. D-Sus supports the terrorists Hamas. Maybe Kamala will trade D-Sus for an American hostage?
 
This is stupid sh!t. Ford never was on a ticket with Nixon. At least pretend you know something of US history.
Can you not read?

Did I say anything about being on the ticket?

After Agnew was forced out, Dems said that Ford is the only that they would confirm. So a guy who was never voted for gets put as VP and then president.

"After Vice President Spiro Agnew resigned in 1973, President Richard Nixon needed to appoint a new vice president. Nixon considered several candidates, including John Connally, Nelson Rockefeller, and Ronald Reagan, but faced significant opposition from congressional Democrats. Ultimately, the Democrats indicated that they would only confirm Gerald Ford for the position. Ford, a long-serving Congressman and House Minority Leader, was seen as a more acceptable and uncontroversial choice compared to the other candidates."
 

ing the suggestions of various party leaders, Nixon found that Rockefeller and Reagan were tied, Connally was third and Ford last. However, among members of Congress, including such Democrats as Sen. Mike Mansfield of Montana, the majority leader, and House Speaker Carl Albert of Oklahoma, Ford came in first.

“They were the ones who would have to approve the man I nominated,” Nixon noted. As Albert later asserted, “We gave Nixon no choice but Ford.”
THANK YOU!
 
  • Like
Reactions: berniecarbo
Maybe not. I can't imagine that every Republican was thrilled with Caribou Barbie being a heartbeat away.
I'd take Palin over anyone in your entire party. I would take millions of people over anyone involved with the democrat party and at least 90-95% of the current Republicans at the Federal level.
That is the sad situation this country is in.
 
Nobody votes for or against based on who the VP candidate is
I don’t agree with that. Trump has one term and who his vp is of importance. Kamala is gonna pick a vp who will help her in the rust or sun belt. There was a time vps were figureheads but right now in this election vp could mean 20000 or more votes in swing states. Any of those states whoever Kamala picks as vp the state will follow because the margins are so thin.
 
  • Like
Reactions: entropy13
220px-Spiro_Agnew.jpg


Old Spiro... If he were in politics today, would be considered a pretty far left liberal. (replete with abusing political office for personal gain, and habitual tax fraud)

Although, he DID come down hard on Vietnam War protestors, and, by extension, gave us the ubiquitous descriptor, “nattering nabobs of negativism”
 
This should be like shooting fish in a barrel for Trump when it comes to debates and campaigning. Literally all he has to do is run down all of Kamala’s stances and statements on these issues, and then point out he is basically exactly opposite of her on every issue. That’s it. No personal attacks. No nicknames. No brawling. Any sensible voter who is presented with these facts should find Kamala to be unelectable.

So why bother debating a defenseless opponent? Sensible voters don't need to be more convinced. It's the nonsensical and irrational voters that vote D, and the media has them by their public parts.
 
I don’t agree with that. Trump has one term and who his vp is of importance. Kamala is gonna pick a vp who will help her in the rust or sun belt. There was a time vps were figureheads but right now in this election vp could mean 20000 or more votes in swing states. Any of those states whoever Kamala picks as vp the state will follow because the margins are so thin.
Kamala has zero chance in the sun belt. she has to sweep MI and PA. That is her only path. No other state but those 4 are going to flip. She'd better hit Nebraska's 2nd district though. If she loses that, it doesn't even matter if she SWEEPS the rust belt, she'll lose, 269 to 269
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: blubo and Girthang
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT