ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
LMAO! Trump threatened to sue his campaign manager this morning because his poll numbers are pathetic and falling. Poor baby cheeto face ;-(
GYgvlAlXkAABIuT
 
Vance’s dance on abortion was pathetic, IMO. Walz acted like Kentucky was extreme. There is no law more extreme than Minnesota’s that Walz signed and Harris praised. In Minn, you can kill your baby the day before she is born. Look at her as a newborn baby and know that in Minnesota, you could have chopped her up in the womb THE DAY BEFORE. SAME BABY!! That IS INSANE and that is what Harris wants for the whole country. She thinks that madness is retiring Roe, probably because she does not understand Roe.

Vance was afraid to point out Minnesota’s pathological law, because he was afraid of the issue and probably thinks they still have a shot in that state. It was a low moment, IMO.
In general I agree with your comment although I don't think the 'dance' was pathetic, just wishy washy. JD did not push hard enough on MN law as you stated and could have scored a few more points if he had. What both Trump and JD are missing, imo, is the 'gotcha' on abortion. I would have loved to see JD say, 'VP Harris and Gov Walz constantly talk about a woman's rights and healthcare when talking about abortion. What about the baby's rights and healthcare? When does the baby begin to have rights? In MN, CA, CO (and maybe others I don't know), the baby has NO rights until after birth. Yet, in every one of those states, an unborn fetus whose pregnant mother is murdered can be considered as a SECOND life when charging the murderer. And, each one of those states define when that fetus is considered a second life differently just like each state can have its own abortion laws. How can your state, Gov Walz, and others say that it's OK for a mother to kill her unborn child in the 30th or 35th week but a murderer can be convicted of killing that same unborn child in week 22?' Most people who are adamant about preserving abortion rights have never thought about this side of the issue. Some may say, 'It's totally different'. To which JD (or I) would reply, 'Not to the baby'. To me as a logically thinking individual, it makes zero sense that a state would define a fetus as a 2nd life when murdered but not a life at all when being aborted. If more people would actually consider this inconsistency, I believe there could be a reasonable limit set on unrestricted abortions. Politically, a huge majority are against late term abortions. Capitalize on that overwhelming majority's opinion and nail Harris/Walz down on when, exactly, the definition of 'late term' should begin?
 
So you think the 2020 election was on the up and up and Biden really beat Trump with 81 milly votes? K.
Bring out all the vote totals you want & all the instances of election fraud you dearly believe to your core, & they still don't add up to Biden not having won. I'll wait for on the emojis of various kinds.
 
He didn’t lose to Joe Biden, he was stripped of his presidency through Democratic tactics. He was right to call it out and fight for it despite how some thinks it made him look. He is exposing our government for all to see, you either want to it or you don’t.
Exposing the government & equating that as to why Trump lost when he was government at the time is bs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dionysus444
In general I agree with your comment although I don't think the 'dance' was pathetic, just wishy washy. JD did not push hard enough on MN law as you stated and could have scored a few more points if he had. What both Trump and JD are missing, imo, is the 'gotcha' on abortion. I would have loved to see JD say, 'VP Harris and Gov Walz constantly talk about a woman's rights and healthcare when talking about abortion. What about the baby's rights and healthcare? When does the baby begin to have rights? In MN, CA, CO (and maybe others I don't know), the baby has NO rights until after birth. Yet, in every one of those states, an unborn fetus whose pregnant mother is murdered can be considered as a SECOND life when charging the murderer. And, each one of those states define when that fetus is considered a second life differently just like each state can have its own abortion laws. How can your state, Gov Walz, and others say that it's OK for a mother to kill her unborn child in the 30th or 35th week but a murderer can be convicted of killing that same unborn child in week 22?' Most people who are adamant about preserving abortion rights have never thought about this side of the issue. Some may say, 'It's totally different'. To which JD (or I) would reply, 'Not to the baby'. To me as a logically thinking individual, it makes zero sense that a state would define a fetus as a 2nd life when murdered but not a life at all when being aborted. If more people would actually consider this inconsistency, I believe there could be a reasonable limit set on unrestricted abortions. Politically, a huge majority are against late term abortions. Capitalize on that overwhelming majority's opinion and nail Harris/Walz down on when, exactly, the definition of 'late term' should begin?

I completely agree with and share your moral position.

The unfortunate fact is that political position is devastating for the gop and thats exactly the response the moderators were trying to elicit.

Its horrible i know, but to draw any harder line than the current one is to guarantee elections will be lost and an even more sinister abortion law will be in place across the land.

Its awful to think a generation of unborn must be sacrificed to save more in the future; but that really is the only long game answer.
 
I completely agree with and share your moral position.

The unfortunate fact is that political position is devastating for the gop and thats exactly the response the moderators were trying to elicit.

Its horrible i know, but to draw any harder line than the current one is to guarantee elections will be lost and an even more sinister abortion law will be in place across the land.

Its awful to think a generation of unborn must be sacrificed to save more in the future; but that really is the only long game answer.

It's tricky for sure. It just seems like an area where repubs are just going to have to concede a bit. I know that will outrage many here, but like you said, elections will be lost if this gets pushed any further, and then it could get real bad.

Just makes me think "Give this one to them". Because if for nothing else, there's just too much emotion in Abortion and I can't see a day where anything less 60% of the nation are pro-abortion. It's a losing battle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigblueinsanity
Bring out all the vote totals you want & all the instances of election fraud you dearly believe to your core, & they still don't add up to Biden not having won. I'll wait for on the emojis of various kinds.
So you believe Walter got the most votes in Presidential history legitimately?
The rest of your opinions are starting to come into focus for me.
 
I think the VP debate last night represents better the state of public opinion than the Presidential debate did. There is more agreement and in common on most issues than you hear from the more extreme members from both parties.
They both run on division instead of running to get sh** done for the American people.
Hell, I think the mainstream Pubs and Dems are closer than they've ever been on immigration, housing, energy production, police/military and crime.
The fringe might talk different but not the mainstream in either party.
The Democrat mayor of Louisville is calling for the crushing of any vehicle caught street racing right now.
Kamala knows she can't win Dems Or independents without being mainstream on the border, crime and energy production (fracking).
Trump is NOT a conservative and is divisive as hell..... Kamala is a left wing liberal in moderate sheep's clothing. Neither is my first choice.
I do think our system of checks and balances can contain most anything kooky Kamala would try. The same can't be said for Trump this round. He's learned from last time to surround himself completely with yes men, suck ups and loyalists. That's bad for America.
That's why I can't support him.
Kamala ran as a tough-on-crime prosecutor originally. All the “left wing” stuff came from the 2020 primary when she was trying to find a lane between Bernie and Joe. She wouldn’t’ve held those positions a few months later in the general had she won, let alone years later now that she’s the candidate. I would love her to be “left wing” but she isn’t. Look at her positions on Israel, not even lip service offered to the left.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sambowieshin
That's interesting. You believe that, let's say, a policy plank touting a 23 week ban on abortion with the obvious exceptions, would still be too draconian and would not cause enough votes to swing to Republican? Yet, poll after poll show a huge majority are against late term abortions. In my opinion, there are plenty of voters who are 100% against a total ban (or a very short time period like FL's 6 weeks) AND late term. Right now, they feel they have to vote D as the R's aren't giving them much to work with and this issue is very important. Match the state's abortion ban with the murder statute and I believe, for a chunk of voters, this would take abortion as THE deciding issue off the table and those voters would then look to immigration, the economy, crime, foreign policy, etc. as determinants of their vote where, I believe, the R's have a lot more going for them than do the D's.

Yes, there are zealots on both sides that will NEVER vote 'for' abortion and others who wouldn't support any restriction on it, but they're not going to change their mind regardless. I believe, and I'm certain I could be way off here, that there is a sizable number of voters who are so concerned about a total ban that they feel the only choice is Harris/Walz even if they promote unlimited abortion rights. Marrying the abortion limitations to the murder statute is defensible, logical, and, my guess, many states have set that time limit around the 20-24 week mark which, politically, is reasonable, imo.

So, it's interesting to me that you believe going further than Vance did last night would be a bad move politically. You may be right. But, it sure doesn't make logical sense to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 55wildcat
Jan 6th lol. An event almost half a decade ago that has literally no affect on anyone today. It's in the past. I don't understand why we are still talking about this, especially when dems never seem to give a shit when their side burns entire cities down.

It's no wonder that THIS is the thing the left keeps harping on, it's about all they have. Keep making Jan 6th some big bad boogeyman that Trump will "do" again (In quotes because he didn't do anything different than liberal politicians saying "we need to take to the streets" and "we can't let him win by any means".).
No other president in the entire history of our country made up fake electors for his VP to unilaterally recognize in an attempt to seize power after losing an election. You keep ignoring that fact. Trump is a unique evil.
 
Lolololol just days ago they were saying he was "redefining masculinity" now today they're going to tell you how MeToo isn't real


I think that is a drop to make him seem more masculine.

That is one closeted fig. No one knows who he is. They can define him anyway they want.

After four years, he’s finally talking. They have to counter what you see and hear. Once you have seen the guy questioned by reporters, his speech and mannerisms say he’s soft.

Doesn’t he live in cali without Kammy?

At the very most it was a bitch slap.
 
I think that is a drop to make him seem more masculine.

That is one closeted fig. No one knows who he is. They can define him anyway they want.

After four years, he’s finally talking. They have to counter what you see and hear. Once you have seen the guy questioned by reporters, his speech and mannerisms say he’s soft.

Doesn’t he live in cali without Kammy?

At the very most it was a bitch slap.


His testosterone leaked out of his Vag...
 
IF the rumors are true that the judge raped his daughter, I don't blame him at all. I'd be going to prison as well if I were in his position.
You going to prison would be a good outcome for society if you did that. Of course it would ruin your family.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT