Sergi91 Posted August 3 Posted August 3 The big brother housemates are the last people on earth to find out about Biden no longer running and Kamala running instead. 1
Douglas Booth Posted August 3 Posted August 3 1 minute ago, Sergi91 said: The big brother housemates are the last people on earth to find out about Biden no longer running and Kamala running instead. and none for trump assassination 8
Navyofbadgals Posted August 3 Posted August 3 4 hours ago, Achilles. said: So it's been reported that Biden likes Shapiro and Pelosi likes Walz. More important than either of those endorsements, though, is the fact that several big unions have publicly expressed disapproval of Shapiro and Kelly. Will be interesting to see how this shakes out. The fun possibility is that they're pulling the same bait and switch they did with Biden and Harris: get everyone talking about Shapiro, Walz, Beshear so they take any negative attention and then pick Buttigieg, Whitmer, or Pritzker instead. In all fairness it was reported he liked both Walz and Shapiro, and that people around Biden noted that he was very lively around Walz (yes that sounds kinda silly but we'll take it with his age ) I don't want to fully bet on Shapiro yet but it's very clearly either him or Walz. Walz doesn't have any immediately obvious advantage that Shapiro has but he is easily the better pick, hope Pelosi, and the unions push for him harder because clearly they like him. most median voters are lowkey idiots, so vibes are enough to make them decide probably lol. Walz vibes are good, and he has the no BS, more normal American charm that they need to counteract Trump/Vance and I guess also the Californian-ness of Kamala Guess we'll see soon enough
Communion Posted August 3 Posted August 3 (edited) 2 hours ago, IBelonginYourArms said: Nothing good about consistently being Putin's cumrag. I wonder if she visited Moscow recently yet to get the Kremlin's permission to unsuccessfully run for the 30th time ???? This is like ZTP worthy. Jill Stein is not a Putin supporter and the idea she is reveals someone is not American and are ignorant to American political realities at the time, or is like 18 and has just discovered politics post-2020. Progressives used to go on RT all the time in the 2000s and early 2010s. She wasn't at a dinner for Putin. She was at a conference for RT and delivered a speech that called Russia's government the twin force of warmongering with America. Edit- Is this someone's dupe for offensive 4chan-style shitposting? Edited August 3 by Communion 1
GraceRandolph Posted August 3 Posted August 3 2 hours ago, Harriser said: All this Shapiro talk is getting hyperbolic. Nothing has actually happened. Yet we have an increasingly overblown bandwagon, yapping to each other seeing who can get the next most outlandish doomer take about how Shapiro brings the whole operation down single handedly. I don't mind pressuring the campaign to not pick him, but if they do, it's gonna be really frustrating to see all the disproportionate breakdowns about it being 'over' VP Shapiro falls firmly into the 'not ideal' category, not the 'disaster' category. In the end it is Kamala's positions that actually matter and he will fall in line with them. The man is not really that meaningfully different to someone like Mark Kelly but yall have convinced each other he is satanspwan. And he somehow gets framed as worse every day. Keep yourselves together It's hyperbolic to think a murder and sex abuse coverup will tank Kamala's campaign? 10 1
Navyofbadgals Posted August 3 Posted August 3 22 minutes ago, GraceRandolph said: It's hyperbolic to think a murder and sex abuse coverup will tank Kamala's campaign? Like how you gon run a prosecutor vs felon/weirdo sexual abuser campaign and then pick that as your VP lol 2 2
NausAllien Posted August 3 Posted August 3 6 hours ago, GhostBox said: Eh. I don't buy into the doom and gloom of a Shapiro pick. I prefer Tim Walz myself because I like his personality the most but still. You didn't buy the doom and gloom of keeping Biden in the ticket, so...
Eat The Acid Posted August 3 Posted August 3 28 minutes ago, NausAllien said: You didn't buy the doom and gloom of keeping Biden in the ticket, so... Yeah boxy isn't exactly a good gauge for anything political. His political acumen is by far the worst I've ever experienced in my life. Completely clueless. 3 1
GraceRandolph Posted August 3 Posted August 3 Jill Stein Russian agent accusations are the new Britney radio ban.
Vermillion Posted August 3 Posted August 3 Sensationalism aside in the descriptions here, perception becomes reality for a lot of voters and the content of a speech ignored when perceptions, fair or not, that Stein was a useful idiot to Putin for attending that RT event in the first place, became baked in across the political spectrum including with a lot of progressives, who resisted the urge to turn to RT which was practically the only outlet in the 2000s and early 2010s with a substantial online following giving substantial coverage to progressive pet causes and issues which it isn't xenophobic to say they knew and were taking advantage of and a lot of lefty handles and writers I knew and followed always considered to be triangular information warfare on the part of the Kremlin and they wouldn't have bothered with that coverage otherwise. Russia's gay community was arguably at it's strongest in the early to mid-2000s (and I know, I hunted for virtually any news item and documentary there was on it years later) before the cultural crackdowns which were several years before RT's breakdown which was several years before Georgia, etc. when I sensed their coverage was for sensationalism and increased scapegoating as opposed to sympathetic coverage of struggles of these citizens trying to get out of a country falling apart around them. Were there legitimate journalists and lefty pundits at RT at the time taking advantage of that opening that now no longer arguably exists in global progressive media? Yes. Were there a ton of lefties, myself included, that weren't motivated by xenophobia that were always looking towards that outlet with a massive side-eye? Yes. Blue Anon uses Jill Stein as an easy scapegoat and Jill Stein didn't care that her message wasn't reaching anyone outside of her base because of the realities of the context that she was delivering them in, which she chose to ignore. 1
Vermillion Posted August 3 Posted August 3 3 hours ago, Harriser said: All this Shapiro talk is getting hyperbolic. Nothing has actually happened. Yet we have an increasingly overblown bandwagon, yapping to each other seeing who can get the next most outlandish doomer take about how Shapiro brings the whole operation down single handedly. I don't mind pressuring the campaign to not pick him, but if they do, it's gonna be really frustrating to see all the disproportionate breakdowns about it being 'over' VP Shapiro falls firmly into the 'not ideal' category, not the 'disaster' category. In the end it is Kamala's positions that actually matter and he will fall in line with them. The man is not really that meaningfully different to someone like Mark Kelly but yall have convinced each other he is satanspwan. And he somehow gets framed as worse every day. Keep yourselves together Shapiro is demonstrably worse than Kelly on labor, on public schools, on Israel, and on oppo research re: political favors. Period, point blank. I'm together, sober, and will be sticking to this point. Turnout will potentially be depressed OVER the margins by which Biden won in 2020 in the Blue Wall states aside from PA AND the Sun Belt with the base if Shapiro's picked. 1
Vermillion Posted August 3 Posted August 3 I ****ing CALLED IT! Trump agrees to the Fox debate and not to ABC's.
Vermillion Posted August 3 Posted August 3 7 hours ago, GhostBox said: This is exactly right 😂 Needs to get Harris on stage without properly being challenged. And I totally buy the internal polling being worse, which is a pleasant surprise. For now.
Vermillion Posted August 3 Posted August 3 5 minutes ago, Douglas Booth said: does no debate hurt Kamala? Great question and another example of a datapoint that's probably out there but hasn't gotten much attention or should be if it isn't. Trump's trying to dictate terms now and portray Kamala as weak for kowtowing to them. If Fox on his terms will be the only debate he accepts she doesn't have much of a choice. I say, sincerely, she should debate to an open podium on ABC then only agree to a Fox debate with a live NABJ-style realtime factcheck and she can afford to deny participating if it's not part of the procedures. 1
Harrier Posted August 3 Posted August 3 6 minutes ago, Douglas Booth said: does no debate hurt Kamala? Only if it gets spun that she chickened out. The Trump campaign are being smart by trying to get Kamala to agree to a debate on favorable ground - Fox - and therefore raising the chance she will double down on ABC and no debate will happen. That might turn it into more of a 'they couldn't agree' rather than Trump being scared of her. Also generally speaking the frontrunner has more to lose in the debate and given the momentum right now, Kamala is likely to be the slight polling frontrunner by early September. So dems might be very cautious, especially given the Biden debacle. I think the risk of a Fox debate is worth it because if she trounces him, it might be enough to change this from a razor thin election into one where she is the favourite. 2 1
Wonderland Posted August 3 Posted August 3 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Vermillion said: Great to see Trump exhibiting a pro-choice stance in regard to terminations Edited August 3 by Wonderland 1 4
Vermillion Posted August 3 Posted August 3 Just now, Wonderland said: Great to see Trump exhibiting a pro-choice stance in regard to terminations
Vermillion Posted August 3 Posted August 3 Well, it's Kamala's move. Assuming Fox doesn't cave on fact-check demands. Either call Trump's bluff and attend ABC but not Fox. Or accept the built-in risk of attending both.
GraceRandolph Posted August 3 Posted August 3 23 minutes ago, Douglas Booth said: does no debate hurt Kamala? Yes
NausAllien Posted August 3 Posted August 3 Kamala and Trump are in the same situation, but at least Trump can claim he already had a debate with the "real" Democratic candidate before their "coup" Ideally, they'll find common ground (NBC/CBS instead of the more partisan ABC/Fox), but I wouldn't be shocked if both of them refuse to cave in. It will be bad look for both, but worse for Kamala. She hasn't even had a full interview since they anointed her as the Democratic nominee. It's getting weird... 1
TaggedGalaxy Posted August 3 Posted August 3 I knew Trump was going to schedule a debate on Fox and put Harris in a position to either agree to debate him on his terms and only on his terms or compete/split the views of a debate. Harris really should stick to the original agreed upon plan and hammer home the fact that Trump is too scared to debate her unless he is in his safe space. She is being set up with the Fox News debate, we all know how that is going to turn out
Recommended Posts