I bet I know the answer. Look no further than what California is proposing for housing for illegals.
OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
You keep pushing this narrative as if it can be created because you keep repeating it.
First off, regarding the polls, the only people that really want these things to be tight and to constantly pump out poll numbers is the media because if either candidate pulls away and it becomes obvious they are going to win (you know, kinda like the landslide territory we were approaching with orange v. Joe before he got kicked to the curb), it's disasterous for the media numbers. They want a close election so I'm not sure how much faith any of us should put behind any of these things. We'll never get access to the their internal numbers and those are the only ones to really trust I think.
Regardless, she's not way ahead and building like you want to push. It will remain close and we'll all pay attention - just like they want us to do. Here's a new poll that shows Trump either leading or a dead heat, and it was done after the DNC, so no bump from that.
Hahahahahaha.
Yesterday the Sore Losers Society on this board were bitching about Kamala Harris wanting to change the parameters regarding next month's debate. Last week it was the DNC and Kamala Harris's supposed role regarding inflation. Today, we're getting an earful about how the Democrats meddled in social media during the COVID-19 pandemic. You guys might want to consider taking a break from politics and stepping away from this forum until after the election. Otherwise, I predict heads will be exploding.
Yesterday the Sore Losers Society on this board were bitching about Kamala Harris wanting to change the parameters regarding next month's debate. Last week it was the DNC and Kamala Harris's supposed role regarding inflation. Today, we're getting an earful about how the Democrats meddled in social media during the COVID-19 pandemic. You guys might want to consider taking a break from politics and stepping away from this forum until after the election. Otherwise, I predict heads will be exploding.
I legit just think you're trying to convince yourself at this point. Trump is going to win. And by a pretty good margin. The fact that it's as close as it is right now is scaring Dems a lot more tied in than you.
But c'mon, you didn't really believe Kamala was going to win, did you? You were all on Biden's jock until he got exposed and you quickly became a Kamala fanboy (a bit embarrassing if I do say so myself). But I think deep down you knew and still know there was no stopping Trump's return. I think you're trying to get under our skin and then when the election happens, you'll disappear for a while so you don't take the beating that's coming for you.
You're too blatant.. We read you like a book. Try something else.
Sorry if it's all too much for you to keep up with current events that are topical. It requires a bit of effort and, you know, reading.
Yesterday, there was discussion on Kamala wanting to change the debate rules to which she'd already agreed because she tried to change them yesterday. Last week, it was about the DNC, because the DNC was happening last week. Today, it's about Zuckerberg admitting in his letter released today that the D's meddled with free speech.
Things change. News occurs. You "might want to consider taking a break from politics and stepping away from this forum until after the election" so your head doesn't explode. Again, we're sorry if it's too hard to keep up.
I wrote what I did in that post in response to Trump's flippant comment where he says, "I mean, right now I say why should I do a debate, I'm leading in the polls?" At least two conservative polls like Rasmussen and the one you're listing might disagree but when you consider the wide spectrum of polls, the consensus suggests otherwise.
Last edited:
Yeah, Hillary was leading in the polls by 6 points, how did that work out for you?
So @Heels Noir , serious questions for you.
Do you think it's proper, appropriate, correct, whatever, that the government is involved in telling social media what and how they should report, censure, label, adjust their algorithms, etc. on any given issue? Whatever your answer is, would you apply the same standards to legacy media such as the tv networks and traditional newspapers? If the answer is different, why?
Is this not a bedrock, foundational problem for you?
Do you think it's proper, appropriate, correct, whatever, that the government is involved in telling social media what and how they should report, censure, label, adjust their algorithms, etc. on any given issue? Whatever your answer is, would you apply the same standards to legacy media such as the tv networks and traditional newspapers? If the answer is different, why?
Is this not a bedrock, foundational problem for you?
It's not so much that SLS members are discussing current events. It's how you're doing it, in an almost rabid state of panic and desperation. I'm no doctor but that can't be good for the ol' ticker.
No, I don't, but I'm not going to lose my shit over a comment made by Mark Zuckerberg. There's always two sides to a story. But don't let that stop you from setting your hair on fire.
I should also add to this that it is a basic tenet to the issue of liability that the sm platforms are insulated because they do not "publish" information/material and influence it's content per federal statute. They take the position that they are basically bulletin boards where anyone can walk up to the the wall at the town square and stick up their message. If we find out they've got a guy there who's ripping stuff down from the bulletin board or covering up people's messages with their own message, isn't that a form of editing and they've waded into the territory of publishing? Think of it in those terms and you begin to see why this is a huge issue.
Two sides? Did the government involve themselves or not? Did they attempt to influence content or not? These are kinda yes or no situations.
Look at it this way, suppose you found out that Trumps administration had done something with sm and forced them to cover up a huge scandal. Let's say that twitter was going to post a series of things that proved he was getting rich because all government officials and those doing business with the feds had to stay in a Trump hotel or they got labeled as terrorists or something. And orange got them to suppress that. You wouldn't even discuss it if a letter came out from their owner admitting this years later?
Does not fit his narrative. He won't answer. I've asked over and over about her policies, crickets. It's all about orange man bad.
Specifically on Zuckerberg, Meta is still a thing and owns all kinds of stuff. FB and Instagram are the two biggest or most well known, but their influence is huge. His letter stated that the Biden administration "repeatedly pressured our teams for months to censor certain COVID-19 content, including humor and satire." That's not a comment. That's what he said after his letter had undoubtedly been reviewed by a 100 lawyers. Think what that really means. Like I said, if you had such a statement regarding the Trump administration, I think your head would actually explode.
He can't discuss what isn't there to be reviewed. Except for all her previous policies that she supposedly doesn't support during election season.
"Everything points to a Trump landslide."
@UNC71-00
Oct. 14, 2020
"Trump is going to win. And by a pretty good margin."
@gunslingerdick
Aug. 27, 2024
@UNC71-00
Oct. 14, 2020
"Trump is going to win. And by a pretty good margin."
@gunslingerdick
Aug. 27, 2024
Sure. Go back to polls and prognostications. It's apparently all you've got. Can't or won't discuss issues. Can't or won't discuss the news of the day. Acts all petty and reinterprets posters' comments to dramatize or belittle them.
I feel pretty certain that you'll update us on today's poll results. Can't wait.
What do you want me to say? I believe in succinct responses rather than than the Russianesque war novels you and @bluetoe are partial to posting.
As for the Zuckerberg story, you've already indicated you're not open to alternative views by mocking the two-sides scenario.
As for Kamala wanting to change the debate rules, so what? She's in a position to do so, so why not leverage it? She has the momentum and she knows that Trump needs something to turn the tide in his favor, namely the upcoming debate. If she gets what she's asking for, it's a win. If Trump pulls out, it's also a win.
Last of all, I'm not that interested in arguing with you over the "issues." We've tried that before and you've proven you cannot admit when you're wrong, even when it's blatantly clear that you are.
Regarding Zuckerberg, I’m willing to listen. What could the other side be? What could rationalize away the Biden/Harris campaign/admin twisting Meta’s arm to suppress information that went against their narrative?
As for the debate, your assertion is absurd. Kamala doesn’t have “leverage” but even if she did, it takes some audacity to step into the race late and act like others should accommodate her demands.
Tulsi Gabbard is now part of the Trump transition team. I think the Dim JOY is disappearing.
^^^^^ edited to add clarity....
War and Peace. I read that piecemeal, but I never really read it from front to back. Maybe that's what I'm trying to make up for when I write my Russianesque war novels. Now, you want a good war novel read Winds of War by Herman Wouk. An American writer about Americans in the big one, WW II; mostly Navy on the action side and riveting in that respect and on the more personal side as well. Holy moly, it's a lot of pages but trust me, it'll grab you by the nads right from the start and you will NOT want to put it down.
That might be how my nocturnal habits became so topsy-turvy. I'm an insomniac, and I always have been. The night time is the right time, sort of thing. But at least I could usually hit the sack in time to get a few hours in. Then that changed at some point, and now I can hardly sleep at all. That's why I post in the wee hours so much, I'm trying get hey heels noir eat me sleepy enough to go to bed. It works, but the time I'm here and watching youtube is lost.
But speaking of watching youtube....those cab view train ride videos are a trip, so to speak. The good ones are almost hypnotic and they almost always do the trick. My favorites are the ones through Switzerland because the scenery is spectacular and in a lot of places, the tracks are feet away form a thousand feet into a valley below.
I would probably pay good money to go to Switzerland just to take one of those trains through the mountains. Just lay back with my nfaorite cocktail and watch the world go by.
My favorite coctail is either a salty dog or bourbon and ginger. I rarely drink whisky straight, but when I do, I drink Angel's Envy. Smooth as silk. If you don't know, a salty dog is just grapefruit juice and vodka in a glass with a salted rim. If the rim is not salted, it's called a greyhound. I'll settle for those as well.
Maybe you just touched upon it. Maybe there was no arm twisting. Maybe there is hyperbole instead. I have no way of knowing and neither do you. I'm just saying that oftentimes it's a good idea to hear both sides before drawing conclusions.
But I know, the Trumpies have heard the one side that fits their agenda, so go ahead and close the book on the subject. Besides, who cares?
"He believes that it's better to be rewarded and not get killed. That's abundantly clear. That kind perspective undermines the entire philosophy of valor and sacrifice associated with the MOH."
I won't argue whether that's true exactly regarding the MOH (I think it is NOT true exactly, I just won't argue it), but it's exactly true that he is echoing what the military tries to drill into the heads of combat troops. If he's wrong, then so are they. And they ain't wrong. Kill the other guy, don't get yourself killed seems like a pretty good mindset to have drilled into your skull if you're a soldier..
I'm encouraged that your post has hints of not taking Trumps remarks in the worst light possible as the usuals do, but rather you have detected the flip side that those of us who don't have an irrational hate for him tend to see. I can live happily with that sort of criticism, because it's fair..
Speaking in general and not about whatever the Zuck issue is, (I don't know, nor do I care to know about it) private companies should be able to do whatever they want. Government needs to get out of the way. As far as your comment about a public bulletin board, that stuff happens all the time. People will always put their stuff on top and will take down any competition.
lol, sorry you missed ^^^^^ this passage.
I was testing you and you either passed or failed depending on your POV. I give you a grade of who gives a shit whether you pass or fail. Also, sorry about your inability to read more than a few words at a time. That must suck.
I guess his bank account is getting low again.
Come on, let's Grift AGAIN, like we did last summer! Let's grift again, like we did last year!
He’s selling pieces of his debate suit, the knockout suit. I guess multibillionaires have a
plethora of ways to make money. Face it, he is cuckoo. 😵💫
plethora of ways to make money. Face it, he is cuckoo. 😵💫
Trump officially welcoming Kash Patel to Team Trump. I guess the Donald believes:
More grifts + more weirdos on the team = more votes
