I would assume the effect they were looking for would be that the majority of the people think they won and since that is what happened, your scenario doesn't work. But I always love a conspiracy theory regardless of the level of probability.
OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
Who thinks they won? Can you get a signed letter stating such and present it as evidence to support your argument?
This guy must not have given her the answers ahead of time. Even the first answer is a big ol' word salad.
At the ABC made for TV event formerly referred to as the "Debate", KH made several claims that are in direct contravention of her long and oft stated positions. That is, once she became anointed as the nominee and had to go about the task of getting the gullible and especially stupid to vote for her because you only get so many votes by constantly screaming orange, the monumental task of 180 degree policy changes began. The media has only helped. Stuff like she's suddenly ok with fracking and claims she made her position clear in the VP debate in 2020. Except she didn't as what she said was Joe Biden would not ban fracking. HER statements about it previously are that she is against it. Period. But now she isn't and the media doesn't hammer her for it. Convenient isn't it? And this pretty much goes across the board. This summarizes how she lies about firearms: We aren't taking your guns, Tim Walz and I are gun owners. But, but, but, butt, butt
The crazy part about this is that they could absolutely hammer ABC over this as an in-kind campaign contribution. Can you imagine the numbers of what that would have cost and all the subsequent media replay since? But, any such notion would actually require a DOJ or others who were interested in fairness, impartiality, and enforcing the law equally. I can dream.
Didn't they also fact check his claim that Harris supported financing gender affirming care for illegals and prisoners, which she also disputed on stage?
Which has since been proven to be a 100% accurate statement. Is anyone here in favor of this policy?:
It's a smart tactic, to be fair. She knows that the average voter in this country is a fvcking moron, and that half of them are dumber than that. The "don't believe your lying eyes and ears" message works on those people, and they could be the key to victory.
It'll be interesting to see if you get anyone to jump on this ask. This is a pure example of how diabolical and ingenious they can be in achieving goals.
If you were to ask the question flat out of whether tax payers should be funding sex change operations or other transitioning of inmates while they are serving prison sentences, I'm gonna speculate that a very high percentage would say No and indicate that a prisoner can do that on their own when he/she leaves the system. That is, even if they are ok with someone doing such to themselves, it shouldn't be on the taxpayers' dime.
So, what KH and others do is change the question. Instead of being honest about it, they simply redefine things and include such as part of an inmate's medical treatment and healthcare. Then, they can ask the populace the question, should the state pay for an inmates' medical treatment and healthcare needs while they are serving their sentence? As most are not heartless, they'd say of course because they are never told what that includes.
The polls taken after said that. Well, except for the newsmax one, which I thought was hilarious.
Really? Because Trump’s numbers continues to improve with “undecideds” and indies, which is who is gonna move the needle. I think the Harris campaign is disappointed their advantage in the debate didn’t help them as much as they had planned.
Did you watch the debate? They specifically asked her about the fracking "change", among others. How many times do you want them to re-ask the question which points out the change?
Speaking of "media bad". Why hasn't this stuff leaked to the public?
apnews.com
News outlets were leaked insider material from the Trump campaign. They chose not to print it
Three news outlets were recently leaked confidential material from inside the Trump campaign, but have chosen not to reveal any of the details about what they received.
apnews.com
We're going to see the gullible one come November. Have you started warming yourself up for another Trump Presidency? Don't worry, I plan to take it easy on you after Trump wins. I won't be too big of a dick.
Shit, I can't even say that with a straight face. I'm going to be a colossal dick. Start warming yourself up for that too.
Do your homework. He is a Trump hater, even his son has said as much. A neighbor of 20 years in Greensboro said he was a staunch Dim.
Amen. A really long list.
Her values have not changed? Lol, you are so gullible.
Last edited:
Exactly. Or they put the gender transition funding into a border bill, and then claim Republicans don't want to secure the border because they rejected the pork rider.
Sicko.
We agree on something.
I really don't think that they have changed appreciably. She's just lying to make herself more palatable to middle of the roaders.
Last edited:
speaking of lies, how about the humongous one that you keep stupidly trying to justify with your baseless, hollow posts? You know, the one that goes something like 'I didn't stick my head completely up my ass when I decided to help gift us with Biden/Harris'.
You do realize that your post is largely deep conspiracy nonsense? Even MTG has corrected some of nonsense you just posted.
Inconceivable? Not if you are this guy...
The better question is whether or not YOU watched the debate, the clip your attached, or did you LISTEN to what was actually said???? The question asked by her sorority sister was about changed positions on fracking, mandatory gun buybacks, and decriminalizing border crossings (otherwise known as criminals). She asserts that she'll respond to all three, only speaks about fracking, but does say three different times that her values haven't changed.
As to fracking, she LIED. What she said in 2020 was that JOE BIDEN would not ban fracking. Her statements prior to that is that she would ban fracking (what Joe was going to do or not do doesn't actually matter since SHE is now the nominee). She claims today that she would not ban fracking, that she had not banned fracking as VP of the United States (forgetting the reality that she has absolutely no power to do anything about anything except breaking a tie in the Senate or assuming duties of the president if he left), and wants to act as if she did something when she voted in favor of the Inflation Reduction Act that allegedly opened new leases for fracking. On that specific vote, she was doing as directed by the Big Guy, she is a D VP who voted in favor of a D bill, and, oh btw, that's the same bill that Joe recently admitted it should not have been called by that name but was really a Climate Spending bill.
So, yes, she has changed her position on all three and did not explain it in the "debate" that wasn't. And, oh, btw way, she's again changed on guns again. See earlier. But keep on preaching with the parroted talking points.
You do realize that your post is largely deep conspiracy nonsense? Even MTG has corrected some of nonsense you just posted.
Inconceivable? Not if you are this guy...
Hey noob. Thanks for chiming in.
You do realize a ton of shit that you Democrat NPCs have called conspiracy theories in the past have proven to be true, right?
June 26, 2020 Trump signed an EO saying you no longer needed a degree to hold a federal job, why is Harris proposing this again?
“Trump is proposing no taxes on tips. What a laugh. Terrible idea. My plan is much stronger. I’m proposing no taxes on tips!”
- Kamala Harris
These 2 statements are consistent with the majority of Americans.
Most don't want assault weapons on the streets and most don't want hunting rifles and handguns taken away.
I agree with both of her statements.
He’s a Trump supporter? Goodness, who’s wearing the tin foil hat now?
Now post the nonsense regarding trump.
Do you know that this was Ron Paul's idea back in 2012 and there's already a bill in Congress regarding tips?
lol. C'mon man.
'nonexistent? Case in point. Nowhere did I see the word 'nonexistent' in the verbiage provided. The constituents mentioned I'm pretty sure exist. One can turn the narrative whichever way one wants to, but to imply nonexistence of the parties mentioned when nothing of the sort was indicated is exactly the kind of one-sided version of the truth that I'm talking about.
Did it occur to you at all to just let the words provided tell their tale without your biased interpretation? Did it occur to you to mention that Vance made sure to point out that the accounts of his 'existent' constituents is what formed the basis of the 'illegals eating pets' story? No, of course it didn't.
A lib would rather walk around the block to tell a lie than to stay where he is and tell the truth.*
*@heelmanwilm, this is an exaggeration for effect. But you can choose to call it a lie if you so desperately need to do so. Jesus loves you either way.
He counseled trump on his impeachment.
Why Old Clinton Sleazeball Mark Penn Loves Trump
Hillary Clinton’s former campaign manager has become a Trump propagandist.
nymag.com
Seriously, google should be your friend. You will find a lot of articles about this clown.
no, in my decent universe, I admit that everyone lies from time to time. But only some lie so habitually, as you do, that lying becomes their predominant character trait.
Similar threads
