OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
On it's face that's a great question, but there are reasons. For example, would you even ask that same question about a debate the first week of Sept., a mere two months prior to the election? Well, early voting in PA (a very important swing state that has full on mail in) starts in mid-Sept. As we're almost in July, that's only 2 1/2 months away. All of these accommodations and alternatives for those voters who can't be bothered to show up on November 5th have unintended (or, perhaps, intended) consequences.
I'd posit the better question is why would the D's allow Biden to participate in a debate this early. Here's the thing, last night was their rules with the best setup for Joe and Trump agreed to it all. Last night is the best version of Joe there is for a debate scenario. The behind the scene powerbrokers had to know this had a high percentage of happening. The decline is rapidly escalating and this has to be about convincing Joe/Jill/whoever to let someone else come in to save the day against the evil in orange. There is no other explanation for them wanting a debate this early.
There's no way the Dem engine didn't know exactly how that was going to go down after asking for the debate and having a week of prep - and they still sent him out there. That has to be the first step in their plan to railroad Biden to get him off the ticket. They had CNN and MSNBC paving the way for them by openly saying he should be replaced and gushing over Harris. I would have thought Newsom would have been their choice, but they must not want to jeopardize his political career if he were to still lose to Trump. I guess they figure they can take their shot with Kamala and kick her to the curb if she loses, and save Newsom for 2028 (or 2032 if she somehow does win).
The Dem engine sucks at the game of politics, but this theory kinda makes sense. In terms of Newsom it seems almost any white, non-gay (nttiawwt), non-bernie-sanders, male could win enough indy's. Could a Gretchen Witmer or Amy Klobuchar?
This is interesting. Those two posts basically say that you didn't watch the debate because you already knew what would come out of it. The universal takeaway from everyone* is that our president is not only incapable of serving in that capacity for the next four years, but that he is incapable of doing so at this very moment. You clearly knew this and confirmed such via your posts. Yet, the hatred for orange hitler, who can at least walk up a full set of steps and remember what he's supposed to be doing at any given public appearance, is so deep that you would rather have a vacant vessel figurehead with some unknown, unnamed, unidentified, non-elected person running things. I retract my earlier word of it being "interesting". That's just sad and disastrous going forward.
* I can't really say "everyone" as there is one particularly dense poster here who will continue to claim Joe is fine, make lame attempts at humor, and post meme's, gif's, etc. about the don to deflect from Joe's incapacitation.
I can't imagine them putting up Harris unless Biden drops out within the last couple of weeks.
Apologies. I thought the reading the room thing was directed at me rather than Bowman. And, you're right about the Jewish vote/support. Even saw an article recently that said every president who ignored them or went after them suffered accordingly. On the Bowman incident, however, you are dead wrong. You've bought into his pathetic statements and apologies that were repeated on his behalf by the msm and across sm. I'm surprised. Despite your leanings, you don't normally have the wool completely pulled over your eyes.
Here's the video of what actually happened. You'll see that he walks up to the door, appears to not even try to open the door, pulls off the signage, turns to pull the fire alarm and immediately walks away in the direction from which he came while still holding one of the signs. He NEVER turns back toward the door let alone TRIES TO OPEN IT after pulling the alarm. Thus, his crap about triggering the alarm to "open" or "unlock" the door was just that. That can only be described as an act of stopping whatever was going on in those buildings where the alarm was connected and wanting to evacuate the buildings. This is an example of rules for thee, not for me. And, I'm not even claiming it's D or R, just being in congress versus normal people like us. Watch for yourself:
That's probably the funniest thing I'll hear all day. Trump also claimed he'd recently won two club championships that weren't even seniors. Bet that was one of those things where his helicopter landed and all but two or three of the entries suddenly got food poisoning or something when they saw the owner of the club had shown up.
First, a few asides, a campaign is very different from the job of being president. And a debate is very different from the job of being president.
Second, I've often referred to Joe Biden as the Biden Administration, cuz I feel the job is too big for any one person - you need advisers (cabinet, appointees, etc). history will show Biden was impressive despite how polarized DC has become.
So are his cabinet/appointees/advisers capable of serving the next 4 yrs? Yes, based on [checks s&p500, economic metrics relative to world, bills passed) the last 3.5 yrs, yes.
If it was Nikki Haley on the other side it would be a totally different game. Biden would be long gone. He's only there cuz people think he's the best chance to save this country from Trump. YOUR party nominated trump over Haley, YOUR party is partly to blame.
"unknown, unnamed, unidentified, non-elected person running things" You sound deep state, wake up. Not all presidents have advisors named Kid Rock and Carl Tucker, but all have advisers.
You keep harping on Kid Rock like you know something that the rest of the world doesn't. Stop assuming things just because you hate djt.
You also seem to have a vastly incorrect concept of how things are supposed to work. We have elections to determine who is in charge. Only then is the braintrust of people picked by the elected person to be "cabinet/appointees/advisors". The elected individual also gets to decide how much or how little they listen to any given person in that group. But, make no mistake, it's supposed to be the president's decision on every single issue that gets implemented and carried out by their cabinet members and so forth - NOT the other way around. As such, the elected person is the one who is supposed to be deciding and setting policy - NOT his administration.
Thus, we need a president who's biggest decision of the week isn't what flavor of Jell-O will be served on what day. That's on your party for pushing what was obvious to anyone with eyes four years ago and trying to do so again this time around. Call it deep state or whatever deflection you want, but stop pretending that our president has been or will be running our country if he is re-elected.
there’s video of him making the clinching putt….at least it’s presented that way lol.
On this, we agree, as "a campaign is very different from the job of being president." And, more importantly, much, much easier. And, a 90 minute "debate is very different from the job of being president." And, more importantly, infinitely easier.
Think of it like playing tic-tac-toe versus being able to explain and prove what came before the big bang. Yet, despite how much easier last night should have been over the job ahead for the next four and a half years, we just saw a debate performance that was so inept that player one filled out his card using both X's and O's and broke his pencil halfway through.
You think that's just dandy because player two is DJT. He's no quantum physicist for sure, but he can at least play checkers or chess. And, he can also remember to pull up his zipper after taking a piss. Again, that's ok because player one's got someone to do that for him or change garments when needed - and it's not DJT. It would at least be honest if you'd just admit it could be anyone other than Trump that you'd support versus constantly trying to claim positives for Joe.
Sure. He's a regular Scottie S. They probably share mugshot stories.
I disagree that a debate is easier than being a pres, because you can't compare them, different abilities entirely.
The ability to consuming information, digest it, probe it, reject the garbage, deliberate it, then make a judgement is very, very different from modern debate (memorizing stats then arguing with liars, their fuzzy stats, and warped spin - all with limited time and a person interrupting you).
Doesn't matter. Last nite (i still haven't seen a clip, just read gotcha headlines) shouldn't have surprised anyone.
that's an interesting assessment, and sort of an ironic one. Do you think watching it was as stupid of us as coming here and blathering pointlessly while learning nothing of value? Given the stakes, I would say that watching it was at least somewhat less stupid, but maybe about as pointless except for those who have somehow managed to this far avoid deciding on which polar opposite to vote for.
I'm sure you spent the time more meaningfully. I wonder why you would interrupt whatever that was just to come here and set off my irony meter.
Sounds like you have to drive across town to the community library to access the internet.
well maybe you should stop to think that I might be able to access the internet pretty much as readily as I can turn on my TV. Access isn't the point, in other words. The choice of how to waste one's time is. Take your adderall and rethink whatever it was you were trying to convey and get back to me with something a bit more sensible.
I made one post about the debate. I don't think that qualifies as "blathering pointlessly."
Well, he sure can't access it on any of that broad band, high speed internet that Joe got all that money allocated towards since not a single person has been hooked up to it. Guess his advisers were too busy the last three years preparing him for the debate since that's harder than actually being president.
I thought the format was surprisingly good as well as the mods.
They both wish they could consistently make that solid of contact. He apparently adlibbed this entire scene when it was filmed.
This is what I picture about either
Agree. I mean, there were some quibbles, but I was surprisingly shocked at how fair and smoothly it went. Kudos to them for at least apparently trying really hard. Which makes one wonder, was that part of the great replacement plan?
No, that comment was in reference to your comment about me. Just because I said the word debate doesn't mean the comment had anything to do with it. I didn't realize my original post would make you feel so insulted. Maybe we can find you a safe space to recover in.
if you have even a touch of reading comprehension, you should easily see that MY post was regarding the irony of your post. And it was ironic that you come her to pointlessly post about pointlessness. I'm not mad and I'm not even saying you're wrong, I just wanted to alert you to the cluelessness of chiding people for indulging in a pointless exercise, by doing the same thing yourself. Geez man, lighten up. Get a grip. Have some fun in life.
I could probably scrutinize and analyze and find something to complain about but if you have to work that hard to find fault, finding fault would be petty. I thought it was well set up and well executed although it might have been a gas to have had a live audience. Both of those characters would have presented a little differently, I think.
If you were looking for humor, you should have tuned in to the debate. Crooked Joe Biden headlined.
no way biden is locked in by the convention, no way…too much talk today while i was on the road about how this looked fixed and he’ll step aside by or at the convention…it’s really too early for a debate and yet, they had one.
You get mad way too easily. I'm sorry I hurt your feelings so much. I'll keep in mind how easily triggered you are when I post in the future.
Geez man, lighten up. Get a grip. Have some fun in life.
Yea people are actually saying the dems set up biden to look bad and conspired with cnn to heap criticism on him in hopes of getting another nominee. I didn’t have that on my bingo card
Yes, it would be trying to pick someone else. Two things would have to happen first. The biggest one would be someone would have to actually agree to be a replacement. The second would have to be delegates on the floor would have to vote against who the voters voted for in the primary. The biggest hurdle for that is most of those delegates were put in place by the Biden administration.
Doesn’t seem likely. Now if fundraising falls apart it might change things and the party turn on him. The almighty dollar will always be heard.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
Zaid Lott’s Right Tackle Gives Insight into UNC’s 2026 QB Commit
- Latest: andrew jones