What's the point of this?
LOL, you think it was a "gotcha". Btw, it says the source was USBE, not produced. "Source" doesn't indicate who produced the actual graph versus the data supporting it. But you do you. It may well have been them, I said "fair enough" and also pointed out how gov agencies are known to "produce" suspect data/graphs according to their agenda. Perhaps this is just another new definition of a word that you like to buy into.
This was my point about AI. It can generate and it can take away. I don't know either way. Would it surprise me that the zealots are claiming this to rag on Kackula, not at all. Would it surprise me that she would actually do this and receive cover from the media? Exhibit A is sitting behind The Resolute desk.
I saw this on sm and didn't know if it was true or just internet bs. That's just shocking. The thing that it's not pointing out, however, is not only are ID's required, but it is an invite only event to which one had to rsvp. And it was non-transferrable. That's some deep, deep level control over the "supporters" at the rally. And, we are supposed to believe that they admitted all those people, comparing them against their approved lists, checking ID's, doing security as well, in two hours? That must be one BIG operation. Or, alternatively, not nearly as many people attending as claimed. Things that make you go hmmmmm . . . . . .Stranger than fiction:
Kamala Harris panned for requiring ID to enter Arizona rally after previously painting voter ID laws as racist
Vice President Harris was panned on X for requiring Phoenix, Arizona, rally attendees to present a photo ID despite framing voter ID laws as racist.www.foxnews.com
What makes that weird? I've never seen any photos posted by Trump attendees at any of his rallies.
The “problem” and “panty wetting” and being crazy is 100% on trump and maga. For four years we’ve heard ad nauseum the moronic claim that biden crowds being smaller than trump rally crowds was somehow part of the “proof” that the election was stolen. For years we’ve heard trump lie-er-exxagerate about the size of his crowds due to some obsession he has with it. He even idiotically claimed point blank to have had a bigger crowd at his Jan 6 speech than mlk did at his “I have a dream” speech. The truth is No one gaf. But once again It’s all about his massive ego. And he’s all butt hurt now that Harris is drawing crowds to the point of repeating YET ANOTHER bogus idiotic stupid rw fuk nut election conspiracy theory about it for the sheep to lap up like kittens to cream. But I’m enjoying all the energy and time the dumbass focuses on it. I don’t remember rally crowd size being in the top 10, 20, 100…issues voters are most concerned over. Maybe trump should focus more about her record with the economy and the border than her crowd size.
I would say in this case "source" and "produced by" are the same thing. Do you believe the USBEA doesn't have the capability to produce their own graphs? Have you ever visited their website? https://www.bea.gov/
Ah, so the crowds at her rallies ARE real after all. Make up your mind, Merlin.Stranger than fiction:
Kamala Harris panned for requiring ID to enter Arizona rally after previously painting voter ID laws as racist
Vice President Harris was panned on X for requiring Phoenix, Arizona, rally attendees to present a photo ID despite framing voter ID laws as racist.
But it is true that "biden crowds" were smaller than the line for the bathroom at a fast food restaurant. Thus, it makes it difficult to believe that a record number of voters turned out simply on the basis of ABT. Just one of those common sense correlation things.
You are correct that he "lies" about the huuuugeness of stuff like crowd size and the greatness of his economy, etc. But that doesn't mean that these blatant exaggerations don't have a basis in fact. He does draw big crowds. The economy was smoking until covid.
That's kind of the point of the discussion. Is she? Forgive me for straddling the fence. It is really difficult to ever take something at face value when it involves orangeman bad. So many claims have been shown to be hoaxes and so many conspiracies have proven to be true (not all mind you, but a fair percentage), that it causes skepticism on virtually anything. Or it should. Maybe this is all crap, maybe there is some truth to it.
On this, agree 100%. Wish he'd hammer her all day long and only about the one giant suck that she's been on the policies. Of course, I wish the media would force her to address it as well.
I would imagine should something as news worthy had happened at the Harris rally that plenty of phone video would emerge.
Well, that would be a poor guess then. It may not matter to you, but the shooter never went through security, he was outside the SS perimeter that had been established with their well thought out security plan.
More regarding the AI conspiracy theory in question:Oh, you were so close, gunner! Just a simple Google search away. 😄
Have you ever demonstrated a reading capacity beyond third grade? This has been addressed.
Doesn’t make it difficult at all if you understand the dynamics of the ‘20 election. To me that’s like people saying the earth is flat cause you can’t see a curve on the horizon. There’s plenty of sensical explanations to why biden won despite having smaller rallies other than a vast world wide conspiracy to steal the election
All idiotic conspiracy theories have some basis in fact.
Okay name one election conspiracy theory proven to be true to the extent it altered the outcome. Voting machines?, magic pens?, plumbing leaks? More people voting than registered?
It’s not the medias fault trump makes himself look foolish focusing on stupid kindergarten claims
Once again….that’s on trump…not the media. So long as he continues to blabber non sensical juvenile bullshit that’s what they will focus on. The media has no obligation to
I teed it up for you to say “I can only hope something like that does happen” and you blew it. Very disappointed.
Oh, you were so close, gunner! Just a simple Google search away. 😄
You see that little "satire" watermark in your post in the right, bottom corner. LOL it's satire you ignorant, gullible POS.
I'll take this $100 wager if someone else wagers 100-1 that you'll pay up.Oh and @blazers , did I see that you offered a bet over the weekend when I was away from the Board (on another note - get a life)? What was it you said...I think you wanted to bet that Kamala would win and Dems take the House. Was that it?
@blazers: If poopslinger pulls any crap on you (like a weapon), go for his shoulder and torn labrum (either one), or for his bad knee (either one), or for his ugly puss (thankfully he only has one of those).
