rump himself previously pushed for 3 debates. Let’s see what his handlers allow him to agree to after this
They don’t get to make the decision. They might beg him to never do another debate again, only for him to walk right out into the hallway and make a public announcement that he’s agreed to like 4 other debates because he can’t be perceived as having backed down.
Why on earth would he poke that bear?
Taylor Swift absolutely can drive voter registrations at levels that would easily supersede the 10-20k that swing states will be decided by, just based on her word. And her fanbase spreads across multiple demographics.
I’d be shocked if her announcement alone doesn’t drive 100k registrations nationwide in the next 48 hours.
Here’s what I expect:
For Harris to “win”: She needs to be able to go toe to toe with Trump. Any stuttering, nervousness, or uneasiness will be preyed upon, both immediately by Trump and afterwards in soundbytes and attack ads. She cannot have a “…we finally beat medicaid!” moment. She needs to show that she can stand up to him and give it as good as she can get it in real time. She is definitely at a bigger risk here. Trump will gaffe every 30 seconds and nobody will bat an eye. One gaffe by Harris could cost her the election. Trump will be spouting his firehose of lies while Harris won’t be able to fact-check 1% in real time. Harris needs to be pretty much perfect from start to finish. Any mistakes can and will be exploited.
For Trump to “win”: Expectations are really low here. He’s not trying to reach new voters. He opely says he doesn’t care about policy. He is doubling down on the racism and misogyny of his base. All he needs to do is control the narrative. Ignore the rules, talk louder, interrupt mid-sentence. It doesn’t matter what gibberish he vomits out of his mouth. None of it will cause him to lose a vote. All he needs to do is dictate the narrative and pace of the debate. He solidifies his position among his base as the mysoginist who will put women back where they belong, and gives undecided voters doubt about whether she will be able to handle the pressure. I think as long as Trump forces everybody to play his games by his rules as he usually does, it’ll be a “victory” for him. Or at the very least a tie. As long as he can portray himself as the strongman going forward, he’s really got nothing to lose.
I don’t care how rich or poor you are. Every parent, and I mean every parent has considered every single friend and family member they could possibly squeeze free child care out of.
Nobody is going to turn down free, reliable child care. Nobody. If a parent isn’t already tapping grandma, siblings, and friends, there’s a reason for that. Could be ranging anywhere from “Mom also has to work” to “Mom can’t keep up with a toddler any more” to “Mom is a fucking psychopath and I cut her out of my life 12 years ago.”
This is what happens when you try to mix “inbred hillbilly” with “incoherent moron”
Remember, everybody thought the last debate was going to be a cakewalk for Biden. All he had to do was show up and not look like a sundowning dementia patient. And look how that turned out.
Harris may be able to “handle it” in that he’s not going to get her all worked up where she’ll break down and cry or something. But will she be able to hold her own on the debate floor? She is untested in that realm and her rally speeches show that she’s still not the most confident public speaker, and I could see a situation where Trump just doesn’t allow her to get a word in edgewise. Even if he says nothing but his usual incoherent word salads, if he can essentially bully her into silence by just throwing her off with his usual interruptions, firehoses of lies, and shouting down her responses, it could bolster his strongman persona, play to his mysoginist base by “putting her in her place”, and give some independent voters the impression that she can’t keep up.
Like I said, Harris hasn’t been tested. Arguing in a courtroom is one thing when there’s a judge who can keep the opposition in check and has the ability to enforce it. It’s different when it’s moderators who are toothless and can’t or won’t do anything about Trump who doesn’t give a shit about the rules at all. And her continuing uneasiness when she gives rally speeches in front of friendly crowds makes me wonder how she’ll handle someone who’s game plan is literally to make her look like she belongs back in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant.
Harris’ game plan right from the beginning is that he goes to the debate and just lashes out. That’s why she wanted the open mics. But like I said before, Biden got the debate he wanted on his terms and it ended up ending his campaign. Hopefully Harris isn’t making the same mistake.
Pathetic.
I’m stating it right now. I am officially running for President in the 2024, 2028, 2032, and 2036 elections. Therefore, to avoid the appearance of impropriety and not show political bias, the criminal court system cannot send me to jail until after the 2036 election, regardless of what crimes I commit or am convicted of in the mean time. The crimes I commit between now and then are irrelevant. I mean, you can convict me of those crimes if you’d like. You just can’t punish me for it because I’m a Presidential Candidate under the Trump standard set forth by this judge.
This act of “not showing bias” goes to show the exact bias that the entire court system continues to give to Trump: giving him special privileges that exactly zero other people in this country would have extended to them in the same situation. And in one fell swoop, Merchan shows that he’s absolutely no better than the rest of them; when push comes to shove, every single one of them will go out of their way to avoid holding Trump accountable for anything, all the while wondering why he keeps doing it.
He’s doing it because it works. He’s doing it because you let him. He’s doing it because you are unwilling to do anything to stop him.
And he’s going to keep doing it because you continue to let him win. Fuck this judge and fuck every other judge who continues to rule that Trump gets special treatment as if it’s some kind of fucking birthright.
I will admit, it took me a second to get the joke.
The trailer-park methheads who have meth’ed their way right onto disability.
You know, the type of person you want your kids around for 8 hours a day, right?
D is an imbecile, BUT I don’t think he’s entirely off of base here. Grandparents (and other extended family members) have historically been very involved in the raising of young children.
First, my children are not my parents’, siblings’, or friends’ responsibility. Just like their kids aren’t mine.
Second, in an age where people are continuing to work even beyond retirement (either by choice or need), these people all likely have work and family responsibilities of their own. And even if they don’t, what if they simply just don’t want the burden of taking your child for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week? I know plenty of grandparents who like the idea of the kids coming by on the weekend where they can load them up with sugar and send them home, and who’s opinion is that of “Hey, I raised my kids. My job is done. It’s your turn now.”, and do not want the day-to-day responsibilites of child care.
What about those who have no family? Maybe their parents have died. Or maybe they’re too old to keep up with the day to day responsibilites? Or your family are simply not the type of people you want your children to be around? What if they live too far away to make childcare a viable option?
Are they also supposed to be responsible for feeding and transporting your child around (to and from school, for example) for free?
Your position just defends the GOP take on the matter that poor people should just rely on these resources as if they’re available to everybody without issues, and that family members are all well-adjusted members of society who will gladly essentially take on the full time job of child care worker for free because they have no responsibilities of their own. Look at it this way. If these people have parents, siblings, and friends available to them and they’re not using them for child care, there’s probably a reason for that. Because I can guaran-fucking-tee you they looked into it.
I think the right cares about kids dying,
The right has shown exactly zero evidence of this in the 25 years since Columbine happened. The most they have ever given is “Thoughts and prayers”, “this isn’t the time to talk about it”, and “Hey, can we just remove the doors?”
But it’s not an “oh well” glance at it.
It is as long as Republican politicans continue to say it is. It is as long as the only “solutions” that the GOP supports are political theater stunts that have proven to be ineffective, have no chance of working, and don’t reduce the availability of guns.
Tell me this: When was the last time a school shooter showed up, found the doors locked, and just said “aw shucks” and gave up? When was the last time a school shooter, having already gained access to the building, was successfully thwarted by teachers without hurting anybody? When was the last time a school shooter even gave half a shit about anti-gun laws when they’re not even planning on living through the event themselves? How many schools in this country are actually physically equipped to stop a school shooter that is that determined to gain entry?
These things don’t work because there are two important facts that people refuse to understand: Once the shooter gets access to their weapon of choice and entry to the target location (both of which are pathetically easy), everything else is irrelevant. Laws don’t matter. He won. He has his weapon, he has his targets, your kids are dead, along with the shooter who will most likely commit suicide while he’s “at his peak”, therefore ignoring consequences or even having to live with what he did.
And until any of this changes, anything the GOP says absolutely is an “Oh well” glance at it. Because they actively refuse to do anything beyond that.
“Meh, close enough.” – JD Vance
Completely disagree. Saying “It’s a fact of life” while actively trying to combat it is one thing. COVID, for example. A fact of life that we had to deal with while we tried to figure out what it was and how to stop it.
He wasn’t saying it’s a fact of life like that. He’s being completely dismissive and saying “It’s a fact of life, it’s not going to change, and people are going to have to accept that.”. There’s no eagerness to combat the problem, and he knows his party has absolutely zero intention of doing so. Heck, he’s not even the first politician to say it, and half of his party has believed this for years.
So no, I do not believe this is a quote from a man who is just acknowledging the reality of the world we live in, as he sees it. This is a man who believes that gun violence is just a side-effect of protecting gun rights above any and all else, and any children that die as a result are just an unfortunate statistic.
They might get to that. Only after they:
I will bet the left body part of your choice that all of those things would happen long before they actually did anything to try to improve the quality of the schools. Remember, half of these people are about to vote for a candidate who says the department of education shouldn’t exist. They’d destroy the entire system before they’d try to improve it.
Remember the saying “If conservatives become convinced that they can not win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy.” The same thing applies here, except it’s the public school system.
gestures broadly
Well, he has mastered the Trumpian art of finding a way to be wrong even when he isn’t wrong.
He’s right in that more anti-gun laws that are largely toothless and/or performative won’t do jack shit. Of course, the reason for that is that the genie was out of the bottle decades ago. There are just simply too many guns out on the streets already for any kind of anti-gun law to be even remotely effective. If the first two steps of the process aren’t “Reduce the amount of guns currently out on the streets” and “Prevent new guns from made available to the public”, then everything else you try to do will be nothing more than a complete waste of time.
Notice how all the laws that have been passed to combat school shootings with AR-15s have done exactly nothing to stop school shooters with AR-15s. There’s a reason for that.
I’m not sure what “milk steak” is, but if JD Vance is eating it, I think there’s a better-than-average chance it’s some kind of slang for performing oral sex on a couch.
How about this.
Take JD Vance saying that this is just a “fact of life” and start playing that on political ads all over Georgia. I don’t like the idea of exploiting tragedy for political purposes but I think people who are considering voting for this waste of oxygen should know that he considers their kids nothing more than collateral damage.
So he’s unequivocally stating that there is nothing he plans on doing to reduce the killing of children. If you support no action, this is the guy you should support.
Remember, after one of the other school shootings (The fact that I cannot remember which one is itself a telling statement, isn’t it?), one of our wonderful elected officials literally stated that they were going to do nothing about it.
Fuck JD Vance. That is all.
Are any of the illegal transgender aliens in the room with us now, Mr. Trump? And did one of them touch your pee pee and turn it into a mushroom?