Jump to content

Tuco

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    3287
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Tuco

  1. Not sure the shooter was a supporter at the time.
  2. Um, I don't think she is going to withdraw from the race before anyone votes. I think that will be the major difference. She withdrew from the race on Dec 3, 2019. The Iowa Caucus didn't occur until two months later. So, yeah, I think that is just another bullshit Republican talking point. I think it is also worth noting that she came out of the 2020 election as the Vice President of the United States of America. I think most of us would love to fail so badly.
  3. Just so we are clear, what percentage do you consider the "fringe"? 25% of Democrats? Am I getting that right?
  4. I agree with pretty much all of that. This discussion started as whether a Kamala immigration commercial should be on-line or broadcast. I said on-line, because I think it's a message that should be targeted, rather than a central theme, because it is divisive within the Democratic Party. I think Biden's approach was too Republican and I am sure more labor-oriented Dems would say it didn't go far enough. I think Harris has to address it, but she needs to be extremely cautious.
  5. Obviously, it's still art. It may be art you don't like. It may be art that is terrible. For the sake of argument, it could even be obscene and profane, and still be art. If it's not art, then what is it? Pornography, maybe? Do you think anyone is jerking off to a (possible) blurry nutsack in the background?
  6. In case you are wondering, I think the last few pages have proved why I think it's a good ad for a targeted audience, but probably shouldn't be a centerpiece of her campaign. Actually, there were a lot of people pissed about it, including the ACLU and most immigrant advocacy groups. Let me repeat: groups whose entire charter is to help immigrants were pissed about Biden's jump to the right on the issue. Obviously, it's not a big issue to you, but it is to them. It would have continued to build the wall, beefed up the deeply flawed Border Patrol, loosened the hiring standards for BP, increased the burden of proof for asylum seekers, and allowed rejection of asylum seekers without a day in court. It had some good stuff too, but it didn't have a path to citizenship for Dreamers, which was always a major negotiation point, even during Trump's presidency. I'm going to vote for Kamala barring some insane shift in her position, or a serious mental health issue on my part. I assume chainsaw will as well. The people on this board are not the concern. But if this compromise made so much sense, the Dems would have offered up years ago. They only did so now because they were getting hammered on the border politically and Biden tied it in with support for Ukraine. Trump has changed how the Democrats approach immigration policy, and that pisses me off. I think Harris's position makes sense to politically to blunt Trump's attack, but she needs to be careful on it. Also, a few pages back there was some shit how we should "just let it go" when disaffected Republicans talk about their Republican beliefs on Twitter, because they might vote for Harris. Ok. But in the interest of coalition building, perhaps that should also be applied to the actual Democrats expressing Democratic beliefs.
  7. I think it's a good ad for targeting certain voters (like "Republicans against Trump"). I would be concerned about making it look like a centerpiece of the campaign. For the voters who list immigration as their number one issue, I think Harris has little opportunity for improvement. For lefites (like me), the pandering could be a major turnoff. I don't mind the ad, but it does set her campaign promise at what had previously been seen as a moderate compromise. It's a shift to the right on an issue that is driven largely by xenophobia. Like I said, I don't mind it, but I can see the campaign treading lightly here. Edit to clarify: I think the issue is driven by xenophobia, but the ad isn't.
  8. I don't know. I bet she knows a thing or two about forcing enthusiasm.
  9. I don't know where the venue is and I don't know Atlanta well, but I do wonder how many Trumpsters will hear "Downtown Atlanta" and assume it's too dangerous to go.
  10. Suddenly they realized how poorly they were dressed.
  11. You know, instead of the 800 texts from different versions of Dem campaigns, all pretty much saying the same shit, I'd love to see Harris have a daily informative text that provides one of the proposals from Project 2025, with a link to that portion of the document, and then a brief "please consider donating at this link". Educate your troops in how to talk about this.
  12. To me, "weird" isn't the kid who got ignored and ate lunch alone. I have sympathy for that kid. Shit, I was that kid a few times in my life. And yes, I am weird. To me, it's more like the Aggie: there are bunch of them who have their own weird ass shit that is pretty gross to anyone looking in from the outside.
  13. I'm pretty sure all sides having been doing it forever. "Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death" was delivered at a church. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a pastor and churches were frequently used for meetings. I remember nuns getting arrested for anti-nuke protests when I was a kid. I don't feel any great need to dictate that church leaders need to steer clear of politics. They are people, and theoretically have values and goals that overlap with politics. But, yeah, they should pay taxes.
  14. "Do I contradict myself? Very well then, I contradict myself. I am large and contain multitudes."
  15. I think we should start a conspiracy theory that JD Vance is still a never-Trumper and this is all just a deep state plot to derail a second Trump presidency. Trumpsters and Trump have believed dumber shit.
  16. I think most people are cool with changing the system. But fuck sticking to rules that don't exist. Losing this election won't do shit to reduce the power of the churches in elections.
  17. If you are going to kick a man in the vagina, you better have a video of it.
  18. But you need to consider 2000. I’m not talking hanging chads, recounts, and Supreme Court challenges. All of that is related to whether we count votes that were cast. Same with the lawsuits the Republicans lost consistently in 2020/21. What I am talking is what Florida’s AG did months leading up to election: disqualification of legal voters, skewed towards those with Hispanic names. You can’t count votes that weren’t cast. There is nothing the awesome lawyers can do after Election Day. By DQ’ing names the registration rolls, they can keep people from casting votes. Some will argue about it and go through the hassle of filling in provisional ballots, but many will not. It was enough to get Bush the presidency in 2000.
  19. … you don’t bother looking for them.
  20. I think the thing Shapiro gets you (besides PA) is the reason he does so well in PA. From what little I have seen, I think he can help with the union/labor vote, which I think has slipped from the Dems in the last 20 years, and maybe the biggest gap with taking Biden off the ticket. That's important in PA, WI, and MI. Big upside. But I don't think it is worth the baggage regarding the Palestinian/Israel issues. I don't know if folks appreciate what a wedge issue that is, especially amongst the youth vote. I assume the Dem strategy is to talk as little about it as possible. Having Shapiro makes that impossible. If she picks Shapiro, she better have a clear position on the conflict (including military and economic support for Israel), because otherwise it will be seen as a tacit acceptance of Shapiro's views, which includes arresting protesters. I think that loses this election.
  21. Definitely, but do you think that Trump 1) appreciates the difference between firing a SoD and firing a VP a few weeks after the convention; 2) perceives any kind of personal fault for doing so? Your argument is logical and reasoned, which is why it is irrelevant to what Trump might do.
  22. But, it's not like it'd be the first time Trump has thrown a hand-selected appointee under the bus. It's kind of his go-to move. AG, cheifs of staffs, sec of defense.. A Scaramouch is now a measurement of time. He nearly got his last VP executed. It's never a sign of weakness. It's never a mistake on his part. It's always "I gave him an opportunity...tried to save him from being a complete loser..and he failed me." And the cultists don't blink an eye. I have no idea what will happen in this election cycle. The simulation has gone berserk. But I wouldn't cite Trump admitting a mistake as part of the reasoning, because no matter what he will never admit a mistake.
  23. I don't think anyone is saying there wouldn't be tradeoffs. I mean, is he going to take on Rachel fucking Green? Does he think that is a winning strategy with suburban women? Hoe Lee Phuk.
×
×
  • Create New...