RenegadeInterrupt
Anarcho-Centrist Judeo-Satanic Imperialist
You sure? Only a liberal would moronically think only Democrats and Republicans exist in the U.S. with a thin sliver of independents. That's now how elections work.
United States Trump v Kamala Harris 2024
- Thread starter Causeimboredrightnow
- Start date
- Status
I think he's pointing put the flaw in your logic, which seems to be "Kamala is losing Independents, so she needs to lean harder left," which would likely scare away more Independents.
But if I am reading your posts correctly, you're suggesting her giving up on trying to win independents and just appeasing her base, correct?
VP Debate between MN Governor Tim Walz (D) vs United States Senator J.D. Vance (R-OH) will be on Tuesday night at the CBS Broadcast Center in NYC, NY St with Margaret Brennan & Norah O'Donnell as the moderators.
SoliFortissimi
Well-known member
It's easy to guess what their tactics would be. Vance will try to make Walz look weak and unmanly, while Walz will try to make Vance look like a crazy theocrat.
And naturally, neither of these will work. Democrats already understand that Walz is a wimp and their propaganda has done the whole blackwhite thing again, so every Democrat will be ready to swear on his life that Walz is the ideal of rugged masculinity that terrifies puny Republicans. The Republican base is already religious, so there's no point in trying to get Vance to admit to his beliefs.
I do think there's a high chance that Walz will try to trip Vance up by calling him a fraud while Vance will try to bring up mythical hordes of cat eating Haitians, but I hope both of them aren't that stupid. At any rate, I don't expect much of them. Walz is a political animal whose mind runs on prerecorded scripts, while Vance is one of those youth "trad" converts who are completely unashamed about being insane.
And naturally, neither of these will work. Democrats already understand that Walz is a wimp and their propaganda has done the whole blackwhite thing again, so every Democrat will be ready to swear on his life that Walz is the ideal of rugged masculinity that terrifies puny Republicans. The Republican base is already religious, so there's no point in trying to get Vance to admit to his beliefs.
I do think there's a high chance that Walz will try to trip Vance up by calling him a fraud while Vance will try to bring up mythical hordes of cat eating Haitians, but I hope both of them aren't that stupid. At any rate, I don't expect much of them. Walz is a political animal whose mind runs on prerecorded scripts, while Vance is one of those youth "trad" converts who are completely unashamed about being insane.
Largo
Well-known member
There is no argument in this entire world that is stupider than "Well, the fact that I could have believed this false thing says something."
Either fraud was committed, or fraud was not committed. That is all there is to it.
There's plenty of evidence that they did commit fraud in 2020.
But, the accusation/suspicions and the Democrats' own, open willingness to do it, even if by some miracle they didn't in the past, have broken trust.
It's like if your house is broken into and your TV stolen, and the prime suspect may or may not have done it, people wouldn't trust him to not have done it simply because he openly says he'd have no issue with breaking into someone's home to steal their TV. I wouldn't trust him around my valuables.
People simply don't trust the Democrats to not do a bit of "creative voting" or other shenanigans, since they're fine with doing them in he first place!
Skitzyfrenic
Well-known member
Fraud happened.
It almost always happens. It's been happening since the first vote was cast thousands of years ago.
The game is almost always rigged in some fashion.
Precious few votes are honest and most of those honest votes belong to very small groups with high transparency, a very small relative wealth and power gap between all the voters, and potentially a few other factors.
The question(s) should be 'how much fraud happened and how obviously?'
The latter half is probably the more important bit.
Voting, especially when there is low transparency on the government's end due to whatever factors (such as the sheer immensity of the nation), very much relies on a level of faith and trust to be legitimate. If you feel you cannot trust the integrity of the count, that there is a lack of faith and trust for whatever reason, you cannot trust the outcome of that count to be legitimate. Which undermines the whole process immensely. If the outcome is not legitimate, most people, all over the political spectrum, believe you do not have to respect it.
So... 'the fact that I could have believed something to be false (Because of things like of computer glitches that were waved off, sudden huge spikes in counts at late hours from the already sketchy and much less secure mail-in votes that scream fraud, the resistance to methods to make voting more secure against fraud, and the blatant attempts at importing a voter base that they can move to areas to weaken their political opponents) says something' is a completely legitimate and not at all stupid argument.
That there are solid reasons to believe, if only circumstantially, that the Democrats (or whatever party is applicable wherever you are) are fucking with count, is a huge problem. And the lefties are convinced it's the Republicans who have the power to manipulate the count thanks to media spin.
Nobody is going to trust this election, they're just going to cling to their candidate as the one who won.
It almost always happens. It's been happening since the first vote was cast thousands of years ago.
The game is almost always rigged in some fashion.
Precious few votes are honest and most of those honest votes belong to very small groups with high transparency, a very small relative wealth and power gap between all the voters, and potentially a few other factors.
The question(s) should be 'how much fraud happened and how obviously?'
The latter half is probably the more important bit.
Voting, especially when there is low transparency on the government's end due to whatever factors (such as the sheer immensity of the nation), very much relies on a level of faith and trust to be legitimate. If you feel you cannot trust the integrity of the count, that there is a lack of faith and trust for whatever reason, you cannot trust the outcome of that count to be legitimate. Which undermines the whole process immensely. If the outcome is not legitimate, most people, all over the political spectrum, believe you do not have to respect it.
So... 'the fact that I could have believed something to be false (Because of things like of computer glitches that were waved off, sudden huge spikes in counts at late hours from the already sketchy and much less secure mail-in votes that scream fraud, the resistance to methods to make voting more secure against fraud, and the blatant attempts at importing a voter base that they can move to areas to weaken their political opponents) says something' is a completely legitimate and not at all stupid argument.
That there are solid reasons to believe, if only circumstantially, that the Democrats (or whatever party is applicable wherever you are) are fucking with count, is a huge problem. And the lefties are convinced it's the Republicans who have the power to manipulate the count thanks to media spin.
Nobody is going to trust this election, they're just going to cling to their candidate as the one who won.
Yep.
No side will believe the other legitimately won; the Republicans because of the Left's/Democrats' willingness to essentially commit fraud, and the Left/Democrats because apparently everyone not one step right of Stalin is a "Nazi".
Terthna
Professional Lurker
IndyFront has made it rather obvious that, in his mind, the Overton window is positioned such that "Independents" and "Moderates" all lean pretty far to the left.
RenegadeInterrupt
Anarcho-Centrist Judeo-Satanic Imperialist
Yes! Mother of god maybe I was having a dyslexic episode or something. She needs to stop trying to win the right-leaning independents and go after the left-leaners. She's already on record supporting progressive positions such as medicare for all so it comes off as insincere and Machiavellian to normies to try the centrist triangulation angle.
The words that sum up the current left are
After me the deluge.
Its all short term thinking grasping anything that gives them power in the short run doing anything to hold onto that power. It will all horrifically backfire and cause a lot of needless suffering but I look at the long term and their idology is doomed, and a dark part of them knows it.
The world will be better once it is freed from utopian bullshit.
President Zelensky stated in an interview that Donald Trump 'is on Ukraine's side' and will support Ukraine if he becomes the U.S. president again. Zelensky emphasized that he received clear confirmation of this from Trump directly.
www.foxnews.com
Meeting with Trump was 'very productive' and 'very important to me': Volodymyr Zelenskyy | Fox News Video
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky sheds light on his visit to the U.S., and on his meetings with former President Trump, and V.P. Harris.
www.foxnews.com
President Zelensky stated in an interview that Donald Trump 'is on Ukraine's side' and will support Ukraine if he becomes the U.S. president again. Zelensky emphasized that he received clear confirmation of this from Trump directly.
Meeting with Trump was 'very productive' and 'very important to me': Volodymyr Zelenskyy | Fox News Video
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky sheds light on his visit to the U.S., and on his meetings with former President Trump, and V.P. Harris.
I don't nessarly blame Zel for being so oportunistic his countries in a battle for national survival he will say and do what ever he has to do to make sure his country survives.
Once you understand his motivations its easier to work with them.
Carrot of Truth
War is Peace
Hopefully the pendulum doesn't swing too far in the other direction after this. I wouldn't be surprised if social Darwinism makes a comeback in some form. The concerning part about that is that while its far closer to reality than any of the delusional bullshit the left currently espouses it's a brutal way to go about things.
SoliFortissimi
Well-known member
Never, then. Emotional humans are hardwired to think in absolutist terms.
We will never escape this cycle.
She's still trying to use Boogeyman Russia, despite it was her who was basically in the proverbial bed with them?
At this point as much as I hate Kamala, the right thing to do is evoke the 25th and take over. As much as I hate her, it's better than this.
You're planning on watching the upcoming VP debate for tomorrow night ?
- Status