An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
2024
432,113 Views |
8357 Replies |
Last: 2 hrs ago by 4th and Inches
sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
Please provide your source that establishes that zero chance.
If not, you are doing the exact thing you are attacking and it makes you a world class hypocrite.
why does it matter whether or not it is true?Adriacus Peratuun said:sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
Please provide your source that establishes that zero chance.
If not, you are doing the exact thing you are attacking and it makes you a world class hypocrite.
if Trump can convince independents that ABC cheated to help Harris, that helps his campaign.
It's not like Democrats don't stand up and say things that are unsourced and provably untrue to win elections. Why shouldn't we do the same. Do we want to be right, or do we want to win?
whiterock said:why does it matter whether or not it is true?Adriacus Peratuun said:sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
Please provide your source that establishes that zero chance.
If not, you are doing the exact thing you are attacking and it makes you a world class hypocrite.
if Trump can convince independents that ABC cheated to help Harris, that helps his campaign.
It's not like Democrats don't stand up and say things that are unsourced and provably untrue to win elections. Why shouldn't we do the same. Do we want to be right, or do we want to win?
Can't agree with this. I'd prefer to be right than win or be popular.
And in either regard, these type of shenanigans make the campaign lose credibility with the American people. Ultimately they will hurt Trump when Americans believe nothing he says can be trusted.
Osodecentx said:Mothra said:Well, glad to hear you have at least a smidgen of scruples. Too bad the TDS has driven the rest of them out of you.Osodecentx said:I've never given money to AG candidate. Got to vote for Ted because KavanaughMothra said:Oh come now, how could you forget the dem candidate for AG you financially supported.Osodecentx said:you admitted voting for a Democrat. So do I , in fact several Democrats. Who is Garza?Mothra said:I think you're confused. You voted for Rochelle Garza. Remember?Osodecentx said:. Oh wow! Nothing lower than a Democrat (like the one you voted for)Mothra said:Thank you. Thankful I don't sound like a Democrat - like you (no offense).Osodecentx said:Mothra said:
My opinion of Trump hasn't changed. He's a self-aggrandizing jackass who I suspect will lose the election - although not nearly as dangerous and capable of inflicting as much damage to the country as Harris.
Hopefully, he's not around in 2028, if of course Kamala hasn't gotten us into a nuclear war or stacked the Supreme Court against Republicans by then, in which case it won't matter. We either won't be having any more elections, or Republicans will never stand a chance of winning another presidential election.
You sure sound like a Republican (no offense)
What other Dems will you be voting for this election cycle? Surely, Allred, like your hero ol' Liz, right?
You are a self confessed crook and Dem voter. So am I. We're okay
Self-confessed crook, eh? I'd ask how so, if I thought it wasn't simply another juvenile taunt.
My post had a typo. You are not a crook, (you vote for them). Apologies
I financially supported Liz & would again
Liz supports Allred. Is she wrong?
Mothra said:Osodecentx said:Mothra said:Well, glad to hear you have at least a smidgen of scruples. Too bad the TDS has driven the rest of them out of you.Osodecentx said:I've never given money to AG candidate. Got to vote for Ted because KavanaughMothra said:Oh come now, how could you forget the dem candidate for AG you financially supported.Osodecentx said:you admitted voting for a Democrat. So do I , in fact several Democrats. Who is Garza?Mothra said:I think you're confused. You voted for Rochelle Garza. Remember?Osodecentx said:. Oh wow! Nothing lower than a Democrat (like the one you voted for)Mothra said:Thank you. Thankful I don't sound like a Democrat - like you (no offense).Osodecentx said:Mothra said:
My opinion of Trump hasn't changed. He's a self-aggrandizing jackass who I suspect will lose the election - although not nearly as dangerous and capable of inflicting as much damage to the country as Harris.
Hopefully, he's not around in 2028, if of course Kamala hasn't gotten us into a nuclear war or stacked the Supreme Court against Republicans by then, in which case it won't matter. We either won't be having any more elections, or Republicans will never stand a chance of winning another presidential election.
You sure sound like a Republican (no offense)
What other Dems will you be voting for this election cycle? Surely, Allred, like your hero ol' Liz, right?
You are a self confessed crook and Dem voter. So am I. We're okay
Self-confessed crook, eh? I'd ask how so, if I thought it wasn't simply another juvenile taunt.
My post had a typo. You are not a crook, (you vote for them). Apologies
I financially supported Liz & would again
Liz supports Allred. Is she wrong?
Yes
Mothra said:whiterock said:why does it matter whether or not it is true?Adriacus Peratuun said:sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
Please provide your source that establishes that zero chance.
If not, you are doing the exact thing you are attacking and it makes you a world class hypocrite.
if Trump can convince independents that ABC cheated to help Harris, that helps his campaign.
It's not like Democrats don't stand up and say things that are unsourced and provably untrue to win elections. Why shouldn't we do the same. Do we want to be right, or do we want to win?
Can't agree with this. I'd prefer to be right than win or be popular.
And in either regard, these type of shenanigans make the campaign lose credibility with the American people. Ultimately they will hurt Trump when Americans believe nothing he says can be trusted.
Well said. Blue star
Doesn't seem to hurt the credibility of Democrats. Why should it hurt the credibility of their opponents?Mothra said:whiterock said:why does it matter whether or not it is true?Adriacus Peratuun said:sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
Please provide your source that establishes that zero chance.
If not, you are doing the exact thing you are attacking and it makes you a world class hypocrite.
if Trump can convince independents that ABC cheated to help Harris, that helps his campaign.
It's not like Democrats don't stand up and say things that are unsourced and provably untrue to win elections. Why shouldn't we do the same. Do we want to be right, or do we want to win?
Can't agree with this. I'd prefer to be right than win or be popular.
And in either regard, these type of shenanigans make the campaign lose credibility with the American people. Ultimately they will hurt Trump when Americans believe nothing he says can be trusted.
whiterock said:Doesn't seem to hurt the credibility of Democrats. Why should it hurt the credibility of their opponents?Mothra said:whiterock said:why does it matter whether or not it is true?Adriacus Peratuun said:sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
Please provide your source that establishes that zero chance.
If not, you are doing the exact thing you are attacking and it makes you a world class hypocrite.
if Trump can convince independents that ABC cheated to help Harris, that helps his campaign.
It's not like Democrats don't stand up and say things that are unsourced and provably untrue to win elections. Why shouldn't we do the same. Do we want to be right, or do we want to win?
Can't agree with this. I'd prefer to be right than win or be popular.
And in either regard, these type of shenanigans make the campaign lose credibility with the American people. Ultimately they will hurt Trump when Americans believe nothing he says can be trusted.
Because the MSM is running cover for the Democrat party. Republicans should know the spotlight is focused on them, in any misstep will be spun by the mainstream media. That being the case we have to behave differently.
And in either regard, I don't want to be like the Democrats. I'd prefer to be the party that speaks truth.
sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
Definitely not a Zero chance
But yes it might not be accurate
LOL. It is madness t to conform to the battlefield offered by your opponent. We should build our own platforms to push the messages that benefit us. That includes undermining the credibility of the MSM, by making sure THEY are put on trial for insisting things like this are not happening:Mothra said:whiterock said:Doesn't seem to hurt the credibility of Democrats. Why should it hurt the credibility of their opponents?Mothra said:whiterock said:why does it matter whether or not it is true?Adriacus Peratuun said:sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
Please provide your source that establishes that zero chance.
If not, you are doing the exact thing you are attacking and it makes you a world class hypocrite.
if Trump can convince independents that ABC cheated to help Harris, that helps his campaign.
It's not like Democrats don't stand up and say things that are unsourced and provably untrue to win elections. Why shouldn't we do the same. Do we want to be right, or do we want to win?
Can't agree with this. I'd prefer to be right than win or be popular.
And in either regard, these type of shenanigans make the campaign lose credibility with the American people. Ultimately they will hurt Trump when Americans believe nothing he says can be trusted.
Because the MSM is running cover for the Democrat party. Republicans should know the spotlight is focused on them, in any misstep will be spun by the mainstream media. That being the case we have to behave differently.
And in either regard, I don't want to be like the Democrats. I'd prefer to be the party that speaks truth.
translation: I'd rather be right than win.
BREAKING: Haitian immigrant daughter confirms what Trump said about Springfield, Ohio pic.twitter.com/TA5GTtZgbQ
— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) September 12, 2024
So, lie like Democrats, and have the media point out that you're an obvious liar?whiterock said:LOL. It is madness t to conform to the battlefield offered by your opponent. We should build our own platforms to push the messages that benefit us. That includes undermining the credibility of the MSM, by making sure THEY are put on trial for insisting things like this are not happening:Mothra said:whiterock said:Doesn't seem to hurt the credibility of Democrats. Why should it hurt the credibility of their opponents?Mothra said:whiterock said:why does it matter whether or not it is true?Adriacus Peratuun said:sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
Please provide your source that establishes that zero chance.
If not, you are doing the exact thing you are attacking and it makes you a world class hypocrite.
if Trump can convince independents that ABC cheated to help Harris, that helps his campaign.
It's not like Democrats don't stand up and say things that are unsourced and provably untrue to win elections. Why shouldn't we do the same. Do we want to be right, or do we want to win?
Can't agree with this. I'd prefer to be right than win or be popular.
And in either regard, these type of shenanigans make the campaign lose credibility with the American people. Ultimately they will hurt Trump when Americans believe nothing he says can be trusted.
Because the MSM is running cover for the Democrat party. Republicans should know the spotlight is focused on them, in any misstep will be spun by the mainstream media. That being the case we have to behave differently.
And in either regard, I don't want to be like the Democrats. I'd prefer to be the party that speaks truth.
translation: I'd rather be right than win.BREAKING: Haitian immigrant daughter confirms what Trump said about Springfield, Ohio pic.twitter.com/TA5GTtZgbQ
— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) September 12, 2024
How has that worked out for Trump thus far? Not well by my book.
Mothra said:whiterock said:why does it matter whether or not it is true?Adriacus Peratuun said:sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
Please provide your source that establishes that zero chance.
If not, you are doing the exact thing you are attacking and it makes you a world class hypocrite.
if Trump can convince independents that ABC cheated to help Harris, that helps his campaign.
It's not like Democrats don't stand up and say things that are unsourced and provably untrue to win elections. Why shouldn't we do the same. Do we want to be right, or do we want to win?
Can't agree with this. I'd prefer to be right than win or be popular.
And in either regard, these type of shenanigans make the campaign lose credibility with the American people. Ultimately they will hurt Trump when Americans believe nothing he says can be trusted.
Ideally, we prefer to win while being correct. There is no reason we cannot have both. It's a false dichotomy.
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Psalm 119:36
dude. they're going to call you a liar no matter what you say, invent ways to call you racist/sexist/this-or-that-aphobic no matter how your couch your opposition or how easily provable as truth it might be. So make EFFECTIVE arguments.Mothra said:So, lie like Democrats, and have the media point out that you're an obvious liar?whiterock said:LOL. It is madness t to conform to the battlefield offered by your opponent. We should build our own platforms to push the messages that benefit us. That includes undermining the credibility of the MSM, by making sure THEY are put on trial for insisting things like this are not happening:Mothra said:whiterock said:Doesn't seem to hurt the credibility of Democrats. Why should it hurt the credibility of their opponents?Mothra said:whiterock said:why does it matter whether or not it is true?Adriacus Peratuun said:sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
Please provide your source that establishes that zero chance.
If not, you are doing the exact thing you are attacking and it makes you a world class hypocrite.
if Trump can convince independents that ABC cheated to help Harris, that helps his campaign.
It's not like Democrats don't stand up and say things that are unsourced and provably untrue to win elections. Why shouldn't we do the same. Do we want to be right, or do we want to win?
Can't agree with this. I'd prefer to be right than win or be popular.
And in either regard, these type of shenanigans make the campaign lose credibility with the American people. Ultimately they will hurt Trump when Americans believe nothing he says can be trusted.
Because the MSM is running cover for the Democrat party. Republicans should know the spotlight is focused on them, in any misstep will be spun by the mainstream media. That being the case we have to behave differently.
And in either regard, I don't want to be like the Democrats. I'd prefer to be the party that speaks truth.
translation: I'd rather be right than win.BREAKING: Haitian immigrant daughter confirms what Trump said about Springfield, Ohio pic.twitter.com/TA5GTtZgbQ
— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) September 12, 2024
How has that worked out for Trump thus far? Not well by my book.
Notwithstanding the hand-wringing by the wizards of smart, Trump appears to have made highly effective arguments in the debate. Somehow, he's got the whole country focused on a perfect microcosm of the illegal immigration problem that is one of the three driving issues of this election cycle.
The template for how he does it is pretty clear. He makes an inflammatory statement in clear violation of political correctness, which ends up inviting fact checking that focuses attention right where attention needs to be focused. Perhaps the initial allegation is thin or hyperbolic to modest degree. But the facts discovered in the arguments are highly damaging to his opponents. There are a metric ****-ton of a single nationality in a small, Great Lakes region city that's been hollowed out by globalism and now finds itself undergoing precisely the kind of social chaos that uncontrolled immigration causes. And their taxes were used to cause it all.
The state of affairs in Springfield OH might not be an earth-shaking issue in most of the country. But they are going to move needles in places like PA, MI, WI, etc.....rust belt states who see examples of similar kinds of problems all over the place.
Bingo.historian said:Mothra said:whiterock said:why does it matter whether or not it is true?Adriacus Peratuun said:sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
Please provide your source that establishes that zero chance.
If not, you are doing the exact thing you are attacking and it makes you a world class hypocrite.
if Trump can convince independents that ABC cheated to help Harris, that helps his campaign.
It's not like Democrats don't stand up and say things that are unsourced and provably untrue to win elections. Why shouldn't we do the same. Do we want to be right, or do we want to win?
Can't agree with this. I'd prefer to be right than win or be popular.
And in either regard, these type of shenanigans make the campaign lose credibility with the American people. Ultimately they will hurt Trump when Americans believe nothing he says can be trusted.
Ideally, we prefer to win while being correct. There is no reason we cannot have both. It's a false dichotomy.
It may be they will call you a liar either way, but when you don't have the evidence to support your positions, you make it easy for them, and it destroys your credibility.whiterock said:dude. they're going to call you a liar no matter what you say, invent ways to call you racist/sexist/this-or-that-aphobic no matter how your couch your opposition or how easily provable as truth it might be. So make EFFECTIVE arguments.Mothra said:So, lie like Democrats, and have the media point out that you're an obvious liar?whiterock said:LOL. It is madness t to conform to the battlefield offered by your opponent. We should build our own platforms to push the messages that benefit us. That includes undermining the credibility of the MSM, by making sure THEY are put on trial for insisting things like this are not happening:Mothra said:whiterock said:Doesn't seem to hurt the credibility of Democrats. Why should it hurt the credibility of their opponents?Mothra said:whiterock said:why does it matter whether or not it is true?Adriacus Peratuun said:sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
Please provide your source that establishes that zero chance.
If not, you are doing the exact thing you are attacking and it makes you a world class hypocrite.
if Trump can convince independents that ABC cheated to help Harris, that helps his campaign.
It's not like Democrats don't stand up and say things that are unsourced and provably untrue to win elections. Why shouldn't we do the same. Do we want to be right, or do we want to win?
Can't agree with this. I'd prefer to be right than win or be popular.
And in either regard, these type of shenanigans make the campaign lose credibility with the American people. Ultimately they will hurt Trump when Americans believe nothing he says can be trusted.
Because the MSM is running cover for the Democrat party. Republicans should know the spotlight is focused on them, in any misstep will be spun by the mainstream media. That being the case we have to behave differently.
And in either regard, I don't want to be like the Democrats. I'd prefer to be the party that speaks truth.
translation: I'd rather be right than win.BREAKING: Haitian immigrant daughter confirms what Trump said about Springfield, Ohio pic.twitter.com/TA5GTtZgbQ
— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) September 12, 2024
How has that worked out for Trump thus far? Not well by my book.
Notwithstanding the hand-wringing by the wizards of smart, Trump appears to have made highly effective arguments in the debate. Somehow, he's got the whole country focused on a perfect microcosm of the illegal immigration problem that is one of the three driving issues of this election cycle.
The template for how he does it is pretty clear. He makes an inflammatory statement in clear violation of political correctness, which ends up inviting fact checking that focuses attention right where attention needs to be focused. Perhaps the initial allegation is thin or hyperbolic to modest degree. But the facts discovered in the arguments are highly damaging to his opponents. There are a metric ****-ton of a single nationality in a small, Great Lakes region city that's been hollowed out by globalism and now finds itself undergoing precisely the kind of social chaos that uncontrolled immigration causes. And their taxes were used to cause it all.
The state of affairs in Springfield OH might not be an earth-shaking issue in most of the country. But they are going to move needles in places like PA, MI, WI, etc.....rust belt states who see examples of similar kinds of problems all over the place.
There is no reason for Republicans to lie. None.
Also, these were the debate topics... Which of these did anyone paying attention to current political news not expect to be asked in the debate beforehand?sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
you'd have a point if there was broad agreement on the definitions of "lie" and "truth." In politics, there most assuredly is not. And in any event, Trump did not lie about having so many Haitians in Springfield that strange things are happening. There most assuredly is, and are. Trump has done a masterful job of spotlighting it to has advantage, no matter how squeamish you might be about the process.Mothra said:It may be they will call you a liar either way, but when you don't have the evidence to support your positions, you make it easy for them, and it destroys your credibility.whiterock said:dude. they're going to call you a liar no matter what you say, invent ways to call you racist/sexist/this-or-that-aphobic no matter how your couch your opposition or how easily provable as truth it might be. So make EFFECTIVE arguments.Mothra said:So, lie like Democrats, and have the media point out that you're an obvious liar?whiterock said:LOL. It is madness t to conform to the battlefield offered by your opponent. We should build our own platforms to push the messages that benefit us. That includes undermining the credibility of the MSM, by making sure THEY are put on trial for insisting things like this are not happening:Mothra said:whiterock said:Doesn't seem to hurt the credibility of Democrats. Why should it hurt the credibility of their opponents?Mothra said:whiterock said:why does it matter whether or not it is true?Adriacus Peratuun said:sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
Please provide your source that establishes that zero chance.
If not, you are doing the exact thing you are attacking and it makes you a world class hypocrite.
if Trump can convince independents that ABC cheated to help Harris, that helps his campaign.
It's not like Democrats don't stand up and say things that are unsourced and provably untrue to win elections. Why shouldn't we do the same. Do we want to be right, or do we want to win?
Can't agree with this. I'd prefer to be right than win or be popular.
And in either regard, these type of shenanigans make the campaign lose credibility with the American people. Ultimately they will hurt Trump when Americans believe nothing he says can be trusted.
Because the MSM is running cover for the Democrat party. Republicans should know the spotlight is focused on them, in any misstep will be spun by the mainstream media. That being the case we have to behave differently.
And in either regard, I don't want to be like the Democrats. I'd prefer to be the party that speaks truth.
translation: I'd rather be right than win.BREAKING: Haitian immigrant daughter confirms what Trump said about Springfield, Ohio pic.twitter.com/TA5GTtZgbQ
— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) September 12, 2024
How has that worked out for Trump thus far? Not well by my book.
Notwithstanding the hand-wringing by the wizards of smart, Trump appears to have made highly effective arguments in the debate. Somehow, he's got the whole country focused on a perfect microcosm of the illegal immigration problem that is one of the three driving issues of this election cycle.
The template for how he does it is pretty clear. He makes an inflammatory statement in clear violation of political correctness, which ends up inviting fact checking that focuses attention right where attention needs to be focused. Perhaps the initial allegation is thin or hyperbolic to modest degree. But the facts discovered in the arguments are highly damaging to his opponents. There are a metric ****-ton of a single nationality in a small, Great Lakes region city that's been hollowed out by globalism and now finds itself undergoing precisely the kind of social chaos that uncontrolled immigration causes. And their taxes were used to cause it all.
The state of affairs in Springfield OH might not be an earth-shaking issue in most of the country. But they are going to move needles in places like PA, MI, WI, etc.....rust belt states who see examples of similar kinds of problems all over the place.
There is no reason for Republicans to lie. None.
It might end up being a turning point in the election.....to his favor.
No she didn't.whiterock said:LOL. It is madness t to conform to the battlefield offered by your opponent. We should build our own platforms to push the messages that benefit us. That includes undermining the credibility of the MSM, by making sure THEY are put on trial for insisting things like this are not happening:Mothra said:whiterock said:Doesn't seem to hurt the credibility of Democrats. Why should it hurt the credibility of their opponents?Mothra said:whiterock said:why does it matter whether or not it is true?Adriacus Peratuun said:sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
Please provide your source that establishes that zero chance.
If not, you are doing the exact thing you are attacking and it makes you a world class hypocrite.
if Trump can convince independents that ABC cheated to help Harris, that helps his campaign.
It's not like Democrats don't stand up and say things that are unsourced and provably untrue to win elections. Why shouldn't we do the same. Do we want to be right, or do we want to win?
Can't agree with this. I'd prefer to be right than win or be popular.
And in either regard, these type of shenanigans make the campaign lose credibility with the American people. Ultimately they will hurt Trump when Americans believe nothing he says can be trusted.
Because the MSM is running cover for the Democrat party. Republicans should know the spotlight is focused on them, in any misstep will be spun by the mainstream media. That being the case we have to behave differently.
And in either regard, I don't want to be like the Democrats. I'd prefer to be the party that speaks truth.
translation: I'd rather be right than win.BREAKING: Haitian immigrant daughter confirms what Trump said about Springfield, Ohio pic.twitter.com/TA5GTtZgbQ
— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) September 12, 2024
Don't really thnk so. Those that emphasize culture usually have a financial motive for doing so.Government interference with businesses used to be something frowned on by Republicans. De Santis wants to set corporate policy for Disney.whiterock said:Frank Galvin said:I am pro-choice, he is ardently pro-life. I think he tries to insert religion into public school classrooms. He was lukewarm at best on support for Ukraine. He seems to elevate culture wars over business interests.KaiBear said:Frank Galvin said:Because I don't like his policies.KaiBear said:Frank Galvin said:Just to be clear, while I dislike DeSantis on many policy issues and am not a fan of his style, he plays by the rules, respects the Constitution, and seems like a personally honorable person. I am unlikely to vote for him, but he is clearly "fit" to be president. Unlike Trump.Mothra said:You are clearly not understanding the context of our discussion. I was responding to a poster who has in the past identified Bush, Cheney, Romney and McCain as the types of Republicans he likes and supports. That is why I mentioned them. He has said he longs for those types of Republicans. We have had a number of conversations about his neocon beliefs.sombear said:This straw man is getting tiresome. The choice isn't between an establishment/moderate/Neocon or Trump.Mothra said:Bush 2 lost the popular vote, and worse, was a neo-conservative who spent like a liberal and did far worse than anything Trump has done by getting us into a needless and costly war, destabilizing the ME and getting hundreds of thousands of people killed, including thousands of our boys, who ended up maimed or dead. If you recall, your side of the aisle called him a war criminal. Do we really want a return to that?Frank Galvin said:Ronald Reagan, Bush 1 and Bush 2 went 5 for 6. The one loss was partially just bad luck with Perot. They all had an optimistic view of America and believed the coutnry had an obligation to promote and defend democracy. It is almost impossible for conservatives to have less than 48 senators and we will have a conservative Supreme Court for decades.Mothra said:Osodecentx said:whiterock said:I agree. The neverTrumpers are indeed responsible for many of the problems besetting the country.Osodecentx said:It's never Trump's faultwhiterock said:It's a sign of the times, a glaring avatar for the chaos and dysfunction facing ordinary people which has been CAUSED by bad policy. It builds on the narrative that Democrats in general and Biden/Harris in particular are not just incompetent but oblivious to the harm they're causing.Osodecentx said:whiterock said:Osodecentx said:whiterock said:You're way too jaded to really believe that.Osodecentx said:whiterock said:
"If I have to decide who is more likely to be truthful, Trump, Mattis, McMaster or Kelly, I'll take the generals.
-Oso
love the faulty premise that generals are not political animals.
there is an old adage amongst retired military officers that "the guys who retire as brigadiers are the warriors," meaning to suggest that they lacked the political acumen to accumulate more stars.
The premise is the generals are more likely to be truthful
Let's talk when the generals say Trump won 2020 and pets are eaten in Ohio
If the Generals DON'T say pets are being eaten in Ohio, you can be sure they are playing politics.FACT CHECK:
— Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) September 11, 2024
🚨🚨🚨🚨
During the Presidential debate tonight, @KamalaHarris and ABC @ABC said there “were no credible reports” of Haitian immigrants eating people’s pets and local geese…
That is a lie.
Here’s a copy of the official police communications from Springfield,… https://t.co/pi8nMZXG4p pic.twitter.com/n9U2FTBzBBWelp, here's audio of a call to police by a citizen reporting Haitians hunting geese in Springfield. Doesn't sound like wild geese either, which wouldn't be illegal. https://t.co/KsT47uutqX
— Rod Dreher (@roddreher) September 11, 2024
Pet eating has always been the issue undecided voters care about, second only to Trump's victory in 2020
And, to top it all off, Muir stuck a knife in ABC's own kidney quoting the city manager's denial of it happening in order to defend Harris. ABC is the functional equivalent of the DNC press office.
Moderate Republicans cannot come to grips with the reality that our campaign opponent is really not Harris but rather the media. The MRs cannot shake the the instinct to accept the constraints and be willing to lose nobly rather than attack the adversaries we have.
And there we have it
What about RINOs & MRs? It's all their fault, right?
I truly am curious, what are you hoping the Republican party will do after Trump either loses or leaves office? Are you hoping for a Mitt Romney type party? Or a dick Cheney neocon type party? Just trying to figure out what it is exactly you want. Would also like to know how you think it has a chance in hell of winning an election.
Mitt Romney and John McCain, don't win elections my friend.
edit: I would add McCain, Romney, Bush 1 (and Dole) lost to two extremely gifted politicians who had skills well beyond what I see in anybody present in today's Democrats. McCain and Dole had terrible timing to be candidates based on economic factors. All meaning that what I call (and what I used to be) "Chamber of Commerce" Republicans can still win elections
And Romney and McCain (another war monger) both lost soundly and decisively to Obama, who BTW had a pretty poor approval rating the second time around. Sure, he was a better candidate than Biden or Harris, but the Repubs also ran what should have been on paper a much better candidate from a likability standpoint, and were still soundly beaten.
Sorry, but I just don't think a return to the party of the country club neo-con republicans is a winning strategy. They were on the way out when McCain and Romney lost...
Who out of popular GOP politicos right now falls under the former? I can't think of any. Some would say Haley, but I disagree. Same with Pence (although he doesn't have enough of a following to even count.)
And BTW, Trump talks a big game now, but he supported the Iraq war before declaring it a promising campaign issue. He provided weapons to Ukraine. He took out Solemani. I could go on and on.
Then a poster responded, defending those Republicans.
I agree with you that none of the popular GOP politicos right now fit that mold, which is why I have consistently said I would have much preferred any of them over Trump. I would be fine with a DeSantis moving forward. In fact, I voted for him in the primary.
Just FYI, the poster in question has a problem with guys like DeSantis as well, since they remind him of Trump.
Why are you unlikely to vote for a 'personally honorable person' irregardles of who his Democratic opponent is ?
But the "unlikely" does depend somewhat on the opponent. If it had been De Santis-Biden, and Biden had debated like he did against Trump, I would probably have had to vote for DeSantis. High likelihood that Biden would not be fit sometime during a second term, and I am not going to vote for a constitutional crisis.
Please be specific and tell me which of DeSantis's policies concern you enough to be unlikely to vote for such a honorable man ?
Not playing 'gotcha games', just trying to learn something.
In DeSantis's defense, far too many business interests are elevating culture wars over business interests.
Frank Galvin said:Don't really thnk so. Those that emphasize culture usually have a financial motive for doing so. Government interference with businesses used to be something frowned on by Republicans. De Santis wants to set corporate policy for Disney.whiterock said:Frank Galvin said:I am pro-choice, he is ardently pro-life. I think he tries to insert religion into public school classrooms. He was lukewarm at best on support for Ukraine. He seems to elevate culture wars over business interests.KaiBear said:Frank Galvin said:Because I don't like his policies.KaiBear said:Frank Galvin said:Just to be clear, while I dislike DeSantis on many policy issues and am not a fan of his style, he plays by the rules, respects the Constitution, and seems like a personally honorable person. I am unlikely to vote for him, but he is clearly "fit" to be president. Unlike Trump.Mothra said:You are clearly not understanding the context of our discussion. I was responding to a poster who has in the past identified Bush, Cheney, Romney and McCain as the types of Republicans he likes and supports. That is why I mentioned them. He has said he longs for those types of Republicans. We have had a number of conversations about his neocon beliefs.sombear said:This straw man is getting tiresome. The choice isn't between an establishment/moderate/Neocon or Trump.Mothra said:Bush 2 lost the popular vote, and worse, was a neo-conservative who spent like a liberal and did far worse than anything Trump has done by getting us into a needless and costly war, destabilizing the ME and getting hundreds of thousands of people killed, including thousands of our boys, who ended up maimed or dead. If you recall, your side of the aisle called him a war criminal. Do we really want a return to that?Frank Galvin said:Ronald Reagan, Bush 1 and Bush 2 went 5 for 6. The one loss was partially just bad luck with Perot. They all had an optimistic view of America and believed the coutnry had an obligation to promote and defend democracy. It is almost impossible for conservatives to have less than 48 senators and we will have a conservative Supreme Court for decades.Mothra said:Osodecentx said:whiterock said:I agree. The neverTrumpers are indeed responsible for many of the problems besetting the country.Osodecentx said:It's never Trump's faultwhiterock said:It's a sign of the times, a glaring avatar for the chaos and dysfunction facing ordinary people which has been CAUSED by bad policy. It builds on the narrative that Democrats in general and Biden/Harris in particular are not just incompetent but oblivious to the harm they're causing.Osodecentx said:whiterock said:Osodecentx said:whiterock said:You're way too jaded to really believe that.Osodecentx said:whiterock said:
"If I have to decide who is more likely to be truthful, Trump, Mattis, McMaster or Kelly, I'll take the generals.
-Oso
love the faulty premise that generals are not political animals.
there is an old adage amongst retired military officers that "the guys who retire as brigadiers are the warriors," meaning to suggest that they lacked the political acumen to accumulate more stars.
The premise is the generals are more likely to be truthful
Let's talk when the generals say Trump won 2020 and pets are eaten in Ohio
If the Generals DON'T say pets are being eaten in Ohio, you can be sure they are playing politics.FACT CHECK:
— Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) September 11, 2024
🚨🚨🚨🚨
During the Presidential debate tonight, @KamalaHarris and ABC @ABC said there “were no credible reports” of Haitian immigrants eating people’s pets and local geese…
That is a lie.
Here’s a copy of the official police communications from Springfield,… https://t.co/pi8nMZXG4p pic.twitter.com/n9U2FTBzBBWelp, here's audio of a call to police by a citizen reporting Haitians hunting geese in Springfield. Doesn't sound like wild geese either, which wouldn't be illegal. https://t.co/KsT47uutqX
— Rod Dreher (@roddreher) September 11, 2024
Pet eating has always been the issue undecided voters care about, second only to Trump's victory in 2020
And, to top it all off, Muir stuck a knife in ABC's own kidney quoting the city manager's denial of it happening in order to defend Harris. ABC is the functional equivalent of the DNC press office.
Moderate Republicans cannot come to grips with the reality that our campaign opponent is really not Harris but rather the media. The MRs cannot shake the the instinct to accept the constraints and be willing to lose nobly rather than attack the adversaries we have.
And there we have it
What about RINOs & MRs? It's all their fault, right?
I truly am curious, what are you hoping the Republican party will do after Trump either loses or leaves office? Are you hoping for a Mitt Romney type party? Or a dick Cheney neocon type party? Just trying to figure out what it is exactly you want. Would also like to know how you think it has a chance in hell of winning an election.
Mitt Romney and John McCain, don't win elections my friend.
edit: I would add McCain, Romney, Bush 1 (and Dole) lost to two extremely gifted politicians who had skills well beyond what I see in anybody present in today's Democrats. McCain and Dole had terrible timing to be candidates based on economic factors. All meaning that what I call (and what I used to be) "Chamber of Commerce" Republicans can still win elections
And Romney and McCain (another war monger) both lost soundly and decisively to Obama, who BTW had a pretty poor approval rating the second time around. Sure, he was a better candidate than Biden or Harris, but the Repubs also ran what should have been on paper a much better candidate from a likability standpoint, and were still soundly beaten.
Sorry, but I just don't think a return to the party of the country club neo-con republicans is a winning strategy. They were on the way out when McCain and Romney lost...
Who out of popular GOP politicos right now falls under the former? I can't think of any. Some would say Haley, but I disagree. Same with Pence (although he doesn't have enough of a following to even count.)
And BTW, Trump talks a big game now, but he supported the Iraq war before declaring it a promising campaign issue. He provided weapons to Ukraine. He took out Solemani. I could go on and on.
Then a poster responded, defending those Republicans.
I agree with you that none of the popular GOP politicos right now fit that mold, which is why I have consistently said I would have much preferred any of them over Trump. I would be fine with a DeSantis moving forward. In fact, I voted for him in the primary.
Just FYI, the poster in question has a problem with guys like DeSantis as well, since they remind him of Trump.
Why are you unlikely to vote for a 'personally honorable person' irregardles of who his Democratic opponent is ?
But the "unlikely" does depend somewhat on the opponent. If it had been De Santis-Biden, and Biden had debated like he did against Trump, I would probably have had to vote for DeSantis. High likelihood that Biden would not be fit sometime during a second term, and I am not going to vote for a constitutional crisis.
Please be specific and tell me which of DeSantis's policies concern you enough to be unlikely to vote for such a honorable man ?
Not playing 'gotcha games', just trying to learn something.
In DeSantis's defense, far too many business interests are elevating culture wars over business interests.
Teddy Roosevelt (Republican) pursued this policy of "trust-busting" by initiating suits against 43 other major corporations during the next seven years...
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Theodore-Roosevelt/The-Square-Deal
[Theodore Roosevelt assails monopolies, Dec. 3, 1901]
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/03/this-day-in-politics-december-3-1027800
*ps
If Big Business is actively going to get involved in State politics to push socially Leftist ideas around race, gender, sexuality (like what Disney did in Florida) then they absolutely should get push back from Republican legislatures and Governors.
They want Republicans to help then with tax breaks and pro-business laws...then turn around and donate to Democrats and use their considerable power and platforms to push radical Leftist social ideas.
Some Republicans are beginning to see the scam being played out....
Adriacus Peratuun said:sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
Please provide your source that establishes that zero chance.
If not, you are doing the exact thing you are attacking and it makes you a world class hypocrite.
We'd know and it wouldn't be this wannabe breaking it
🚨 BREAKING: Trump ticks back to being the 61% favorite in Nate Silver’s election model after more polls release
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) September 13, 2024
🔴 Trump: 61% (+22.3)
🔵 Harris: 38.7%
The model also gives Trump a 63% chance of winning PENNSYLVANIA, and a 52% chance at MICHIGAN.
Silver Bulletin | Sept. 13 pic.twitter.com/URsjPvtt9m
🚨 Buzzfeed finds Trump leads with undecideds by 5 points post-debate, improves from pre-debate. WOW.
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) September 13, 2024
PRE-TO-POST DEBATE:
🔴 Trump 39% ➡️ 42% [+3]
🔵 Harris 36% ➡️ 37% [+1]
🟡 Still undecided: 21% pic.twitter.com/5Pa8ZooLHX
🚨 BREAKING: MICHIGAN poll finds more voters switched from Harris to Trump after the debate
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) September 13, 2024
🔴 To Trump: 5% (+2)
🔵 To Harris: 3%
🟡 No switch: 90%
🟠 Unsure: 2%
Mitchell | Sept. 10 | N=600LV pic.twitter.com/2ybhFjgO4H
Frank Galvin said:Nno she didn't.whiterock said:LOL. It is madness t to conform to the battlefield offered by your opponent. We should build our own platforms to push the messages that benefit us. That includes undermining the credibility of the MSM, by making sure THEY are put on trial for insisting things like this are not happening:Mothra said:whiterock said:Doesn't seem to hurt the credibility of Democrats. Why should it hurt the credibility of their opponents?Mothra said:whiterock said:why does it matter whether or not it is true?Adriacus Peratuun said:sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
Please provide your source that establishes that zero chance.
If not, you are doing the exact thing you are attacking and it makes you a world class hypocrite.
if Trump can convince independents that ABC cheated to help Harris, that helps his campaign.
It's not like Democrats don't stand up and say things that are unsourced and provably untrue to win elections. Why shouldn't we do the same. Do we want to be right, or do we want to win?
Can't agree with this. I'd prefer to be right than win or be popular.
And in either regard, these type of shenanigans make the campaign lose credibility with the American people. Ultimately they will hurt Trump when Americans believe nothing he says can be trusted.
Because the MSM is running cover for the Democrat party. Republicans should know the spotlight is focused on them, in any misstep will be spun by the mainstream media. That being the case we have to behave differently.
And in either regard, I don't want to be like the Democrats. I'd prefer to be the party that speaks truth.
translation: I'd rather be right than win.BREAKING: Haitian immigrant daughter confirms what Trump said about Springfield, Ohio pic.twitter.com/TA5GTtZgbQ
— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) September 12, 2024
Ha!
Trump has gone viral in a tiktok trend again! 🤣🤣🤣 pic.twitter.com/JSnnJUjNvp
— Mark Lewis (@Maga4liberty) September 13, 2024
Please, keep talking about the dog & cat menu in Springfield OH!
THIS WINS THE DAY!!!! pic.twitter.com/Lk2PJeFByd
— Morgan J. Freeman (@mjfree) September 13, 2024
Van Jones: "It's not just Kamala Harris who's moved, our whole party was on some weird pogo stick in 2020... we had all kinds of ideas that turned out to be bad ideas"
— Ryan James Girdusky (@RyanGirdusky) September 13, 2024
Me: "It's called black lives matter, that was the weird pogo stick you're talking about" pic.twitter.com/S6AAb9btVk
Babylon Bee:
https://babylonbee.com/news/doj-warns-if-trump-is-elected-he-will-do-to-them-all-the-stuff-theyre-doing-to-him
https://babylonbee.com/news/democrats-concerned-california-wildfires-may-burn-up-their-stock-of-prefilled-kamala-harris-ballots
https://babylonbee.com/news/doj-warns-if-trump-is-elected-he-will-do-to-them-all-the-stuff-theyre-doing-to-him
https://babylonbee.com/news/democrats-concerned-california-wildfires-may-burn-up-their-stock-of-prefilled-kamala-harris-ballots
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Psalm 119:36
Tim Walz is amazingly honest but it's accidental:
https://notthebee.com/article/i-kid-you-not-tim-walz-just-said-kamala-started-her-career-as-a-young-prostitutor-read-that-again
https://notthebee.com/article/i-kid-you-not-tim-walz-just-said-kamala-started-her-career-as-a-young-prostitutor-read-that-again
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Psalm 119:36
This is the greatest fact-check to ever exist. It will never get better than this. Savor it. pic.twitter.com/V6U6q4EF8t
— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) September 14, 2024
whiterock said:Frank Galvin said:Nno she didn't.whiterock said:LOL. It is madness t to conform to the battlefield offered by your opponent. We should build our own platforms to push the messages that benefit us. That includes undermining the credibility of the MSM, by making sure THEY are put on trial for insisting things like this are not happening:Mothra said:whiterock said:Doesn't seem to hurt the credibility of Democrats. Why should it hurt the credibility of their opponents?Mothra said:whiterock said:why does it matter whether or not it is true?Adriacus Peratuun said:sombear said:An unsourced tweet is not news. Zero chance this is true.Redbrickbear said:BREAKING: ABC whistleblower allegedly will release an affidavit claiming the Harris campaign was given sample questions that were “essentially the same questions that were given during the debate,” as well as assurances that Trump would be “fact-checked” and she would not.
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 12, 2024
Please provide your source that establishes that zero chance.
If not, you are doing the exact thing you are attacking and it makes you a world class hypocrite.
if Trump can convince independents that ABC cheated to help Harris, that helps his campaign.
It's not like Democrats don't stand up and say things that are unsourced and provably untrue to win elections. Why shouldn't we do the same. Do we want to be right, or do we want to win?
Can't agree with this. I'd prefer to be right than win or be popular.
And in either regard, these type of shenanigans make the campaign lose credibility with the American people. Ultimately they will hurt Trump when Americans believe nothing he says can be trusted.
Because the MSM is running cover for the Democrat party. Republicans should know the spotlight is focused on them, in any misstep will be spun by the mainstream media. That being the case we have to behave differently.
And in either regard, I don't want to be like the Democrats. I'd prefer to be the party that speaks truth.
translation: I'd rather be right than win.BREAKING: Haitian immigrant daughter confirms what Trump said about Springfield, Ohio pic.twitter.com/TA5GTtZgbQ
— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) September 12, 2024
Ha!Trump has gone viral in a tiktok trend again! 🤣🤣🤣 pic.twitter.com/JSnnJUjNvp
— Mark Lewis (@Maga4liberty) September 13, 2024
Harris still maintains a 1-2 point lead over Trump in the most recent national polls.
This may surprise you (okay. It won’t), but this is not in the opinion section.
— Jeremy Redfern (@JeremyRedfernFL) September 14, 2024
It’s “news” from USA Today White House correspondent @fran_chambers. pic.twitter.com/NyNuqfwwb9
It's all fun and games until the nanny gets knocked up….Jack Bauer said:This may surprise you (okay. It won’t), but this is not in the opinion section.
— Jeremy Redfern (@JeremyRedfernFL) September 14, 2024
It’s “news” from USA Today White House correspondent @fran_chambers. pic.twitter.com/NyNuqfwwb9
Did they kill the baby?
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Psalm 119:36