• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Dem Post Mortem

TV and credit cards said:
A father with a very young daughter or mother with a very young son in tow might.
Click to expand...
Where's the problem?

Does anyone have a problem with little kids in the restroom with a parent?
Not that I know of, but maybe you live in a place where people get upset about that sort of thing.
Tom
 
scombrid said:
They complain about the Democrats not doing anything for the common man and "Fauxahontas" is the pinnacle of their commentary on Elizabeth Warren.
Click to expand...
Do you have an actual comment about how the anti-police attitude sparked by #BLM riots harmed the Democratic Party brand in general and Kamala Harris brand in particular, or are you just here to bitch about nicknames?
 
Spacetime Inhabitant said:
I obviously was too subtle with my reference to millions of imaginary people. It is not simply the raw numbers (which ARE exaggerated, especially with regard to time scale, they are claiming those numbers each year)
Click to expand...
They certainly are in the millions per year now.
2023-10-12-ambriefing-border-encounters-index-videoSixteenByNineJumbo1600.png

Note that these are apprehensions, who end up in the US because of "catch and release". How many more sneak by border patrol agents?
This level of influx is clearly unsustainable, especially when it is very difficult to deport people.
but the alleged nature of these immigrants - for instance, that they all are carting in a big package of Fentanyl ready to corrupt the American people. If this was true then these immigrants wouldn't be super poor.
Click to expand...
Why do you think the drug mules themselves would be well off?
Also Americans should take some responsibility for their drug indulging habit. Drug dealers are only successful because there are so many drug buyers/consumers. Also, they are not all illegals.
Click to expand...
Addictions are hard to kick, especially to opioids. And drug dealers make their product more dangerous by lacing it with fentanyl.
 
Shadowy Man said:
Dems really need to stop nominating people because "it's their turn" or because "they would make history".
Click to expand...
for this election it was too late to do much else and have a good chance. But for the next they really do need a robust primary.
Click to expand...
True. I was mainly talking about 2028.
As far as 2024, by the time Biden decided not to seek reelection, it was late in the process. He should have decided sooner. But was it Biden's own hubris that caused his prevarication, or did DNC encourage it so that they did not have to deal with a challenge to heiress apparent?
 
Absolutely the wrong approach, by one Sunjeev Berry at The Intercept
Take Out the Trash: A Proposal to Clean Up the Democratic Party
He proposes that the Democratic Party purge all moderates, and especially those who are pro-Israel.

It was the Democratic Party's leftward lurch after 2016 that set the stage for the 2024 debacle. I think that without COVID, Trump would have cruised to reeelction in 2020. It might be forgotten now, as it happened in the pre-Pandemic era that seems like forever ago, but the Dem primary debates starting in Summer 2019 were an absolute shitshow.
 
Derec said:
scombrid said:
They complain about the Democrats not doing anything for the common man and "Fauxahontas" is the pinnacle of their commentary on Elizabeth Warren.
Click to expand...
Do you have an actual comment about how the anti-police attitude sparked by #BLM riots harmed the Democratic Party brand in general and Kamala Harris brand in particular, or are you just here to bitch about nicknames?
Click to expand...
I think the obvious point that flew right past you is that is possible to make such a point with employing racist or bigoted nicknames. In fact, there absence makes any point more credible because the reader is not tempted to wonder what type of person feels it necessary to include such unnecessary nastiness.
 
laughing dog said:
I think the obvious point that flew right past you is that is possible to make such a point with employing racist or bigoted nicknames.
Click to expand...
That nickname is neither. It's poking fun at paleface Elizabeth Warren self-identifying as "American Indian" based on, at best, a tiny fraction of Amerindian heritage.
In fact, there absence makes any point more credible because the reader is not tempted to wonder what type of person feels it necessary to include such unnecessary nastiness.
Click to expand...
Oh, please! Unnecessarily nasty nicknames are de rigueur around here. At least when aimed at Republicans.
 
Derec said:
Shadowy Man said:
Dems really need to stop nominating people because "it's their turn" or because "they would make history".
Click to expand...
for this election it was too late to do much else and have a good chance. But for the next they really do need a robust primary.
Click to expand...
True. I was mainly talking about 2028.
Click to expand...

I don’t know whose “turn” it would be in 2028. I’m looking forward to a primary with hopefully some good options.

Derec said:
As far as 2024, by the time Biden decided not to seek reelection, it was late in the process. He should have decided sooner.
Click to expand...

I agree with you here. I think many of those who came out for him in 2020 did so under the assumption he would be a one term president.

Derec said:
But was it Biden's own hubris that caused his prevarication, or did DNC encourage it so that they did not have to deal with a challenge to heiress apparent?
Click to expand...
Good question. I think part of the delay was that he and others didn’t actually think Harris could beat Trump so he was trying to stick it out. Choosing not to go with Harris as the “heiress apparent” may have been the best option but I think Party leaders saw that as bad for the Party. but when Biden bombed at the debate they had no choice but to install
Harris and try to be as enthusiastic as possible.
 
TomC said:
TV and credit cards said:
A father with a very young daughter or mother with a very young son in tow might.
Click to expand...
Where's the problem?

Does anyone have a problem with little kids in the restroom with a parent?
Not that I know of, but maybe you live in a place where people get upset about that sort of thing.
Tom
Click to expand...
 
ZiprHead said:
Loren Pechtel said:
But what body of adequate authority ever determined that it was an insurrection?? That's where I have a problem--if a suitable body declares that 1/6 was an insurrection then he should be yeeted on the 14th. But that didn't happen--remember the various red areas talking about yeeting Biden on "insurrection"?
Click to expand...
Keep moving those goalposts, Captain.
Click to expand...
Just because I disagree with what Colorado did doesn't make me think The Felon is good. Colorado jumped the gun as far as I'm concerned--you haven't addressed my point about others planning the same thing for nonsense reasons.
 
TSwizzle said:
Bill Maher sums things up in his usual style.
Click to expand...
All the numbers mean is that The Felon had a far bigger disinformation system, courtesy of Moscow and Beijing. The election wasn't decided on issues, it was decided on deception.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
Loren Pechtel said:
The problem isn't "incitement", but "insurrection". Look what happened when Colorado tried to use it--a bunch of red states were going to come up with pretexts to use it against Biden. We need an authoritative source on whether an action is insurrection, not 50 states making their own decisions.
Click to expand...
The law needs to make sense. So either we need 50 states to individually concur that insurrection happened, and sign off on it, or one centralized authority indicates as such. Being excluded from serving is a national thing, not a state thing, so it can be reasonably argued that if one states says they are disqualified, no state can allow that person to serve in Government without a note from Congress.
Click to expand...
So the reddest state excludes any Democrats. No, that doesn't make sense, so the decision must be at a federal level.

Jimmy Higgins said:
The trouble with the 14th Amendment is it was written specifically for the Civil War. That wasn't remotely a gray area! So it fit fine with the circumstances. Heck, didn't lots of people get permission regardless of their actions? (John Brown was executed for his insurrection... the Southerners were treated quite like royalty for theirs... which cost the lives of over 800,000 Americans. And the South still whines about it.!
Click to expand...
Agreed. Good idea, poor implementation.
 
TomC said:
Loren Pechtel said:
But for small businesses it's not a problem--they should have a single-occupancy bathroom anyway.
Click to expand...
Why?
I see no reason for that.

Provide two restrooms, a restroom for anyone male or female, and I see no reason for them to spend any more.

If it's in their best interest to do so, fine. But if there's a restroom for everyone they've done their public duty.
Tom
Click to expand...
You're not disagreeing with me.

Single occupancy, anyone can use it, gender doesn't matter. It's only an issue when you have sufficient demand that you have multiple toilets.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
TSwizzle said:
Bill Maher sums things up in his usual style.
Click to expand...
All the numbers mean is that The Felon had a far bigger disinformation system, courtesy of Moscow and Beijing. The election wasn't decided on issues, it was decided on deception.
Click to expand...
Musk and his pal Thiel were huge disinfo suppliers. Thiels data analytics were certain t have been handy directing the bots whom and how to target.
 
scombrid said:
Loren Pechtel said:
TSwizzle said:
Bill Maher sums things up in his usual style.
Click to expand...
All the numbers mean is that The Felon had a far bigger disinformation system, courtesy of Moscow and Beijing. The election wasn't decided on issues, it was decided on deception.
Click to expand...
Musk and his pal Thiel were huge disinfo suppliers. Thiels data analytics were certain t have been handy directing the bots whom and how to target.
Click to expand...
And Musk spent a lot of money on the campaign.
 
Derec said:
laughing dog said:
I think the obvious point that flew right past you is that is possible to make such a point with employing racist or bigoted nicknames.
Click to expand...
That nickname is neither. It's poking fun at paleface Elizabeth Warren self-identifying as "American Indian" based on, at best, a tiny fraction of Amerindian heritage.
In fact, there absence makes any point more credible because the reader is not tempted to wonder what type of person feels it necessary to include such unnecessary nastiness.
Click to expand...
Oh, please! Unnecessarily nasty nicknames are de rigueur around here. At least when aimed at Republicans.
Click to expand...
Thanks for confirming the point flew right past you with the additional bonus of a “whataboutism”!!!!

BTW, do you find those unnecessary nicknames enhance the criticisms?
 
Loren Pechtel said:
ZiprHead said:
Loren Pechtel said:
But what body of adequate authority ever determined that it was an insurrection?? That's where I have a problem--if a suitable body declares that 1/6 was an insurrection then he should be yeeted on the 14th. But that didn't happen--remember the various red areas talking about yeeting Biden on "insurrection"?
Click to expand...
Keep moving those goalposts, Captain.
Click to expand...
Just because I disagree with what Colorado did doesn't make me think The Felon is good. Colorado jumped the gun as far as I'm concerned--you haven't addressed my point about others planning the same thing for nonsense reasons.
Click to expand...
You may disagree with the Colorado decision (and I'd like to see you point to the sections of the decision you actually disagree with) but that doesn't mean that the issue wasn't addressed by an adequate authority.

And we have courts and court rules to take care of the "nonsense reasons", though perhaps you would simply state that some red state's Supreme Court would be too corrupt to not declare Biden an insurrectionist without any credible evidence. I guess there's no arguing against that kind of logic, eh?
 
Loren Pechtel said:
what body of adequate authority ever determined that it was an insurrection??
Click to expand...
THERE IS NO "ADEQUATE AUTHORITY".
The State Supreme Court was the ONLY authority to adjudicate that point, and they found that it was an insurrection and that Trump was complicit.
 
laughing dog said:
Thanks for confirming the point flew right past you
Click to expand...
Nothing flew past me. You are very obviously using your feigned outrage over Fauxachontas to avoid dealing with the points I made.
with the additional bonus of a “whataboutism”!!!!
Click to expand...
Pointing out hypocrisy is not "whataboutism".
BTW, do you find those unnecessary nicknames enhance the criticisms?
Click to expand...
Yes, when used judiciously. They act like spice.
If my posts were just nicknames it would be one thing. But they are not.

So, do you have anything substantive to say or do you just want to keep derailing and being butthurt?
 
Loren Pechtel said:
Shadowy Man said:
Loren Pechtel said:
But what body of adequate authority ever determined that it was an insurrection?? That's where I have a problem--if a suitable body declares that 1/6 was an insurrection then he should be yeeted on the 14th. But that didn't happen--remember the various red areas talking about yeeting Biden on "insurrection"?
Click to expand...
Did you read the ruling of the Colorado case? Would the Colorado Supreme Court be a “body of adequate authority”?
Click to expand...
I think it needs to be either Congress or SCOTUS.
Click to expand...
Not according to the wording of the amendment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom