The Race For 2024

[TomC]

I continue to disagree. Context is important. If the state brings charges, I'll be shocked.

Disagree about what? Do you honestly think that what he said was not a threat of violence against someone who Trump disliked and considered a threat to him?

I don't expect the state to bring charges either. I'm confident that they will decide that a violence prone presidential candidate will beat the system, again. Like he has done over and over, he'll lie and dissemble and delay and instigate more violence. Then the state officials will have to deal with the outcome. More Teaparty violence.
Tom

 

[Toni]

His rhetoric, as I've said before, can inspire some sick individuals to literally try to kill the person that he attacks

And yet it is Trump who narrowly escaped death when a sick individual took a shot at him and killed a bystander.

Yes, a non-partisan mentally ill person who had easy access to weapons as per your request. Someone died as result.

So yes, it is surprising that a guy who narrowly escaped being murdered would be so loose with violent rhetoric.

Oooooh, but you forgot: That would be assassination was because Dems speak critically about Trump.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

It'd been better if the stable genius had said:

“She’s a radical war hawk. They’re all war hawks when they’re sitting in Washington in a nice building, saying, ‘Oh gee, let’s send 10,000 troops right in the mouth of the enemy. Let’s put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, okay? Let’s see how she feels about it then."

The context becomes crystal clear at this point.

I'm sure someone here would still claim it was a threat to have her killed.

In sohy's defense, the headlines aren't saying the full quote. So it presents a different prejudicial context.

It is annoying that Trump says something isn't completely unreasonable, but then loads it up with unfortunate imagery that can honestly be taken out of context if one isn't careful enough. It is further annoying that the accurate point of her being a warhawk has nothing to with her support of Harris. The right-wing... MAGA-wing (?) is trying to suggest Harris is just like Cheney. Which is insane.

I mean, Trump was threatening nuclear war with North Korea for crying out loud! That was, until his dystopian bromance, Mussolini style.

I posted the full quote. It had no effect.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It'd been better if the stable genius had said:

“She’s a radical war hawk. They’re all war hawks when they’re sitting in Washington in a nice building, saying, ‘Oh gee, let’s send 10,000 troops right in the mouth of the enemy. Let’s put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, okay? Let’s see how she feels about it then."

The context becomes crystal clear at this point.

I'm sure someone here would still claim it was a threat to have her killed.

In sohy's defense, the headlines aren't saying the full quote. So it presents a different prejudicial context.

It is annoying that Trump says something isn't completely unreasonable, but then loads it up with unfortunate imagery that can honestly be taken out of context if one isn't careful enough. It is further annoying that the accurate point of her being a warhawk has nothing to with her support of Harris. The right-wing... MAGA-wing (?) is trying to suggest Harris is just like Cheney. Which is insane.

I mean, Trump was threatening nuclear war with North Korea for crying out loud! That was, until his dystopian bromance, Mussolini style.

Well, certainly it was intended as a threat towards Liz Cheney. Just couched in Trump’s special brand of subtlety.

Well, you respect his intelligence a lot more than I do. I think it was verbal diarrhea and his thoughts were all over the place. Speaking of which diarrhea is one of my bucket list words to spell right the first time... but it is also the only word that I wish wasn't on that list.

It is not an accident that he only makes such comments suggesting violence directed at women. While claiming he wants to protect women. Whether they like it or not.

Now that ("like it or not") I think was Stephan Miller or that jackass that is in charge of campaign coaching. It was meant and targeted towards toxic men. Oh boy, I hope I didn't trigger someone.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It'd been better if the stable genius had said:

“She’s a radical war hawk. They’re all war hawks when they’re sitting in Washington in a nice building, saying, ‘Oh gee, let’s send 10,000 troops right in the mouth of the enemy. Let’s put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, okay? Let’s see how she feels about it then."

The context becomes crystal clear at this point.

I'm sure someone here would still claim it was a threat to have her killed.

In sohy's defense, the headlines aren't saying the full quote. So it presents a different prejudicial context.

It is annoying that Trump says something isn't completely unreasonable, but then loads it up with unfortunate imagery that can honestly be taken out of context if one isn't careful enough. It is further annoying that the accurate point of her being a warhawk has nothing to with her support of Harris. The right-wing... MAGA-wing (?) is trying to suggest Harris is just like Cheney. Which is insane.

I mean, Trump was threatening nuclear war with North Korea for crying out loud! That was, until his dystopian bromance, Mussolini style.

I posted the full quote. It had no effect.

I know, however, the press is presenting a prejudicial context, and us humans suck at being legitimately second-guessed. I know I hate it!

I think there is room for Toni's interpretation, but I see it more as his rambling.

 

[TomC]

I posted the full quote. It had no effect.

I'd already heard the full quote.
Trump wants people like Liz Cheney in front of a firing squad. Not because they've threatened violence or are an existential threat to American values or institutions.

But because they are a threat to his ambitions. Violent destruction of our values and institutions.
Tom

 

[Toni]

It'd been better if the stable genius had said:

“She’s a radical war hawk. They’re all war hawks when they’re sitting in Washington in a nice building, saying, ‘Oh gee, let’s send 10,000 troops right in the mouth of the enemy. Let’s put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, okay? Let’s see how she feels about it then."

The context becomes crystal clear at this point.

I'm sure someone here would still claim it was a threat to have her killed.

In sohy's defense, the headlines aren't saying the full quote. So it presents a different prejudicial context.

It is annoying that Trump says something isn't completely unreasonable, but then loads it up with unfortunate imagery that can honestly be taken out of context if one isn't careful enough. It is further annoying that the accurate point of her being a warhawk has nothing to with her support of Harris. The right-wing... MAGA-wing (?) is trying to suggest Harris is just like Cheney. Which is insane.

I mean, Trump was threatening nuclear war with North Korea for crying out loud! That was, until his dystopian bromance, Mussolini style.

Well, certainly it was intended as a threat towards Liz Cheney. Just couched in Trump’s special brand of subtlety.

Well, you respect his intelligence a lot more than I do. I think it was verbal diarrhea and his thoughts were all over the place. Speaking of which diarrhea is one of my bucket list words to spell right the first time... but it is also the only word that I wish wasn't on that list.

It is not an accident that he only makes such comments suggesting violence directed at women. While claiming he wants to protect women. Whether they like it or not.

Now that ("like it or not") I think was Stephan Miller or that jackass that is in charge of campaign coaching. It was meant and targeted towards toxic men. Oh boy, I hope I didn't trigger someone.

Oh, I do not give him any credit for intelligence or self control at all. He intended it as a threat and at least in some level, he hopes someone will take the hint.

As far as toxic men go: that would be Trump and his ilk. Trust me: we know threats directed towards us. I cannot begin to count the times some nice, well meaning man suggested I be careful because of the bad dudes out there. Without the slightest glimmer of self recognition.

 

[Millrat]

I posted the full quote. It had no effect.

I'd already heard the full quote.
Trump wants people like Liz Cheney in front of a firing squad. Not because they've threatened violence or are an existential threat to American values or institutions.

But because they are a threat to his ambitions. Violent destruction of our values and institutions.
Tom

There are many more men that threaten his ambitions.

He goes after Liz mostly because her father voted with democrats.

 

[TomC]

I posted the full quote. It had no effect.

I'd already heard the full quote.
Trump wants people like Liz Cheney in front of a firing squad. Not because they've threatened violence or are an existential threat to American values or institutions.

But because they are a threat to his ambitions. Violent destruction of our values and institutions.
Tom

There are many more men that threaten his ambitions.

He goes after Liz mostly because her father voted with democrats.

I don't think it's because she's a woman. I think it's because she's a principled, old school, Republican.
Unlike her male compadres, such as Rubio and Cruz and McConnell and Johnson, who saw which way they political winds were blowing. As soon as they did they all dropped trou, bent over, and handed Trump a bottle of lube.
Begging him to be gentle.
Tom

 

[pood]

Did anyone else hear that Trump is now threatening to execute Liz Cheney? He said she should be put in a barrel and shot. If anyone else had said that, I'm pretty sure they would be arrested for making a terrorist threat.

That's not what he said. There's no need to exaggerate what he spews.

That is exactly what he said, as well as calling her a moron. I guess you failed to read the link I quoted in the post following that one. It's all over the news and it's disgusting that a presidential candidate can call to have his opponents executed. Or were you being sarcastic and I missed that.

I didn't need to read your link because I've already read what he said. Let's look at the whole quote:

“She’s a radical war hawk. Let’s put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, okay? Let’s see how she feels about it. You know, when the guns are trained on her face. They’re all war hawks when they’re sitting in Washington in a nice building, saying, ‘Oh gee, let’s send 10,000 troops right in the mouth of the enemy."

Seems pretty clear to me that he's saying, "She wouldn't be so gung-ho on sending people off to war if she had to go with them."

Your interpretation that he was calling for her execution is wildly off-base, and I'm calling you on it. He didn't say she should be "put in a barrel" or that she should be shot, as you've claimed twice now. As I said, he throws out enough crazy nonsense without having to make absurd exaggerations about his statements.

Except for the uncomfortable wider context, which includes the fact that back in June or July, Trump, on his stupid social media thing with the most inapt name ever, amplified a post saying that Cheney was guilty of TREASON and should face a MILITARY TRIBUNAL. Treason is punishable by death.

I think you are splitting hairs here by looking at the larger context of this particular quote, but not the larger context beyond that. Trump has repeatedly called for violence against his political rivals, against American citizens, against whole categories of people. He has called the press “the enemy of the people.” This man is a dangerous, psychotic fascist, and if he is elected he might well try to put people, including Cheney, before a firing squad.

 

[Patooka]

His rhetoric, as I've said before, can inspire some sick individuals to literally try to kill the person that he attacks

And yet it is Trump who narrowly escaped death when a sick individual took a shot at him and killed a bystander.

Yep, Republicans are fucking despicable.

 

[TSwizzle]

He definitely did, and it wasn't even a good joke.

And that is why it landed flat.

It certainly was a strange choice of comedian for a political rally. But we do live in strange times.

Flat? No. Not flat. It was horrifically offensive be to anyone with two functioning brain cells. So, maybe just replace that for Trump and his supporters.

Flat? Yes. Nobody laughed because it was a crap joke.

All this clutching at pearls over a silly, crap joke

 

[TomC]

Flat? Yes. Nobody laughed because it was a crap joke.

All this clutching at pearls over a silly, crap joke

It was his standard schick.
Why did Trump and Co hire him to open the show?

I'll explain it. Because they are trying to appeal to vicious racist people like the Basket of Deplorables they depend on for power.
That's why he was hired by Trump.
Tom

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

He didn't incite the riot in the Capital. He told people to peacefully go home. He did not tell them to enter the Capital. He did not tell them to invade the Capital. He did not tell them to steal the lectern. He did not tell them to go into Nancy Pelosi's office and take her laptop. He didn't even tell the police to shoot one person and cause the one death that occurred during the incident.

He did, however, order the strike that killed Nawar Al-Awlaki. But you don't want to talk about that for some reason.

If he didn't do those things why have multiple 1/6ers thought they were following his instructions? Just because he didn't spell it out in a 72 point font doesn't mean the message wasn't communicated.

As for Nawar Al-Awlaki--a human shield died in a strike on a terrorist. It happens. Ugly, but the only alternative is to surrender to the terrorists.

There were idiots on his side who thought he gave instructions. There are also idiots against him who think he gave instructions. Idiots gonna idiot. Produce quotes if you want to convince me otherwise.

I'm glad you are comfortable with war crimes, we're in for a lot more of them in the future.

You need to show a war crime.

A civilian dying from a strike doesn't make it a war crime.

Killing a little girl ought to be a war crime. Not killing a little girl is not surrendering to the terrorists.

Jason Harvestdancer's forecast appears accurate: we are in for a lot more of them in the future regardless of who is in charge.

However, his apologia for Trump is as predictable as it is wrong.

Apologia for Trump? My post was a CRITICISM of Trump. One that nobody has joined me on, in spite of this being an anti-Trump forum.

 

[Swammerdami]

Polymarket now shows 57 - 42 as the chances Trump or Harris resp. will win the election. This 15-point spread is much better than the 33-point spread just 4 days ago. Betfair shows 59½ - 40, a 10-point spread much better than the 27-point spread just 4 days ago. Realistically these predictions aren't much different from a 50-50 coin toss.

I show the Seven Swing States™ (and two other states), along with latest poll averages as shown at https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/wisconsin/ . The final number shown on each line is #EVs÷5. The eight poll numbers shown for each state are the weighted averages as of Sept 28, Oct 8, Oct 12, Oct 16 Oct 20, Oct 25, Oct 29, Nov 2. Note the very big recent improvement in the Rust Belt (though not Pennsylvania :-( ). Fivethirtyeight weights polls by pollster reliability.

Minnesota +6 +6 +6 +5.8 +5.7 +5.5 +4.5 +5.8 . . . . . . . . // 2

Michigan +3 +1.6 +0.7 +0.7 +0.2 +0.7 +0.5 +1.0 . . . . . . .// 3
Wisconsin +2 +1.5 +0.6 +0.5 +0.2 +0.2 0.0 +0.8 . . . . . . .// 2
Pennsylvania +1 +0.6 +0.3 +0.7 -0.4 -0.3 -0.3 -0.2 . . . . .// 4
Nevada +1 +1 +0.5 +0.7 +0.5 +0.1 -0.2 -0.4. . . . . . . . . // 1
North Carolina 0 -1 -0.9 -0.9 -0.5 -1.2 -1.3 -1.3 . . . . . // 3
Georgia -1 -1 -0.9 -0.9 -1.8 -1.5 -1.5 -1.5 . . . . . . . . // 3
Arizona -1 -1.5 -1.4 -1.7 -1.9 -1.8 -1.9 -2.1 . . . . . . . // 2

Florida -4 -4 -5 -5.1 -5.5 -6.0 -6.1 -6.5 . . . . . . . . . // 6

Once again, the "Keystone State" is the Key to victory. It seems a good bet that whoever wins Pennsylvania will win the election.

 

[ZiprHead]

So presidential.

 

[Swammerdami]

He didn't incite the riot in the Capital. He told people to peacefully go home. He did not tell them to enter the Capital. He did not tell them to invade the Capital. He did not tell them to steal the lectern. He did not tell them to go into Nancy Pelosi's office and take her laptop. He didn't even tell the police to shoot one person and cause the one death that occurred during the incident.
...

If he didn't do those things why have multiple 1/6ers thought they were following his instructions?...

There were idiots on his side who thought he gave instructions. There are also idiots against him who think he gave instructions. Idiots gonna idiot. Produce quotes if you want to convince me otherwise.

I'm glad you are comfortable with war crimes, we're in for a lot more of them in the future.

Killing a little girl ought to be a war crime. Not killing a little girl is not surrendering to the terrorists.

Jason Harvestdancer's forecast appears accurate ...

However, his apologia for Trump is as predictable as it is wrong.

Apologia for Trump? My post was a CRITICISM of Trump. One that nobody has joined me on, in spite of this being an anti-Trump forum.

No it wasn't. You posted one brief sentence about a decision that Trump wasn't even involved in. The rest of your rants were DEFENDING Trump from charges that he helped incite January 6.

Yet once again, as is his habit, Mr. Harvestdancer has grossly misinterpreted his own post.

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength,'

 

[TomC]

Apologia for Trump? My post was a CRITICISM of Trump. One that nobody has joined me on, in spite of this being an anti-Trump forum.

Give it a rest.
Yes, it was a tragedy that a little girl was killed because she was hanging out with violent terrorists who were targeted for destruction.

Some people consider his damage to our basic values, our economy, our institutions as a bigger deal. Then there's his damage to the UN and NATO.
Then there's him paving the way for Putin to invade Ukraine.

There's so much else to criticize about Trump that her tragic death doesn't even register on the vast majority of the world.
Tom

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So presidential.

This is in the Humor thread as well. He is complaining about the microphones and all the troubles he has with them. The guy does nothing but bitch and whine. Microphine ia too low, I'll mime a BJ to demonstrate that.

 

[ZiprHead]

Trump doesn't think that deeply. He hates her because she defied him.