The Race For 2024

[ZiprHead]

I actually got an eighteen pack of grade A large eggs from Kroger for $1.99

They are not quite that cheap around here. An 18 pack is more like $2.89.

The price of eggs did skyrocket for a while there. There was some kind of bird virus that killed off a bunch of chickens, resulting in a big jump in egg prices. Lasted a few months, as I recall. The reason I noticed is that I am trying to reduce our meat consumption. Didn't really change anything.

Tom

Well, they were on sale so I got two 18 packs.

 

[SLD]

Yesterday, Trump said that Harris was mentally unstable. I've never heard anyone project like Trump does. He is the most mentally unstable, compulsive liar that has ever run for president and his VP nominee is as well. It's hard to understand how people don't see that.

We are bombarded with ads here in Georgia. Every Trump ad does nothing but call Harris names, while every Harris ad expresses a plan that she hopes to accomplish. There are also lots of ads from organizations that support the right of women to have control over their own bodies. Since I record most of the things I watch, I'm not subjected to many of these ads, as I fast forward them whenever possible.

And I say that’s why she will lose. Sorry. She needs to attack him

 

[SLD]

Yesterday, Trump said that Harris was mentally unstable. I've never heard anyone project like Trump does. He is the most mentally unstable, compulsive liar that has ever run for president and his VP nominee is as well. It's hard to understand how people don't see that.

We are bombarded with ads here in Georgia. Every Trump ad does nothing but call Harris names, while every Harris ad expresses a plan that she hopes to accomplish. There are also lots of ads from organizations that support the right of women to have control over their own bodies. Since I record most of the things I watch, I'm not subjected to many of these ads, as I fast forward them whenever possible.

And I say that’s why she will lose. Sorry. She needs to attack him

The other issue is to what extent does TV advertising work with today’s streaming services?

One thing is during sporting events that are still widely watched by regular TV viewers. Maybe a few other very popular shows.

 

[Ford]

Yesterday, Trump said that Harris was mentally unstable. I've never heard anyone project like Trump does. He is the most mentally unstable, compulsive liar that has ever run for president and his VP nominee is as well. It's hard to understand how people don't see that.

We are bombarded with ads here in Georgia. Every Trump ad does nothing but call Harris names, while every Harris ad expresses a plan that she hopes to accomplish. There are also lots of ads from organizations that support the right of women to have control over their own bodies. Since I record most of the things I watch, I'm not subjected to many of these ads, as I fast forward them whenever possible.

And I say that’s why she will lose. Sorry. She needs to attack him

From what I've seen (and I don't watch broadcast/cable TV and have adbockers on my PC) her pattern seems to be "bring up something crazy/bad about Trump" and then provide a contrast.

There's plenty of bad about him, but if she tries to match him one-for-one with lies and name-calling, she'd lose. Trying to beat the boss hog in a mud-slinging contest in his own pen is not a good idea.

 

[SLD]

Yesterday, Trump said that Harris was mentally unstable. I've never heard anyone project like Trump does. He is the most mentally unstable, compulsive liar that has ever run for president and his VP nominee is as well. It's hard to understand how people don't see that.

We are bombarded with ads here in Georgia. Every Trump ad does nothing but call Harris names, while every Harris ad expresses a plan that she hopes to accomplish. There are also lots of ads from organizations that support the right of women to have control over their own bodies. Since I record most of the things I watch, I'm not subjected to many of these ads, as I fast forward them whenever possible.

And I say that’s why she will lose. Sorry. She needs to attack him

From what I've seen (and I don't watch broadcast/cable TV and have adbockers on my PC) her pattern seems to be "bring up something crazy/bad about Trump" and then provide a contrast.

There's plenty of bad about him, but if she tries to match him one-for-one with lies and name-calling, she'd lose. Trying to beat the boss hog in a mud-slinging contest in his own pen is not a good idea.

I don’t think it’s name calling. I think there just need to be numerous ads that just point out his insanity, his suckers and losers comments, his comments about Medal of Honor winners, whales and windmills. Use quotes from others who know him and worked for him, calling him unfit. Like HR McMaster. Or many others.

She doesn’t have to do the name calling herself though. That’s fine. Voice over by men is preferable.

 

[Rhea]

Yesterday, Trump said that Harris was mentally unstable.

Just a correction on the wording, it looks like he called her “mentally impaired” and “mentally disabled”, evoking an even worse demeaning of those with permanent conditions by using their status as an insult to others.

Former President Donald J. Trump’s series of demeaning insultscalling Vice President Kamala Harris “mentally impaired” and “mentally disabled” drew rebukes Sunday morning from Republicans and Democrats alike.

So this is a repeat of his mocking of disabled people. what an asshole.

 

[Toni]

Vance mocked for saying eggs cost $4 — while standing in front of a dozen for $2.99

Vance was at a supermarket in Reading, Pennsylvania with his sons to illustrate how grocery prices have been impacted by ‘Kamala Harris’s policies’

www.independent.co.uk

JD Vance was roundly mocked online over a trip to the supermarket where he bemoaned the steep price of eggs — and botched the photo opp.

The Republican vice presidential nominee stopped by a supermarket in Reading, Pennsylvania, with his sons over the weekend to illustrate how grocery prices have been impacted by “Kamala Harris’s policies” when he claimed a dozen eggs cost $4.

The problem? When footage of the visit emerged, Vance was quickly called out by viewers who spotted the price tag of a dozen eggs behind him was actually $2.99.

I actually got an eighteen pack of grade A large eggs from Kroger for $1.99.

Cheapest price for a dozen eggs are $5.49/dozen at my local Lucky store. If organic is your thing, you can get 18 for $12.99 from the "Happy Egg Company".

Wow. Eggs at my local farmers’ market are $6/doz. I buy there, if I need eggs because I know the chickens live humane lives plus they are organic, I’m supporting local farmers and all that jazz. Plus they come in pretty colors—which is simply a bonus that makes me smile—and who doesn’t need more smokes in their life?

At the grocery store, it’s between $2-3/dozen for those which are labeled cage free and local. This is a more reliable source of eggs as they run out fast at the farmers’ market and I don’t always get there in time.

 

[Elixir]

When possible I've been trading our homegrown tomatoes for farm eggs. I sometimes ride with our County's brand inspector and his wife, who are great people. They run a small/medium sized haying and cattle operation and we often use his cows for cutting practice. They have hens and a hen house, but usually the hens lay eggs all over the place rather than in the henhouse. It's like an Easter egg hunt every time they want breakfast! But the eggs are fantastic - no comparison. Dark orange yolks, and the whites barely spread out in a pan... delicious!! I am totally mystified that the coyotes don't get all their chickens and the raccoons don't find all the eggs. But they don't and they don't.

 

[unapologetic]

I actually got an eighteen pack of grade A large eggs from Kroger for $1.99

They are not quite that cheap around here. An 18 pack is more like $2.89.

The price of eggs did skyrocket for a while there. There was some kind of bird virus that killed off a bunch of chickens, resulting in a big jump in egg prices. Lasted a few months, as I recall. The reason I noticed is that I am trying to reduce our meat consumption. Didn't really change anything.

Tom

The price dropped during Covid lockdown and restaurants were closed. We even got free eggs for a few months.
I wouldn't be surprised if farmers thinned their herds, leading to shortages now.

The other issue is to what extent does TV advertising work with today’s streaming services?

I watch the free (ad supported) streamers. I ignore political ads, and most others. But I did fall for 2 nifty gadgets. Turned out to be over-priced and under-preforming.

I don’t think it’s name calling.

Well you're alone in that. Rump supporters think anything negative about Rump, is JUST name-calling. So you can never get through to them. They hear so much shit from Rump, They CAN'T recognize truth anymore. So why play Rump's game.
I, for one, made my decision about Rump during 'Apprentice'. And don't listen to the current flood of shit. I know my sister did too. But she liked what she saw. I believe she is typical of Rump voters.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

Vance mocked for saying eggs cost $4 — while standing in front of a dozen for $2.99

Vance was at a supermarket in Reading, Pennsylvania with his sons to illustrate how grocery prices have been impacted by ‘Kamala Harris’s policies’

www.independent.co.uk

JD Vance was roundly mocked online over a trip to the supermarket where he bemoaned the steep price of eggs — and botched the photo opp.

The Republican vice presidential nominee stopped by a supermarket in Reading, Pennsylvania, with his sons over the weekend to illustrate how grocery prices have been impacted by “Kamala Harris’s policies” when he claimed a dozen eggs cost $4.

The problem? When footage of the visit emerged, Vance was quickly called out by viewers who spotted the price tag of a dozen eggs behind him was actually $2.99.

I actually got an eighteen pack of grade A large eggs from Kroger for $1.99.

Cheapest price for a dozen eggs are $5.49/dozen at my local Lucky store. If organic is your thing, you can get 18 for $12.99 from the "Happy Egg Company".

Lucky in San Jose has organic cage free eggs for $5.99/dozen. Seems like a pretty reasonable price to me.

 

[ZiprHead]

The price dropped during Covid lockdown and restaurants were closed.

And we were whiping our asses with coffee filters.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Vance mocked for saying eggs cost $4 — while standing in front of a dozen for $2.99

Vance was at a supermarket in Reading, Pennsylvania with his sons to illustrate how grocery prices have been impacted by ‘Kamala Harris’s policies’

www.independent.co.uk

JD Vance was roundly mocked online over a trip to the supermarket where he bemoaned the steep price of eggs — and botched the photo opp.

The Republican vice presidential nominee stopped by a supermarket in Reading, Pennsylvania, with his sons over the weekend to illustrate how grocery prices have been impacted by “Kamala Harris’s policies” when he claimed a dozen eggs cost $4.

The problem? When footage of the visit emerged, Vance was quickly called out by viewers who spotted the price tag of a dozen eggs behind him was actually $2.99.

Actually look at prices?? What sort of idiot are you when you can just listen to what you're told!

Found a hanger on the door yesterday bashing Harris. With things like a gas price something close to 50% above what the pump at the corner has. And it said "sanctuary cities" but showed tents like a homeless encampment. There was literally nothing on it that was accurate.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Donald did that too, with the appointment of Amy Barrett. He made it very clear he would only consider a woman to replace RBG.

"Trump did it too" is not the excuse you seem to think it is.

What’s your excuse, Derec? The one you gave up thread smells very familiar.

You think I’m picking on you? Look, I’m just sick of wading through bullshit nonsense in your posts to figure out if you actually have anything of value to say, I assume anyone writing here wants to be heard and I assume people have points or think they do and pretty often, the points are valid, even when I don’t agree.

I’m going to waaaaaay overstep boundaries here and say that I think that you, and a lot ( but certainly not all and probably not most) of white men find it upsetting to realize that sometimes other people—not white, maybe female, get jobs and recognition and admissions to all sorts of good schools and get a lot of good things when a particular person who is white and male did not. For a long long time, only white males were allowed to vote, own property, go to college, get most types of work, hold elected office: I’m only going back as far as electing officials—which was a huge advancement over everything being hereditary and long male lines.

We’re making more advancements here by including in our searches and occasionally explicitly looking for some well qualified candidates who are not necessarily white or male. It should not be necessary to do so. But at least Biden chose his candidates from among well qualified and experienced individuals, unlike Trump.

When you select on things like race or gender you're engaging in racism or sexism. Period. At things like SCOTUS there would be adequate candidates available of any group so it doesn't harm the selection process but it's still wrong.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It absolutely is racist and sexist to assert that race and gender were the only or major qualifications Harris possessed or possesses, which is exactly what you and others do when you focus on that one thing: A powerful white mam publicly saying d that out of the pool of candidates he was drawing from, he was going to look first at those candidates who were female and not white. He just said what is being unsaid aloud but definitely known all the time, from time immemorial—only before it was white men who comprised the totality of the pool.

But it's not wrong to consider her being selected as racially motivated.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It absolutely is racist and sexist to assert that race and gender were the only or major qualifications Harris possessed or possesses, which is exactly what you and others do when you focus on that one thing: A powerful white mam publicly saying d that out of the pool of candidates he was drawing from, he was going to look first at those candidates who were female and not white.

THis is a good point. The complaint about “DEI hires” always seem to convey that what they really mean is that the candidate had ONLY DEI as a qualification.

Which says So. Much. about whether racism and sexism are behind the comment.

Yes, the label is used to imply a lack of other qualifications rather than to simply say the pool was filtered on characteristics irrelevant to doing the job. But that doesn't make such filtering proper, whether it's for or against white males. To only hire a black is the same sin as to only hire a white.

 

[Toni]

It absolutely is racist and sexist to assert that race and gender were the only or major qualifications Harris possessed or possesses, which is exactly what you and others do when you focus on that one thing: A powerful white mam publicly saying d that out of the pool of candidates he was drawing from, he was going to look first at those candidates who were female and not white.

THis is a good point. The complaint about “DEI hires” always seem to convey that what they really mean is that the candidate had ONLY DEI as a qualification.

Which says So. Much. about whether racism and sexism are behind the comment.

Yes, the label is used to imply a lack of other qualifications rather than to simply say the pool was filtered on characteristics irrelevant to doing the job. But that doesn't make such filtering proper, whether it's for or against white males. To only hire a black is the same sin as to only hire a white.

Let’s face it: by explicitly saying that he would be looking for a VP who was black and female, he actually soared the fragile feelings of white men everywhere who cannot deal with the fact that the best person for the job was black and female. I’m not happy he gave bigots something to try to hang their hats on,

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Not butthurt. I think it is wrong to limit selection in this way, but that is the nature of modern Democratic Party - steeped in identity politics

Ask yourself this.
Do you think that Trump ever considered a VP running mate who wasn't a straight white male? Or does the assumption that he will only choose from that category of people go without saying?

Then, let's talk about Mike Pence, Trump's first VP pick. He fit the demographic Trump was looking for, straight white male. He was also a political loser, who was about to lose the governor election in Indiana.

But he had credibility with the Christians who didn't know why he was losing so badly in Indiana. Trump desperately needed cred with the Christian demographic, given his history and lifestyle. He knew he couldn't possibly win anything without their support. So he picked Pence.

Although Pence turned out to have too much character for Trump to pick him again, this time around.

But, the bottom line remains. Trump is not looking for the best candidate from the whole population. He's only willing to consider the straight white male candidates.
Tom

Quite true. Both sides are equally guilty here. If anything The Felon is moreso as he also had religious requirements.

 

[Toni]

Donald did that too, with the appointment of Amy Barrett. He made it very clear he would only consider a woman to replace RBG.

"Trump did it too" is not the excuse you seem to think it is.

What’s your excuse, Derec? The one you gave up thread smells very familiar.

You think I’m picking on you? Look, I’m just sick of wading through bullshit nonsense in your posts to figure out if you actually have anything of value to say, I assume anyone writing here wants to be heard and I assume people have points or think they do and pretty often, the points are valid, even when I don’t agree.

I’m going to waaaaaay overstep boundaries here and say that I think that you, and a lot ( but certainly not all and probably not most) of white men find it upsetting to realize that sometimes other people—not white, maybe female, get jobs and recognition and admissions to all sorts of good schools and get a lot of good things when a particular person who is white and male did not. For a long long time, only white males were allowed to vote, own property, go to college, get most types of work, hold elected office: I’m only going back as far as electing officials—which was a huge advancement over everything being hereditary and long male lines.

We’re making more advancements here by including in our searches and occasionally explicitly looking for some well qualified candidates who are not necessarily white or male. It should not be necessary to do so. But at least Biden chose his candidates from among well qualified and experienced individuals, unlike Trump.

When you select on things like race or gender you're engaging in racism or sexism. Period. At things like SCOTUS there would be adequate candidates available of any group so it doesn't harm the selection process but it's still wrong.

But no one was chosen because of their race or gender.

When you refuse to acknowledge that there are a lot of women and a lot of people of color who are exceptionally well qualified, you are engaging in racism and sexism.

 

[TomC]

But it's not wrong to consider her being selected as racially motivated.

Suppose one of the people on Harris' VP list were a black female. Would it matter that she was a PhD in political science, and elected to state legislature four times, because she's brilliant? No. She'd be a drag on the ticket and everyone knows it.

Walz was a DEI hire. Harris needed a white male to "balance" the ticket. Harris is smart enough to realize that. So she did hire the middle aged, Midwestern, white dude.
Tom

 

[ZiprHead]

Donald did that too, with the appointment of Amy Barrett. He made it very clear he would only consider a woman to replace RBG.

"Trump did it too" is not the excuse you seem to think it is.

What’s your excuse, Derec? The one you gave up thread smells very familiar.

You think I’m picking on you? Look, I’m just sick of wading through bullshit nonsense in your posts to figure out if you actually have anything of value to say, I assume anyone writing here wants to be heard and I assume people have points or think they do and pretty often, the points are valid, even when I don’t agree.

I’m going to waaaaaay overstep boundaries here and say that I think that you, and a lot ( but certainly not all and probably not most) of white men find it upsetting to realize that sometimes other people—not white, maybe female, get jobs and recognition and admissions to all sorts of good schools and get a lot of good things when a particular person who is white and male did not. For a long long time, only white males were allowed to vote, own property, go to college, get most types of work, hold elected office: I’m only going back as far as electing officials—which was a huge advancement over everything being hereditary and long male lines.

We’re making more advancements here by including in our searches and occasionally explicitly looking for some well qualified candidates who are not necessarily white or male. It should not be necessary to do so. But at least Biden chose his candidates from among well qualified and experienced individuals, unlike Trump.

When you select on things like race or gender you're engaging in racism or sexism. Period. At things like SCOTUS there would be adequate candidates available of any group so it doesn't harm the selection process but it's still wrong.

Wrong? I consider it an attempt to slightly alleviate a far greater wrong.