Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting!
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On October 17 2024 08:30 Razyda wrote: The same people who were few months ago in "Ave Biden" camp, now complain about not having Trump medical records. The only explanations are either shamelessness, or having memory span of a drone ant.
There was also a stark contrast between Clinton's and Trump's too, making this the third straight presidential election where Trump is hiding things: "Dr. Bardack’s letter shows what a real letter of evaluation from an internist should look like, instead of the sloppy note from Donald Trump’s doctor, Harold Bornstein. In fact, that superficial note—dashed off in five minutes while Trump’s limo waited—was so filled with superlatives that it sounded like something Trump himself likely said. Trump’s results were “astonishingly excellent” and he would be the “healthiest individual ever elected.” Little substance, big bravado and YUGE ego." https://www.forbes.com/sites/judystone/2016/09/14/the-surprises-in-hillary-clintons-newly-released-medical-records/
srsly?
pReSiDeNt BiDeN iS a HeAlThY, aCtIvE, rObUsT 81-yEaR-oLd MaLe, WhO rEmAiNs FiT tO sUcCeSsFuLlY eXeCuTe ThE dUtIeS oF tHe PrEsIdEnCy, To InClUdE tHoSe As ChIeF eXeCuTiVe, HeAd Of StAtE aNd CoMmAnDeR iN cHiEf.
The entire report is six pages long, with an incredible amount of detail, and no amount of alternating between capital and lowercase letters is going to make you sound intelligent. Do better.
On October 17 2024 08:30 Razyda wrote: The same people who were few months ago in "Ave Biden" camp, now complain about not having Trump medical records. The only explanations are either shamelessness, or having memory span of a drone ant.
There was also a stark contrast between Clinton's and Trump's too, making this the third straight presidential election where Trump is hiding things: "Dr. Bardack’s letter shows what a real letter of evaluation from an internist should look like, instead of the sloppy note from Donald Trump’s doctor, Harold Bornstein. In fact, that superficial note—dashed off in five minutes while Trump’s limo waited—was so filled with superlatives that it sounded like something Trump himself likely said. Trump’s results were “astonishingly excellent” and he would be the “healthiest individual ever elected.” Little substance, big bravado and YUGE ego." https://www.forbes.com/sites/judystone/2016/09/14/the-surprises-in-hillary-clintons-newly-released-medical-records/
srsly?
pReSiDeNt BiDeN iS a HeAlThY, aCtIvE, rObUsT 81-yEaR-oLd MaLe, WhO rEmAiNs FiT tO sUcCeSsFuLlY eXeCuTe ThE dUtIeS oF tHe PrEsIdEnCy, To InClUdE tHoSe As ChIeF eXeCuTiVe, HeAd Of StAtE aNd CoMmAnDeR iN cHiEf.
The entire report is six pages long, with an incredible amount of detail, and no amount of alternating between capital and lowercase letters is going to make you sound intelligent. Do better.
yes, it's incredibly detailed report full of meaningless data. who cares about biden's vit d levels when he's mentally impaired?
On October 17 2024 08:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Can anyone find/post the full interview between Fox News's Bret Baier and Kamala Harris?
On October 17 2024 08:30 Razyda wrote: The same people who were few months ago in "Ave Biden" camp, now complain about not having Trump medical records. The only explanations are either shamelessness, or having memory span of a drone ant.
There was also a stark contrast between Clinton's and Trump's too, making this the third straight presidential election where Trump is hiding things: "Dr. Bardack’s letter shows what a real letter of evaluation from an internist should look like, instead of the sloppy note from Donald Trump’s doctor, Harold Bornstein. In fact, that superficial note—dashed off in five minutes while Trump’s limo waited—was so filled with superlatives that it sounded like something Trump himself likely said. Trump’s results were “astonishingly excellent” and he would be the “healthiest individual ever elected.” Little substance, big bravado and YUGE ego." https://www.forbes.com/sites/judystone/2016/09/14/the-surprises-in-hillary-clintons-newly-released-medical-records/
srsly?
pReSiDeNt BiDeN iS a HeAlThY, aCtIvE, rObUsT 81-yEaR-oLd MaLe, WhO rEmAiNs FiT tO sUcCeSsFuLlY eXeCuTe ThE dUtIeS oF tHe PrEsIdEnCy, To InClUdE tHoSe As ChIeF eXeCuTiVe, HeAd Of StAtE aNd CoMmAnDeR iN cHiEf.
The entire report is six pages long, with an incredible amount of detail, and no amount of alternating between capital and lowercase letters is going to make you sound intelligent. Do better.
yes, it's incredibly detailed report full of meaningless data. who cares about biden's vit d levels when he's mentally impaired?
I think the main reason why she bombed so hard is because her campaign shortened the interview from 30 to 20min and she didnt have enough time to go into details because they had to go though a lot.
Still wild how she was this unprepared, the tone of the interview wasnt even that confrontational
Trump describes 6 January, 2021 - when some of his supporters stormed the Capitol after the former president's false claims that fraud prevented him from winning the election - as a "day of love".
He says hundreds of thousands of people travelled to Washington DC, where he called for peaceful protests.
"They didn't come because of me," Trump tells the Latino town hall event. "They came because of the election. They thought the election was a rigged election, and that's why they came."
He goes on to say: “Nothing done wrong at all. Nothing done wrong. And action was taken. Strong action."
Trump also says: "There were no guns down there, we didn't have guns, the others had guns, but we didn't have guns."
Trump attacks his vice-president from the time, Mike Pence, who refused to block certification of Biden's victory over Trump.
"The vice president, I disagree with him on what he did. I totally disagreed with him on what he did."
Trump describes 6 January, 2021 - when some of his supporters stormed the Capitol after the former president's false claims that fraud prevented him from winning the election - as a "day of love".
He says hundreds of thousands of people travelled to Washington DC, where he called for peaceful protests.
"They didn't come because of me," Trump tells the Latino town hall event. "They came because of the election. They thought the election was a rigged election, and that's why they came."
He goes on to say: “Nothing done wrong at all. Nothing done wrong. And action was taken. Strong action."
Trump also says: "There were no guns down there, we didn't have guns, the others had guns, but we didn't have guns."
Trump attacks his vice-president from the time, Mike Pence, who refused to block certification of Biden's victory over Trump.
"The vice president, I disagree with him on what he did. I totally disagreed with him on what he did."
Aw golly gee Donald I wonder what on Earth gave them that idea?!
On October 17 2024 16:01 zeo wrote: I think the main reason why she bombed so hard is because her campaign shortened the interview from 30 to 20min and she didnt have enough time to go into details because they had to go though a lot.
Still wild how she was this unprepared, the tone of the interview wasnt even that confrontational
Why do you think she bombed? I thought she did fine with an interviewer that kept trying to prevent her from answering any question. It's the Mehdi Hassan style of interview where you bombard the interviewee with questions but you don't really care about the answer: the questions are a masked lecture. She pivoted off of some fairly silly lines of questioning (as though jail surgeries were the most pressing issues) to get her own view points out and she pushed back on the Fox's sane-washing of Trump's 'enemy within' comments. (In fact, Fox news used a sound bite where they clipped out the part where Trump repeated his 'enemy within' comments to try and defend Trump. "Fair and Balanced", indeed.) I think it was a reasonable showing for her.
I thought she did fine too and I give her credit for even giving the interview. People need to realize how hard it is to even answer questions when you're trying to appeal to moderates but also not alienate the woke left. At best you should expect wordy non-answers followed by an "at least I'm not Trump" which is basically what we got. Baier was fishing for some kind of "basket of deplorables" line when repeatedly asking Kamala why so many support Trump and she was smart enough to dodge that.
I think the Drumpf thing is the original name and one of his ancestors changed it to Trump. It was first something that was pointed out as "funny" by comedians back in 2015, when he was first running for president and must have been co-opted now by hard-right outlets as a badge of pride. Sort of like the deplorables thing. It is a bit weird to be honest.
On October 17 2024 18:41 EnDeR_ wrote: I think the Drumpf thing is the original name and one of his ancestors changed it to Trump. It was first something that was pointed out as "funny" by comedians back in 2015, when he was first running for president and must have been co-opted now by hard-right outlets as a badge of pride. Sort of like the deplorables thing. It is a bit weird to be honest.
IIRC it was used as a stick to beat him with re his rhetoric on immigrants, maybe people have ironically co-opted it now or something?
On October 17 2024 18:41 EnDeR_ wrote: I think the Drumpf thing is the original name and one of his ancestors changed it to Trump. It was first something that was pointed out as "funny" by comedians back in 2015, when he was first running for president and must have been co-opted now by hard-right outlets as a badge of pride. Sort of like the deplorables thing. It is a bit weird to be honest.
IIRC it was used as a stick to beat him with re his rhetoric on immigrants, maybe people have ironically co-opted it now or something?
Yes, that's what I meant. Comedians seized on the fact that his family originally immigrated into the US to point out the irony.
On October 17 2024 18:41 EnDeR_ wrote: I think the Drumpf thing is the original name and one of his ancestors changed it to Trump. It was first something that was pointed out as "funny" by comedians back in 2015, when he was first running for president and must have been co-opted now by hard-right outlets as a badge of pride. Sort of like the deplorables thing. It is a bit weird to be honest.
IIRC it was used as a stick to beat him with re his rhetoric on immigrants, maybe people have ironically co-opted it now or something?
Yes, that's what I meant. Comedians seized on the fact that his family originally immigrated into the US to point out the irony.
I just watched the Fox News interview, and I think it went perfectly fine. The very beginning and the very end had some interruptions and combativeness between Kamala Harris and Bret Baier, but I think the middle 95% was a reasonably respectful back-and-forth.
Baier spent almost the entire first half of the interview on immigration and the border, as Harris has been weaker on those issues than others. I think Harris's responses were decent here; she's starting to get down the important talking points on these topics (her experience as a prosecutor of cartels, the bipartisan bill that Trump blew up, etc.).
I found it bizarre that Baier's second issue was about how Trump was putting out ads showing off Harris's support for trans-prisoners (as opposed to a more relevant issue, like the economy), but Harris deftly handled that by (1) pointing out she was just continuing to follow the same law that Trump followed, (2) asking if this topic is really going to affect the lives of most Americans, and (3) even had some time left over to mention some of her economic plans. Unsurprisingly, Baier never followed up and asked her to elaborate on her economic plans, because Harris has solid answers and Trump has none.
In the interview, Harris often contrasted herself with Trump. Sometimes, the comparisons were pivots that didn't quite address the question, sometimes the comparisons were absolutely justified, and sometimes the comparisons were even prompted by Baier. The only part I would call disingenuous by Baier was when they were discussing Trump in one particular way - how Trump attacks Americans with his rhetoric and threatens Americans who disagree with him - and rather than showing the clips that they were referring to, showed a clip of Trump simply denying them instead. That was pretty shady, but I think the rest was above board. I also think Baier did a better, fairer job than most other Fox News anchors would have done.
As a very open-ended question, how do some of you feel to live in a nation where Trump can conceivably win an election?
Some, probably not many in this particular thread are excited by the prospect. I assume most here, less so. But is the prospect something that genuinely depresses you and makes one question one’s fellow citizens, or something shit but ‘hey that’s democracy in action baby’
On October 17 2024 20:12 WombaT wrote: As a very open-ended question, how do some of you feel to live in a nation where Trump can conceivably win an election?
Some, probably not many in this particular thread are excited by the prospect. I assume most here, less so. But is the prospect something that genuinely depresses you and makes one question one’s fellow citizens, or something shit but ‘hey that’s democracy in action baby’
I could probably write several huge paragraphs as a response to your question, but for my sanity's sake I'm just going to summarize my perspective like this: It's genuinely depressing for me, both as a human being (because of the very real impact that Trump has on our country and our world) and as an educator (because so many Americans have been tricked by Trump).
I also don't think that the electoral college, gerrymandering, stealing ballot boxes, sending slates of fake electors, and trying to overturn fair elections could be accurately depicted as "democracy in action" - it is, in fact, the undermining of democracy in action - but I don't think that was the real point of your question.
Most in the thread probably don't actually live in the US which would fortunately make the result of a US election not their business and therefore any emotional burden unwarranted.
On October 17 2024 20:45 oBlade wrote: Most in the thread probably don't actually live in the US which would fortunately make the result of a US election not their business and therefore any emotional burden unwarranted.
While plenty of domestic policies probably wouldn't affect non-Americans, I think there's something to be said about America's foreign policy and military aid and relationships with allies and enemies and international organizations, so who the commander-in-chief of the world's largest military is can definitely tread into the business of other countries.
EPT![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/AZGiXda.jpeg)
