Yes, I agree with all of this. My point was don't just automatically assume it's locked down.
Huh? The only people assuming anything were members of the Trump campaign.....
The Harris nomination most assuredly takes away Trump's gains with younger voters, as well as minorities (although Trump was not necessarily gaining those voters--Joe was losing them mostly due to the age factor)...it also sures up the dem base moreso than before.
If I had to bet, I'd say Harris would have a 3-4 point national lead heading into Labor Day weekend. Of course, the swing states will decide it, but the odds of Trump losing, I think, are significantly higher than they were the moment his convention ended.
Yes, I agree with all of this. My point was don't just automatically assume it's locked down.
"In a six-way hypothetical race that includes other candidates"
Poll Question: "4. If the election for president were being held today, and the candidates were Kamala Harris the Democrat, Donald Trump the Republican, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. running as an independent candidate, Cornel West running as an independent candidate, Jill Stein the Green Party candidate, and Chase Oliver the Libertarian Party candidate, for whom would you vote?"
I mean... what an awful polling question!
Probably more relevant, from the same poll. People have heard enough about tRump to know he's a terrible person & candidate.
Yes, I agree with all of this. My point was don't just automatically assume it's locked down.
Huh? The only people assuming anything were members of the Trump campaign.....
The Harris nomination most assuredly takes away Trump's gains with younger voters, as well as minorities (although Trump was not necessarily gaining those voters--Joe was losing them mostly due to the age factor)...it also sures up the dem base moreso than before.
If I had to bet, I'd say Harris would have a 3-4 point national lead heading into Labor Day weekend. Of course, the swing states will decide it, but the odds of Trump losing, I think, are significantly higher than they were the moment his convention ended.
The biggest change is now abortion. Abortion and women's rights are now the focus of the campaign when you have a woman on the top of the ticket, speaking about it every day with credibility. And don't you worry, Harris will speak about it daily.
And once Vance's remarks about abortion, divorce and abuse in a marriage become well known, well he will become more of a liability than the upside of juicing the base. Then we can talk about this stupid-ass quote:
The Democrats are talking about giving the vote to 16-year-olds,” Vance noted. “Let’s do this instead. Let’s give votes to all children in this country, but let’s give control over those votes to the parents of the children.” He continued, asking, “Doesn’t this mean that nonparents don’t have as much of a voice as parents? Doesn’t this mean that parents get a bigger say in how democracy functions?” He answered with a simple “yes” after saying “the Atlantic and the Washington Post and all the usual suspects” would criticize him.
Yeah abortion and Project 25. They need to hang that around tRump/Vance's necks until the election.
I think project 2025 only animates the D base. It's pretty esoteric to be honest. Abortion is real and we know it drives people to the polls. I wouldn't confuse the issues too much.
Yeah abortion and Project 25. They need to hang that around tRump/Vance's necks until the election.
I think project 2025 only animates the D base. It's pretty esoteric to be honest. Abortion is real and we know it drives people to the polls. I wouldn't confuse the issues too much.
Project 2025 = Authoritarianism - Something swing voters absolutely hate. Not abstract at all.
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; WF Center 10/21/13; WF Center 10/22/13; Baltimore 10/27/13; WF Center 4/28/16; WF Center 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; WF Center 9/7/24; WF Center 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
Yeah abortion and Project 25. They need to hang that around tRump/Vance's necks until the election.
I think project 2025 only animates the D base. It's pretty esoteric to be honest. Abortion is real and we know it drives people to the polls. I wouldn't confuse the issues too much.
Project 2025 is the future of America.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
You can bet that tRump's camp is wishing they had that Vance pick back. I bet they would go with Haley right now given the circumstances.
Interesting argument. Would she have taken it?
I bet she would; she's every bit as ambitious/ craven as Vance is. She would have been a far more palatable option, too, since her foreign policy views are reality-based, at least.
There are a small, vilified handful of Republicans that have stayed true to recognizing Trump for what he is. Haley, like most of them, always comes back to King Donny. I am sure she'd have taken it.
I'm not clear what the Biden decision would make the Trump camp wish they'd picked her instead of Vance though.
Good question. I'd guess: she's more physically appealing/ attractive than Vance is (that matters to T---p!); she's more qualified than Vance; having a woman on the ticket would allow them to point to their own party diversity/ pay lip service to understanding the needs of women. Again, I'm just guessing here.
With Harris as the supposed running mate, I was kind of expecting Trump to pick a woman...and at that point, I thought looks would come into play which (while I find it generally gross to objectify this way but it applies to him), is why I never thought for a second it would be Stafinik and figured on Haley, Tulski, or Noem.* I think Vance was more of the "party" pick than the Trump pick, though. I truly believe he was picked because he thought Pence should have found a way to certify for Trump and that he will not certify 2028 for a Democrat regardless of how the votes go.
*I wonder if the dog-shooting story cost her...
Vance was a Donnie Jr. pick.
It was between Rubio and Vance. Yeah Jr. wanted Vance but apparently the law that VP and President can’t reside in the same state played a big factor as well.
There’s no law that says the vp and pres have to be from different states. Although it makes zero political sense to pick someone from the same state.
You can bet that tRump's camp is wishing they had that Vance pick back. I bet they would go with Haley right now given the circumstances.
Interesting argument. Would she have taken it?
I bet she would; she's every bit as ambitious/ craven as Vance is. She would have been a far more palatable option, too, since her foreign policy views are reality-based, at least.
There are a small, vilified handful of Republicans that have stayed true to recognizing Trump for what he is. Haley, like most of them, always comes back to King Donny. I am sure she'd have taken it.
I'm not clear what the Biden decision would make the Trump camp wish they'd picked her instead of Vance though.
Good question. I'd guess: she's more physically appealing/ attractive than Vance is (that matters to T---p!); she's more qualified than Vance; having a woman on the ticket would allow them to point to their own party diversity/ pay lip service to understanding the needs of women. Again, I'm just guessing here.
With Harris as the supposed running mate, I was kind of expecting Trump to pick a woman...and at that point, I thought looks would come into play which (while I find it generally gross to objectify this way but it applies to him), is why I never thought for a second it would be Stafinik and figured on Haley, Tulski, or Noem.* I think Vance was more of the "party" pick than the Trump pick, though. I truly believe he was picked because he thought Pence should have found a way to certify for Trump and that he will not certify 2028 for a Democrat regardless of how the votes go.
*I wonder if the dog-shooting story cost her...
Vance was a Donnie Jr. pick.
It was between Rubio and Vance. Yeah Jr. wanted Vance but apparently the law that VP and President can’t reside in the same state played a big factor as well.
There’s no law that says the vp and pres have to be from different states. Although it makes zero political sense to pick someone from the same state.
It's a provision in the Constitution made before the 12A was ratified and the President and VP were on the same ballot. I agree that it would be a long shot, but in 2000 Cheney changed his address before the election from TX to WY just to be sure. Someone did raise that as a challenge and it was dismissed pretty quickly in court.
Yeah abortion and Project 25. They need to hang that around tRump/Vance's necks until the election.
I think project 2025 only animates the D base. It's pretty esoteric to be honest. Abortion is real and we know it drives people to the polls. I wouldn't confuse the issues too much.
Project 2025 is the future of America.
The document is a series of contradictions, stream of consciousness and right wing fever dreams. No chance.
You can bet that tRump's camp is wishing they had that Vance pick back. I bet they would go with Haley right now given the circumstances.
Interesting argument. Would she have taken it?
I bet she would; she's every bit as ambitious/ craven as Vance is. She would have been a far more palatable option, too, since her foreign policy views are reality-based, at least.
There are a small, vilified handful of Republicans that have stayed true to recognizing Trump for what he is. Haley, like most of them, always comes back to King Donny. I am sure she'd have taken it.
I'm not clear what the Biden decision would make the Trump camp wish they'd picked her instead of Vance though.
Good question. I'd guess: she's more physically appealing/ attractive than Vance is (that matters to T---p!); she's more qualified than Vance; having a woman on the ticket would allow them to point to their own party diversity/ pay lip service to understanding the needs of women. Again, I'm just guessing here.
With Harris as the supposed running mate, I was kind of expecting Trump to pick a woman...and at that point, I thought looks would come into play which (while I find it generally gross to objectify this way but it applies to him), is why I never thought for a second it would be Stafinik and figured on Haley, Tulski, or Noem.* I think Vance was more of the "party" pick than the Trump pick, though. I truly believe he was picked because he thought Pence should have found a way to certify for Trump and that he will not certify 2028 for a Democrat regardless of how the votes go.
*I wonder if the dog-shooting story cost her...
Vance was a Donnie Jr. pick.
It was between Rubio and Vance. Yeah Jr. wanted Vance but apparently the law that VP and President can’t reside in the same state played a big factor as well.
There’s no law that says the vp and pres have to be from different states. Although it makes zero political sense to pick someone from the same state.
It's a provision in the Constitution made before the 12A was ratified and the President and VP were on the same ballot. I agree that it would be a long shot, but in 2000 Cheney changed his address before the election from TX to WY just to be sure. Someone did raise that as a challenge and it was dismissed pretty quickly in court.
Got ya, my bad. I forgot about cheney doing that, great example bud.
Yeah abortion and Project 25. They need to hang that around tRump/Vance's necks until the election.
I think project 2025 only animates the D base. It's pretty esoteric to be honest. Abortion is real and we know it drives people to the polls. I wouldn't confuse the issues too much.
Project 2025 is the future of America.
The document is a series of contradictions, stream of consciousness and right wing fever dreams. No chance.
Something that has “no chance” doesn’t come with a link to submit your resume for consideration in a POOTWH executive branch. It’s not a “fever dream.”
Yeah abortion and Project 25. They need to hang that around tRump/Vance's necks until the election.
I think project 2025 only animates the D base. It's pretty esoteric to be honest. Abortion is real and we know it drives people to the polls. I wouldn't confuse the issues too much.
Project 2025 is the future of America.
The document is a series of contradictions, stream of consciousness and right wing fever dreams. No chance.
Something that has “no chance” doesn’t come with a link to submit your resume for consideration in a POOTWH executive branch. It’s not a “fever dream.”
Look, I like to argue things that are at, some level, empirically provable. This isn't one of them. So you guys may be worried about this project, I'm not. I'm more worried about NATO, Ukraine, choice and other more tangible issues. I'll not try to convince you not to worry about it. I think the D's can win on more concrete issue. Abortion is #1.
Yeah abortion and Project 25. They need to hang that around tRump/Vance's necks until the election.
I think project 2025 only animates the D base. It's pretty esoteric to be honest. Abortion is real and we know it drives people to the polls. I wouldn't confuse the issues too much.
Project 2025 is the future of America.
The document is a series of contradictions, stream of consciousness and right wing fever dreams. No chance.
Something that has “no chance” doesn’t come with a link to submit your resume for consideration in a POOTWH executive branch. It’s not a “fever dream.”
Look, I like to argue things that are at, some level, empirically provable. This isn't one of them. So you guys may be worried about this project, I'm not. I'm more worried about NATO, Ukraine, choice and other more tangible issues. I'll not try to convince you not to worry about it. I think the D's can win on more concrete issue. Abortion is #1.
All of those things that you care about, inclusive of your #1, are mentioned, along with what needs to happen, where and by who. They are telling you what they intend to do. Ignore it and them at your peril. It is detailed and specific and written by people who know what they’re talking about and what levers need to be pulled. A fever dream or wish list is bullet points and not tens of pages on a specific subject and office of government or staffing that deals with said subject.
People need to wake up. Or, just rely on the courts to ensure their rights aren’t trampled or Ukraine is handed over to Putin on the ritz. Choice is yours and you are yours.
Yeah abortion and Project 25. They need to hang that around tRump/Vance's necks until the election.
I think project 2025 only animates the D base. It's pretty esoteric to be honest. Abortion is real and we know it drives people to the polls. I wouldn't confuse the issues too much.
Project 2025 is the future of America.
The document is a series of contradictions, stream of consciousness and right wing fever dreams. No chance.
Something that has “no chance” doesn’t come with a link to submit your resume for consideration in a POOTWH executive branch. It’s not a “fever dream.”
Look, I like to argue things that are at, some level, empirically provable. This isn't one of them. So you guys may be worried about this project, I'm not. I'm more worried about NATO, Ukraine, choice and other more tangible issues. I'll not try to convince you not to worry about it. I think the D's can win on more concrete issue. Abortion is #1.
All of those things that you care about, inclusive of your #1, are mentioned, along with what needs to happen, where and by who. They are telling you what they intend to do. Ignore it and them at your peril. It is detailed and specific and written by people who know what they’re talking about and what levers need to be pulled. A fever dream or wish list is bullet points and not tens of pages on a specific subject and office of government or staffing that deals with said subject.
People need to wake up. Or, just rely on the courts to ensure their rights aren’t trampled or Ukraine is handed over to Putin on the ritz. Choice is yours and you are yours.
I know what they are saying. I'm saying it's nonsense, contradictory and generally a fever dream of things they could never pull off. And the reality is that it doesn't matter if I believe it or not, I'm voting against the candidate that would, in theory, implement it. And I can only vote against him once. So I can't super-vote against him even if I believed the strategy was likely.
Yeah abortion and Project 25. They need to hang that around tRump/Vance's necks until the election.
I think project 2025 only animates the D base. It's pretty esoteric to be honest. Abortion is real and we know it drives people to the polls. I wouldn't confuse the issues too much.
Project 2025 is the future of America.
The document is a series of contradictions, stream of consciousness and right wing fever dreams. No chance.
Something that has “no chance” doesn’t come with a link to submit your resume for consideration in a POOTWH executive branch. It’s not a “fever dream.”
Look, I like to argue things that are at, some level, empirically provable. This isn't one of them. So you guys may be worried about this project, I'm not. I'm more worried about NATO, Ukraine, choice and other more tangible issues. I'll not try to convince you not to worry about it. I think the D's can win on more concrete issue. Abortion is #1.
All of those things that you care about, inclusive of your #1, are mentioned, along with what needs to happen, where and by who. They are telling you what they intend to do. Ignore it and them at your peril. It is detailed and specific and written by people who know what they’re talking about and what levers need to be pulled. A fever dream or wish list is bullet points and not tens of pages on a specific subject and office of government or staffing that deals with said subject.
People need to wake up. Or, just rely on the courts to ensure their rights aren’t trampled or Ukraine is handed over to Putin on the ritz. Choice is yours and you are yours.
I know what they are saying. I'm saying it's nonsense, contradictory and generally a fever dream of things they could never pull off. And the reality is that it doesn't matter if I believe it or not, I'm voting against the candidate that would, in theory, implement it. And I can only vote against him once. So I can't super-vote against him even if I believed the strategy was likely.
They said Roe would never be overturned too....
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Yeah abortion and Project 25. They need to hang that around tRump/Vance's necks until the election.
I think project 2025 only animates the D base. It's pretty esoteric to be honest. Abortion is real and we know it drives people to the polls. I wouldn't confuse the issues too much.
Project 2025 is the future of America.
The document is a series of contradictions, stream of consciousness and right wing fever dreams. No chance.
Something that has “no chance” doesn’t come with a link to submit your resume for consideration in a POOTWH executive branch. It’s not a “fever dream.”
Look, I like to argue things that are at, some level, empirically provable. This isn't one of them. So you guys may be worried about this project, I'm not. I'm more worried about NATO, Ukraine, choice and other more tangible issues. I'll not try to convince you not to worry about it. I think the D's can win on more concrete issue. Abortion is #1.
All of those things that you care about, inclusive of your #1, are mentioned, along with what needs to happen, where and by who. They are telling you what they intend to do. Ignore it and them at your peril. It is detailed and specific and written by people who know what they’re talking about and what levers need to be pulled. A fever dream or wish list is bullet points and not tens of pages on a specific subject and office of government or staffing that deals with said subject.
People need to wake up. Or, just rely on the courts to ensure their rights aren’t trampled or Ukraine is handed over to Putin on the ritz. Choice is yours and you are yours.
I know what they are saying. I'm saying it's nonsense, contradictory and generally a fever dream of things they could never pull off. And the reality is that it doesn't matter if I believe it or not, I'm voting against the candidate that would, in theory, implement it. And I can only vote against him once. So I can't super-vote against him even if I believed the strategy was likely.
They said Roe would never be overturned too....
Who said that? That's pretty stupid, even without hindsight. And if that was the case, then why was the question about Roe such a litmus test during SCOTUS confirmations? Obviously the good senators thought it could be overturned because they asked about it. They didn't ask about Dred Scott because of the 14th or any other number of seminal cases.
The irony of it all is that I generally agree Roe was a bad ruling from the beginning. It was rooted in a strained reading of the 14A. I'm glad Roe was the precedent for 50 years and I wish it were today, but it was always a stretch.
Yeah abortion and Project 25. They need to hang that around tRump/Vance's necks until the election.
I think project 2025 only animates the D base. It's pretty esoteric to be honest. Abortion is real and we know it drives people to the polls. I wouldn't confuse the issues too much.
Project 2025 is the future of America.
The document is a series of contradictions, stream of consciousness and right wing fever dreams. No chance.
Something that has “no chance” doesn’t come with a link to submit your resume for consideration in a POOTWH executive branch. It’s not a “fever dream.”
Look, I like to argue things that are at, some level, empirically provable. This isn't one of them. So you guys may be worried about this project, I'm not. I'm more worried about NATO, Ukraine, choice and other more tangible issues. I'll not try to convince you not to worry about it. I think the D's can win on more concrete issue. Abortion is #1.
All of those things that you care about, inclusive of your #1, are mentioned, along with what needs to happen, where and by who. They are telling you what they intend to do. Ignore it and them at your peril. It is detailed and specific and written by people who know what they’re talking about and what levers need to be pulled. A fever dream or wish list is bullet points and not tens of pages on a specific subject and office of government or staffing that deals with said subject.
People need to wake up. Or, just rely on the courts to ensure their rights aren’t trampled or Ukraine is handed over to Putin on the ritz. Choice is yours and you are yours.
I know what they are saying. I'm saying it's nonsense, contradictory and generally a fever dream of things they could never pull off. And the reality is that it doesn't matter if I believe it or not, I'm voting against the candidate that would, in theory, implement it. And I can only vote against him once. So I can't super-vote against him even if I believed the strategy was likely.
They said Roe would never be overturned too....
Who said that? That's pretty stupid, even without hindsight. And if that was the case, then why was the question about Roe such a litmus test during SCOTUS confirmations? Obviously the good senators thought it could be overturned because they asked about it. They didn't ask about Dred Scott because of the 14th or any other number of seminal cases.
The irony of it all is that I generally agree Roe was a bad ruling from the beginning. It was rooted in a strained reading of the 14A. I'm glad Roe was the precedent for 50 years and I wish it were today, but it was always a stretch.
All three POOTWH SCOTUS nominees during their confirmation hearings. Do you accept that they lied when they testified that they believed Roe was settled law?
Regarding your one vote and not having a super vote and voting for the candidate who opposes Project 2025, it’s all well and good but to dismiss Project 2025 as a fever dream and unattainable is dangerous. The Heritage Foundation, which funded and lobbied for all three POOTWH SCOTUS appointees have studied and funded the analysis of went wrong in 2017-2021, and have laid the groundwork for the “next time.” You see it in the latest SCOTUS “official acts” ruling.
Ignoring the canary in the coal mine is how Hitler came to power and how democracy will die. It may not be POOTWH but Project 2025, its vision and its backers aren’t going away.
Yeah abortion and Project 25. They need to hang that around tRump/Vance's necks until the election.
I think project 2025 only animates the D base. It's pretty esoteric to be honest. Abortion is real and we know it drives people to the polls. I wouldn't confuse the issues too much.
Project 2025 is the future of America.
The document is a series of contradictions, stream of consciousness and right wing fever dreams. No chance.
Something that has “no chance” doesn’t come with a link to submit your resume for consideration in a POOTWH executive branch. It’s not a “fever dream.”
Look, I like to argue things that are at, some level, empirically provable. This isn't one of them. So you guys may be worried about this project, I'm not. I'm more worried about NATO, Ukraine, choice and other more tangible issues. I'll not try to convince you not to worry about it. I think the D's can win on more concrete issue. Abortion is #1.
All of those things that you care about, inclusive of your #1, are mentioned, along with what needs to happen, where and by who. They are telling you what they intend to do. Ignore it and them at your peril. It is detailed and specific and written by people who know what they’re talking about and what levers need to be pulled. A fever dream or wish list is bullet points and not tens of pages on a specific subject and office of government or staffing that deals with said subject.
People need to wake up. Or, just rely on the courts to ensure their rights aren’t trampled or Ukraine is handed over to Putin on the ritz. Choice is yours and you are yours.
I know what they are saying. I'm saying it's nonsense, contradictory and generally a fever dream of things they could never pull off. And the reality is that it doesn't matter if I believe it or not, I'm voting against the candidate that would, in theory, implement it. And I can only vote against him once. So I can't super-vote against him even if I believed the strategy was likely.
They said Roe would never be overturned too....
Who said that? That's pretty stupid, even without hindsight. And if that was the case, then why was the question about Roe such a litmus test during SCOTUS confirmations? Obviously the good senators thought it could be overturned because they asked about it. They didn't ask about Dred Scott because of the 14th or any other number of seminal cases.
The irony of it all is that I generally agree Roe was a bad ruling from the beginning. It was rooted in a strained reading of the 14A. I'm glad Roe was the precedent for 50 years and I wish it were today, but it was always a stretch.
All three POOTWH SCOTUS nominees during their confirmation hearings. Do you accept that they lied when they testified that they believed Roe was settled law?
Regarding your one vote and not having a super vote and voting for the candidate who opposes Project 2025, it’s all well and good but to dismiss Project 2025 as a fever dream and unattainable is dangerous. The Heritage Foundation, which funded and lobbied for all three POOTWH SCOTUS appointees have studied and funded the analysis of went wrong in 2017-2021, and have laid the groundwork for the “next time.” You see it in the latest SCOTUS “official acts” ruling.
Ignoring the canary in the coal mine is how Hitler came to power and how democracy will die. It may not be POOTWH but Project 2025, its vision and its backers aren’t going away.
No, they lied. I understand that. My point is that Roe was always in danger, that's why those questions were asked.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Yeah abortion and Project 25. They need to hang that around tRump/Vance's necks until the election.
I think project 2025 only animates the D base. It's pretty esoteric to be honest. Abortion is real and we know it drives people to the polls. I wouldn't confuse the issues too much.
Project 2025 is the future of America.
The document is a series of contradictions, stream of consciousness and right wing fever dreams. No chance.
Something that has “no chance” doesn’t come with a link to submit your resume for consideration in a POOTWH executive branch. It’s not a “fever dream.”
Look, I like to argue things that are at, some level, empirically provable. This isn't one of them. So you guys may be worried about this project, I'm not. I'm more worried about NATO, Ukraine, choice and other more tangible issues. I'll not try to convince you not to worry about it. I think the D's can win on more concrete issue. Abortion is #1.
All of those things that you care about, inclusive of your #1, are mentioned, along with what needs to happen, where and by who. They are telling you what they intend to do. Ignore it and them at your peril. It is detailed and specific and written by people who know what they’re talking about and what levers need to be pulled. A fever dream or wish list is bullet points and not tens of pages on a specific subject and office of government or staffing that deals with said subject.
People need to wake up. Or, just rely on the courts to ensure their rights aren’t trampled or Ukraine is handed over to Putin on the ritz. Choice is yours and you are yours.
I know what they are saying. I'm saying it's nonsense, contradictory and generally a fever dream of things they could never pull off. And the reality is that it doesn't matter if I believe it or not, I'm voting against the candidate that would, in theory, implement it. And I can only vote against him once. So I can't super-vote against him even if I believed the strategy was likely.
They said Roe would never be overturned too....
Who said that? That's pretty stupid, even without hindsight. And if that was the case, then why was the question about Roe such a litmus test during SCOTUS confirmations? Obviously the good senators thought it could be overturned because they asked about it. They didn't ask about Dred Scott because of the 14th or any other number of seminal cases.
The irony of it all is that I generally agree Roe was a bad ruling from the beginning. It was rooted in a strained reading of the 14A. I'm glad Roe was the precedent for 50 years and I wish it were today, but it was always a stretch.
All three POOTWH SCOTUS nominees during their confirmation hearings. Do you accept that they lied when they testified that they believed Roe was settled law?
Regarding your one vote and not having a super vote and voting for the candidate who opposes Project 2025, it’s all well and good but to dismiss Project 2025 as a fever dream and unattainable is dangerous. The Heritage Foundation, which funded and lobbied for all three POOTWH SCOTUS appointees have studied and funded the analysis of went wrong in 2017-2021, and have laid the groundwork for the “next time.” You see it in the latest SCOTUS “official acts” ruling.
Ignoring the canary in the coal mine is how Hitler came to power and how democracy will die. It may not be POOTWH but Project 2025, its vision and its backers aren’t going away.
No, they lied. I understand that. My point is that Roe was always in danger, that's why those questions were asked.
Any law is always in “danger” upon reaching SCOTUS and it’s common practice for the senate judiciary committee members to ask questions about existing laws, views, etc. The difference here is that all three POOTWH SCOTUS appointees lied under oath regarding Roe. All three were short listed by the Heritage Foundation. In effect, all three were “hired” by the conservatives who back Heritage to overturn Roe and they, the appointees, had no qualms with lying under oath to deliver for their benefactors.
Do you honestly believe this court, as currently appointed, won’t or wouldn’t go along with Project 2025 initiatives if and when challenged, particularly in light of the “official acts” ruling? Or that any future POOTWH or other con SCOTUS appointees wouldn’t lie under oath when asked how they might rule or what considerations they’d make if an EO was issued eliminating the department of education? Or if funds for said department were diverted to build a wall, effectively starving it into an inability to function?
Yeah abortion and Project 25. They need to hang that around tRump/Vance's necks until the election.
I think project 2025 only animates the D base. It's pretty esoteric to be honest. Abortion is real and we know it drives people to the polls. I wouldn't confuse the issues too much.
Project 2025 is the future of America.
The document is a series of contradictions, stream of consciousness and right wing fever dreams. No chance.
Something that has “no chance” doesn’t come with a link to submit your resume for consideration in a POOTWH executive branch. It’s not a “fever dream.”
Look, I like to argue things that are at, some level, empirically provable. This isn't one of them. So you guys may be worried about this project, I'm not. I'm more worried about NATO, Ukraine, choice and other more tangible issues. I'll not try to convince you not to worry about it. I think the D's can win on more concrete issue. Abortion is #1.
All of those things that you care about, inclusive of your #1, are mentioned, along with what needs to happen, where and by who. They are telling you what they intend to do. Ignore it and them at your peril. It is detailed and specific and written by people who know what they’re talking about and what levers need to be pulled. A fever dream or wish list is bullet points and not tens of pages on a specific subject and office of government or staffing that deals with said subject.
People need to wake up. Or, just rely on the courts to ensure their rights aren’t trampled or Ukraine is handed over to Putin on the ritz. Choice is yours and you are yours.
I know what they are saying. I'm saying it's nonsense, contradictory and generally a fever dream of things they could never pull off. And the reality is that it doesn't matter if I believe it or not, I'm voting against the candidate that would, in theory, implement it. And I can only vote against him once. So I can't super-vote against him even if I believed the strategy was likely.
They said Roe would never be overturned too....
Who said that? That's pretty stupid, even without hindsight. And if that was the case, then why was the question about Roe such a litmus test during SCOTUS confirmations? Obviously the good senators thought it could be overturned because they asked about it. They didn't ask about Dred Scott because of the 14th or any other number of seminal cases.
The irony of it all is that I generally agree Roe was a bad ruling from the beginning. It was rooted in a strained reading of the 14A. I'm glad Roe was the precedent for 50 years and I wish it were today, but it was always a stretch.
All three POOTWH SCOTUS nominees during their confirmation hearings. Do you accept that they lied when they testified that they believed Roe was settled law?
Regarding your one vote and not having a super vote and voting for the candidate who opposes Project 2025, it’s all well and good but to dismiss Project 2025 as a fever dream and unattainable is dangerous. The Heritage Foundation, which funded and lobbied for all three POOTWH SCOTUS appointees have studied and funded the analysis of went wrong in 2017-2021, and have laid the groundwork for the “next time.” You see it in the latest SCOTUS “official acts” ruling.
Ignoring the canary in the coal mine is how Hitler came to power and how democracy will die. It may not be POOTWH but Project 2025, its vision and its backers aren’t going away.
No, they lied. I understand that. My point is that Roe was always in danger, that's why those questions were asked.
Any law is always in “danger” upon reaching SCOTUS and it’s common practice for the senate judiciary committee members to ask questions about existing laws, views, etc. The difference here is that all three POOTWH SCOTUS appointees lied under oath regarding Roe. All three were short listed by the Heritage Foundation. In effect, all three were “hired” by the conservatives who back Heritage to overturn Roe and they, the appointees, had no qualms with lying under oath to deliver for their benefactors.
Do you honestly believe this court, as currently appointed, won’t or wouldn’t go along with Project 2025 initiatives if and when challenged, particularly in light of the “official acts” ruling? Or that any future POOTWH or other con SCOTUS appointees wouldn’t lie under oath when asked how they might rule or what considerations they’d make if an EO was issued eliminating the department of education? Or if funds for said department were diverted to build a wall, effectively starving it into an inability to function?
First, there was no case re: abortion in front of the court during any of the nominations. Second, I don't know what you're arguing with me about. I already said that they lied on the stand, as far as I'm concerned.
And you don't need Trump in the WH to institute much of the project 2025. It could be done at the state level easily.
Yeah abortion and Project 25. They need to hang that around tRump/Vance's necks until the election.
I think project 2025 only animates the D base. It's pretty esoteric to be honest. Abortion is real and we know it drives people to the polls. I wouldn't confuse the issues too much.
Project 2025 is the future of America.
The document is a series of contradictions, stream of consciousness and right wing fever dreams. No chance.
Something that has “no chance” doesn’t come with a link to submit your resume for consideration in a POOTWH executive branch. It’s not a “fever dream.”
Look, I like to argue things that are at, some level, empirically provable. This isn't one of them. So you guys may be worried about this project, I'm not. I'm more worried about NATO, Ukraine, choice and other more tangible issues. I'll not try to convince you not to worry about it. I think the D's can win on more concrete issue. Abortion is #1.
All of those things that you care about, inclusive of your #1, are mentioned, along with what needs to happen, where and by who. They are telling you what they intend to do. Ignore it and them at your peril. It is detailed and specific and written by people who know what they’re talking about and what levers need to be pulled. A fever dream or wish list is bullet points and not tens of pages on a specific subject and office of government or staffing that deals with said subject.
People need to wake up. Or, just rely on the courts to ensure their rights aren’t trampled or Ukraine is handed over to Putin on the ritz. Choice is yours and you are yours.
I know what they are saying. I'm saying it's nonsense, contradictory and generally a fever dream of things they could never pull off. And the reality is that it doesn't matter if I believe it or not, I'm voting against the candidate that would, in theory, implement it. And I can only vote against him once. So I can't super-vote against him even if I believed the strategy was likely.
They said Roe would never be overturned too....
Who said that? That's pretty stupid, even without hindsight. And if that was the case, then why was the question about Roe such a litmus test during SCOTUS confirmations? Obviously the good senators thought it could be overturned because they asked about it. They didn't ask about Dred Scott because of the 14th or any other number of seminal cases.
The irony of it all is that I generally agree Roe was a bad ruling from the beginning. It was rooted in a strained reading of the 14A. I'm glad Roe was the precedent for 50 years and I wish it were today, but it was always a stretch.
All three POOTWH SCOTUS nominees during their confirmation hearings. Do you accept that they lied when they testified that they believed Roe was settled law?
Regarding your one vote and not having a super vote and voting for the candidate who opposes Project 2025, it’s all well and good but to dismiss Project 2025 as a fever dream and unattainable is dangerous. The Heritage Foundation, which funded and lobbied for all three POOTWH SCOTUS appointees have studied and funded the analysis of went wrong in 2017-2021, and have laid the groundwork for the “next time.” You see it in the latest SCOTUS “official acts” ruling.
Ignoring the canary in the coal mine is how Hitler came to power and how democracy will die. It may not be POOTWH but Project 2025, its vision and its backers aren’t going away.
No, they lied. I understand that. My point is that Roe was always in danger, that's why those questions were asked.
Any law is always in “danger” upon reaching SCOTUS and it’s common practice for the senate judiciary committee members to ask questions about existing laws, views, etc. The difference here is that all three POOTWH SCOTUS appointees lied under oath regarding Roe. All three were short listed by the Heritage Foundation. In effect, all three were “hired” by the conservatives who back Heritage to overturn Roe and they, the appointees, had no qualms with lying under oath to deliver for their benefactors.
Do you honestly believe this court, as currently appointed, won’t or wouldn’t go along with Project 2025 initiatives if and when challenged, particularly in light of the “official acts” ruling? Or that any future POOTWH or other con SCOTUS appointees wouldn’t lie under oath when asked how they might rule or what considerations they’d make if an EO was issued eliminating the department of education? Or if funds for said department were diverted to build a wall, effectively starving it into an inability to function?
First, there was no case re: abortion in front of the court during any of the nominations. Second, I don't know what you're arguing with me about. I already said that they lied on the stand, as far as I'm concerned.
And you don't need Trump in the WH to institute much of the project 2025. It could be done at the state level easily.
I’m arguing that your spin of Project 2025 being a wish list and not to be concerned about it because of Ukraine, abortion and whatever else you mentioned as priorities is a naive approach to something that serious people with serious resources intend to implement in all seriousness. SCOTUS may not have had an abortion case before it at the time of the appointees hearings but there were certainly cases winding their way through the lower courts, hence the questions and concerns as it related to Roe.
How does Project 2025 implemented at the state level impact DOD, FBI, NSA, etc,, exactly? And more importantly, the power of the Executive Branch? C’mon man, I know you’re smarter than that.
Comments
The Harris nomination most assuredly takes away Trump's gains with younger voters, as well as minorities (although Trump was not necessarily gaining those voters--Joe was losing them mostly due to the age factor)...it also sures up the dem base moreso than before.
If I had to bet, I'd say Harris would have a 3-4 point national lead heading into Labor Day weekend. Of course, the swing states will decide it, but the odds of Trump losing, I think, are significantly higher than they were the moment his convention ended.
Yep, looooooong way to go.
Poll Question:
"4. If the election for president were being held today, and the candidates were Kamala Harris the Democrat, Donald Trump the Republican, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. running as an independent candidate, Cornel West running as an independent candidate, Jill Stein the Green Party candidate, and Chase Oliver the Libertarian Party candidate, for whom would you vote?"
I mean... what an awful polling question!
Probably more relevant, from the same poll. People have heard enough about tRump to know he's a terrible person & candidate.
And once Vance's remarks about abortion, divorce and abuse in a marriage become well known, well he will become more of a liability than the upside of juicing the base. Then we can talk about this stupid-ass quote:
The Democrats are talking about giving the vote to 16-year-olds,” Vance noted. “Let’s do this instead. Let’s give votes to all children in this country, but let’s give control over those votes to the parents of the children.” He continued, asking, “Doesn’t this mean that nonparents don’t have as much of a voice as parents? Doesn’t this mean that parents get a bigger say in how democracy functions?” He answered with a simple “yes” after saying “the Atlantic and the Washington Post and all the usual suspects” would criticize him.
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
WF Center 4/28/16; WF Center 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; WF Center 9/7/24; WF Center 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
AND..tRump has been running from it. All the more reason to make him own it. If he pushes too far away from it the religious psychos will sour
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
People need to wake up. Or, just rely on the courts to ensure their rights aren’t trampled or Ukraine is handed over to Putin on the ritz. Choice is yours and you are yours.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
The irony of it all is that I generally agree Roe was a bad ruling from the beginning. It was rooted in a strained reading of the 14A. I'm glad Roe was the precedent for 50 years and I wish it were today, but it was always a stretch.
Regarding your one vote and not having a super vote and voting for the candidate who opposes Project 2025, it’s all well and good but to dismiss Project 2025 as a fever dream and unattainable is dangerous. The Heritage Foundation, which funded and lobbied for all three POOTWH SCOTUS appointees have studied and funded the analysis of went wrong in 2017-2021, and have laid the groundwork for the “next time.” You see it in the latest SCOTUS “official acts” ruling.
Ignoring the canary in the coal mine is how Hitler came to power and how democracy will die. It may not be POOTWH but Project 2025, its vision and its backers aren’t going away.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Chicago 1 (August 20, 2016)
Chicago 2 (August 22, 2016)
Ft. Worth 1 (September 13, 2023)
Ft. Worth 2 (September 15, 2023)
Do you honestly believe this court, as currently appointed, won’t or wouldn’t go along with Project 2025 initiatives if and when challenged, particularly in light of the “official acts” ruling? Or that any future POOTWH or other con SCOTUS appointees wouldn’t lie under oath when asked how they might rule or what considerations they’d make if an EO was issued eliminating the department of education? Or if funds for said department were diverted to build a wall, effectively starving it into an inability to function?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
And you don't need Trump in the WH to institute much of the project 2025. It could be done at the state level easily.
How does Project 2025 implemented at the state level impact DOD, FBI, NSA, etc,, exactly? And more importantly, the power of the Executive Branch? C’mon man, I know you’re smarter than that.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©