__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
I'm not convinced that Trump isn't losing some wishy washy voters of his own, the I never voted before Trump crowd, mostly in the rust belt.
He isn't exactly putting forward any life altering vision, fake or not, for the working class this time around, like he did in 2016. Nafta, TPP, China, bringing back manufacturing jobs, coal, better cheaper healthcare, revitalizing the military, immigration, the wall ect.
His campaign is essentially more of the same with nothing on his populist agenda, no real wall progress, sweet FA on healthcare, and none of the rhetoric around the working class. All he has from the above are a few items on the trade agenda that everyone knew is superficial, or can't see tangible results in their own lives. Add that to the pandemic boat anchor and I think he's bleeding more support than Biden is from the left.
That's a good point. He's replaced the "I'm going to stop the Mexicans and other foreigners from stealing your jobs" talk with plain old racism against Americans.
The Following User Says Thank You to nfotiu For This Useful Post:
Just to remind you of red America, my Aunt was arguing with my mom and among my aunts talking points were that Trump has give more to farmers than anyone ever (our family is from small town Illinois), that he has brought peace to the middle east, and that Biden wants to make us all socialists. She also asked my mom to name anything bad about Trump aside from his abrasiveness. (essentially actual policy critiques)
I gave my mom some response talking points and explained why I felt my aunt was full of s%&t, but just wanted you guys to know, Trumpers are sticking with him.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
This individual is not affluent and more of a member of that shrinking middle class. It is likely the individual does not have a high paying job, is limited on benefits, and has to make due with those benefits provided by employer.
They are never going to come out against white supremacist and hate groups because those kinds of people vote for them. They should be ashamed that's the case, but their priority solely lies in power.
__________________ "It's a great day for hockey."
-'Badger' Bob Johnson (1931-1991)
"I see as much misery out of them moving to justify theirselves as them that set out to do harm." -Dr. Amos "Doc" Cochran
Honestly, I think that muting the mic would be red meat for the "liberal censorship" "cancel culture" crowd. It would embolden the "freedom of speech" types.
Honestly, I think that muting the mic would be red meat for the "liberal censorship" "cancel culture" crowd. It would embolden the "freedom of speech" types.
Give each contestant a mute button that mutes the other!
Honestly, I think that muting the mic would be red meat for the "liberal censorship" "cancel culture" crowd. It would embolden the "freedom of speech" types.
Each person gets two minutes. The other candidate’s mic is off during that time.
During the 30 second response, the other mic is off.
Go back and forth twice, the onto the next topic.
I think this should be the case in all political debates. You get your time. Speak your peace.
Then shut the #### up.
Let the other person talk, they have just as much right to their time as you do to yours.
It might go a long way to restoring civility if people actually saw it in action.
There used to be a word for that. Leadership, I think it was.
__________________ ”All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you.”
Rowan Roy W-M - February 15, 2024
The Following User Says Thank You to GreenLantern2814 For This Useful Post:
Honestly, I think that muting the mic would be red meat for the "liberal censorship" "cancel culture" crowd. It would embolden the "freedom of speech" types.
They're basically terrorists. They use their hurt feelings as a weapon. You can't acquiesce to them just because they'll throw a tantrum if you don't. If a mute button is needed to shut that fat ###### up, it's not even a question. Just do it and let them complain.
"The Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis of the Department of Homeland Security shall, in coordination with appropriate Federal partners, develop a terrorism threat assessment and reference aid regarding threats to the United States associated with foreign violent white supremacist extremist organizations."
This is not a new bill either. This has been working through the process since January 30, 2020. So this was not a "gotcha" bill like some are likely to portray.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Lanny_McDonald For This Useful Post:
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
