US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians

Status
Not open for further replies.
BidenGIF.gif
 
Last edited:
With the possibility of a diesel shortage, which will further cripple the US, I'm a bit surprised peaceful protests have not sprung up at Biden's Delaware residence or wherever he's in public. While some may be afraid of a corrupt DOJ hunting them down, others may reach the point where they have nothing left to lose and will exercise their 1st Amendment right to protest.
I'm acquainted with members of right wing groups and they're too busy accusing every other group and everyone in their own group of being feds, scared of running afoul of the DoJ, and scared of getting someone else arrested if they don't care about themselves to do anything.
J6 was a raving success for the government.
 
I'm acquainted with members of right wing groups and they're too busy accusing every other group and everyone in their own group of being feds, scared of running afoul of the DoJ, and scared of getting someone else arrested if they don't care about themselves to do anything.
J6 was a raving success for the government.
To be fair, if memory serves the IRA's top brass I think only 1 or 2 of them weren't informants.
 
With the possibility of a diesel shortage, which will further cripple the US, I'm a bit surprised peaceful protests have not sprung up at Biden's Delaware residence or wherever he's in public. While some may be afraid of a corrupt DOJ hunting them down, others may reach the point where they have nothing left to lose and will exercise their 1st Amendment right to protest.
With the midterms looking very spicy, I'd say give them about a month or two for civil unrest to get really rolling.
 
When Kamala stopped in Milwaukee back in September, support for every down-ballot Democrat dropped 5 full fucking points. It's to the point we have seriously tried to think of a way to invite her to other places to be seen.
It's pretty amusing that she is apparently that poisonous. That's impressive. Could you imagine what would happen if she became president? Speaking of which, what exactly is the Democrats' plan for the Presidency? Are they just hoping Biden can finish his term and have someone else replace him?
 
-Kamala- though.

When Kamala stopped in Milwaukee back in September, support for every down-ballot Democrat dropped 5 full fucking points. It's to the point we have seriously tried to think of a way to invite her to other places to be seen.
Ask and it shall be given unto you.
 
Ask and it shall be given unto you.
Hahahaha. They're bringing out Kamala and Hillary? Imagine being in the same room as those three. Even just a few months ago the thought of the VP and the Clintons being trotted out to make sure Zeldin doesn't become governor would've been laughable.
 
Ask and it shall be given unto you.
Why would you -ever- bring Kamala into a tight race? There is a single point difference between the two candidates there, even if Kamala has -half- the effect she had in Milwaukee it nudges it over towards the Republican.
 
Why would you -ever- bring Kamala into a tight race? There is a single point difference between the two candidates there, even if Kamala has -half- the effect she had in Milwaukee it nudges it over towards the Republican.
It's as if they're trying to lose on purpose.
 
View attachment 3776844

View attachment 3776848
This bothers me. It bothers me a lot.

I mean maybe he's just fucking with everybody to keep em guessing but.. man I really hope you didn't do any black magic dude.
Looks like a Halloween costume, so I doubt it's real Satan worship.

It also looks kinda cheap, like Rings of Power cheap.

He should've just played into the billionaire playboy Halloween costume of Iron Man or Batman.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Vyse Inglebard
>presidency so fucking awful that NY is a tossup
>parade around said president
I reiterate my earlier post, I have no clue what the DNC is thinking. This must be what complete panic looks like.
You know, the old adage "panic kills more people than the actual situations do" is true but I never thought it applied to an entire political party's death by irrelevance.

Though, I guess the Brexit thing showed that with Carl Benjamin being brought into UKIP. Though I'm still unsure if that was panic or just a really, really dumb marketing/campaign ploy.
 
It's as if they're trying to lose on purpose.
They aren't, that's the thing. Though thinking through it I think I can see why they are doing this as a hail mary.

For the Democrats, having to rig New York would be worse than outright losing it. It is -the- stronghold for them. California is largely Prog Central but New York is their home, their base, and their center of power. From it they control the party and their control of it provides a massive out-sized influence over global politics through finance.

So, losing it is bad. But why would rigging it be worse? Surely losing it must be, right? Well...

Let's say you have a leaky roof, you heavily suspect the whole thing could cave anytime. But replacing it would cost a lot and while you could technically do it, it would strain your finances -hard-. So instead you do a constant series of small repairs to keep it all from collapsing. After ten years, you look back and realize you have been paying 1,500 in repairs every year, and the cost of replacing it would have been 10,000. You now realize you are in the hole an extra 5,000 you'd not have been if you had just replaced it.

That is New York now, it is standing perilously close to being their leaky roof. If they have to rig it now, they have to rig it in -every future election-. And Because of the sheer size of new york, that is going to cost, and it is going to cost every time. If they lose it they take a big hit but it is a -single- big hit. If it moves within the realm of winnable only by fraud then it is likely to stay there... and cost them again, and again, and again.

So bringing on Kamala is a hail mary, a desperate attempt to move the election into their field so there is no risk at all of them having to rig it. Likely banking and hoping the Progs come out for her due to skin color.
 
I see the MAGA-oriented Republicans taking over the party by the end of this decade.
There really is no other path I can think of for the Republican party to take, the current heads of the R party are dullard dinos and the most passionate Republicans are MAGA. If the Republican party doesn't get stampeded by MAGA, then they'll get stampeded by the Democrat party, they're too complacent and out of touch to remain the way they are.
 
They aren't, that's the thing. Though thinking through it I think I can see why they are doing this as a hail mary.

For the Democrats, having to rig New York would be worse than outright losing it. It is -the- stronghold for them. California is largely Prog Central but New York is their home, their base, and their center of power. From it they control the party and their control of it provides a massive out-sized influence over global politics through finance.

So, losing it is bad. But why would rigging it be worse? Surely losing it must be, right? Well...

Let's say you have a leaky roof, you heavily suspect the whole thing could cave anytime. But replacing it would cost a lot and while you could technically do it, it would strain your finances -hard-. So instead you do a constant series of small repairs to keep it all from collapsing. After ten years, you look back and realize you have been paying 1,500 in repairs every year, and the cost of replacing it would have been 10,000. You now realize you are in the hole an extra 5,000 you'd not have been if you had just replaced it.

That is New York now, it is standing perilously close to being their leaky roof. If they have to rig it now, they have to rig it in -every future election-. And Because of the sheer size of new york, that is going to cost, and it is going to cost every time. If they lose it they take a big hit but it is a -single- big hit. If it moves within the realm of winnable only by fraud then it is likely to stay there... and cost them again, and again, and again.

So bringing on Kamala is a hail mary, a desperate attempt to move the election into their field so there is no risk at all of them having to rig it. Likely banking and hoping the Progs come out for her due to skin color.
All the more reason to force the issue.

Outplaying someone isn’t just about predicting their moves and nullifying them. It’s entirely worthwhile, and often much cheaper, to frustrate the everloving fuck out of your opponent so that they start making unforced, exploitable errors. Doubly so when said opponent is deeply delusional like they seem to be.
 
Last edited:
They got al capone on his taxes. Basically, they can't find anything on Trump (or, at least, nothing that they media-political class can understand, because they don't operate anywhere near the mafia-ridden world of New York property manipulation), so they're trying to get him on a technicality instead. It's a revenge play, nothing more.
That's kind of the issue though. The man came out of that mafia-ridden world smelling like roses. If there was something, anything, the DoJ in the Southern Department of New York (SDNY) would have nailed him instead of everyone quitting after years of fruitlessness.
To be fair, if memory serves the IRA's top brass I think only 1 or 2 of them weren't informants.
IIRC even the very top man of the IRA was working for MI5. The whole thing was a farce.
 
Why would you -ever- bring Kamala into a tight race? There is a single point difference between the two candidates there, even if Kamala has -half- the effect she had in Milwaukee it nudges it over towards the Republican.
Harris is a very interesting opportunity because she's just so bad and yet she has full establishment support. The Twitterati love her and whoever inevitably takes her out is going to be branded a bigot by the radical left latte crowd.

It seems like it might be beneficial for each of us to start a Kamala Harris fan account
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back