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

 

[Harvey Danger]

I wish he'd push them more on the assasination attempt. Dems are not afraid to repeat Project 2025 or Jan 6th over and over, so just fight back like a Family Guy gag:

"Oh yeah! It's just like that time you guys tried to kill me and missed."

Fuck the details, refuse to explain anything, just put the headline out and keep pushing it. Best thing about it is that their attempts to discredit it always end up in some variant of "It wasnt an assasination attempt because he survived!"

This is the correct answer. I previously suggested in the Biden debate, he should wrinkle his nose and say "what smells?" A million fact checkers could never debunk it, every viewer would remember it, and Biden would never recover from the humiliation.

So find an immediate analog for Kamala. She has even less ability than Biden to talk her way out of such moments. Something like "the policies you oversaw are responsible for 2/3 of the inflation we see at the grocery store", or "you are still losing more staffers than you can hire!"

These are random attacks with a bit of truth and a bit of uncertainty, which requires detailed debunking that listeners won't bother sitting through. Kamala's team can give her talking points against the general attack, but against a unique specific attack those canned answers sound terrible.

Spoiler: general leftists

For the left in general, you need to focus on the effects their policies cause and accuse them of directly and intentionally causing them. Ignore all the reddit style screeching for SOURCE and PROOF, that's a trap to get you going in circles yelling citations at each other. Your citations are their words. Your source is the effect you are complaining about. The slippery slope is assumed, you don't need to prove it exists. Destroy their motte-and-bailey by accusing both positions of being the same thing. Again: your citations are their words.

But this is only the argumentation side of things. The real power comes from political and organizational confrontation--invading their little domains of local power. You organize against them by telling others about leftist effects, not their positions. Pound them on the damage their policies do, refuse to debate the "rightness" of their policies. Force through votes and action while everyone is focused on the effects and the damage.

For far too long, mainstream conservatism was obsessed with being intellectually correct. Even now they think you can't have a political positions until you get your FACTS and LOGIC in place, examined and approved by every right-winger, a winner in the marketplace of ideas. And while conservative debate club fiddled, the left burned down the things they were debating about.

It's time to settle for being instinctively correct, morally sound, and quick to action. Stamp out leftism, don't try for a compromise or a debate. There is little left to conserve and much evil to uproot. Every action should be taken in the direction of uprooting, not debating what you might want to conserve or not.

 

[tehpope]

Wasn't that one full of really bad pork? I don't think it would be the own she thinks it is.

Its not. This is the claim she's been using in ads and in her speech.

Andrew from Don't Walk Run covered this claim and there were several dems who voted for the bill too. And when a previous border security bill, hr2, was introduced, every dem voted against it.

 

[GettrGriftr]

Have you tried eating trash out of a garbage can, citizen?

Great. The government wants everyone to be Ethan Ralph.

I certainly feel inspired.

 

[Quence]

Quite clearly this is 100% US politics.

I’ve heard that liberal women are happily surprised when they take a chance and date conservative men. I suppose it has to do with them being mostly orbited by leftist men who - if they’re not gay - are soybois with a nauseating penchant for simping and cuckoldry. Even liberal women can’t escape their biology which makes them yearn for real men.

 

[The Ugly One]

That was the compromise, yes.

The right wanted it to be rare.
The left wanted it to be legal.
Both agreed it should be safe.

Then, once it was passed, the left broke the compromise. So why should the right allow "legal" to be on the table, if "rare" isn't? Remember, it's like 1.5% of abortions that aren't blatantly abortions of convenience, and they have since made insane pretzel logic legal decisions to make damned sure there's no way to restrict that in any way.

If you had told the right back in the day that over 95% of abortions were just women who got pregnant and decided it was too big of a pain in the ass to have a kid and being pregnant was making it hard for them to slut around, they would have NEVER, EVER, allowed the compromise. You would have seen shit like "abortions require a judge to sign off on it" or something similar to prevent -- or at least slow, since we're very obviously being culturally engineered into this degeneracy -- the modern "abortion trucks outside the DNC" situation we're in.

View attachment 6387145

There never was a compromise, and no bill was ever passed. The Supreme Court declared it had always been in the Constitution. There was nothing for the right to allow or disallow; the 1972 Court was liberal, full stop.

 

[XYZpdq Jr.]

Matt and Trey have more money than most people will see in several lifetimes.

iirc they've HAD more money, but piss through it constantly

 

[Seething Troon Collector]

I’ve heard that liberal women are happily surprised when they take a chance and date conservative men. I suppose it has to do with them being mostly orbited by leftist men who - if they’re not gay - are soybois with a nauseating penchant for simping and cuckoldry

I try to avoid sweeping generalizations because a lot of situations are fluid, but I'm reminded of something I saw...probably a year ago now.

It was a couple, I guess the woman's ex-boyfriend went insane and drove over to the new boyfriends house with a shotgun where they both were at the time. Instead of, you know, confronting this lunatic and shooting back, he convinced her to cower on the back porch and frantically call the police (beacuse they're definetly going to get there in the time it takes to break a couple of doors down), basically waiting for this guy to bust in and shoot them both. Luckily, either the police showed up and shot him, or he decided to an hero, I don't remember.

Really makes you think. You may have a point.

 

[Pampered Degenerate]

It seems like they’re going to try the evil white terrorist strategy just like whining about Charlottesville. Maybe we’ll get some extreme gun control with some 2 tier policing like the UK.

You probably won't get the gun control, at least not for the foreseeable future, but the two-tier policing has been happening for some time. The response to the 2020 race riots Summer of Love vs. the 2021 January 6th unguided tour of the White House insurrection being one of the starker examples, but it'd be easy to come up with a thousand more.

 

[Chop Top]

How are people on the Right supposed to co-exist with a faction who sole goal is their destruction, who will use any method possible and then turn around and get mad at the Right for fighting back?

The right has a lot of work to do on themselves before they can combat their enemies. Many of their enemies are internal.

The biggest problem the right has is that it operates under the liberal worldview. Every debate is built on the foundation of Enlightenment principles that have been proven false.

People aren’t blank slates. They aren’t all the same. They sure as hell aren’t equal.

What the right needs is to embrace postmodernism themselves. They do not offer anything new. They only say we must return to tradition. This is true, but irrelevant.

The right has ignored art, the humanities, and outsourced the responsibility of mythos to Christianity. Christianity also needs to adapt its message. Not in the way they are now where they essentially sell their soul to gain an audience, but in a real way.

For all the criticism you can give the Left, they paint a picture of a beautiful future. It’s unnatural, retarded, and gay, but it’s appealing to the sensibilities of young and naive people.

“We must study history” doesn’t resonate when the concept of history is attached to boring, half-hearted lectures in school and constant messaging that our ancestors were stupid and mean.

The right needs mythos and vision. Until they embrace that, we’re just going to time travel back a few decades until we’re right back where we started. Until there’s a compelling reason to head in the opposite direction, all the “right” will do is complain and sign tap about speed limits.

 

[AnotherPleb]

There never was a compromise, and no bill was ever passed. The Supreme Court declared it had always been in the Constitution. There was nothing for the right to allow or disallow; the 1972 Court was liberal, full stop.

And never forget that the right to privacy that ruling implied only extended to abortion as Wuflu showed. If it had extended to 'I'd rather not take this experimental shot and don't want to be persecuted for wanting to have some bodily autonomy' there might be a reason for men to support abortion, but we all saw how that played out.

 

[GettrGriftr]

It was a couple, I guess the woman's ex-boyfriend went insane and drove over to the new boyfriends house with a shotgun where they both were at the time. Instead of, you know, confronting this lunatic and shooting back, he convinced her to cower on the back porch and frantically call the police (beacuse they're definetly going to get there in the time it takes to break a couple of doors down), basically waiting for this guy to bust in and shoot them both. Luckily, either the police showed up and shot him, or he decided to an hero, I don't remember.

Lmao! Former anti-SJW turned Breadtube You Tuber and Vaush disciple Hunter Avellone. He has a short and mostly dead thread over in Grift Wars.

 

[Seething Troon Collector]

Lmao! Former anti-SJW turned Breadtube You Tuber and Vaush disciple Hunter Avellone. He has a short and mostly dead thread over in Grift Wars.

That’s the guy. He’s such a massive faggot that I couldn’t even remember his name. Thank you for reminding me.

Didn’t remember the part where she got shot because he was cowering being her like a pussy.

 

[HodgePodgeRogerDodger]

>people taking about mythos and history of the west

The good guys won every time, what are the odds? Good thing we’re all on the right side of history right?

 

[northstar747]

iirc they've HAD more money, but piss through it constantly

casa bonita

fucking stripers than marrying them but still fucking strippers

having mr garison be a stand in for trump doesnt work any more and i would say its spart of them to just take a pass

 

[Gorillion others]

beautiful future

It isn't "beautiful" in the genuine sense. The kind of future the left wants is when a guy asks a 12 year old girl to strip for him. In public. The girl not only does so, but with the support of her parents, does a twirk to seal the deal. All of it legal. By the laws of those who went to Epstein's. Why would she do this?

Why aren't people stopping this?

Because it's homophobic, transphobic, racist, ableist, ageist, pedophobic and everything in-between to do so, and you will celebrate it happening, or else.

 

[Vaclav]

Big if true. Tracks with the accounts of Kamala's leadership style.

 

[Hey Johnny Bravo]

I hope she's dumb enough to try to sneak a little sip or eight of booze to calm her nerves and we get 2 hours of her cackling and talking nonsense.

Like that time Rubio snuck a xanny in 2016?

(I don't actually know what this was, but it was weird.)

https://fixupx.com/FreeMattKim/status/1832279709083685053?t=keZ2DM5-ZvTLN4fmbkq6JQ&s=19

VPNs are useful.

Again...how do you treat with a group like this?

You [FEDPOST]. Quite simple, really.

After watching the whole scene hit retirement age I am convinced the only good, morally consistent punks were the contrarians with obvious oppositional defiance disorder.

I know some old punks who hate Trump, but they were always working class dudes and that makes sense. Watching the anti-authority punks shill for big government has been breathtaking.

 

[Drag-on Knight 91873]

Big if true. Tracks with the accounts of Kamala's leadership style.
View attachment 6392735

Is she wrong though? Her staff probably are incompetent. Sure, it's because she's an incompetent boss, but that's no excuse.

 

[clipartfan92]

Mentioning the debates...

Harris team worried she’ll be ‘handcuffed’ by debate rules set by Biden
Politico (archive.ph)
By Elena Schneider, Holly Otterbein, and Eli Stokols
2024-09-06 16:34:00GMT

Spoiler

Kamala Harris had planned to object, fact-check and directly question Donald Trump while he was speaking during their debate next week. But now, with rules just finalized to mute the candidates when their opponents speaks, campaign officials said Harris advisers are scrambling to rewrite their playbook.

Harris and her team — holed up in Pittsburgh for a multi-day debate camp — wanted unmuted microphones so that the vice president could lean on her prosecutorial background, confronting the former president in the same way she laced into some of Trump’s Supreme Court nominees and Cabinet members during Senate hearings.

Instead, four Harris campaign officials argued that she will be “handcuffed” by the rules, which were negotiated by President Joe Biden’s team earlier this summer.

“Trump’s worst moments in the debates are when he gets upset and snaps,” said an aide to Harris in her 2020 presidential campaign, granted anonymity to speak freely. “And they have neutered that.”

Some Democrats privately dismiss the Harris campaign’s frustration as largely gamesmanship and expectation-setting around Tuesday’s debate in Philadelphia. But others say the rule change and her limited experience in national general election debates and interviews since becoming her party’s nominee could affect Harris’ debate performance.

“She could get thrown off by [the muted mics], so putting [their frustration] about the mics out there, they’re preparing for that possibility,” said one national Democratic strategist, granted anonymity to speak candidly. “Or they’ve also got a set piece ready to go, where Harris could turn to the camera and say, ‘For those who can’t hear it, Donald Trump is trying to yell over me. How many of you have been in a meeting where you get talked over?’”

David Axelrod, who advised Barack Obama’s presidential campaigns, was one of several Democratic operatives who noted that Harris’ complaints about the muted microphones also could serve to “get into Trump’s head.”

“What the [Harris] team is saying is that Trump’s campaign does not trust him to control himself,” Axelrod said. “I don’t think Trump likes to be depicted as someone being handled, so I do think there’s an element of trying to psych-out their side, too.”

Trump senior adviser Jason Miller said the campaign is glad that Harris’ team has “finally accepted the already agreed-upon rules of the debate that they wrote in the first place,” adding, “Americans want to hear both candidates present their competing visions to the voters, unburdened by what has been. No notes, no sitting down, no advance copies of the questions.”

Even as the Harris campaign looks to reorient their candidate to debate rules agreed to when Biden was the nominee, there’s ongoing frustration among some of her aides that the vice president is inheriting them, according to one person familiar with the Harris team’s thinking. That’s because they view her as a stronger debater than Biden, whose debacle on stage in June ultimately led to his withdrawal from the race.

“It was a bad set of rules for someone who needed to be protected, who never should’ve been on the debate stage,” the national Democratic strategist added. “And now they’re stuck with it.”

In many ways, Harris has benefited from Biden’s political inheritance. Largely undefined herself, the vice president has mostly adopted the administration’s record and legislative achievements as her own. Anointed as the Democratic nominee in late July, she took over the president’s sprawling campaign, a turnkey operation that quickly adjusted to a new candidate, as did the organizers of last month’s convention in Chicago. But in the run-up to the debate next Tuesday, Harris’ team fought hard — publicly and privately — to change the muted microphones rule that Biden’s top aides demanded months ago.

Ultimately, to no avail.

Brian Fallon, Harris’ senior communications adviser who led the campaign’s negotiations with ABC News about the debate rules, informed the network in a letter on Wednesday that the vice president would begrudgingly accept the original rules including the muted microphones, which he said “fundamentally disadvantaged” the former prosecutor.

The rule, he wrote in a letter, “will serve to shield Donald Trump from direct exchanges with the Vice President. We suspect this is the primary reason for his campaign’s insistence on muted microphones.”

Although Trump himself said publicly he’d be fine with Harris’ request to keep the microphones unmuted for the entire debate, his team negotiating with ABC was adamant about keeping one candidate’s mic muted when the other is speaking, as was the case in the first debate between Biden and Trump.

“If I was [on] her campaign team, I would go to her, exactly like they probably did, and say, ‘Look, these rules suck. But in the end, the country wants a debate. Let’s give them a debate,’” said Jim Messina, Obama’s 2012 campaign manager, who also noted that the Harris campaign wants “Trump to show up,” so “when he threatened to not do this, I think they believed him.”

But some Democrats think the muted microphones won’t have much of an impact on the debate.

Democratic strategist James Carville said that the rules mean that, while Harris won’t be able to interrupt Trump, he also won’t be able to needle her while she’s speaking. Overall, he said, his expectations for Harris are high.

“He won’t be able to do his shenanigans either,” he said. “So it seems kind of like a wash to me.”

Another person who is close to Harris, who was granted anonymity to speak freely, said that any outbursts by Trump will still hurt him: “I think you’ll still hear him in the background whining.”

Earlier this summer, Harris had already begun to prepare for what was an expected vice presidential debate, before Biden withdrew from the race. But the stakes are now dramatically higher for Harris, who has surged in public and private polling but is still lesser-known to many voters.

Karen Dunn, an attorney who coached Harris ahead of her 2020 debate, and Rohini Kosoglu, her longtime policy expert and former Senate chief of staff, are co-leading the vice president’s debate preparations. She’ll also be joined by several other top advisers and aides.

Several Democrats said that since Harris is known for meticulously preparing, sometimes over-preparing, for major events, “I’d expect they’re structuring these sessions so she doesn’t get stuck in the weeds or the minutiae of an issue,” said Karen Finney, a former top aide to Hillary Clinton.

“The mock debates are a way to cut that out, practicing what it really means to have just two minutes to talk about something,” she said.

Harris is expected to participate in several 90-minute mock debates over the next several days. Philippe Reines, a former Clinton aide, will reprise his role as Trump in those practice sessions. Harris will also take breaks for off-the-record campaign stops in Pennsylvania over the weekend, said one person familiar with the vice president’s schedule.

 

[Ukraine is Big Gay]

Doesn't that just all but confirm she isn't even as """capable""" as Biden for not even accepting terms he fucking set up?