let me just preface this by saying
I like the implication that he's aware of what common sizes are for the breasts of fourteen year olds.
I think more third parties would be more advantageous. In a head to head, Trump has to get 50%+1. With third parties he doesn't. His base is solid; there'll be few defectors. Look at the primaries where he got like 95% in every state. Biden will lose more voters than Trump will.
Absolute mad lad this Joe feller, and a man of culture as well.
Remember, this is the man who on many occasions, would tell young women, "remember, no boys!" and, "no dating until you're 30!"
This is why expect it'll be Kamala Harris as his VP. She's the only choice that satisfies his woman pledge, appeases the part of his party demanding black representation and is also at least credible to step into the role immediately. Stacey Abrams, not so much. And apparently she's beginning to piss off the Biden people with her public campaign for VP.
Tulsi already destroyed Kamala Harris, plus she is from California. I would say has to be someone else.
The Dems have successfully convinced their base that Gabbard is a Russian operative who maliciously carried out a hit job on her. She's who they wanted in the first place. They have no qualms with forcing her in anyway and telling their base 'Who else you gonna vote for?' And it would work because Dem voters are sheep.
Well, was she or wasn't she? Why isn't the media asking the tough questions?
He doubtless meant 1) why settle for a boy, when you could have a MAN? and 2) he doesn't ask the age (ie "date", in the other sense) of women under 30, sort of a reverse of alcohol ID rules.
