No Republican knows that oil production under Biden is higher than ever. But Jill Stein’s people do. … Stein is furious about the oil drilling. The college kids are furious about it. The more exposure these [third-party candidates] get, the better it is for us.
...
This saga captures something essential about how MAGA-world fights the information wars. You’ll note that Bannon is not even slightly troubled by the idea that telling the truth about Biden’s record to one set of voters—left-leaning, green-minded ones—might contradict one of Trump’s most frequent lies to countless others.
Liar, liar, pants on fire.
Re: Trump vs. Biden Part 2
Posted: Thu Apr 11, 2024 11:04 am
by Caribbean Hen
don’t pretend like anybody in the Biden ministration actually likes him either … they even had to get rid of the dog because it kept snarling and biting Joe Bozo.
In fact, you might be the only dog that actually likes that old perv
Re: Trump vs. Biden Part 2
Posted: Fri Apr 12, 2024 8:05 am
by kalm
We have two presidents right now, both setting policy on things like funding for UKR, the border, abortion. I don’t think this what the founders envisioned.
Re: Trump vs. Biden Part 2
Posted: Fri Apr 12, 2024 10:06 am
by GannonFan
kalm wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 8:05 am
We have two presidents right now, both setting policy on things like funding for UKR, the border, abortion. I don’t think this what the founders envisioned.
Eh, it's not that crazy nor unprecedented, even for the Founders. The whole Quasi-War with France, with the XYZ Affair leading up to, was an example of both parties, through their leaders, trying to dictate policy in opposite directions. And that included Adams, Jefferson, Hamilton, and a host of other Founders. We got through that without losing the country. We've probably had more mediocre Presidents than good ones, so we'll survive this Trump/Biden dip in Presidential quality. They're both clearly on limited time.
Adding on to this, the more I thought of it, we've been in a weird era of ex-Presidents standing apart from current politics, at least as compared to prior times. People have made a stink of someone like Obama still being involved in politics at a pretty active level, as opposed to the examples of other Presidents recently, like both Bush's, Clinton, etc, who backed away from an active role in politics when they left office. But there have been plenty of examples of Presidents in the past who still had considerable political influence after they left office - Teddy Roosevelt comes to mind as one.
kalm wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 8:05 am
We have two presidents right now, both setting policy on things like funding for UKR, the border, abortion. I don’t think this what the founders envisioned.
Eh, it's not that crazy nor unprecedented, even for the Founders. The whole Quasi-War with France, with the XYZ Affair leading up to, was an example of both parties, through their leaders, trying to dictate policy in opposite directions. And that included Adams, Jefferson, Hamilton, and a host of other Founders. We got through that without losing the country. We've probably had more mediocre Presidents than good ones, so we'll survive this Trump/Biden dip in Presidential quality. They're both clearly on limited time.
Adding on to this, the more I thought of it, we've been in a weird era of ex-Presidents standing apart from current politics, at least as compared to prior times. People have made a stink of someone like Obama still being involved in politics at a pretty active level, as opposed to the examples of other Presidents recently, like both Bush's, Clinton, etc, who backed away from an active role in politics when they left office. But there have been plenty of examples of Presidents in the past who still had considerable political influence after they left office - Teddy Roosevelt comes to mind as one.
Ganny brings Teddy Roosevelt into the conversation. Will kalm be able to respond?
The sheer number of Trump officials − a minimum of 16 − speaking out against their former boss, and the severity of their criticism, is highly unusual. It has no historical precedent in the last century, according to three presidential historians and a political scientist interviewed by USA TODAY.
“I don’t think we’ve seen anything like this, certainly not in the last 100 years,” said Lindsay Chervinsky, a senior fellow at the Center for Presidential History at Southern Methodist University.
How do the MAQA yahoos justify/defend/deflect/dismiss this?
"This has not been something anybody has ever dealt with. … [The GOP Secretaries] just cooked it up. No, this has never happened before," Elaine Kamarck, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a member of the Democratic National Committee, said.
...
"These deadlines don't exist for partisan reasons. ... But it is kind of partisan this year," he told ABC News.
"You have to go all the way back to 1964 to find a state that kept a major party presidential candidate off the ballot, and that had nothing to do with deadlines. … There's never ever since been a major party candidate who was off the ballot in any state," Winger added.
...
Historically, in both Ohio and Alabama -- and across a handful of other states -- provisional ballot access certification has been granted to nominees of both major parties if they weren't able to square their convention dates with state election code certification deadlines.
Ahead of the 2020 general election, Oklahoma, Illinois, Washington and Montana accepted provisional certifications from the DNC and the Republican National Committee. Alabama also accepted a provisional certification from Republicans that year in order to make Trump and Pence qualify.
In 2020, the Alabama legislature moved their certification deadline for that election only to Aug. 20, 2020, but that was still ahead of the Republican convention's end a week later. The RNC then submitted a provisional certification, which was accepted by the state.
Good read, especially for anyone who wants to argue that Alabama and Ohio possibly leaving biden off the 2024 ballot would be normal, reasonable and oh so different from what Colorado and Maine attempted.
The sheer number of Trump officials − a minimum of 16 − speaking out against their former boss, and the severity of their criticism, is highly unusual. It has no historical precedent in the last century, according to three presidential historians and a political scientist interviewed by USA TODAY.
“I don’t think we’ve seen anything like this, certainly not in the last 100 years,” said Lindsay Chervinsky, a senior fellow at the Center for Presidential History at Southern Methodist University.
How do the MAQA yahoos justify/defend/deflect/dismiss this?
Easy
Let’s see the internal poll on the former Joey idol… wouldn’t be pretty at all
kalm wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 8:05 am
We have two presidents right now, both setting policy on things like funding for UKR, the border, abortion. I don’t think this what the founders envisioned.
Eh, it's not that crazy nor unprecedented, even for the Founders. The whole Quasi-War with France, with the XYZ Affair leading up to, was an example of both parties, through their leaders, trying to dictate policy in opposite directions. And that included Adams, Jefferson, Hamilton, and a host of other Founders. We got through that without losing the country. We've probably had more mediocre Presidents than good ones, so we'll survive this Trump/Biden dip in Presidential quality. They're both clearly on limited time.
Adding on to this, the more I thought of it, we've been in a weird era of ex-Presidents standing apart from current politics, at least as compared to prior times. People have made a stink of someone like Obama still being involved in politics at a pretty active level, as opposed to the examples of other Presidents recently, like both Bush's, Clinton, etc, who backed away from an active role in politics when they left office. But there have been plenty of examples of Presidents in the past who still had considerable political influence after they left office - Teddy Roosevelt comes to mind as one.
Regardless, it’s still not what they intended. Withholding military aid, border security, etc, because Marj Greene can threaten the speakership on behalf of a cult leader does not need to be normalized.
No Republican knows that oil production under Biden is higher than ever. But Jill Stein’s people do. … Stein is furious about the oil drilling. The college kids are furious about it. The more exposure these [third-party candidates] get, the better it is for us.
...
This saga captures something essential about how MAGA-world fights the information wars. You’ll note that Bannon is not even slightly troubled by the idea that telling the truth about Biden’s record to one set of voters—left-leaning, green-minded ones—might contradict one of Trump’s most frequent lies to countless others.
BDKJMU wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 9:34 pm
So that means Biden was lying…
They both lie but you seem to think biden's lies are a big deal but trump's aren't.
And supporters from either seem to not care. Surface level talking points “facts”. Biden supporters don’t want to believe he lies, Trump supporters simply don’t care.
Regardless, gas prices will likely shoot through the roof this year as the Saudi’s and Russians really want a Trump win.
They both lie but you seem to think biden's lies are a big deal but trump's aren't.
And supporters from either seem to not care. Surface level talking points “facts”. Biden supporters don’t want to believe he lies, Trump supporters simply don’t care.
Regardless, gas prices will likely shoot through the roof this year as the Saudi’s and Russians really want a Trump win.
Newsflash: Gas prices almost always rise late Spring, and fall during the Fall.
And supporters from either seem to not care. Surface level talking points “facts”. Biden supporters don’t want to believe he lies, Trump supporters simply don’t care.
Regardless, gas prices will likely shoot through the roof this year as the Saudi’s and Russians really want a Trump win.
Newsflash: Gas prices almost always rise late Spring, and fall during the Fall.
So you’re saying the Russians and Saudis won’t or already haven’t cut production? Or that it has nothing to do with politics?
How do the MAQA yahoos justify/defend/deflect/dismiss this?
Easy
Let’s see the internal poll on the former Joey idol… wouldn’t be pretty at all
Play that other song you know.
Re: Trump vs. Biden Part 2
Posted: Wed Apr 17, 2024 8:32 am
by kalm
Trump’s finest give him a needed shot in the arm. Here’s one example …
Donald Trump tried to overturn the 2020 presidential election, was recently found liable for sexual assault, and has been charged with 88 felonies. Trump is currently spending four days a week at the Manhattan Criminal Courthouse. And yet, there are still a lot of rich people who choose to spend massive sums of money to help Trump become the next president.
Trump's biggest supporters are directing their largess to a newly-formed joint fundraising committee called Trump 47. The new committee can accept donations in excess of $800,000. The first $6,600 goes to Trump's campaign, the next $5,000 goes to Trump's Save America PAC (which has been paying Trump's legal bills), the next $413,000 goes to the Republican National Committee, and the remaining amount is distributed to the local Republican Party in 39 states. The state Republican Parties often send the money right back to the national party, sometimes on the same day. Almost all of the money will be used to benefit Trump. (Biden uses a similar joint fundraising vehicle, the Biden Victory Fund, to facilitate large donations.)
On Monday, the Trump 47 committee filed its first report with the FEC. The filing revealed 20 people have donated $800,000 or more. Popular Information profiled nine of the most notable donors.
Jose "Pepe" Fanjul: $814,600
Jose Fanjul on May 14, 2008, in New York City. (PAUL PORTER/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images)
Jose Fanjul and his family own a sugar harvesting and refining empire, including a majority stake in Domino Sugar. Since the 1980s, the sugar industry has enjoyed billions of dollars in annual subsidies from the federal government, which guarantees high prices for domestic sugar. This makes sugar farming much more profitable than other kinds of farming and forces American consumers to spend twice as much for sugar compared to other countries. Fanjul is a prolific donor to Republican causes to preserve these subsidies. His brother, known as Alfy, focuses on influencing Democrats.
In November 2022, a subsidiary owned by the Fanjul brothers in the Dominican Republic, Central Roma, was banned from importing sugar after the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) found evidence of "the use of forced labor in its operations." In its investigation of Central Roma, the CBP found indications that the company engages in "abuse of vulnerability, isolation, withholding of wages, abusive working and living conditions, and excessive overtime." Federal law prohibits the importation of goods produced by forced labor. Central Roma said it "disagree[d] vehemently with the decision" and hopes "to work collaboratively with CBP to resolve this matter."
Jose Fanjul employed Chloe Hardin Black, "a long-time white nationalist and the wife of a notorious former Klan leader," as an "executive assistant." Black was married to "Don Black, a former Alabama Klan chieftain who is famous among white supremacists for his creation of Stormfront, the largest white supremacist Web forum in the world." Before that, she was married to neo-Nazi and former KKK grand wizard David Duke. (Fanjul's wife even used Black as a public relations contact for a charter school seeking to help "impoverished migrant workers and their families.") After Black's white nationalist connections received substantial attention in the national media, a spokesperson for Fanjul told the New York Post that Black "remains presently employed by the company, and that is all we're going to say."
kalm wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2024 8:32 am
Trump’s finest give him a needed shot in the arm. Here’s one example …
Donald Trump tried to overturn the 2020 presidential election, was recently found liable for sexual assault, and has been charged with 88 felonies. Trump is currently spending four days a week at the Manhattan Criminal Courthouse. And yet, there are still a lot of rich people who choose to spend massive sums of money to help Trump become the next president.
Trump's biggest supporters are directing their largess to a newly-formed joint fundraising committee called Trump 47. The new committee can accept donations in excess of $800,000. The first $6,600 goes to Trump's campaign, the next $5,000 goes to Trump's Save America PAC (which has been paying Trump's legal bills), the next $413,000 goes to the Republican National Committee, and the remaining amount is distributed to the local Republican Party in 39 states. The state Republican Parties often send the money right back to the national party, sometimes on the same day. Almost all of the money will be used to benefit Trump. (Biden uses a similar joint fundraising vehicle, the Biden Victory Fund, to facilitate large donations.)
On Monday, the Trump 47 committee filed its first report with the FEC. The filing revealed 20 people have donated $800,000 or more. Popular Information profiled nine of the most notable donors.
Jose "Pepe" Fanjul: $814,600
Jose Fanjul on May 14, 2008, in New York City. (PAUL PORTER/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images)
Jose Fanjul and his family own a sugar harvesting and refining empire, including a majority stake in Domino Sugar. Since the 1980s, the sugar industry has enjoyed billions of dollars in annual subsidies from the federal government, which guarantees high prices for domestic sugar. This makes sugar farming much more profitable than other kinds of farming and forces American consumers to spend twice as much for sugar compared to other countries. Fanjul is a prolific donor to Republican causes to preserve these subsidies. His brother, known as Alfy, focuses on influencing Democrats.
In November 2022, a subsidiary owned by the Fanjul brothers in the Dominican Republic, Central Roma, was banned from importing sugar after the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) found evidence of "the use of forced labor in its operations." In its investigation of Central Roma, the CBP found indications that the company engages in "abuse of vulnerability, isolation, withholding of wages, abusive working and living conditions, and excessive overtime." Federal law prohibits the importation of goods produced by forced labor. Central Roma said it "disagree[d] vehemently with the decision" and hopes "to work collaboratively with CBP to resolve this matter."
Jose Fanjul employed Chloe Hardin Black, "a long-time white nationalist and the wife of a notorious former Klan leader," as an "executive assistant." Black was married to "Don Black, a former Alabama Klan chieftain who is famous among white supremacists for his creation of Stormfront, the largest white supremacist Web forum in the world." Before that, she was married to neo-Nazi and former KKK grand wizard David Duke. (Fanjul's wife even used Black as a public relations contact for a charter school seeking to help "impoverished migrant workers and their families.") After Black's white nationalist connections received substantial attention in the national media, a spokesperson for Fanjul told the New York Post that Black "remains presently employed by the company, and that is all we're going to say."
"We ask that all candidates and committees who choose to use President Trump’s name, image, and likeness split a minimum of 5% of all fundraising solicitations to Trump National Committee JFC," said the April 15 letter signed by campaign co-campaign managers Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita.
The shakedown begins. Are trump and his campaign?
i) a mob boss and his mafia?
2) a cult and his followers?
c) Ryan Rogers and Mary Kay?
IV) something else (explain in your reponse)?
Re: Trump vs. Biden Part 2
Posted: Thu Apr 18, 2024 4:15 pm
by BDKJMU
Bidens senility on full display with this staged BS hoax.I’ve been in dozens of WaWas probably over 1000 times the last 22 years, and NEVER have seen one that empty during daylight hours..And notice at the about :55-1:10 mark the leader of the free world, after struggling, is unable to close a simple cardboard takeout box, finally instructing a handler to take it.
