2022 Elections Thread

[UNI88]

I wouldn’t vote for either of those nitwits. I’d vote for Ike but not FDR.

I’d prefer to live in a country with a capitalist economy like Sweden or Denmark and not a “socialist utopia” like Venezuela or the USSR like Bernie wants to create.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You keep saying that as if it’s true.

There is more evidence that it’s true than there is that trump is a fascist but you keep pushing that fairy tale Mr. Partisan Poster.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Baldy]

Which is exactly why I said BIDEN simps.

Biden has been doing the exact same thing for decades and your team didn't care enough to the point of making him your presidential nominee.

Why do you people think lying about your background a big deal all of the sudden?
What changed?

Baldy. All politicians are liars. Joe is good at it in a bullshit artist way. Santiago is still next level…

So, 50+ years of lies about his education, family, career, record, etc., makes Joe's lies (D)ifferent?

[Baldy]

Warren repeated a family Story.

Santos has lied about:

Jobs
Wealth
Education at all level
Race (claimed to be half-black)
Religion
His mother's death (claimed to be a 9/11 victim, tweeted in 2016 on two different occasions months apart that his mom died)
His immigration status
Having employees that died in the Pulse Shooting

Not even close to the same

Which is exactly why I said BIDEN simps.

Biden has been doing the exact same thing for decades and your team didn't care enough to the point of making him your presidential nominee.

Why do you people think lying about your background a big deal all of the sudden?
What changed?

BUMP

It's a simple question, jon.

[kalm]

Which is exactly why I said BIDEN simps.

Biden has been doing the exact same thing for decades and your team didn't care enough to the point of making him your presidential nominee.

Why do you people think lying about your background a big deal all of the sudden?
What changed?

BUMP

It's a simple question, jon.

Start with “exact same thing” and go from there.

[UNI88]

BUMP

It's a simple question, jon.

Start with “exact same thing” and go from there.

Here we go again with the “we’ll accept and defend our sides poor behavior because in our partisan opinion it isn’t as bad as the other sides” argument.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Baldy]

Start with “exact same thing” and go from there.

Here we go again with the “we’ll accept and defend our sides poor behavior because in our partisan opinion it isn’t as bad as the other sides” argument.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Obfuscation and deflection is klam and jon's MO.
Don't expect anything better.

[kalm]

Start with “exact same thing” and go from there.

Here we go again with the “we’ll accept and defend our sides poor behavior because in our partisan opinion it isn’t as bad as the other sides” argument.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Who’s defending something? This would make sense if I was a fan of the DNC. And I’ve acknowledged Biden’s embellishments before.

Now…back to the “exactly the same” argument. You want to plant your flag in the ground there? Please tell me how Biden or practically anyone else in politics has shown the exact same level of lying as Santos.

All politicians lie. Some are better (or worse) at it than others.

[UNI88]

Here we go again with the “we’ll accept and defend our sides poor behavior because in our partisan opinion it isn’t as bad as the other sides” argument.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Who’s defending something? This would make sense if I was a fan of the DNC. And I’ve acknowledged Biden’s embellishments before.

Now…back to the “exactly the same” argument. You want to plant your flag in the ground there? Please tell me how Biden or practically anyone else in politics has shown the exact same level of lying as Santos.

All politicians lie. Some are better (or worse) at it than others.

I didn’t realize your name was Chris Hayes.

Maybe you’re right about “exactly the same”. Biden has been lying for 50+ years, he has Santos beat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

Who’s defending something? This would make sense if I was a fan of the DNC. And I’ve acknowledged Biden’s embellishments before.

Now…back to the “exactly the same” argument. You want to plant your flag in the ground there? Please tell me how Biden or practically anyone else in politics has shown the exact same level of lying as Santos.

All politicians lie. Some are better (or worse) at it than others.

I didn’t realize your name was Chris Hayes.

Maybe you’re right about “exactly the same”. Biden has been lying for 50+ years, he has Santos beat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

WaPo is reporting Santos I has gone by 5 different names. It’s paywalled but the lead sentence is basically we are accustomed to all politicians lying but…

UNI’s headline would read…

“Both Sides Do It!”

Or maybe

“But Biden, Hillary, Bernie, AOC!”

Lol.

[UNI88]

I didn’t realize your name was Chris Hayes.

Maybe you’re right about “exactly the same”. Biden has been lying for 50+ years, he has Santos beat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

WaPo is reporting Santos I has gone by 5 different names. It’s paywalled but the lead sentence is basically we are accustomed to all politicians lying but…

UNI’s headline would read…

“Both Sides Do It!”

Or maybe

“But Biden, Hillary, Bernie, AOC!”

Lol.

Sure Chris.

I’m not arguing that Santos isn’t a lying sack of shit and unfit for public service. Based on everything that’s being reported, he is.

I am laughing at illiberals who think that Santos and trump were the first to cross the line of lying that is unacceptable for a supposed public servant. Biden crossed that line before Santos was born.

Illiberals defend and deflect for Biden not because what he’s said and done didn’t go too far but because he’s a Democrat and can help further their agenda.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

I could support this. UNI88?

[UNI88]

I could support this. UNI88?

You're a little late to the party and I'm on record supporting this ...

Justin Amash offers to serve as ‘nonpartisan’ Speaker

“If neither party has the votes to elect a speaker of the House, I’d be happy to serve as a nonpartisan speaker who ensures the institution works as it’s supposed to—a place where all ideas are welcome and where outcomes are discovered through the process, not dictated from above,” Amash said in a tweet on Tuesday.

Moderate House GOP ready to push back against Freedom Caucus rule changes

Moderate Republicans are preparing to flex their political muscles to ensure their newly-won but narrow House majority is not hijacked by conservative hard-liners from the Freedom Caucus who are looking to impose a new set of rules in 2023.

Justin Amash for Speaker!

But I'm not sure you would be when you changed one of my posts to say that Amash was worse than that fascist trump ("Biden > trump > Hillary > Bernie > Amash > Paul").

[∞∞∞]

Watching the house speaker vote is legitimately entertaining. What a shitsh*w.

[UNI88]

Watching the house speaker vote is legitimately entertaining. What a shitsh*w.

I read that the groomer Jim Jordan got a couple of votes.

I so want this to blow up in MAGAts' faces and for moderate Republicans and Democrats to work together to elect a rational Speaker with a functioning brainstem.

[GannonFan]

I'm generally against politicians with the name McCarthy so I'm good with all of this.

[kalm]

I could support this. UNI88?

You're a little late to the party and I'm on record supporting this ...

Justin Amash offers to serve as ‘nonpartisan’ Speaker

Moderate House GOP ready to push back against Freedom Caucus rule changes



Justin Amash for Speaker!

But I'm not sure you would be when you changed one of my posts to say that Amash was worse than that fascist trump ("Biden > trump > Hillary > Bernie > Amash > Paul").

Sarcasm…it’s no longer a two way street I guess.

Smh

[SeattleGriz]

Watching the house speaker vote is legitimately entertaining. What a shitsh*w.

I read that the groomer Jim Jordan got a couple of votes.

I so want this to blow up in MAGAts' faces and for moderate Republicans and Democrats to work together to elect a rational Speaker with a functioning brainstem.

I know this is about Republicans, but the way you make that statement, it sounds as if you felt Pelosi was a rational speaker.

[UNI88]

I read that the groomer Jim Jordan got a couple of votes.

I so want this to blow up in MAGAts' faces and for moderate Republicans and Democrats to work together to elect a rational Speaker with a functioning brainstem.

I know this is about Republicans, but the way you make that statement, it sounds as if you felt Pelosi was a rational speaker.

I think you and I might define rational differently. I don't have to agree with someone to consider them rational. Pelosi was an effective speaker who for the most part kept her caucus together. McCarthy is struggling to keep his caucus together and the Republican House caucus looks like a bunch of boobs.

I do not consider the groomer Jim Jordan or other MAGAt members of the House to be rational. They, like their emotional leader, are a bunch of petulant children who throw temper tantrums if they don't get their way. They are a minority of the Republican caucus but believe they should dictate policy and focus.

[Ibanez]

I'm generally against politicians with the name McCarthy so I'm good with all of this.

Joe was just misunderstood

[SeattleGriz]

I know this is about Republicans, but the way you make that statement, it sounds as if you felt Pelosi was a rational speaker.

I think you and I might define rational differently. I don't have to agree with someone to consider them rational. Pelosi was an effective speaker who for the most part kept her caucus together. McCarthy is struggling to keep his caucus together and the Republican House caucus looks like a bunch of boobs.

I do not consider the groomer Jim Jordan or other MAGAt members of the House to be rational. They, like their emotional leader, are a bunch of petulant children who throw temper tantrums if they don't get their way. They are a minority of the Republican caucus but believe they should dictate policy and focus.

Keeping your party together is a far cry from rational. Pelosi. Rational? Just listen to her. Wanting Trump to get something by the house so it can be squashed in the Senate. "lets talk away from the cameras".

[UNI88]

I think you and I might define rational differently. I don't have to agree with someone to consider them rational. Pelosi was an effective speaker who for the most part kept her caucus together. McCarthy is struggling to keep his caucus together and the Republican House caucus looks like a bunch of boobs.

I do not consider the groomer Jim Jordan or other MAGAt members of the House to be rational. They, like their emotional leader, are a bunch of petulant children who throw temper tantrums if they don't get their way. They are a minority of the Republican caucus but believe they should dictate policy and focus.

Keeping your party together is a far cry from rational. Pelosi. Rational? Just listen to her. Wanting Trump to get something by the house so it can be squashed in the Senate. "lets talk away from the cameras".

Maybe she was taken out of context like trump was when he "rationally" suggested using bleach to fight COVID.

Was Jim Jordan rational when he was grooming collegiate wrestlers for abuse?

Pelosi is rational compared to trump and the MAGAts. Granted that bar isn't very high.

[Winterborn]

I know this is about Republicans, but the way you make that statement, it sounds as if you felt Pelosi was a rational speaker.

I think you and I might define rational differently. I don't have to agree with someone to consider them rational. Pelosi was an effective speaker who for the most part kept her caucus together. McCarthy is struggling to keep his caucus together and the Republican House caucus looks like a bunch of boobs.

I do not consider the groomer Jim Jordan or other MAGAt members of the House to be rational. They, like their emotional leader, are a bunch of petulant children who throw temper tantrums if they don't get their way. They are a minority of the Republican caucus but believe they should dictate policy and focus.

Pelosi is no idiot and built up her power carefully to the point she controlled the purse strings in her caucus. This led her to wield significant behind the scenes power of those that would dissent. McCarthy has no such background and thought it would be handed to him.

I consider half of either party to be irrational (can throw in there blatantly corrupt as well) and should go the way of the dodo bird.

[SeattleGriz]

I think you and I might define rational differently. I don't have to agree with someone to consider them rational. Pelosi was an effective speaker who for the most part kept her caucus together. McCarthy is struggling to keep his caucus together and the Republican House caucus looks like a bunch of boobs.

I do not consider the groomer Jim Jordan or other MAGAt members of the House to be rational. They, like their emotional leader, are a bunch of petulant children who throw temper tantrums if they don't get their way. They are a minority of the Republican caucus but believe they should dictate policy and focus.

Pelosi is no idiot and built up her power carefully to the point she controlled the purse strings in her caucus. This led her to wield significant behind the scenes power of those that would dissent. McCarthy has no such background and thought it would be handed to him.

I consider half of either party to be irrational (can throw in there blatantly corrupt as well) and should go the way of the dodo bird.

A little bit of a tangent from your post, but I think it speaks to the irrational.

You ever read any hot button issues on both sides of the media? The comments are exactly the same. Dems and Reps both say their reps are weak, spineless and America as we know it is being ruined. Both sides feel they are constantly on the losing end.

So how is it that both sides feel the same way? My thought is simply the basic one that our elected officials aren't representing anyone other than their donor class, which are two sides of the same coin, so it never feels like "your guy" is fighting for your side.

Congress finally gets a couple of people elected who at the least don't toe the verbal narrative and they come across as nuts, although they represent the comment section statements.

[kalm]

Pelosi is no idiot and built up her power carefully to the point she controlled the purse strings in her caucus. This led her to wield significant behind the scenes power of those that would dissent. McCarthy has no such background and thought it would be handed to him.

I consider half of either party to be irrational (can throw in there blatantly corrupt as well) and should go the way of the dodo bird.

A little bit of a tangent from your post, but I think it speaks to the irrational.

You ever read any hot button issues on both sides of the media? The comments are exactly the same. Dems and Reps both say their reps are weak, spineless and America as we know it is being ruined. Both sides feel they are constantly on the losing end.

So how is it that both sides feel the same way? My thought is simply the basic one that our elected officials aren't representing anyone other than their donor class, which are two sides of the same coin, so it never feels like "your guy" is fighting for your side.

Congress finally gets a couple of people elected who at the least don't toe the verbal narrative and they come across as nuts, although they represent the comment section statements.

This.

And WB’s only half of each party is irrational is being generous.

Our system is built on legalized corruption. Plain and simple.

[GannonFan]

A little bit of a tangent from your post, but I think it speaks to the irrational.

You ever read any hot button issues on both sides of the media? The comments are exactly the same. Dems and Reps both say their reps are weak, spineless and America as we know it is being ruined. Both sides feel they are constantly on the losing end.

So how is it that both sides feel the same way? My thought is simply the basic one that our elected officials aren't representing anyone other than their donor class, which are two sides of the same coin, so it never feels like "your guy" is fighting for your side.

Congress finally gets a couple of people elected who at the least don't toe the verbal narrative and they come across as nuts, although they represent the comment section statements.

This.

And WB’s only half of each party is irrational is being generous.

Our system is built on legalized corruption. Plain and simple.

Don't forget the incompetence, we have that in spades as well.