DNC Convention. Boring, but Dems have bigger stars than the Republicans — and the Repubs hate that. Trump most of all— hence the endless talk about crowd size and fantasizing about a Taylor Swift endorsement (she’ll endorse Harris).

Dems have Swift and Beyonce — GOP have Hulk Hogan and Chachi. There’s a drop-off here.

We had to turn away lots of people yesterday in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, but Comrade Kamala Harris’ Social Media Operation showed empty seats, long before the Rally started, early in the afternoon when, in actuality, we had to turn away 11,500 people! She’s a Crooked Radical Left Politician, and always will be! Everything she touches turns bad, just like California, and San Francisco before it - as is the case with all Marxists. She should have never been Vice President, and had to stage a COUP of Joe Biden, with her America-hating friends, Barrack Hussein Obama, Crazy Nancy Pelosi, Cryin’ Chuck Schumer, and the rest. Comrade Kamala is a STONE COLD LOSER, she will FAIL and, if she doesn’t, our Country will cease to exist as we know it, turning into a Communist, Crime Ridden Garbage Dump.

So here’s my question: is this satire, or is this what the former president wrote on his social media platform?

“Garbage Dump” :rofl:

Phil Donohue

Another one off the list.

Price controls are an excellent idea. Harris keeps surprising me. If she keeps this up, she’ll win easily. The fact that every moronic armchair political analyst and both CNN and Fox News are screaming against it — are all great signs that she’s on the right track.

Maybe stop reading — and regurgitating — the Daily Mail.

Several of your numbers are wrong, and it’s obvious to any reader that you’ve bought into the tired right-wing talking point about debt and spending — which you’ll only hear about when it’s a Democrat in office. Never mind that Trump jacked up the debt as well — by trillions.

My eyes glaze over whenever I see your name, Xtrix. — NOS4A2

Whenever you see my previous screen name? :lol:
Even your jabs don’t make sense.

No good questions — NOS4A2

They can’t all be on the level of reading the NY Post for my opinions and then trolling on an Internet forum with stupid questions like “are you all upset?” That level of genius is monopolized.

Is the troll still talking? :yawn:

Trolls asking troll questions. :yawn:

I get your point, but toxicity in general is important. As @Benkei pointed out, the cause is mostly the same: profits over people. So the rate at which we’re killing insects alone is alarming. Fertility rates are down too— there’s not overwhelming evidence that this is due to pesticides and the like, but there’s some that points in that direction.

Anyway— yeah, also important. We can walk and chew gum at the same time. The framing of climate change being “ethereal,” or somehow far away and less real, in contrast to pollution and toxins, is ridiculous. We should be alarmed about both.

Harris and Walz will turn the country communist “immediately, if not sooner.”

Just a very stable genius, with the best words.

obfuscates the very real, short-term health risks that everybody ignores. — Tzeentch

Who’s ignoring it? I hear about things like PFAS and microplastics and pesticides, etc., all the time. So I suppose that’s “alarmism” as well.

But of course there’s real, short-term health risks of climate change too. Like dying in a wildfire or starving from draught’s impact on food — or flooding, or heat stroke. And so forth. I don’t see how one can ignore these things and claim ii’s ethereal. It’s at least as real and important as toxicity.

Co-ops are communist. Think of it that way. Far closer to anything in the USSR or China.

Simplified a bit, but it’s one way to think of the matter if it’s a struggle to get your mind around.

ethereal 'climate change' — Tzeentch

clearly discernible causes — Tzeentch

It’s not ethereal— it’s overwhelmingly supported by evidence, and also happening all around us. The effects are at least as obvious (if not more so) than toxicity (which is also not ethereal).

The causes are also very clearly discernible: greenhouse gases. This is pretty basic stuff. To imply the causes aren’t discernible, the effects aren’t seen, etc — is pure climate denial. Why don’t you grow up on this subject already?

:up:

Harris’s crowds are big. He doesn’t like that — so it doesn’t exist.

He lost the election — but he can’t lose, so it didn’t happen.

What’s more pathetic, though— Trump, or his slavish followers that go along with the beyond obvious lies?

“I’m a lot of things, but weird I’m not.” — Donald Trump :lol:

Oh and thinking Nate Holden was Willie Brown is fantastic too.

And a Harris crowd that was AI-generated. Don’t forget that.

He’s losing his fucking mind. :lol:

Kramer vs. Kramer

Good movie, but I don’t see how it was both the best picture winner and top grossing film of 1979.

Because it took me so long to watch it, I probably can’t appreciate how original it was. It’s been done so many times since then, it’s not as compelling. Kind of like how I felt about Animal House — not that funny.

It’s awesome that Trump keeps doing interviews because he believes he’s a great speaker. Hope he keeps it up. Nothing could be better for Harris.

Hey Mikie this is the list I'd have posted to you if I felt like looking it all up. — fishfry

universal free school meals
- legal weed
- carbon free electricity by 2040
- tax rebates for the working class up to $1,300 (making under $150k per year)
- 12 weeks paid family leave
- 12 weeks paid sick leave
- banned conversion therapy
- red flag laws for guns
- universal background checks for guns
- automatic voter registration
- free public college (under $80k)
- ban on PFAS (forever chemicals)
- $2.2 billion increase in k-12 school funding
- sectoral bargaining for nursing home workers
- opposed Wall St bailouts in 2008
- voted against outsourcing deals
- supports lifting a moratorium on nuclear energy in Minnesota
- 100% rating from Planned Parenthood
- banned non-compete clauses
- raised minimum wage for small businesses
- raised taxes on multinational corporations
- protected gender affirming care
- banned medical providers from withholding care over debt
- protected construction workers from wage theft
- massive Minnesota infrastructure bill
- backed the Iran deal — Mr Bee

Sounds good to me. So your point is that Mr Bee can make substantive points, but that you could too if you tried. Cool. Guess you really showed me.

Let me know if you ever have a substantive point to make. — fishfry

Substantive points like…

making Minnesota a sanctuary state for underage trans surgeries, to meeting five times with a Muslim cleric who admires Hitler. — fishfry

Yeah, you let me know too.

You’re the one that said you aren’t very familiar with his policies. So why you’re now arguing about it is odd.

Just a long time between now and November and America has an attention span of a gnat. So unless he finds a way to milk this for four months, I don’t see it changing much. — Mikie

A month later, and I was right. As usual.

Remember when everyone was saying “he just got elected”? :lol:

:up:

Same old arguments: communism has killed 100 million people. Capitalism has killed more people and responsible for slavery, but that’s not really capitalism. So that doesn’t count. But Pol Pot counts. Stalin counts. China counts— except for the part where they’re now a superpower with several economic measures better than the US. That part is capitalism though. Etc. etc.

Anyway— even if communism was tried, and failed, it’s still the morally correct system. We’ve certainly given “capitalism” a shot — or “tried to bring it about” — and the track record is pretty grim. Maybe some people still love Pinochet though, who knows?

I actually don't even know much about his actual policies in office. — fishfry

Shocking.

What's Trump's stance actually on the state level book bans in Utah, Tennessee, Idaho, and South Carolina? — Benkei

I’ve heard nothing from him so far, but as you know he has no principles, so — like with project 2025 — if it becomes a political liability he may just dump it. But he’s tried to ban books himself, so I don’t think he cares one way or another.

Oh boy, I can’t wait to hear more from bland blowhards about how Walz is “too far left” and how Harris should move more to the “middle” because it’s super wise. The analysis is complicated and original, and definitely not stupid and boring.

That's a stupid talking point which you repeat endlessly. — fishfry

Typical Trump cultist response: the guy repeating Fox News talking points accuses his opponent of— wait for it— repeating “talking points.”

Predictable. :yawn:

I am not making a partisan point. — fishfry

I'd say this if I were for Trump, which I am — fishfry

Can we do away with the “I’m not biased, I’m just a straight shooter.” No one believes that. It’s ridiculous.

I’m not a member of either political party, but I’m certainly against Trump. That will undoubtedly bias me in Harris’ direction, and will creep in unconsciously, however much I try not to let it. You’re no different.

Anyway— that’s silly enough, but the fact that you’re actually for Trump basically disqualifies you as someone worth taking seriously, I’m sorry to say. Your judgment is awful. It’s rooted in ignorance and failure to recognize or prioritize basic problems in our society.

clever strategy! — fishfry

Which according to you is “tacking to the center.” This is what I mean by silly, shallow analysis. I can hear this on CNN and Fox too. As if Harris isn’t anything but a right-of-center candidate to begin with. I wish she were centrist — because that would mean she’s more left.

Pardon the Daily Caller link — fishfry

Totally expected, actually. No need to pretend like you get your “opinions” and analysis from anywhere else.

You might think you like Walz's politics. That is not at all the point. I hope you can see that. The point is that from an electoral standpoint, Walz shines a light on the very leftism that Kamala was trying to hide.

That's why Walz was a bad pick. — fishfry

What’s hilarious is that you feel this is somehow hard to understand. Not something I’ve heard about 1,000 times from every political analyst out there who pretends to be non-partisan. Way to go! You’re officially the forum’s right-wing Chuck Todd.

Terrible pick. Kam just blunted the momentum of her terrific last two weeks, and breathed new life into the Trump/Vance campaign. — fishfry

You have to be fairly delusional to believe this.

He’s an excellent pick. And not just because he’s well liked and well regarded, but because his policies in Minnesota have been fantastic. I hope he runs on that strength non-stop. They’re extremely popular both in Minnesota and the US generally.

But thanks for providing watered-down versions of what Fox News and Tucker Carlson told you to believe.

Kamala just screwed up her vp pick. — fishfry

Actually, he’s a great pick and the one thing she’s gotten right so far.

Maybe lay off the Fox News.

Climate change deniers make up nearly a quarter of US Congress

Climate denialists – 23 in Senate and 100 in House – are all Republicans and make US an outlier internationally

Speaking of Oreskes:

Naomi Oreskes, a history of science professor at Harvard University who has long studied anti-climate rhetoric, said it was “unsurprising” that the report found old-school climate denial is on the decline.

“It’s harder to deny the science when it’s so much more apparent that the climate is warming, that extreme weather is getting worse and happening constantly,” she said. “Nobody can deny the science with a straight face, given everything.”

She noted, however, that the fossil fuel industry and its allies have long used a variety of messaging to rebuff concerns about the climate. She said she was unsure those other forms of rhetoric were any less harmful.

“As far back as the 1990s, they were saying renewable energy isn’t reliable enough, or they were saying that wind power … kills whales,” she said. “Is it really so different from climate denial if you don’t deny the science but you deny the possibility of solutions?”

Interesting article. They spell it out in undeniable terms. But it’s not from Nature — it’s from Nature communications.

That’s part of it. He’s also very Twitter-minded, and the biggest voices on there are Trump trolls and the alt-right. If it were SNL, it would have been different.

The more cynical view is that he wants to sell cars to the Trump crowd. Which as you see now, Trump has changed his tune on EVs a bit, and was just recently gifted a Cybertruck by some online influences— which he praised. Good publicity for Tesla.

The most simple theory is that Musk is basically an idiot, and always has been. That’s the most likely case, I think.

My thing is; don’t the ceos of these companies have kids and family? I mean they must know what they’re saying is bs but they still do it for the buck. Just weird to me. — John McMannis

Glad you liked the book.

Yes, it is bizarre, but it’s understandable when you look at it. In the same way that Christian fundamentalists deny evolution, the religious cult that is Trumpism and the republican party was easily duped into climate denial. All they had to do was tell them that climate change is a lie from the devil to take over the world. The devil being in this case “liberals” (which to them means anyone from cities or the coastal states, or anyone who’s ever looked down on them).

Unfortunate, but that’s what money can buy.

Republicans are not copying with UK and European conservatives who, although not so alarmed as the progressives, do not dare to say in public that climate change is not happening. Many polls show, also, that even in conservative voting states like TX and FL, the majorities think that climate change is happening. — Eros1982

Because some of the biggest donors to the Republicans are fossil fuel giants. Not only that, but they own think tanks and election infrastructure as well. The propaganda was so strong that it lingers even today, when we’re seeing the effects of a warming planet all around us.

Because it was associated with “liberals” (thanks in part to Al Gore’s involvement), it’s become politicized and thus Trumpers would rather die, literally, then face the reality. So goes US politics.

I’m beginning to think Tim Waltz is the best choice for Harris after hearing him interviewed. — Mikie

Wow, she actually made the best choice. I’m surprised, but I’m happy she did it. Now I can spell his name correctly (Walz).

Not untenable— stupid.

I live in Washington state so I'll vote for Cornel West this year. — 180 Proof

:up: If I lived in a safe state, like Massachusetts, I’d vote for West as well. But since I don’t (I’m in swingy New Hampshire), I’m not throwing my vote away and, mathematically, putting Trump +1, I’ll be voting for the awful Harris. But I envy you.

I have been convinced that the only difference between democrats and republicans is in words — Eros1982

So you’ve settled on the tired, fossilized view — that passes as sophisticated but is in fact lazy and absurd — which absolves you of having to know anything in detail. Not the great progression you think it is.

That view may have been tenable at some point, but it’s simply ridiculous now. The Democratic Party, for all it’s faults (and I have always been critical of them), are radically different than Republicans. Plenty of examples; guns, abortion, climate change, etc. If you can’t see that, you’re not paying attention.

Yes, they mostly agree on military spending — but even that is showing cracks (on both sides) — and apparently in panicking about China, but that hardly makes them “only different in words.”

The destruction of Roe, the Inflation Reduction Act, the raising of corporate taxes, budgetary priorities, appointments of administrative heads (Lina Kahn at FTC, Jennifer Abruzzo at NLRB, Regan at EPA, Gensler at SEC, and so on), appointments to the Supreme Court — these things actually matter. To throw up our hands and say “Well they’re all the same anyway” is just aggressively ignorant.

Edit:



Missed this. :up:

The man said OUTRIGHT before the election that if he loses it will be because of fraud. He literally said what he was going to do before anything happened, and then DID IT. — schopenhauer1

:up:

It was very easy to predict that Trump, if he lost, would claim it was stolen. He’s been doing it since Ted Cruz won Iowa.

And he only lost the popular vote in ‘16 because of millions of illegal votes, of course.

Imagine believing this stupid shit? I thought the Russia thing was silly, but this takes the cake. Especially from those who are quick to agree about the Russian narrative being silly.

Find illegal votes because he was concerned about illegal activity, like a president ought to be. — NOS4A2

:rofl:

Kamala officially made the nominee.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/08/02/us/harris-trump-election

Oh joy.

My guess is you are yearning for the placating platitudes, euphemisms, and bromides that tend to lull the public to sleep. It serves to disguise a politician’s actual thoughts and intentions behind an opaque cloud of political play-acting, so that they may get away with murder or convince you to war. This sort of language is designed so that you don’t have to think about politics, so it’s no strange wonder that one might resent when he sees its opposite. It’s the kind of rhetoric that makes Orwell turn in his grave, and the daily Two Minutes Hate we see at little shows like that one make it all the more egregious. — NOS4A2

Great speech. :clap: Now back to the endless apologetics for the Trump cult.

Not a shred of irony detected.