How about an argument that right-wing news isn’t controlled by the establishment.

You forgot to explain how there can be US news which flatters Trump if the establishment controls US News and hates him.

I don’t get it. If the US establishment hates Trump and they control the media then wouldn’t all US news be fake news (news unflattering to Trump)?

Huh? Two thirds of Republicans in Washington support the “big lie,” and pretty much the rest kowtow to his every whim.

Isn’t everyone supposed to hate Kamala, btw?

There is a bigger probability to read something negative about Trump on conservative media, than reading something negative about Kamala on liberal media. — Eros1982

Could you provide a link or two to negative stories about Trump on conservative media?

The idea that enemies of the establishment coincidentally happen to befall bad fates is just about as naive as one can get. — Tzeentch

This may be a silly question but why is Trump the enemy of the establishment?

The establishment:

the point is making people to work more. — Eros1982

Yeah, eight hours a day isn’t enough. Make America healthy again!

It’s obviously an act of desperation. Next week he’ll be promising to eliminate taxes altogether.

If democrats had majority control of congress Trump could pass legislation supporting workers.

It is remarkable that the conservative landscape in America is so bereft of meaning that someone like Trump could be a modern day Mr. Bumble.

Sure, but MAGA folk don't do implication good. For instance, what does Trump traveling to the 9/11 memorial with a 9/11 conspiracy theorist imply? It appears to imply that he's literally onboard the plane with QAnonish alternative realities. I think he's onboard with such realities because, like a religious authority, it allows him to be the ultimate arbiter of truth. If he says that he won the debate, for example, then that is the truth. If he says that he won the election then that is the truth.

I would not be surprised if this escalates. Eating people is next. — Fooloso4

Laura Loomer, a 9/11 conspiracy theorist who flew with Trump to the 9/11 memorial yesterday, wrote on X that the “Biden-Harris regime imported over 20,000 cannibalistic Haitians who are now killing people’s pets and hunting domestic animals on the streets of Ohio.”

What national abortion ban? — NOS4A2

"There's no reason to sign a ban because we have gotten what everyone wanted," Trump said.

I’m pretty sure that the 170,000 women who were forced to travel out of state for abortions last year didn’t want what Trump gave them.

I’m certain that all the pro-life folks aren’t pleased with the fact that the abortion rate hasn’t decreased by much if at all since the Dobbs decision.

that he wants a national abortion ban — NOS4A2

The abortion issue is a political tool for him, he wants whatever benefits him the most and that’s why he refused to answer when asked if he would veto a national ban.

She even said something like J6 was the worst attack on the US since the civil war, and on the eve of 9/11. — NOS4A2

You consider 9/11 an attack on American democracy?

“Tulsi, you’re fired!”

It’s an opinion regarding the principle. The principle is:

1.5 Parental Rights
Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs, provided that the rights of children to be free from abuse and neglect are also protected.

Brent DeRidder’s opinion is the opinion of all members of the libertarian party of North Carolina, and the opinion of all Libertarians in the US? I wouldn’t have thought that libertarians would relinquish their freedom of opinion so completely to one man.

His main argument suggests that abortions will happen irrespective of legal restrictions, advocating instead for imposing religious beliefs through avenues other than legislation.

If I think a state ought to determine its own laws that does not mean I think it ought to prohibit anything it wants. — NOS4A2

We weren’t talking about anything were we? We were talking about abortion.

Anyway, I hope you work out the contradiction some day.

Technically a lie, my bad, though a more generous interpretation would be that I was paraphrasing.

The contradiction remains unresolved. To repeat myself:

If you think abortion is a woman’s choice then the state ought not restrict that choice on any level and no matter how easy or difficult. — praxis

No, conservative libertarians don’t think that women should have the liberty to choose.

That’s not helpful. Assuming that you want to clarify where I allegedly lied, can you explain what you mean when you say, “The act is no one’s decision but the woman’s.”?

This appears to mean that you think the state should not to have the power to restrict a woman’s choice.

A favorite pastime especially today in politics (witness the backbitting back and forth between Democrats and Repulbicans) is this infantile labelling of the opponent. We never learn, seems to be an inherent thing in the human mind. — Ray Liikanen

Aren’t you negating everything else these infantile labelers might be?

That’s a lie and misrepresentation of my view. — NOS4A2

I honestly have no idea what the lie is supposed to be.

our resident Trumper and Ayn Rand devotee — Mikie

Ayn Rand made strong arguments for choice. Whadaya bet she would have argued differently has she been a he.

The act is no one’s decision but the woman’s. — NOS4A2

You say abortion is no one’s decision but the woman’s, and then go on to say that the state ought to have more right to determine women’s choice because it’s easier to restrict or liberate at the local level. This is contradictory. If you think abortion is a woman’s choice then the state ought not restrict that choice on any level and no matter how easy or difficult.

Trump is attempting to side-step the problem by leaving it up to the state. This makes it a matter of choice. It is a form of pernicious relativism - arbitrarily permissible if and when the individual state says it is. No true "pro-life" advocate should find this acceptable. — Fooloso4

Exactly. Trump is currently saying he’d be “great for women and their reproductive rights.” If he doesn’t lose the support of pro-life advocates it just further demonstrates that the issue is little more than politicization.

I did read your whole post.

Okay, assuming that you’re actually serious, you seem to believe that being religious means thinking, believing, and concluding whatever is in accordance with your religion.

That is certainly part of it (though not to the extreme you claim) and why religion tends to be very dogmatic. You must think there’s more to it though, right?

to be not religious means that you cannot think, that you do not believe in anything, and that you cannot reach any conclusions of any kind. — Ray Liikanen

Are you serious about this?

Every human being who walked the earth began that way. They are not like cysts. Abortion, infanticide, homicide…they all involve the same act: causing the death, or killing, of a human being. — NOS4A2

If that’s what you believe then shouldn’t you want a national ban? As it is, the abortion rate hasn’t decreased by much, if at all. Most abortions are performed with drugs, and as you pointed out earlier, women can travel to states where it’s legal. It seems that the most vulnerable women, those with the least resources, in red states are hardest hit.

The architects and propagandists of the Bush regime join your campaign. — NOS4A2

The MAGA term is RINO. Anyway, who’s more neocon than Nikki Haley, whose wealth seems to be tied to defense contractors. No “Republican” is rejecting her endorsement of Trump. In fact, many Republicans wanted to elect her president in this race.

Former Trump administration staffers also support Harris in this election. Not a great look.

Several spoke at the DNC, including Stephanie Grisham. She reported that Trump said his diehard supporters, people like you, were basement dwellers. How does that make you feel?

Nikki Haley Says Donald Trump “Has My Strong Endorsement, Period” In Republican National Convention Speech

If you’re right then there is an opportunity for you or some other abortionist to run on such a platform. — NOS4A2

Yup, the people always have to fight for their liberty.

Now women can vote for the policies they want. — NOS4A2

Is that true? According to polls in Texas, most favor some access to abortion, and as far as I can tell it hasn’t been on a ballot.

I don’t think the feds should have any say in the matter. — NOS4A2

You think that states should have the power to deny women their freedom to choose, right? If so, doesn't that make you a stinking statists?

As for abortion, now people can vote for the laws they want. I know people having more power is anathema to the authoritarian, but you’ll get used to it. — NOS4A2

The women in many states don’t have the power to choose now. Aren’t you supposed to be some breed of libertarian?

In 2009, some residents of Royal Tunbridge Wells called the tag "inappropriate" and "stereotypical" and asked the town to drop association with it in favour of Delighted of Tunbridge Wells. However, there was opposition to this campaign by other residents, some of whom wrote to newspapers in the "Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells" style arguing they preferred Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells. Local merchants at the town's information centre pointed out that tourists were buying twice as many goods bearing Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells than with Delighted of Tunbridge Wells. — Wikipedia

Tunbridge Wells knows the value of brand equity. :lol: