Ooh, this is close. I was sad when it wasn't Mark Kelly, half because it's so easy to make fun of how he looks. This one looks like Muppet John McCain to me.
He bailed on his unit just before they deployed for combat. He claims he is a Command Sergeant Major when that rank was revoked because he left service before he fulfilled the requirements.
I wouldn't be stoked as a Democrat voter, but you all got JD Vance. The only thing that stops that dude from being the poster boy for the word 'milquetoast' is how agonizingly weird he really is. It doesn't help that he looks like a blockhead from Gumby wearing eye shadow, either.
I wouldn't be stoked as a Democrat voter, but you all got JD Vance. The only thing that stops that dude from being the poster boy for the word 'milquetoast' is how agonizingly weird he really is. It doesn't help that he looks like a blockhead from Gumby wearing eye shadow, either.
I've noticed something when Democrats or Republicans pick their running mate...
Republicans:
...tend to pick a running mate who often comes with a lot more experience than they do. For example, Bush Jr. picked Dick Cheney. Trump picked Mike Pence. They do this mostly because they want someone who not only compliments them, but rounds out their experience.
Demcorats:
...Democrats tend to do the exact opposite. They usually pick someone less experienced, or worse, someone who's a B-lister. Basically... someone who won't upstage them or take the lime-light.
What we have with Walz, is the reject, of the reject, of the reject. Consider that Biden was Obama's drop-out, and then Kamala Harris was Biden's drop-out... someone he picked that wouldn't upstage him. And now Kamala has picked someone even worse than her in Walz... someone she hopes won't upstage her. So with Walz, you basically have four levels of shitty... the least of which is a pathological liar.
I've noticed something when Democrats or Republicans pick their running mate...
Republicans:
...tend to pick a running mate who often comes with a lot more experience than they do .
JD Vance. . . A Senator for a full FIFTEEN MONTHS before Trump picked him as his running mate.
Jo Biden. . . Senator for 26 years before Obama picked him as running mate.
Tim Kaine. . .Governor of Virginia for 4 years and three years as a Senator before Hillary picked him as running mate.
Kamala Harris. . . Attorney General for California for 6 yeears, Senator for 4 years before Biden picked her as runnning mate.
So this is another great example of you just making stuff up in your head. Every Democrat candidtae for President over the last 20 years has chosen a running mate with much more experience than the one Trump just selected.
Trump can not deal with a Vice President that can think for himself. He had to find a boot-licker. MIke Pence was the main reason we did not have a bigger catastrophe on January 6. If Vance had been his Vice President at the time we would have been thrown into a constitutional crisis because Vance can not think for himself.
[This message has been edited by BingB (edited 09-17-2024).]
What we have with Walz, is the reject, of the reject, of the reject. Consider that Biden was Obama's drop-out, and then Kamala Harris was Biden's drop-out... someone he picked that wouldn't upstage him. And now Kamala has picked someone even worse than her in Walz... someone she hopes won't upstage her. So with Walz, you basically have four levels of shitty... the least of which is a pathological liar.
Since Biden beat Trump that makes Trump the "reject".
Tim Walz is 60. The average age of menopause onset is 51. You're going to have to find a new way to hate on both women and democrat politicians at the same time. I know, bigotry is hard
Must be really frustrating being a liberal. With most all the major news outlets (MSM), and the Hollywood "celebrities" pushing the Harris debacle as hard as they can, and yet there's a real good chance DJT is going to be the next president.
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: I've got to watch the debate... what exactly did he mean by this? Did he just screw up when he said that? ... or was there a point?
Did you get a chance to? I caught it on follow up. He was trying to say he had become friends with the families of victims of school shooters. Hell of a gaff, and that that Trump campaign response was legitimately funny.
It's been fun to watch the spins come out on this one. The two Presidential debates were so lopsided you have to be pretty deep in partisanship to have not seen it. This was...traditional? Close? Respectful, even? They both gave plenty of spin-worthy moments, and I felt like Vance gave a better debate performance overall, but neither came off unlikable or incompetent. It's almost like we've forgotten how to respond to something like that.
I have a feeling that Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama came off as incompetent to you as well.
Maybe, a story I'd like to relate. 2016 the Big O gave the commencement address at Rutgers University. Flew in with a few Ospreys for affect. So, during his speech, he took a couple jabs at Trump, literally ridiculing & laughing at him. Now in the Rusty Screw stadium that day, the graduates were seated on the lower levels, the parents & relatives in the cheap seats. So, during those comments, laughter came from those lower levels with a few "Love you Obama" chants. However, the comments from the cheap seats were much much different. Even still the poles showed the Big H was a shoo in. Wrong.
The Big H loss in 16 was her, the Big O' s and their campaign's fault. Not the freakin' Russian's. And they couldn't and still can't...handle it..
I have a feeling that Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama came off as incompetent to you as well.
Clinton came of as an entitled scheming crook. Obama came off as smug, entitled racist who wanted to fundamentally change America in ways that many Americans did not want. Neither of them deserved the trust of the Office, as throughout their political careers, both have been in it for personal power and gain at the expense of the American people.
I would imagine you extend similar judgments to John Kerry, Al Gore, and Bill Clinton?
Of the three, you have a smart corrupt Governor, a climate change hoaxer and a bumbling stolen valor idiot. All three had one common goal.....get rich from politics, at the expense of the American taxpayer.
[This message has been edited by olejoedad (edited 10-04-2024).]
Of the three, you have a smart corrupt Governor, a climate change hoaxer and a bumbling stolen valor idiot. All three had one common goal.....get rich from politics, at the expense of the American taxpayer.
Would it be fair to say, then, that in the last -at least- 32 years, you believe the Democrats have failed to field a single competent candidate?
Would it be fair to say, then, that in the last -at least- 32 years, you believe the Democrats have failed to field a single competent candidate?
I would say the Democrats have failed to nominate a trustworthy candidate since Jimmy Carter.
If the Dems were honest, they would nominate Bernie Sanders. In 2016, I was really hoping to see Bernie vs Ted Cruz. It would have been the debate of the century.
The above should not be misconstrued as an endorsement of the policies of Carter or Sanders, just an assessment of their character.
Edit to say: I think Jimmy Carter is a man of character, while Bernie is just a character.
[This message has been edited by williegoat (edited 10-04-2024).]
