pattayasan

Because of her father's war crimes.

You've seen the photo then I take it?

General disposition to white supremacy is the elephant in the room. Should we have a conversation about project 2025?

Do you see the Dems dismantling capitalism? I don't. Did any bankers responsible for the GFC go to jail? Obama was heavily criticized for not taking it to the wall street moguls. I really think you're just labeling, you can't be serious.

I know a lot about trump and I think it's beyond debate that he's far right. Anyone supporting him is guilty by association.

Well, you're pretty safe. There aren't any genuinely marxist countries in the world these days. Never will be again either. Dems are capitalists despite what you'd like to believe. I think socialism is the word you are groping for. If it really is marxist it's time to put the pitchfork back in the barn.

Jimmy Kimmel feigned faint indignation and exclaimed "Oh, my stars". It won't move the needle. It didn't in 2016 either.

1. I'm not a politician. 2, I didn't name or imply any person. 3. It's an allusion to a mythological multi headed snake. 4. I want anybody on the court who is not part of a a corrupt organized cabal installed to advance c-nat policies and protect the oligarchs from the great unwashed. 5. I have no clue how religious Harris is but I can tell you how religious Trump is.

They're going to have to cut the head off the snake to unite the country again. I'm not referring to Trump, he's just the useful idiot. Uniting the country will involve putting the white supremacist bogeyman back in the bag and removing the religious activists from the SC. Also knock the nat-C attempted takeover of government on the head. It's gonna take time. If I could do one thing it would be to overturn the citizens united decision.

She's a Republican. No use once Trump is defeated, if he is. Right now, it's a case of the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

The problem is that the far right can't ever just come out and elucidate what they mean in clear, concise (explained!) terms. They have to use weasel words and obfuscate the message to the maximum extent possible. Trump has it down to a fine art. Often he can't finish a thought or a sentence. He rarely makes a point. Yet his sycophants cover for him, calling this word salad "weaving a message". I guess it gels with the evangelicals. Republicans communicate by innuendo and dog whistles. When their target digests this whatever you want to call it, they break it down to logical parts and reassemble it into English so they can understand it. When they do this, republicans call it taking the words out of context. Getting caught saying the secret part out loud is their greatest fear. If, perchance, a manifesto gets leaked somehow (think project 2025) they run and duck for cover and deny they have ever seen it.

Obesity and incontinence are proven.

Hitler is a personal comparison and is arguably apt. Fascist and dictator are both words used to describe a particular political paradigm. "Not having to vote next time" are fairly unequivocal words. We all know what that means. "Only dictator for a day" is slightly less unequivocal because coming from a man who has lied countless times a day for his entire political career we could just drop for a day as meaningless. That leaves dictator. I'm not getting why it's not fine. And I'll tell you why. Notice that there's no physical threat implied by those words? Yeah, me too.

If they lose this year, how can they concede if they haven't conceded 2020 yet?

If being paid to trash someone on TV is a problem for you then why do you watch any political TV, including Fox? They're all paid. Even your guys.

There was quite a bit of pushback against Cheney from the liberal left I thought. I guess that will evaporate now.

"Harris" "Firearms" and insults. Is that concise enough for you? You'd fail reading comprehension in elementary school. He's not just holding some dispassionate conversation which happens to mention Harris and firearms without there being a particular point. That particular point is that Trump would love for somebody to act. Crystal clear to anyone other than the true believers.

Wake me up when Harris refers to Trump and firearms in the same context.

Pretty sure I saw a post from Candide here today.

A sure takeaway from somebody using "communist" as invective, they have no clue what it is.

You're trying to dance on the head of a pin. Trump is trying to incite someone to violence, just like De Pepe. You well know this.

Trump didn't mention firearms and Cheney in the same paragraph?

He had some decent hires. They all hate him now.

Still can't grasp the concept? There is no context in which invoking firearms in respect to a political opponent is not an incitement to violence. None.

The stock market is much higher now so his portfolio yields would be much higher now. Pop goes your argument.