|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 25, 2024 12:28:53 GMT -8
That's crazy. Harris would be a good President. Trump would be a disaster. It's hard to NOT make a call there. Harris is starting to adopt more and more of Trump's policies and ideas. This is pissing off the Left. The problem is that she would have no idea on how to get them done unless Trump put them on a teleprompter for her to read. Trump is in early stages of dementia, and he was never very smart to begin with. Kamala earned her positions. She graduated law school, got a job as a prosecutor, did a great job there, became D.A. as a result, then was elected Attorney General because she had such a solid record. She's WAY smarter than Trump ever was. He was born on the one yard line going in. It would have been almost impossible for him not to be a big business owner. Of course, half of his businesses have failed and he's had to file for bankruptcy six times because he isn't smart and doesn't know how to manage money or run a business, but you can believe in him all you want. I don't believe in the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus, either, but you can if you want. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 25, 2024 14:18:40 GMT -8
The LA Times: Refuses to make a presidential endorsement. The Washington Post: Refuses to make a presidential endorsement. Real-time decay (death?) of democracy in view. That's crazy. Harris would be a good President. Trump would be a disaster. It's hard to NOT make a call there. Doesn't the LA Times historically endorse the Democratic Candidate? |
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 25, 2024 14:35:13 GMT -8
That's crazy. Harris would be a good President. Trump would be a disaster. It's hard to NOT make a call there. Doesn't the LA Times historically endorse the Democratic Candidate? Historically. However, with Trump saying he's going to go after reporters and news agencies he sees as enemies (and he said it more than once, threatening to pull the licenses of the networks he viewed as enemies recently) it would seem they've been intimidated into a no endorsement this time. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 25, 2024 14:54:58 GMT -8
Doesn't the LA Times historically endorse the Democratic Candidate? Historically. However, with Trump saying he's going to go after reporters and news agencies he sees as enemies (and he said it more than once, threatening to pull the licenses of the networks he viewed as enemies recently) it would seem they've been intimidated into a no endorsement this time. I don't think that's the case here. Many others have went ahead and endorsed Harris. It may have to do with the new owner of the paper not wanting to commit one way or another due to reader/subscription backlash because he's a Trump supporter. That's what makes sense. You're more safe to say that you're a Harris supporter, but he didn't want to. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Oct 25, 2024 15:01:15 GMT -8
Historically. However, with Trump saying he's going to go after reporters and news agencies he sees as enemies (and he said it more than once, threatening to pull the licenses of the networks he viewed as enemies recently) it would seem they've been intimidated into a no endorsement this time. I don't think that's the case here. Many others have went ahead and endorsed Harris. It may have to do with the new owner of the paper not wanting to commit one way or another due to reader/subscription backlash because he's a Trump supporter. That's what makes sense. You're more safe to say that you're a Harris supporter, but he didn't want to. It absolutely is the case. Bezos pulled the WaPo endorsement out of fear of Amazon's government contracts being killed if Trump wins. What you're seeing is media complicity, like some have said for months. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecbrothers on Oct 25, 2024 15:14:30 GMT -8
Harris is starting to adopt more and more of Trump's policies and ideas. This is pissing off the Left. The problem is that she would have no idea on how to get them done unless Trump put them on a teleprompter for her to read. Trump is in early stages of dementia, and he was never very smart to begin with. Kamala earned her positions. She graduated law school, got a job as a prosecutor, did a great job there, became D.A. as a result, then was elected Attorney General because she had such a solid record. She's WAY smarter than Trump ever was. He was born on the one yard line going in. It would have been almost impossible for him not to be a big business owner. Of course, half of his businesses have failed and he's had to file for bankruptcy six times because he isn't smart and doesn't know how to manage money or run a business, but you can believe in him all you want. I don't believe in the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus, either, but you can if you want. I can see where an atheist would be in opposition of the radical right. With the Democrats running an "Identity Campaign" I just don't get why destroying the Country would be justification to vote for a candidate that can't give a straight answer? I wonder if Willie Brown helped her pass the Bar on her second try? She seems to be aging by the day. I didn't realize she was as old as she is. Its too bad she didn't have the stamina and energy to accept the Joe Rogan podcast invite. Anderson Cooper really exposed her inability to answer simple questions, and she is now losing the support of the Left Media. As a result, she seems to need time off after a bad performance to regain some self confidence again. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Oct 25, 2024 15:20:41 GMT -8
Let there be zero ambiguity and no mistake here: Corporate media, especially print media, are in support of Trump winning. Thousands of people have canceled their LA Times subscription in protest, but all that does is harm the journalists and their ability to cover stories.
Vote.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 25, 2024 19:09:25 GMT -8
I don't think that's the case here. Many others have went ahead and endorsed Harris. It may have to do with the new owner of the paper not wanting to commit one way or another due to reader/subscription backlash because he's a Trump supporter. That's what makes sense. You're more safe to say that you're a Harris supporter, but he didn't want to. It absolutely is the case. Bezos pulled the WaPo endorsement out of fear of Amazon's government contracts being killed if Trump wins. What you're seeing is media complicity, like some have said for months. Yeah, I was listening to the news this afternoon and it was brought up that Trump had previously threatened Bezos/Amazon with higher taxes if he didn't fall in line with something, so Bezos is just hedging his bets to make sure that IF Trump wins he won't come after Bezos/Amazon. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 25, 2024 22:12:59 GMT -8
I don't think that's the case here. Many others have went ahead and endorsed Harris. It may have to do with the new owner of the paper not wanting to commit one way or another due to reader/subscription backlash because he's a Trump supporter. That's what makes sense. You're more safe to say that you're a Harris supporter, but he didn't want to. It absolutely is the case. Bezos pulled the WaPo endorsement out of fear of Amazon's government contracts being killed if Trump wins. What you're seeing is media complicity, like some have said for months. Sure, that may be the case for Bezos, but not the case for others, and that's just an opinio. We'll really know next year, and thereafter if they do what they say they're going to do, and not endorse at all anymore I looked it up and the owner of the LA Times said he wants to leave it to the readers to make their own decision, so it's different than Bezos. Not everybody is in fear of backlash from Trump. |
|
|
|
Post by sdsuball on Oct 26, 2024 13:55:47 GMT -8
I think Trump wins.
Hope I'm wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on Oct 26, 2024 16:31:32 GMT -8
I think Trump wins. Hope I'm wrong. Well, since AI has destroyed photography and reality. With trump, there will be no reality left. The goal will be to massage reality, science and history into a new reality that keeps the masses off balance...to a point they won't know which is up or down...thus easier to manipulate. The rest of us will have the choice to bail out (if you have the means) or line up at the dispensary. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Oct 26, 2024 18:27:25 GMT -8
Hm...
|
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 26, 2024 21:02:17 GMT -8
Ha!!! Halperin himself says he doesn't believe it. You need to research a little/a lot more. You're doing what the media does, and mislead people. Sheesh. Looks like more of your throwing stuff out there and see if it sticks stuff. There's no "Hm" about it. It's National Enquirer stuff, evidence by the quick snippet that you provided. The lengths some will go to. I know, I know, you're just posting a clip that's out there. Ok..... www.newsweek.com/mark-halperin-says-hes-been-pitched-story-that-could-end-trumps-campaign-1973637 |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Oct 26, 2024 21:11:46 GMT -8
Ha!!! Halperin himself says he doesn't believe it. You need to research a little/a lot more. You're doing what the media does, and mislead people. Sheesh. Looks like more of your throwing stuff out there and see if it sticks stuff. There's no "Hm" about it. It's National Enquirer stuff, evidence by the quick snippet that you provided. The lengths some will go to. I know, I know, you're just posting a clip that's out there. Ok..... www.newsweek.com/mark-halperin-says-hes-been-pitched-story-that-could-end-trumps-campaign-1973637I know you're a Trump defender, but calm yourself. Weird. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 26, 2024 21:23:47 GMT -8
Ha!!! Halperin himself says he doesn't believe it. You need to research a little/a lot more. You're doing what the media does, and mislead people. Sheesh. Looks like more of your throwing stuff out there and see if it sticks stuff. There's no "Hm" about it. It's National Enquirer stuff, evidence by the quick snippet that you provided. The lengths some will go to. I know, I know, you're just posting a clip that's out there. Ok..... www.newsweek.com/mark-halperin-says-hes-been-pitched-story-that-could-end-trumps-campaign-1973637I know you're a Trump defender, but calm yourself. Weird. I know you'll go to ANY lengths like a National Enquirer Writer, but chill dude. That's what's weird. It doesn't make you look good. I don't like it when people like you stretch stuff, or deceive people, no matter who the subject is, and you're the Captain of that on here. It just so happens that there's a TON of it about Trump and nothing much about any others. The desperation is real. Gotta keep people like you in check. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Oct 26, 2024 22:00:25 GMT -8
I know you're a Trump defender, but calm yourself. Weird. I know you'll go to ANY lengths like a National Enquirer Writer, but chill dude. That's what's weird. It doesn't make you look good. I don't like it when people like you stretch stuff, or deceive people, no matter who the subject is, and you're the Captain of that on here. It just so happens that there's a TON of it about Trump and nothing much about any others. The desperation is real. Gotta keep people like you in check. I said "Hm." Perhaps stop going to insane lengths to find controversy? If I wanted to provide comment, I would have. I don't care what "looks good." How many times do we have to go through this? I...don't....care. Simple enough? I don't like it when you comment at all. But here we are. You, the attack dog. Do I have to check with you to see about upsetting your delicate sensibilities when I post something you don't like? I'm not trying to deceive anyone. To insinuate that is ignorance on your part. You sound like a lunatic. Just stop. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 26, 2024 22:29:56 GMT -8
I know you'll go to ANY lengths like a National Enquirer Writer, but chill dude. That's what's weird. It doesn't make you look good. I don't like it when people like you stretch stuff, or deceive people, no matter who the subject is, and you're the Captain of that on here. It just so happens that there's a TON of it about Trump and nothing much about any others. The desperation is real. Gotta keep people like you in check. I said "Hm." Perhaps stop going to insane lengths to find controversy? If I wanted to provide comment, I would have. I don't care what "looks good." How many times do we have to go through this? I...don't....care. Simple enough? I don't like it when you comment at all. But here we are. You, the attack dog. Do I have to check with you to see about upsetting your delicate sensibilities when I post something you don't like? I'm not trying to deceive anyone. To insinuate that is ignorance on your part. You sound like a lunatic. Just stop. Of course you don't like it when I comment at all, especially when it's calling you out for something. Yeah, you said, "hm" as if it had any credibility at all. Hilarious. Halperin himself said he didn't believe it, yet you decide to say, "hm." You need to fact check a little better. It'll serve you well. There's some more advice for ya. No charge, this time. You don't have to check with me. You can keep on going, throwing things out there that aren't credible because not your hate. That's on you. Uh, I'm the lunatic? Hilarious. I'm not the lunatic posting crap about a sound bite that tricks you into clicking on the click bait, so there's that. The delicate one would be you, again. All flustered because you were called out on a crap video. Just own out. Sheesh. I know your ego won't let you go there, but try a little harder next time. I still have hope for you. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 26, 2024 22:40:19 GMT -8
I said "Hm." Perhaps stop going to insane lengths to find controversy? If I wanted to provide comment, I would have. I don't care what "looks good." How many times do we have to go through this? I...don't....care. Simple enough? I don't like it when you comment at all. But here we are. You, the attack dog. Do I have to check with you to see about upsetting your delicate sensibilities when I post something you don't like? I'm not trying to deceive anyone. To insinuate that is ignorance on your part. You sound like a lunatic. Just stop. Of course you don't like it when I comment at all, especially when it's calling you out for something. Answer this question. Did you not think that you needed to check out more than the sound bite? I'm sure you were just frothing at the mouth, again, to get that out there. I hope you've learned. Yeah, you said, "hm" as if it had any credibility at all. Hilarious. Halperin himself said he didn't believe it, yet you decide to say, "hm." You need to fact check a little better. It'll serve you well. There's some more advice for ya. No charge, this time. You don't have to check with me. You can keep on going, throwing things out there that aren't credible because not your hate. That's on you. Uh, I'm the lunatic? Hilarious. I'm not the lunatic posting crap about a sound bite that tricks you into clicking on the click bait, so there's that. The delicate one would be you, again. All flustered because you were called out on a crap video. Just own out. Sheesh. I know your ego won't let you go there, but try a little harder next time. I still have hope for you. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Oct 26, 2024 22:52:00 GMT -8
I said "Hm." Perhaps stop going to insane lengths to find controversy? If I wanted to provide comment, I would have. I don't care what "looks good." How many times do we have to go through this? I...don't....care. Simple enough? I don't like it when you comment at all. But here we are. You, the attack dog. Do I have to check with you to see about upsetting your delicate sensibilities when I post something you don't like? I'm not trying to deceive anyone. To insinuate that is ignorance on your part. You sound like a lunatic. Just stop. Of course you don't like it when I comment at all, especially when it's calling you out for something. Yeah, you said, "hm" as if it had any credibility at all. Hilarious. Halperin himself said he didn't believe it, yet you decide to say, "hm." You need to fact check a little better. It'll serve you well. There's some more advice for ya. No charge, this time. You don't have to check with me. You can keep on going, throwing things out there that aren't credible because not your hate. That's on you. Uh, I'm the lunatic? Hilarious. I'm not the lunatic posting crap about a sound bite that tricks you into clicking on the click bait, so there's that. The delicate one would be you, again. All flustered because you were called out on a crap video. Just own out. Sheesh. I know your ego won't let you go there, but try a little harder next time. I still have hope for you. Because A) You're not a mod and B) It's often a short-sighted attempt to start an argument. Why? Scroll on by. Doesn't affect you in the slightest. Fact check what? I literally said nothing. Didn't we have this same discussion a few days ago? Where you were...wrong? Like, what's the point? You can infer what I think from a one word post? Man, you should be a telepathic mind reader, you missed your calling. You read a Newsweek article and cherrypick one sentence and suddenly you're an expert in credibility? Shocking. There's nothing to fact check, the story hasn't come out. Other sources have said there's definitely legs to the story, so maybe you should do some investigating instead of harassing me. I don't want your advice, don't need your advice and I don't care to hear it. I'm not flustered. You're just incredibly annoying and add nothing of substance here. Your idea of critical thought is "Well, both sides are doing this and water is wet." Like, good. Great. But also useless. Just say nothing, we are both better off that way. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Oct 26, 2024 23:20:15 GMT -8
Of course you don't like it when I comment at all, especially when it's calling you out for something. Yeah, you said, "hm" as if it had any credibility at all. Hilarious. Halperin himself said he didn't believe it, yet you decide to say, "hm." You need to fact check a little better. It'll serve you well. There's some more advice for ya. No charge, this time. You don't have to check with me. You can keep on going, throwing things out there that aren't credible because not your hate. That's on you. Uh, I'm the lunatic? Hilarious. I'm not the lunatic posting crap about a sound bite that tricks you into clicking on the click bait, so there's that. The delicate one would be you, again. All flustered because you were called out on a crap video. Just own out. Sheesh. I know your ego won't let you go there, but try a little harder next time. I still have hope for you. Because A) You're not a mod and B) It's often a short-sighted attempt to start an argument. Why? Scroll on by. Doesn't affect you in the slightest. Fact check what? I literally said nothing. Didn't we have this same discussion a few days ago? Where you were...wrong? Like, what's the point? You can infer what I think from a one word post? Man, you should be a telepathic mind reader, you missed your calling. You read a Newsweek article and cherrypick one sentence and suddenly you're an expert in credibility? Shocking. There's nothing to fact check, the story hasn't come out. Other sources have said there's definitely legs to the story, so maybe you should do some investigating instead of harassing me. I don't want your advice, don't need your advice and I don't care to hear it. I'm not flustered. You're just incredibly annoying and add nothing of substance here. Your idea of critical thought is "Well, both sides are doing this and water is wet." Like, good. Great. But also useless. Just say nothing, we are both better off that way. Shoot, to you, anything that's negative towards Trump has legs on it, that's obvious, especially with this crap video you decided to post amongst other things. Come on now. You think it's the "hm" that it's in question? No, it's you posting that video at all. It's disingenuous. You only played a snippet of what he said. The guy in the video that you decided to post, said that he didn't believe it himself. How about this idea, don't froth at the mouth to get it out, and take a look at the whole video instead of just a snippet when a person is saying that they can end someone's election with a story. That would be responsible. Of course someone would want to look into what you posted. It's very threatening. He said that it's typical that people right about now, will throw out these National Enquirer stories right before election day and you decided to post it. Weird. How about you not posting crap videos, and articles that you're wrong about. You're very annoying when you do. We're both better off that way. |
|
