They had to stop calling him a Nazi too after his rabbi and Jewish wife and children complained.
2024 Election prediction/discussion
- Thread starter lawpoke87
- Start date
Just because ha restricts his racism to not be focused on jews, does not make him kosher. He is a repulsive human being. He is racist against just about every other minoritiy. He has been a repulsive man since HS/College. Id say it gets worse and more entrenched as he ages, but his views in college were pretty bad early on. He started out warped.
So when mass deportation is implemented, does Elon Musk go too now that we know that he is an illegal immigrant?
Hey look everyone a fascist. (And one being talked about for Trump’s Chief of Staff))
www.rawstory.com
Leaked video reveals ex-Trump official's plot to unleash military on Americans
Russell Vought, the former director of the Office of Management and Budget during Donald Trump's first term, was caught on video discussing plans to override objections from Defense Department officials to deploy the U.S. military against American citizens.Vought discussed plans earlier this...
www.rawstory.com
Today's Updates:
PA - Harris +0.3% (19)
WI - Harris +0.4% (10)
MI - Harris +1.1% (15)
NV - Trump +0.3% (6)
GA - Trump +0.9% (16)
NC - Trump +1.1% (16)
AZ - Trump +1.7% (11)
Popular Vote - Harris +0.7%
EC - Harris 270-268
PA - Harris +0.3% (19)
WI - Harris +0.4% (10)
MI - Harris +1.1% (15)
NV - Trump +0.3% (6)
GA - Trump +0.9% (16)
NC - Trump +1.1% (16)
AZ - Trump +1.7% (11)
Popular Vote - Harris +0.7%
EC - Harris 270-268
comrad Harris wins.
I no longer have to make any decisions. The gov will now tell me what I need.
Rawstory.com 😂. WTH is that ? Afraid of the type of websites a Google search would lead me too.Hey look everyone a fascist. (And one being talked about for Trump’s Chief of Staff))
Leaked video reveals ex-Trump official's plot to unleash military on Americans
Russell Vought, the former director of the Office of Management and Budget during Donald Trump's first term, was caught on video discussing plans to override objections from Defense Department officials to deploy the U.S. military against American citizens.Vought discussed plans earlier this...
lol fair enough. It was a Reddit link.
“Put Them in Trauma”: Inside a Key MAGA Leader’s Plans for a New Trump Agenda
Private videos reveal Trump adviser Russ Vought’s “shadow” plans for using the military on protesters, defunding the EPA and villainizing civil servants.
Last edited:
Have a left leaning buddy (TU law grad) who sends me a lot of propublica stuff. Very well written articles. I expect a multitude of these types of articles to come out over the next week.lol fair enough. It was a Reddit link.
“Put Them in Trauma”: Inside a Key MAGA Leader’s Plans for a New Trump Agenda
Private videos reveal Trump adviser Russ Vought’s “shadow” plans for using the military on protesters, defunding the EPA and villainizing civil servants.www.propublica.org
The one where they expose the Biden administration for knowingly allowing tens of thousands of kids to be sold into labor trafficking is a must read.
It's fair to point out the editorial boards of both papers did want to endorse her, and in the case of WaPo, had even written it and had it ready to go. But the billionaire owners of the respective papers interfered and scuttled the endorsements.
Not exactly the same thing as "The newspapers chose not to endorse because they didn't like Harris"
Not so odd, and maybe even genius. Hosted in the nation's largest city, at the world's most iconic arena, and the New York City is the media capital the US made it an event that was going to receive maximum media coverage from all outlets. They didn't care if it was media in support of or in opposition, it was on more tv's, web pages, etc.. They just made it an event that was too big to ignore...
The LA Times and WaPo haven’t endorsed a Republican for President in over 50 years. Not surprising given the hard left bias of those editorial boards. I assume both are more of a business decision. Pretty obvious their endorsements are all about the letter in front of the persons name rather than the better candidate. So why give the endorsement and risk alienating a portion of your readers in a challenging market when said endorsement is based solely on politics ? The WaPo did fail to endorse any candidate when Dukakis ran btw.
Along those lines, I read where the WaPo was going to start publishing a more balanced paper. I assume in hopes of attracting new readers. Of course they risk alienating those on the left who don’t want “their” paper giving a hint of supporting the other side. Maybe the days of obvious bias are coming to an end. Newspaper business is tough these days
Now for something I don’t understand. Harris is campaigning in Nevada this Thursday. However, 2/3 of the vote in the state will be cast as of Thursday. One would think she needed to be there a week ago. Any ideas what she’s doing here ?
Part of that “balanced” effort is just trying to off load large salaries by suggesting life won’t be as cozy if people stay.
Souls to the Polls and Union organized mass voting is a big deal in some states. Just a guess, but the casino unions are probably busing to the polls on Thursday before they have to work the weekend. She can do that and meet large donors there same day. It’s not like her schedule is packed. She takes multiple days off to prepare for simple things other candidates do five or six times a day.
Can you imagine being a high paid newspaper journalist and quitting your job because the owner wants to start running a more balance paper? I can’t imagine your employment options are large.
I’ve been really surprised she’s been out worked by a 78 year old man. If she loses she will regret it.
I had a friend who found that out quick. Was making over $500,000 a year doing left wing leaning personal interest stories related to sports. Was told to take a pay cut, get more balanced, and start working games as a beat writer again. He tried to organize a newsroom revolt and found out quickly every one silently resented him and his salary. He was out on the street a month later, doing a podcast for peanuts six months after that when nobody would pick him up at that salary, and dead by Christmas from a stress related heart attack.
This race is too close to call.
That said, if I had to predict any regrets she might have, it will be the anti-constitutional rhetoric about abolishing the Electoral College because you can win the Presidency without winning the popular vote. And that’s a real possibility for her. Something that nobody thought true even a month ago.
Hope he enjoys his choice. He lost 10% of his subscribers to that paper already.
I'm sure they'll endeavor to be just as fair and balanced as Fox News..... LMAO.
Dude is a brilliant businessman. I’ll trust his decision. He’s doing damage control. Unfortunately the plane has already crashed imo. Not sure he can undo the mess the WaPo has already created.
Last edited:
Bezos wrote his own op-ed explaining the decision, and he (not inaccurately) pointed out that opinion pieces like presidential endorsements can call newpaper's credibility into question, and also have very little effect on the actual election. He's not wrong, and if his stance is "Hey, we're ending newspaper endorsements in general because they don't work and make us look biased", then I could get behind that. But if that's the case, it shouldn't be framed as some sort of historic rebuke of Harris. It has nothing to do with her if you take him at his word.
It's also worth pointing out that Trump met with Blue Origin execs on the day of the announcement of the non-endorsement, and he could have made a deal. The timing of a "principled" decision like that is also suspect. If they announced last year that they weren't going to do an endorsement for all the reasons he mentions, this would have been less of a big deal. To wait until the op-ed was ready to print and then swoop in and pull it raises a lot of questions about the true intent here.
But maybe he means what he says. Or maybe this is a savvy business move somehow for Blue Origin. Or maybe Huffy is right and there were some strong-willed editors that he pulled a power play on just to try and get rid of them and cut payroll. *shrug*
My only real point is that I don't think this move, whatever the motive, actually has much of anything to do with Harris.
I could agree with that. To be fair looking at the past 50 years the endorsements from those papers appear to have a lot more to do with their political party than the actual candidate. Maybe it’s just as simply as that. USA Today has also announced they won’t endorse this cycle. Seems to be a significant change in policy for some of the largest newspapers in the country. I’m assuming the real reason for the shift will eventually come out.
Couple of polls out this am showing NC tied. Not sure I’m buying this based on early voting patterns there but still an encouraging sign for Harris.
Pubs are currently ahead 40k in the early vote in Nevada. Dems still have a few days to cut that gap and even take the lead. If that doesn’t happen, Nevada will turn red this cycle.
Pubs are currently ahead 40k in the early vote in Nevada. Dems still have a few days to cut that gap and even take the lead. If that doesn’t happen, Nevada will turn red this cycle.
its time to clean up the mess.
after this election. all voter registers need to be wiped clean.
Then everybody can re-register. And after showing proof of Citizenship and residentsy, they will receive a Voter ID.
after this election. all voter registers need to be wiped clean.
Then everybody can re-register. And after showing proof of Citizenship and residentsy, they will receive a Voter ID.
All of this. He also said in the article they weren’t so much ending the policy of endorsing candidates as much as they were going back to the policy before World War II when they didn’t endorse candidates out of concerns of appearance of bias.
But editorial pages are for opinions. Even is the paper itself doesn't officially endorse, I would hope that editorial writers could continue to make reasoned arguments about candidates.
You will still see editorials. Now the makeup of the editorial boards might change a little to achieve a more balanced approach. When you’ve endorsed the same party in every election for the past 50 years the idea of reasoned arguments as to the best candidate sort of goes out the door.
If I am a basketball referee should I endeavor to call the same number of fouls for both teams?
What if one team actually fouls more than the other and it helps them win the game because I ignored many of their fouls and artificially penalized a team that didn’t foul much to bring the fouls into balance?
I think the only correct decision is to call the game to the letter of rulebook. If one team ends up feeling like they got cheated but it was only because they actually committed more fouls, so be it.
Last edited:
When you call 3x as many fouls on the visiting teams every year for the past 50 you might want to look at changing referees. No conference would allow that type of bias
If the opponent actually continually commits more fouls, then I have no problem with it. You call the game as it actually conforms to the rules. If one team continually tries to cheat then they will continually be penalized.
Now I do appreciate increased skepticism, but what is really required is reviewing the actual activity of both teams. Was one actually crappier than the other for that long? Probably not, but it’s not impossible.
Today's Updates:
PA - Harris +0.3% (19)
MI - Harris +2.0% (15)
WI - Trump +0.2% (10)
NV - Trump +0.6% (6)
GA - Trump +0.9% (16)
AZ - Trump +1.1% (11)
NC - Trump +1.3% (16)
Popular Vote - Harris +1.0%
EC - Trump 278-260
PA - Harris +0.3% (19)
MI - Harris +2.0% (15)
WI - Trump +0.2% (10)
NV - Trump +0.6% (6)
GA - Trump +0.9% (16)
AZ - Trump +1.1% (11)
NC - Trump +1.3% (16)
Popular Vote - Harris +1.0%
EC - Trump 278-260
Different opponents won’t commit 3x the number of fouls in every game year after year. Hell….in this example they aren’t calling any fouls on the home team. When the ref continues to “home town” these games he eventually gets replaced. Looks like we’re finally seeing evidence. After 50 years the bias if apparent.
This isn’t different opponents it’s one opponent being played over and over again…. And it’s one opponent not played continually for 50 years who has used the same playbook the whole time
lol. The likes of John McCain and Bob Dole are not the same opponent as Donald Trump. Reading your posts I’m beginning to realize how the same party could be endorsed for 50 straight years regardless of candidate and appreciate this change all the more.
It is. I agree with nearly all the messaging but I have since 2016 or 2017.
Who needs the info now? Or maybe it is motivational?
Similar threads
