Hodad

Don't bother until you have something remotely intelligent to say.

How do you go shopping and get things done around the house while griping those pom-poms so tightly? Don't they get in the way? Maybe if you cheer hard enough you can make the evidence disappear?

Another nuanced analysis from you! Whenever facts get involved you immediately collapse into a puddle of toxic sewage. If you don't have self respect, we certainly can't respect you either. If you're content being a lazy parrot, so be it.

Don't be silly. I made no blanket statement about whistleblowers. Vindman's claims were absolutely backed up by the facts. Note that I said facts, not interpretations or opinions. Shapley, on the other hand, seems to not have his facts straight, as they have been generally contradicted by the other people involved. For example, Shapley claimed that Weiss, in the past, had requested Special Prosecutor status but was denied. Everyone else, including Weiss, says that isn't the case--that when he recently requested that status for the first time it was granted. That's a very large disagreement on a central fact. You're obviously going to believe whatever you want to believe (ala oil production) but it's not sensible, serious or logical.

That doesn't really have anything to do with my post, but okay... You are accusing Weiss, (who was hand picked by "your team") of being corrupt because his investigation didn't reach the conclusion and outcomes that you had foreordained. That's crazy. The "whistleblowers" were roundly refuted last week by multiple others involved. It seems their accusations were not grounded in fact. The other people in the room contradicted Shapley's version of events. Perhaps Shapley was confused or misunderstood. Perhaps he is a "rah rah" conspiracy fanboy too? At any rate, there is a minority opinion on what transpired and you're going to embrace the minority opinion and call everyone else corrupt (despite no knowledge or evidence of the facts) simply because you find Shapley's version convenient. Again, it's a massive breakdown of logic on your part.

Do you not see a fundamental problem with ^^this pattern of reasoning. You only accept the validity of things that confirm your biases or conform to your preferences. In the mold of Trump, "If I win the election, it was fair. If I lose the election, it was fraud." In the mold of turning on effective lifetime Republican warriors (like McConnell or Pence) and calling them RINOs if they break from Trump. When a prosecutor Weis's track record, who was hand-picked by TrumpCo to hunt the Bidens comes up with a set of charges, the sane reaction should be "Well, that must be what is plausible under the law." But instead you, without any legal expertise or understanding of the evidence "feel" that something more should have happened, so you impugn his intent and qualification. Regardless of how aligned or "on your side" a person appears to be, if they don't go to to the maximal extremes that you feel are right, they are apostates. You don't care about their expertise or the pesky intrusions of reality. It's a problem you should get checked out.

Don't forget that he was fined $2 million and his "charity" was dissolved because he has been illegally using the funds to buy himself things like oversized portraits and campaign ads, and to pay legal fees. He's a scumbag and a scammer, to the core.

No way. Do you have any idea how many built in social advantage (not to mention privilege) white men enjoy? It would be fantastic if our society had a level playing field, but until it is, why would anyone elect the disadvantaged position?

Nah, it's you who look foolish. I post numbers, you talk about your feelings. That's the nature of our relationship. I spoon feed you information, and you flounce off, only to return days later not having learned a thing Tell me again about how the (factual) highest domestic oil production in history makes you feel (fictional) like Biden has destroyed energy production and driven up gas prices. That's always good for a laugh.

You mean how the GDP, jobs and stocks all fare better under Democratic administrations? But congrats, Republicans are #1 in deficit and debt!

No, they didn't. While many Democratic politicians supported BLM protests, none of them supported riots. There is a difference. And most commentary explicitly condemned the riots. And Trump tossing in the word "peaceful" into a speech in which he told them to march with him to the Capitol right now and stop the steal or they wouldn't have a country anymore is a very thin facade. They heard and did exactly what he meant them to hear and do. Not to mention the surrounding speakers. But the attack on the Capitol and the intent to harm and/or kill our legislators is only half the story of the Jan 6 coup attempt. The Eastman scheme is the more dangerous and more insidious half. And it came FAR closer to destroying America than the attacks of 9/11. We survived those attacks as a unified people. The Big Lie, culminating in the events of Jan 6 has, as implausible as it seems for a country once based on democratic principles, left us fractured and divided.

Rudeness is the least of it. He's just a big orange skin sack filled with the seven deadly sins. The man has no redeeming qualities. He has no love or loyalty or faithfulness to anyone but himself. I swear, he only even likes his children insomuch as they are his legacy. If one of them crossed him or became a liability, I expect he'd turn on them as quickly a any of his once-loyal associates. I don't know a single person who would want their son to grow up to be that man, or who would what their daughter to marry a man like that. I'm not saying any of this as a point of politics or bombast. I can say positive things about any other post Republican POTUS and usually several of the candidates in any given cycle. He's just the worst human being. And he doesn't embody any of the positive qualities Republicans once identified as virtues either. I know that aspects of populist politics appeal to a certain type of voter, but at least find one who is a decent person worthy of respect.

Nope. Haley is a reasonable candidate capable and interested in practical solutions. I might prefer Biden's policies, but Haley would continue the transition back to normalcy and decency. Nobody cares about Tim Scott though. But every indication is that Republicans are too stupid and spiteful to do anything except nominate the perpetrator of a failed coup facing multiple indictments. What IS funny are your constant predictions that Biden is "toast." Which is laughable. He hasn't even begun campaigning. The 1v1 campaign is still far in the future. We're still in hypothetical polling. People aren't enthusiastic about Biden because he's old and decrepit and uninspiring, but putting him up against Trump again (also old and decrepit and a traitor to boot) and things look very, very different. Trump burned too many bridges. America has already rejected him once, and he's less popular today due to the coup attempt. Even if he manages to avoid a well-earned prison sentence, I don't think he's electable. If Biden is a soggy PB&J that people aren't excited about, Trump is the Orange Chicken that gave us food poisoning last time. No thanks.

I know you're hoping this "death cult" thing will catch on, but it's really very silly. It's so wildly divorced from reality that it makes you seem like a lunatic. Head Start early childhood education? Death and suffering! Environmental regulation to stop companies polluting our water? Death and suffering! Voting rights protections? Death and suffering! You're really quite a kook.

Ah, the articulate, intelligent rebuttal I've come to expect from the conservatives on this board. Sigh.

Our influence is everywhere. That's what it means to be a superpower. I have no interest in becoming a hermit nation like NK. Far better to take part in positively shaping the community in which one lives than to simply hope things work out in your favor. If we're not positively influencing things, someone else will fill that role, and we might not like what comes of it.

Oh, then you'll be delighted to learn that we're NOT there. I remember a time not too long ago when democracy and liberty were Republican values too, not "wokeness." Clearly you've moved beyond such "trivial" values in your quest for authoritarian domination. Pity.

A. The vaccines saved millions of lives. So not exactly a weird thing to celebrate. B. It's called the "cult of marketing," goofus. Turns out Pfizer sells things. Who knew? ? C. Here's what's happening this week. I'm especially excited about the "45th season of Survivor" cult... Really dumb thread.

There are plenty of geopolitical reasons to support Ukraine, but the core interest is that it's a free people fighting for survival against an aggressive dictator to remain free people. There aren't many more noble causes. As Republicans used to believe, freedom isn't free. Self determination is something to be cherished, rather than taken for granted. It must be protected from enemies foreign and domestic (ahem!). And that's a burden that all like-minded people can share Every Western democracy in the world exists because another another nation supported their fight to be free. Ukraine deserves the same, not out of cynical self interest, but simply because it's the right thing to do.

The OP is comically confused about platforms and values, but there isn't even a question about which party is a cult. Parties are formed around a set of common beliefs. Cults are most often formed around one personality. And in America 2023, one party has decided that they will follow one man beyond and set of values, even to the death of democracy and the republic. Sadly, that's not an exaggeration. It should be unthinkable that in the United States of America, a man who attempted to defy the will of the electorate and stage an illegal coup to retain power could ever be the nominee from one of the two major political parties, but that is indeed how far they've fallen.

That's a bit of a body slam by Willis. Looks like Jordan and @WestCanMan are both trying to wrestle above their "weight" class.

He probably had PTSD about gettin' stuffed in the basket.

You live in the weirdest bubble, entirely detached from reality. Not only was there no "definitive proof" there was no evidence whatsoever. Nor is there any evidence that the Democrats have ever committed election fraud at scale. Sure, some random losers from either party occasionally, but there never been evidence of large-scale cheating from any party in modern times. The Republicans much prefer legalized voter suppression. If you want to fantasize about Trump's FBI lying about Hunter's laptop to help Joe Biden, you enjoy the ride. It's nonsense, but that doesn't seem to bother you. And no, one would have to be a fool to believe that an utterly massive conspiracy took place under the most intense scrutiny of any US election in history, and still was sooooooooo brilliant and airtight that nobody could detect the fraud.? Trump, the compulsive liar, told you that the only way he could lose was if someone cheated. And, despite being tremendously divisive, unpopular and unsuccessful, with poor approval ratings and trailing in the polls, that sounded reasonable to you. ? ^^ This is very interesting though. It sounds almost like you acknowledge that what Trump tried to pull off with the Eastman coup was illegal and immoral. And, one would assume, wholly disqualifying even for the most fervent Trumpistas. I mean, if you don't approve of people stealing elections, surely the one person (along with his cronies) who very clearly and with ample evidence tried to steal an election should be repulsive to you. Or perhaps like your allies here you simply don't care at all about frivolous concepts like democracy and the rule of law.

Bullshit. There is no legal provision for what Trump tried to do. Even the jackass who wrote the coup memo admitted it was illegal. It's obviously immoral on every level, it's obviously illegal. The fact that you think it's hunky dory is purely down to your unwavering commitment to Dear Leader--no matter how outrageous his lies and betrayals.

What Trump tried as a primary plan -- and the actions you defend and support--have nothing to do with a contingent election. They simply wanted Pence to discard the inconvenient votes so that Trump could be declared the winner. What you're proposing is that, (prior to the legal clarification) regardless of the outcome of the election it would be cool for Kamala Harris to simply reject the votes from Florida and Texas --and whatever other states necessary--to secure a Biden win. You literally think that was a legal option in the United states for 250 years? ? GTFO.