User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: Yesterday 3:41:57 PM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Master_Shake: I think they were secretly hoping he'd lose so Q and the my pillow guy could save the day again. Yep. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 3:47:54 PM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: Perhaps they were afraid that stealing it again, without the COVID lies as cover, would be even more obvious. And perhaps they are afraid that people would not just sit back and take it this time. In both 2020 and in 2024, there was a lot of results and Trump winning the vast majority of swing States by 2am EST. In 2020, counting stopped in a lot of states. Then a bunch of vote by mail were dropped in with ridiculous numbers for Biden. In 2024, counting did not stop and the election finished on a very similar trajectory. Yet those running the 2024 election claimed that it would take days to weeks to count those votes. If you can't see it, I don't know what to tell you. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: Originally Posted By RolandofGilead: Originally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By Missilegeek: Blatantly stealing the 2020 election and trashing the constitution makes me angry. It should make everyone angry. But some are too stupid to see what obviously happened. Even dumber are the ones who think Trump reacting to it was the Constitutional issue. All the grass is covered in white stuff today. If it was so blatant and obvious, why didn't they just do it again? Trump is going to end up with very similar vote totals to 2020. Seems it would have been simple for the Dems to just steal it again. We're just too stupid to understand why they just didn't do the exact same thing again to easily win. We're even dumber for thinking trump saying we should "suspend all rules, even those in the constitution" is a constitutional issue. Perhaps they were afraid that stealing it again, without the COVID lies as cover, would be even more obvious. And perhaps they are afraid that people would not just sit back and take it this time. In both 2020 and in 2024, there was a lot of results and Trump winning the vast majority of swing States by 2am EST. In 2020, counting stopped in a lot of states. Then a bunch of vote by mail were dropped in with ridiculous numbers for Biden. In 2024, counting did not stop and the election finished on a very similar trajectory. Yet those running the 2024 election claimed that it would take days to weeks to count those votes. If you can't see it, I don't know what to tell you.  They cheated- "Conspiracy!" They didn't cheat- "Conspiracy!" |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 4:00:56 PM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TaskForce: For the record - this is so awesome. I'm so happy the R's won. If we do this right, SCOTUS could be locked red for the next 40 years. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 4:03:04 PM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mcculver5: So, I think a person could look at 2020 and believe the election was stolen. Just as one can believe someone committed a crime but have insufficient proof. I can also believe, based on evidence in this election, that the same opportunity to steal the election was not present in 2024 because of heightened scrutiny. Easy. I don't require existential certainty to come to an everyday conclusion. Hope that explanation helps. Even friendly DAs can only hide so much horseshit and do so much lawfare. It doesn't always work out. While I don't come to the same conclusion, this is a pretty fair take. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 4:04:55 PM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kihn: Putting in place the ability to stop dead people from voting, and illegals, so on and as much made it possible for there not to be that many voters.  https://i.postimg.cc/2SRB72hB/Gbs-TOv-Xo-BAv5-o.png Dems down 14 million votes from 2020. Weird. And you don't mention the massive fluctuation in the red bar. Yeah, weird. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 4:55:49 PM EST
[Last Edit: Bigger_Hammer]
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MADMAXXX: No one that posted anti Trump posts day after day like it was their job in a thread titled "People not voting for Trump" will ever convince anyone that they actually voted for Trump even if some showed easily changeable ballots.  Originally Posted By Alwaysright: No one who moved to Thailand will ever convince me that didn't move there for the Ladyboys. Hypothetically speaking of course.  You Bastard!!!   Bigger_Hammer  |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: Yesterday 4:59:59 PM EST
[#7]
Quote History
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 5:02:44 PM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PortaJohnPicasso: I was in the corps. We're lucky if I'm not eating crayons, and you want fucking reading comprehension skills?!?!?!?  
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 5:23:34 PM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Watch the clip in this tweet. There was not a single county in which Harris outperformed Biden from 2020. I’d argue that simply blaming 2020 on fraud, and failing to take an objective look at what happened, and why so many people were turned away from Trump is precisely “sticking your head in the sand”. Trump has been given a second chance. A clean slate, if you will. The nation rejected him in 2020, and soundly rejected Harris and the leftist agenda 4 years later. Let’s hope he has learned from his first term and is more prepared to effectively take advantage of the opportunity now presented. The uneducated make up the bulk of Trump's support, and that didn't change in 2024. He lost a big chunk of educated white men in 2020, and they didn't come back in 2024. The economy, obviously, was a huge driver. People who thought the economy was poor the last four years were a +42 for Trump. Democrats lost their lead among those who feel abortion should be legal in most cases. It turned out not to be an issue on average, though it may impact specific races. Moderates embraced Trump over Harris. She lost half of Biden's support there. https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2024/politics/2020-2016-exit-polls-2024-dg/ Opinion: Harris failed to separate herself from the Biden economy, and worse, she made comments that chained her to it. "I wouldn't change a thing." Blunder. Picking Walz over Shapiro, assuming Shapiro didn't decline, was a blunder. Trump hid under the table rather than have a second debate against Harris. That was a smart move strategically for him. 7 out of 10 Americans felt that America needed a change, which ties back to Harris' inability to create space between her and Biden. In that sense, Democrats would've been much better off replacing Biden with someone other than Harris. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/economy-ranked-as-a-top-issue-but-concerns-over-democracy-drove-many-voters-to-polls-ap-votecast-shows |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 5:34:47 PM EST
[#10]
Democrats at work were very quiet today. Almost somber.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 5:45:06 PM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GutWrench: Democrats at work were very quiet today. Almost somber. Nothing eventful at my workplace. Everyone was too tired from staying up all night watching the PA count. Maybe someone will be upset tomorrow. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 5:45:39 PM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GutWrench: Democrats at work were very quiet today. Almost somber.  Scott Is A Crybaby and Cartman Licks his Tears |
|
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: Yesterday 5:50:02 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GutWrench: Democrats at work were very quiet today. Almost somber. A few no shows in my office today |
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 5:58:03 PM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: Originally Posted By GutWrench: Democrats at work were very quiet today. Almost somber.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfFeEcbHEVs
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 6:08:57 PM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RolandofGilead: And you don't mention the massive fluctuation in the red bar. Yeah, weird. It's like three million votes. Duh. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 6:11:06 PM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kihn: It's like three million votes. Duh. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kihn: Originally Posted By RolandofGilead: And you don't mention the massive fluctuation in the red bar. Yeah, weird. It's like three million votes. Duh. Less of an anomaly, but still an anomaly. He won in 16 and 24 and you guys just can't accept that he could have lost in 20. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 6:11:57 PM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MK3110: A few no shows in my office today It’s crazy how much this affects peoples lives. I like talking about it politics but at the end of the day. All I can do is cast 1 single vote. Same as them. For me to get butthurt and call in sick or walk around with my head down just seems silly. Politics has become like a sport for the masses. Some pick a team or in the case of Trump they pick a canidate and ride them to the end cheering like a high school pep squad. Hyping themselves up so much that if your team or candidate loses it hits them like a death in the family. All for a person or persons they have never met in their lives. It’s strange to me. Intriguing.. but strange. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 6:12:58 PM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RolandofGilead: Less of an anomaly, but still an anomaly. He won in 16 and 24 and you guys just can't accept that he could have lost in 20. It his third term bro. He ran his second from his country club in FL. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 6:18:38 PM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kihn: It's like three million votes. Duh. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kihn: Originally Posted By RolandofGilead: And you don't mention the massive fluctuation in the red bar. Yeah, weird. It's like three million votes. Duh. I think another million plus have rolled in since that was made. The delta for the Donald between 20 and 24 is around 2 million. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 6:18:55 PM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kihn: It's like three million votes. Duh. So an increase or decrease is only notable if it props up your theory, otherwise it’s just insignificant? Huh. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 6:27:06 PM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Never_A_Wick: So an increase or decrease is only notable if it props up your theory, otherwise it’s just insignificant? Huh. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Never_A_Wick: Originally Posted By Kihn: It's like three million votes. Duh. So an increase or decrease is only notable if it props up your theory, otherwise it’s just insignificant? Huh. A 20% Delta vs a 3% Delta in the numbers, and you wonder why people look at one as more significant?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 7:07:30 PM EST
[Last Edit: macros73]
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: A 20% Delta vs a 3% Delta in the numbers, and you wonder why people look at one as more significant? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: Originally Posted By Never_A_Wick: Originally Posted By Kihn: It's like three million votes. Duh. So an increase or decrease is only notable if it props up your theory, otherwise it’s just insignificant? Huh. A 20% Delta vs a 3% Delta in the numbers, and you wonder why people look at one as more significant?  Your chart appears based on counted ballots. Not all ballots have been counted. There are nearly 7 million ballots still uncounted in California, alone. This is what happens when you blindly accept unvetted information from trash sites like ZeroHedge without exercising due diligence. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: Yesterday 7:07:31 PM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macros73: Unchecked craziness on either side is a worry. That’s partly why I voted for McCormick over Casey. That, and Casey came out in favor of ending the filibuster.  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 7:18:24 PM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macros73: https://i.imgflip.com/99i6wm.jpg Your chart appears based on counted ballots. Not all ballots have been counted. There are nearly 7 million ballots still uncounted in California, alone. This is what happens when you blindly accept unvetted information from trash sites like ZeroHedge without exercising due diligence. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macros73: Originally Posted By Missilegeek: Originally Posted By Never_A_Wick: Originally Posted By Kihn: It's like three million votes. Duh. So an increase or decrease is only notable if it props up your theory, otherwise it’s just insignificant? Huh. A 20% Delta vs a 3% Delta in the numbers, and you wonder why people look at one as more significant? https://i.imgflip.com/99i6wm.jpg Your chart appears based on counted ballots. Not all ballots have been counted. There are nearly 7 million ballots still uncounted in California, alone. This is what happens when you blindly accept unvetted information from trash sites like ZeroHedge without exercising due diligence. She is going to be around 10 million short of Biden... The geriatric, unpopular lifelong politician, who didn't campaign. Yet somehow got millions more than anyone else in history. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 7:26:31 PM EST
[Last Edit: macros73]
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: She is going to be around 10 million short of Biden... The geriatric, unpopular lifelong politician, who didn't campaign. Yet somehow got millions more than anyone else in history. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: Originally Posted By macros73: Originally Posted By Missilegeek: Originally Posted By Never_A_Wick: Originally Posted By Kihn: It's like three million votes. Duh. So an increase or decrease is only notable if it props up your theory, otherwise it’s just insignificant? Huh. A 20% Delta vs a 3% Delta in the numbers, and you wonder why people look at one as more significant? https://i.imgflip.com/99i6wm.jpg Your chart appears based on counted ballots. Not all ballots have been counted. There are nearly 7 million ballots still uncounted in California, alone. This is what happens when you blindly accept unvetted information from trash sites like ZeroHedge without exercising due diligence. She is going to be around 10 million short of Biden... The geriatric, unpopular lifelong politician, who didn't campaign. Yet somehow got millions more than anyone else in history. Typical. Put your back into those goal posts, you can do it! Try leading with: "Oh, you're right. That graph I spent pages defending was complete bullshit, let's revisit it when the count is complete." VEP % in 2024 is going to end up roughly on par with 2020. Both were significantly higher than 2016. You have to go back to 1908 to see turnout % as high as the past two elections. That's not clear evidence of fraud. It's clear evidence of more people voting after our ocuntry spent decades around the 40% turnout mark. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 7:48:32 PM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: A 20% Delta vs a 3% Delta in the numbers, and you wonder why people look at one as more significant? That’s not what I said. Read it again. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: Yesterday 7:49:50 PM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Alwaysright: No one who moved to Thailand will ever convince me that didn't move there for the Ladyboys. Hypothetically speaking of course. How much do they Pay you per Post?? |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: Yesterday 7:52:26 PM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GutWrench: Democrats at work were very quiet today. Almost somber. The “Democrats” in Philly have already started to loot. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: Yesterday 7:54:26 PM EST
[Last Edit: Alwaysright]
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Primecube: How much do they Pay you per Post?? About Tree Fiddy a post and a free trip to Bohemian Grove. |
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 8:02:14 PM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Johnny666: The “Democrats” in Philly have already started to loot. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Johnny666: Originally Posted By GutWrench: Democrats at work were very quiet today. Almost somber. The “Democrats” in Philly have already started to loot. Source? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 8:07:39 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RolandofGilead: Less of an anomaly, but still an anomaly. He won in 16 and 24 and you guys just can't accept that he could have lost in 20. How about it's statistically very improbable? That super spike is what you call a clue. Not an anomaly. Especially in the time of rapey incest forced deliveries. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 8:09:04 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macros73: Typical. Put your back into those goal posts, you can do it! Try leading with: "Oh, you're right. That graph I spent pages defending was complete bullshit, let's revisit it when the count is complete." VEP % in 2024 is going to end up roughly on par with 2020. Both were significantly higher than 2016. You have to go back to 1908 to see turnout % as high as the past two elections. That's not clear evidence of fraud. It's clear evidence of more people voting after our ocuntry spent decades around the 40% turnout mark. The superspike in 2020 is not going to change. |
|
|
|
OH, USA
|
Posted: Yesterday 8:10:01 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macros73: Trump hid under the table rather than have a second debate against Harris. He never hid under a table after getting shot or from the hoe. 3 against 1 debates are a joke but really cute theory / no surprise knowing your thought process. |
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 8:10:17 PM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Johnny666: The “Democrats” in Philly have already started to loot. It’s Wednesday. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 8:26:12 PM EST
[Last Edit: Bigger_Hammer]
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Never_A_Wick: Shit, I’m still waiting for someone to tell me what a N_T is…. Bigger_Hammer
|
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: Yesterday 8:56:31 PM EST
[Last Edit: Johnny666]
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macros73: Source? WTTW Philadelphia podcast. People looting a shoe store at 3600 Germantown Ave, about a 5 minute walk to the medical school on Broad St. Other news/rumors about people amassing to loot around 15th and Market. Posted initially on (FB). |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: Yesterday 8:58:07 PM EST
[Last Edit: Johnny666]
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By eurotrash: It’s Wednesday. They’ll need to steal some calendars won’t they? Edit: Muh bad |
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 9:10:58 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kihn: How about it's statistically very improbable? That super spike is what you call a clue. Not an anomaly. Especially in the time of rapey incest forced deliveries. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kihn: Originally Posted By RolandofGilead: Less of an anomaly, but still an anomaly. He won in 16 and 24 and you guys just can't accept that he could have lost in 20. How about it's statistically very improbable? That super spike is what you call a clue. Not an anomaly. Especially in the time of rapey incest forced deliveries. Show your math. Why, with everything going on in 2020 is it statistically improbable that there was unusually high voter turnout? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 9:16:15 PM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RolandofGilead: Show your math. Why, with everything going on in 2020 is it statistically improbable that there was unusually high voter turnout? It’s been explained over and over. They can’t just comprehend that at the end of 2020, more people wanted somebody other than Trump, than Trump. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Yesterday 9:25:16 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Johnny666: WTTW Philadelphia podcast. People looting a shoe store at 3600 Germantown Ave, about a 5 minute walk to the medical school on Broad St. Other news/rumors about people amassing to loot around 15th and Market. Posted initially on (FB). Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Johnny666: Originally Posted By macros73: Source? WTTW Philadelphia podcast. People looting a shoe store at 3600 Germantown Ave, about a 5 minute walk to the medical school on Broad St. Other news/rumors about people amassing to loot around 15th and Market. Posted initially on (FB). My dude, in Philadelphia, they call that Wednesday. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: Yesterday 9:30:44 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macros73: My dude, in Philadelphia, they call that Wednesday. I think it's called reparations Wednesday. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: Yesterday 10:49:25 PM EST
[#42]
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: Yesterday 10:54:23 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1paintball]
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Never_A_Wick: Shit, I’m still waiting for someone to tell me what a N_T is…. Generally N_T is an abbreviation for Never_Trumper, with emphasis on the underscore as an identifier. There are other delightful terms that it can stand for as well, as they are often co-morbid with the affliction, such as: Neo_Tard, No_Testosterone, Never_Truthful, Notably_Trifling, Nascent_Transexual...ect.  (The last one being particularly spicy considering the profligate homo-erotic ideations exibited by the archetype)...
|
|
|
|
Posted: Today 2:13:18 AM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 1paintball: Generally N_T is an abbreviation for Never_Trumper, with emphasis on the underscore as an identifier. There are other delightful terms that it can stand for as well, as they are often co-morbid with the affliction, such as: Neo_Tard, No_Testosterone, Never_Truthful, Notably_Trifling, Nascent_Transexual...ect. (The last one being particularly spicy considering the profligate homo-erotic ideations exibited by the archetype)... I know what the abbreviation stands for, and so does everyone else. I didn't ask for someone to decode it. Once again, I'm waiting for someone to define "Never Trumper." |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Today 2:25:51 AM EST
[Last Edit: nolan7120]
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macros73: The exit polling tells an interesting tale. Trump also saw a significant decrease in white male voter turnout from 2016 to 2020, and it didn't recover in 2024. In 2024, Latino men made up for the white men Trump lost in 2020. It'll be interesting to see how that changes in 2028 after 4 years of Trumpunist immigration policy. The uneducated make up the bulk of Trump's support, and that didn't change in 2024. He lost a big chunk of educated white men in 2020, and they didn't come back in 2024. The economy, obviously, was a huge driver. People who thought the economy was poor the last four years were a +42 for Trump. Democrats lost their lead among those who feel abortion should be legal in most cases. It turned out not to be an issue on average, though it may impact specific races. Moderates embraced Trump over Harris. She lost half of Biden's support there. https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2024/politics/2020-2016-exit-polls-2024-dg/ Opinion: Harris failed to separate herself from the Biden economy, and worse, she made comments that chained her to it. "I wouldn't change a thing." Blunder. Picking Walz over Shapiro, assuming Shapiro didn't decline, was a blunder. Trump hid under the table rather than have a second debate against Harris. That was a smart move strategically for him. 7 out of 10 Americans felt that America needed a change, which ties back to Harris' inability to create space between her and Biden. In that sense, Democrats would've been much better off replacing Biden with someone other than Harris. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/economy-ranked-as-a-top-issue-but-concerns-over-democracy-drove-many-voters-to-polls-ap-votecast-shows Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macros73: Originally Posted By Low_Country: Watch the clip in this tweet. There was not a single county in which Harris outperformed Biden from 2020.
I’d argue that simply blaming 2020 on fraud, and failing to take an objective look at what happened, and why so many people were turned away from Trump is precisely “sticking your head in the sand”. Trump has been given a second chance. A clean slate, if you will. The nation rejected him in 2020, and soundly rejected Harris and the leftist agenda 4 years later. Let’s hope he has learned from his first term and is more prepared to effectively take advantage of the opportunity now presented. The exit polling tells an interesting tale. Trump also saw a significant decrease in white male voter turnout from 2016 to 2020, and it didn't recover in 2024. In 2024, Latino men made up for the white men Trump lost in 2020. It'll be interesting to see how that changes in 2028 after 4 years of Trumpunist immigration policy. The uneducated make up the bulk of Trump's support, and that didn't change in 2024. He lost a big chunk of educated white men in 2020, and they didn't come back in 2024. The economy, obviously, was a huge driver. People who thought the economy was poor the last four years were a +42 for Trump. Democrats lost their lead among those who feel abortion should be legal in most cases. It turned out not to be an issue on average, though it may impact specific races. Moderates embraced Trump over Harris. She lost half of Biden's support there. https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2024/politics/2020-2016-exit-polls-2024-dg/ Opinion: Harris failed to separate herself from the Biden economy, and worse, she made comments that chained her to it. "I wouldn't change a thing." Blunder. Picking Walz over Shapiro, assuming Shapiro didn't decline, was a blunder. Trump hid under the table rather than have a second debate against Harris. That was a smart move strategically for him. 7 out of 10 Americans felt that America needed a change, which ties back to Harris' inability to create space between her and Biden. In that sense, Democrats would've been much better off replacing Biden with someone other than Harris. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/economy-ranked-as-a-top-issue-but-concerns-over-democracy-drove-many-voters-to-polls-ap-votecast-shows Hid under the table from a 2nd debate which you then call strategically smart. Lol. Such an "at odds" statement. Avoiding a 3on1 gang bang where only one participant gets fact checked is a pretty wise move but you wanted it to happen because you get off on unfair shit like that. Your tears... they're delicious. And I got a free car wash from them today. 
|
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: Today 2:51:16 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1paintball]
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Never_A_Wick: I know what the abbreviation stands for, and so does everyone else. I didn't ask for someone to decode it. Once again, I'm waiting for someone to define "Never Trumper." Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Never_A_Wick: Originally Posted By 1paintball: Generally N_T is an abbreviation for Never_Trumper, with emphasis on the underscore as an identifier. There are other delightful terms that it can stand for as well, as they are often co-morbid with the affliction, such as: Neo_Tard, No_Testosterone, Never_Truthful, Notably_Trifling, Nascent_Transexual...ect. (The last one being particularly spicy considering the profligate homo-erotic ideations exibited by the archetype)...DID I STUTTER?... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: Today 5:23:41 AM EST
[Last Edit: macros73]
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By nolan7120: Hid under the table from a 2nd debate which you then call strategically smart. Lol. Such an "at odds" statement. Avoiding a 3on1 gang bang where only one participant gets fact checked is a pretty wise move but you wanted it to happen because you get off on unfair shit like that. Your tears... they're delicious. And I got a free case wash from them today. https://media1.tenor.com/m/H6dcvStY34MAAAAd/liberal-tears-trump.gif Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By nolan7120: Originally Posted By macros73: Originally Posted By Low_Country: Watch the clip in this tweet. There was not a single county in which Harris outperformed Biden from 2020.
I’d argue that simply blaming 2020 on fraud, and failing to take an objective look at what happened, and why so many people were turned away from Trump is precisely “sticking your head in the sand”. Trump has been given a second chance. A clean slate, if you will. The nation rejected him in 2020, and soundly rejected Harris and the leftist agenda 4 years later. Let’s hope he has learned from his first term and is more prepared to effectively take advantage of the opportunity now presented. The exit polling tells an interesting tale. Trump also saw a significant decrease in white male voter turnout from 2016 to 2020, and it didn't recover in 2024. In 2024, Latino men made up for the white men Trump lost in 2020. It'll be interesting to see how that changes in 2028 after 4 years of Trumpunist immigration policy. The uneducated make up the bulk of Trump's support, and that didn't change in 2024. He lost a big chunk of educated white men in 2020, and they didn't come back in 2024. The economy, obviously, was a huge driver. People who thought the economy was poor the last four years were a +42 for Trump. Democrats lost their lead among those who feel abortion should be legal in most cases. It turned out not to be an issue on average, though it may impact specific races. Moderates embraced Trump over Harris. She lost half of Biden's support there. https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2024/politics/2020-2016-exit-polls-2024-dg/ Opinion: Harris failed to separate herself from the Biden economy, and worse, she made comments that chained her to it. "I wouldn't change a thing." Blunder. Picking Walz over Shapiro, assuming Shapiro didn't decline, was a blunder. Trump hid under the table rather than have a second debate against Harris. That was a smart move strategically for him. 7 out of 10 Americans felt that America needed a change, which ties back to Harris' inability to create space between her and Biden. In that sense, Democrats would've been much better off replacing Biden with someone other than Harris. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/economy-ranked-as-a-top-issue-but-concerns-over-democracy-drove-many-voters-to-polls-ap-votecast-shows Hid under the table from a 2nd debate which you then call strategically smart. Lol. Such an "at odds" statement. Avoiding a 3on1 gang bang where only one participant gets fact checked is a pretty wise move but you wanted it to happen because you get off on unfair shit like that. Your tears... they're delicious. And I got a free case wash from them today. https://media1.tenor.com/m/H6dcvStY34MAAAAd/liberal-tears-trump.gif Here I mistook you for one of the Trumpies who could discuss things like an adult. My bad. Yes, Trump ran from a second debate after being exposed as a lying buffoon. Yes, it was smart strategy to avoid getting shredded again. If he didn’t like being fact checked, he could have lied less. The simple fact is that he lied more often, and more substantially, than Harris did. Sticking to settings where his lies would go unchallenged was good strategy by his campaign. If moderators have to make statements like “there is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it's born” or that there are no credible reports of pets being eaten, the issue isn’t with the moderators. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Today 7:24:46 AM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: She is going to be around 10 million short of Biden... The geriatric, unpopular lifelong politician, who didn't campaign. Yet somehow got millions more than anyone else in history. No one liked Kamala. No one. She doesn’t even like herself. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Today 8:00:11 AM EST
[Last Edit: eurotrash]
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Never_A_Wick: I know what the abbreviation stands for, and so does everyone else. I didn't ask for someone to decode it. Once again, I'm waiting for someone to define "Never Trumper." Originally, it probably meant conservatives who were not voting for Trump. The TX Rabbit, fadedsun and duck_hunt would fit that original definition. Colloquially, its been expanded to include conservatives who spread their hatred of Trump far and wide but are voting for him anyway. Lots of words have lost their original meaning. Republican and Democrat are two examples. Hey, I don’t make the rules. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: Today 8:17:04 AM EST
[Last Edit: Never_A_Wick]
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By eurotrash: Originally, it probably meant conservatives who were not voting for Trump. The TX Rabbit, fadedsun and duck_hunt would fit that original definition. Colloquially, its been expanded to include conservatives who spread their hatred of Trump far and wide but are voting for him anyway. Lots of words have lost their original meaning. Republican and Democrat are two examples. Hey, I don’t make the rules. Thanks for at least trying I’d also include “people who disagree with Trump’s policies and are vocal about it.” Especially here. It’s actually pretty funny, the anger level of some posters has ramped UP since his election victory. Sore winners and all that I guess. |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
