The Frankish Reich

You mean there’s two of them? Two Posobishits?

No one cares about some kind of innocuous edit. If you’re right, the actually edited out one of the more powerful/concise responses she gave. So a big nothingburger. And yes, she is more mentally adept and smarter than her opponent, which bothers you to no end because you wanted to keep harping on Biden is Senile rather than Trump is an old fool.

Oxen

So as I told you, Kamala's campaign is running an ad here in AZ (get me outta this hellhole of nonstop political ads and 110 degree temps!) featuring her in the debate. Trump is not running "THEY'RE EATING THE CATS" or anything else from the debate. I wonder why. He is, after all, superb at this off-the-cuff stuff.

True. And you clearly see my point: it all depends on whose ox is getting gored.

Biden just gave a perfectly coherent and strong response to Trump’s silly allegations about the federal government dragging its heels on emergency response.

Commsvet, you make good points. Unlike some others with “expertise” in this area. But unaddressed are these points: - why send ANY essential equipment directly to Putin at that point in time? Why? You suggest it may have been an act of friendship/comity. But then … - why deny it happened? The Kremlin said it did. And Woodward didn’t just make it up. If it was normal and important to maintaining good relations, well, then admit and explain. It’s just … weird. this “what if” game can go too far, but here it’s fair to say “what if it had been Biden and the recipient had been China”

I’m in Arizona now. (Mistake. I was I formed that the heat breaks last week of September.) Kamala is running an ad with one of her debate answers. It is obviously rehearsed, but is delivered well, and forcefully. I would call it an effective oral argument. I don’t know what “off the cuff” means to you. Having talking points and delivering them effectively is modern politics. She is perfectly fine at that. She doesn’t wander into a silly stream of consciousness consistent with mild dementia.

SC automatically gets assigned Jacksonville. Maybe Trevor Lawrence’s girlfriend goes to Matt Gaetz’s orgies. Something to hang your hat on.

You really think stream of consciousness riffing on sharks, Hannibal Lecter, etc is evidence of good off the cuff speaking skills? Only one remaining candidate is mentally fit, and it ain’t Mr “Dampen the Forests” subgenius.

True. These folks support any and everyone who posts leaks, including Julian Assange, who made a career out of it. But a boring assessment of JD Vance crosses the line?

Funny, I thought it worked pretty damn well in 2020. That is why we call him “former President Trump”

She is a more talented off the cuff speaker than her opponent. Right now that’s the relevant test.

That edited bit you cite is coherent and expresses solid support for Israel. So where’s that liberal “word salad” you guys are harping on?

It’s like when JD Vance said that if Biden’s policies were working we’d be the strongest economy in the world. Which we are. But never mind I guess.

I spent some time last week talking with an MBA who worked as a consultant to the national flood insurance program. Did you know that some people have submitted multiple claims? Total loss, rebuild. Flood again, repeat. Those homes should not be eligible for a renewed policy. Insanity.

From economist Tyler Cowen at marginalrevolution.com on socialized risk and bad incentives. Note that "socialized" means "government takes on the risk of hurricane damage," which is exactly what happens in Florida. Commies ... First, whenever possible it is better to use private insurance, such as homeowner’s insurance and flood insurance, to protect against loss. One of the functions of insurance is to make losers at least partially whole after the fact, but another is to make risky decisions too expensive to contemplate in the first place. This second function of insurance is especially important for Florida. The state is vulnerable to storms, so market prices for insurance should be allowed to adjust to higher levels, most of all for vulnerable properties. High prices in an area are a sign that building and renovation should not take place there. With fewer people living in vulnerable areas, the cost of storms will fall accordingly. That sounds harsh, but “incentives matter” is the first and primary principle of economics, and sometimes incentives should be allowed to operate. Unfortunately, Florida has a state-run insurer of last resort which continues to bail out homeowners. Political debates tend to frame this issue as whether to help poor, struggling homeowners. And indeed they may well suffer some terrifying losses because of storms. But whatever you think of such bailouts after the fact, with better incentives ahead of time, that issue will come up less often.

Maybe we need to think about not encouraging people to build/rebuild in areas prone to hurricane damage?

How so? Why on earth would Trump do this?

LOL is way overused. I laughed out loud at this one.

Brain damaged QB.

I like the reason for your edit. Maybe Walz should've said he'd been to Gaza, not Iraq. Or that he'd been Time Man of the Year.

The guy you quoted walked right into it. Ron DeSantis delivers another blow. Haha. You, umm, blew it!

Unlike Kamala’s worthy opponent in his 60 Minutes interview?

Well he never misses a chance to blow Trump. On that we agree.