SectionC3

Hmmm . . . so, now that you seem to think "the generals" are profiteers, could you please identify at least two Army generals who are providing from war mongering? I think we're getting to a Rule #2 situation here and we need some specificity. Hoax. In this context "the" means "all." And Trump does not respect "all" men and women in uniform. Case in point: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53337818

He doesn't need my money given his recent monstrous fundraising haul. But I want to give him some of it so we can consign Trumpism to the dustbin of history.

Hmmm . . . last I checked side means a position to the left or to the right of the starting point. I knew you alt wrongers liked alternative facts, but I didn't realize you had delved into "fake lefts" and "fake rights." Interesting. Apparently you haven't heard of it. It was the scandal in which anonymous sourcing supported reporting that took down a crooked, deceitful President. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/carl-bernstein-defends-atlantic-editor-almost-all-200-of-our-stories-about-watergate-were-based-on-anonymous-sourcing It's almost as if history is trying to repeat itself!

Ahhh. The student is trying to become the teacher. An interesting application of “hoax.” Flattery, if you will. And also a hint if copying the libs to try to own the libs. Also. How many sides does an aisle have? I thought it was just two. Maybe I have misconceived aisles.

Nut up on a message board. That’s funny. this is entertainment, pure and simple. Don’t like a point? Don’t read it. Or read it and comment. But never take it too seriously.

Big old zero for Hillary. Joe is going to get some section C3 bucks, though. And not a penny of it will be wasted.

He definitely never heard of watergate. He won’t get this reference, either.

Took zinc with it. That adds the silver to that bullet. Hmmm ... so, who is it engaging in profiteering? The generals or their civilian superiors? You seem to think it’s the civilians, but the chef thinks it’s the generals. I think we need to pick one. (And I wouldn’t argue with characterizing the Halliburton VP as a profiteer, but that’s a different issue for a different day.) Did you ever hear of Watergate?

Sorry didn’t read that was busy munching on hydroxychloroquine.

Hmmm . . . So, under your theory, the generals are the ones chasing the money and therefore instigate the war? Or the civilian leader of the military chases the money and then, without Congressional approval, instigates the war? I’m confused. I don’t think we’re in a Rule #2 situation because you’ve expressed an opinion. I’m simply trying to nail down what exactly that opinion is.

I anticipated your cooperation with Rule #2. It looks like I was wrong. Non-compliance with Rule #2 requires the conclusion that your contention that polls are “garbage” and that they always skew in favor of Democrats until Election Day is nothing more than a hoax.

What is it that I misunderstand, sir?

I hope he doesn’t. That is not very pro-military at all.

Rule #2, FYI, is the “show your work” rule. Not the “restate your baseless opinion” rule. I’ll politely ask again for Rule #2 compliance. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation. This may be a second meltdown. FYI, I satisfied Rule #2 here by quoting your prior post. Also, I’m not sure that you “showed . . . what garbage they are.” That gets us back to our prior issue with Rule #2 compliance. Thank you, again, for your anticipated compliance with that Rule #2 request.

Agreed. Solid application of Rule #2. I’m gonna Rule #2 this. Why are polls trash? And how do they skew toward Democrats until Election Day? MO is interesting, too. Trump running well behind R governor candidate. One or two more points of uptick for Biden might convince me to drop a little cash in STL, KC, and maybe Columbia and make them play some defense. Especially in the KC market if it might help the Senate candidate in KS.

Well said. I don’t agree with it, but I can’t say that the opinion is irrational or baseless. It’s just a difference of opinion. Such is life.

No nerve. You want to waste money on a tactic like this? Go for it. But don’t delude yourself into thinking that what is said here is even marginally important. It’s entertainment, pure and simple. I say something, you get mad, I get amused, and we get on with our lives. Nothing more, nothing less.

No way. Huge, huge, huge, huge waste of cash. You’re better off going door to door in those PA counties, geofencing people (at places like churches, or bars, or schools, or whatever you think is going to help you), hitting them on FB (when you actually know who they are, calling them, sending them a bunch of fancy mail, doing selective cable buys, working local radio, or doing basically anything besides this. I have NEVER seen or heard a political operative even suggest something like working this message board. They would be laughed out of the room.

Solid point. Rule #2 applies here.

Context is key. If you think you’re going to win an election on an Internet message board like this one, you don’t know what you’re doing. It is a waste of time. All day long.

I’m not sure how characterizing a speech that I liked (and, frankly, that was very well delivered) could be viewed ironic or sarcastic in any reasonable world. Sure. But all that said the demographics of a place like this aren’t clear. Don’t know who the people are, ages, genders, where they live, etc. It’s a waste of time to deal with them. Go on FB and hit them that way with microtargeted advertising. Geofence them. Piggyback them (buy call logs from talk radio stations, etc.) But gambling that a bunch of randos might be in the demo you want and might live in the place you want? Waste of time.

Highly doubt the influence point. I don’t have traffic numbers, but, having been in the business, nobody would waste their time with a bunch of randos like this. At least nobody who has any kind of clue what they’re doing.

And it was fair to discuss them in different threads. Here’s the solution. If you don’t like it, then don’t read it. Don’t complain about it. And don’t try to censor it.

Kind of interesting that Booker is running so far ahead of Biden in NJ. Not sure what to make of that. Probably insignificant in presidential race. But still interesting. *** Looked again. He’s not running head. Spread is weird. But still a strange spread.

The decision to start a new thread about a new speech in a new phase of the campaign is one of creator’s discretion, and that discretion was exercised soundly here. And my intent was to discuss the very important issue of Joe Biden’s quite presidential 9/2 and 9/4 speeches. It’s a shame that none of the “open-minded” right wingers cared to participate.