leh-nerd skin-erd

Would the US government do that, do you think?

I've been reading your posts, thanks for sharing your thoughtful comments. I'm probably not a centrist, likely more center right and can understand the character concerns about Trump. Full disclosure, it seems to me as a nation we're all sorts of comfortable with all sorts of politicians who lack moral character and fail at leadership tests (we've had perjurers, predators, politicians who sent American soldiers to be brutalized/die in war(s) over false pretenses, presidents who completely disregard the law regarding safe-keeping of classified documents, who have propped up dictators in foreign lands, misinformation, deception and a whole lot who seem to have a disconnect between what's really true and the truth as they spin it). Personally, I think the 'character' discussion is a great philosophical argument, but falls apart when reality comes into play. You've indicated that Trump divided the nation. The reality as I see it is that after the election of 2016, the nation should have been unified. The electorate considered the successes/failures of the previous admin, considered the hand-selected successor v the outside the beltway candidate, and delivered an unquestionably decisive victory to the new president. What is more American than that? A clear winner chosen, a chance to start anew, and a chance to move forward together. That didn't happen. Quite the opposite occurred. From any reasonable perspective, they supersized division and made it a centerpiece of their platform moving forward. Did you see an attempt at unity from the democrats commencing in January, 2017 when Trump was inaugurated?

I've roundly and routinely criticized the actions of 1/6 participants since 1/6. It was a horrible day, and those that broke the law should have expected to be punished. For those who participated peacefully, they no more were looking to overthrow the government than you. For BLM/Geo Floyd protests, for those who participated peacefully, I support their right to do so, though the actions of participants surely resulted in significant spread of COVID and the pain, suffering and death that went hand in hand with the protests. I've never understood why people in government supported and encouraged that behavior knowing full well the pain and suffering it would cause, but hey, people are complicated. Not all protests were peaceful, however, and in spite of your obviously flawed analysis, people were victimized, assaulted and murdered. Neighborhoods were burned, property destroyed, and stores ransacked. That is not in dispute, even for a cracker jack patriot like you. Finally, I did not suggest the talking points of the destruction in Minneapolis was a winning point, I simply pointed out that if the R leadership can successfully tie the civil unrest to the Harris VP, it may influence voters who are not true believers like you and Roundy. Sure, but when you're running with the old "You spelled ____ wrong" play, it's pretty funny.

Patriotic. There’s another I in there you missed. This is awkward— I have to take back the gold star.

It’s not about you, Roundy. We already know where your allegiance lies. Your point here is a good one, even if you stumbled upon it accidentally. 1/6 will be part of the dialogue of the election, though Washington DC is fine today, and many, many of the perpetrators on that day have been tracked down, arrested and imprisoned.

I believe it is @Roundybout 's contention that death/destruction/violence/arson is not happening today, it's not part of the dialogue.

You're in the true believer crowd, but you have earned a gold star for participation in your permanent record.

1. Tara Reade story was no less/more fishy than the tale told by EJ Carroll or the Blasey Ford accusations against Brett Kavanaugh. The main difference is that her allegations were against someone you support v someone you do not. 2. I don't know what that means. 3. I'd think the free lunch thing is probably not on the list of things they will be focusing on. However, this story from NY would be one way to address the issue. How do you like them apples? https://nypost.com/2024/08/04/us-news/nycs-doe-accepts-offer-for-nearly-5-6m-worth-of-apples-leaving-most-to-rot-ridiculous/ 4. Trump would be part of the patriarchy. Harris would not, though she certainly partnered with the poster boy of the Washington patriarchy for the last several years. 5. Oh, let me clarify. Poor wording on my part. You're a true believer, that wasn't meant to be about "your", as in you. I meant from the perspective of independent voters or those not convinced that the Harris/Walz ticket is the best path forward. Btw, a quick search reveals that crime in Minneapolis is approx 150% higher than the national average.

You didn't care about the Tara Reade situation, or the 10 or so women who were uncomfortable that he groped them, or his acknowledgement that he groped them, but only in the nicest way possible. The same standard would apply to Shapiro, it would be a non-issue for the base. Sanders is the biggest poser in the senate, a caricature of a politician made famous for his crazy hair and old guy accent. Meanwhile, he's made himself a tidy sum of money while fighting for the little guy. We do agree that the modern democrat party needs to have him at the table to run progressive causes. As for his time as governor, his record will show what it shows. It won't matter to his base, but if the Rs can target his weaknesses there's a shot they can turn off some independents. He's an old white guy and part of the patriarchy. The play here is to out him as an extremist, and tie what happened in the riots as that which is coming to your neighborhood if he and Harris get in.

Cheatle sounds a bit like Denzel in Training Day.

She git Butkered? Now that’s ironic.

Sounds like the Butker family has it figured out. Love, commitment, happiness and a boatload of money to support their love, commitment and happiness.

“…and we’ll leave you there…Becky…and get security there…um..” I would have gone with “Becky, get the **** out of there!”.

Fair questions imo.

But this is nothing new, either. The admin claims credit for the good things in the economy, blames the other guys for what ails the economy. At the same time, she’s been a major player in Washington since 2017, VP For nearly 4 years, and the number two to a guy who has shaped American and international policy for decades. Her influence is not limited to the last couple of weeks.

Trump may or may not win, and if he doesn’t, we still get up each day. As for the debate, it is what it is. He debated the best the Dems had to offer, and that candidate couldn’t string a sentence together that made any sense. That was the anytime, anywhere debate. As for the second debate against the new bestest candidate, he should insist on a debate setting that works for him. The reality is that Dem loyalists would move from Biden, to Harris, and should Harris stumble, to Sanders or Pelosi or whomever else they were told is the new bestest. As for independents or those who might not be sure, the debate setting is largely irrelevant.

I keep asking because I’m interested in what a person in your field might see as the future. I’m not interested personally, because what seems to be offered isn’t anything I would like. What bothers me here is the “possibly” part of your post. I’m hard-pressed to find a government mandated housing scenario that values quality over economy, freedom of choice over mandated choices, and the ultimate reality that the govt ultimately chooses winners/losers as in any other system. Plus, all that f@rt dust blowing through the vents on the top floors of these communes has to be overwhelming. Hard pass for me.

Thanks for weighing in. I’m always interested in hearing a birds eye view on this sort of thing. A friend of mine purchased a home north of London a year or two ago and loves it. Plans on spending his retirement years there when the time comes. I’m not certain I would view weapon wielding thugs counted in the hundreds/thousands as a tiny disturbance. It looked quite nasty, in fact, and reminds me that while I’m not a gun owner, probably not a bad idea to own a weapon if you end up in the wrong place at the wrong time. I’m not persnickety, either, I feel the same way whether the bad guys be far left or far right.

I think about experiments in government mandated/assigned housing in foreign lands…places like the USSR. Is that the solution to today’s crisis—government built complexes, communal living, with x amount of space designated to individuals/families? An improvement on that model? Personally, I think the root cause of the problem is a failure of the government to govern pretty much across the board.

These streets and neighborhoods look very walkable if one removes the roving gangs of miscreants on every street corner. What's the plan to address this sort of societal unrest in the collective, Roundy?

I've got you down in the "Maybe, but probably not..." column, Andrew.

I think it has sort of a cool kick to it. "Yeah man, he hit him square on the jaw--the guy was shoulder toast!". "Say it to my face bro...you'll be shoulder toast!". "Wait 'til your father gets home--then you're shoulder toast!". "Breh, he wiped out. Total shoulder toastage!"

It’s just slippage, really.

And of course, if he represented the like sent accurately, we could certainly discuss the rumor. The problem is he’s deliberately misrepresenting what he’s linked to. Why bother, really?

The record is clear, Fiberius.