Deranged Rhino Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 Context: Trump was talking about his number one pick during the primaries today... but who cares about facts when you have talking points to push? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 2 hours ago, Koko78 said: Makes me wonder if the 'accidental' release of a pre-written article about Creepy Joe's pick of Harris about 2 weeks ago wasn't intentional to gauge interest and try to swing/leverage a better running mate like Michelle Obama. It definitely was. They found no one better. I don't think Michelle Obama wants to be President. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 (edited) Rememberer how she got a step up in politics by servicing Willie Brown, the speaker of the state assembly Edited August 12, 2020 by Wacka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 2 hours ago, Doc said: How did they pick her knowing this? Or did they not vet her properly, figuring being the most accomplished and well-known of the bunch was good enough? How do you get around this when it's revealed to everyone? 2 hours ago, Doc said: Won't matter. It will be brought up on Twitter, Fox, at the debates. You can't hide it. Wait, never mind. They were black so owning slaves was OK. Just like blacks killing other blacks is OK but a white person or cop killing one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiotAct Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 3 hours ago, BullBuchanan said: They don't need progressives to fall in line. Absolute best case they're only about 35% of the party and even then most of them are just voyeurs in progressive politics. Most of them will fall in line. The 10% or so that won't aren't needed to win Dem strongholds. I wouldn't be shocked if they win every battleground state by appealing to republicans who hate Trump, but in my book that's what Biden was for. They didn't need to pick a second conservative in Harris. They could have selected a progressive to appease the left, and hid them behind Biden and they would have had the same result, except for what happens after the election. Biden won’t win every battleground state, but he’ll win enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HillaryClinton Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: Alex I'l take 200$ on 'Things that will never be on CNN ' 1 hour ago, RiotAct said: Biden won’t win every battleground state, but he’ll win enough. Keep saying it enough Unicorn it will happen!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 3 hours ago, Jauronimo said: What is indefensible about a tweet sent 12 hours after the "assault" expressing concern about a friend and condemning hatred? What facts were publicly available at 3PM January 29th mere hours after the hoax? Jussie made a lot of people look like fools. His actions were heinous. And if Harris was his hairstylist at Sportsclips, his waitress at Hooters, or his former biology professor at university, her comments made perfect sense. But she wasn’t any of those things, she is one of the most powerful people in the world with access to everyone connected with the investigation. The story was implausible, certainly unusual and I’d think common sense and professional decorum would have one keep the messaging about love and support. Instead, she chose to rush in, as fools do, and used very specific language which turned out to be grossly irresponsible. I note there is some speculation about whether or now she played a more sinister role in the incident, but I’ll leave it she was grossly irresponsible and made herself look foolish. It happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WEATHER DOT COM Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 9 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: If it's Rice -- she sinks his campaign faster than anyone else. If it's Harris (it won't be) -- she brings him afloat the longest but can't carry him over the finish line. If it's Demings (his best choice in a bad bunch) -- she sinks him due to her impeachment flubs ... Survey says it'll be Rice because he's No Chance Joe and she's the perfect anchor to assure his campaign is destroyed from within. Sahhhhh wing and a miss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 4 hours ago, snafu said: Biden does need the progressives. Without them he's toast. Naah....they’ll show up to vote for anyone other than Trump. Just ask Hillary! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 (edited) SEEN ON FACEBOOK: Edited August 12, 2020 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 37 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: And if Harris was his hairstylist at Sportsclips, his waitress at Hooters, or his former biology professor at university, her comments made perfect sense. But she wasn’t any of those things, she is one of the most powerful people in the world with access to everyone connected with the investigation. The story was implausible, certainly unusual and I’d think common sense and professional decorum would have one keep the messaging about love and support. Instead, she chose to rush in, as fools do, and used very specific language which turned out to be grossly irresponsible. I note there is some speculation about whether or now she played a more sinister role in the incident, but I’ll leave it she was grossly irresponsible and made herself look foolish. It happens. Which language in the above tweet is irresponsible given what was known and knowable as of 3:30 PM on January 29th? This tweet bothers you? Meanwhile POTUS has daily twitter tantrums and there isn't a shred of scrutiny on this board. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 14 minutes ago, Jauronimo said: Which language in the above tweet is irresponsible given what was known and knowable as of 3:30 PM on January 29th? This tweet bothers you? Meanwhile POTUS has daily twitter tantrums and there isn't a shred of scrutiny on this board. As a former prosecutor and AG she should know to not jump to conclusions one way or the other. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 (edited) 45 minutes ago, Jauronimo said: Which language in the above tweet is irresponsible given what was known and knowable as of 3:30 PM on January 29th? This tweet bothers you? Meanwhile POTUS has daily twitter tantrums and there isn't a shred of scrutiny on this board. You’re getting turned around here. I never suggested the tweet bothered me—my expectations of politicians are fairly low so I tend not to get worked up by things like this. I believe I’ve stated my point on her tweet, but I’ll try one more time. The fact pattern as alleged by Smollette was very unusual, and given that she definitively described it as “an attempt at a modern day lynching” targeting him as a person of color and discussing his sexuality, it seems to me she knew more than what was publicly available on the date and time in question. I’d hazard a guess that law enforcement knew rather quickly there were holes in the story and that it was likely fabricated, I’d assume a seasoned prosecutor would have cause to be concerned as well. Since she chose to push onward,it’s fair to point out she looks irresponsible when the truth came out. Additionally, though not relevant to the point I originally made, Harris had an exceptional opportunity to clean up the mess she made once the truth was revealed. So, paragraph one of the tweet is perfectly understandable. Paragraph two, given what she appears to have known and her professional background was where she gets ahead of the story, seems irresponsible to me. Since you mentioned Donald Trump,well, his tweets, words and actions are dissected daily, as they should be. They are the frequent target of criticism, and I’m unsure if your lobbying for a different standard for Harris or not, I try to stay away from twitter and tweets in general, mostly because most are ugly and I choose to seek out activity that is not. Finally, as to being “bothered”. Harris’ tweet about Smollette can be debated, I’ll acknowledge I could be wrong and she was spot on in temperament, tone and verbiage. Perhaps there was no political calculus at all to her post. However, a couple of examples of things that bothered me: -Trump’s initial tweet about Obama wire tapping Trump Towers. I can recall where I was when I heard that, and my response was “You can’t say that, it’s a horrible thing to say about Obama without proof” or something similar. Of course, that was before the details of the investigation came out and we discovered the level of complicity of Obama et al. -Harris’ treatment of Brett Kavanaugh. I thought she was horrific, manipulative and condescending, and my only hope was that one day she had a loved one treated as such in a public forum. Then, of course, I realized that that solves nothing, and hoping for a ***** chrarcter assassination for an innocent person is really a Harris thing to do, and I don’t want to live like that. Edited August 12, 2020 by leh-nerd skin-erd 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts