Uncle Joe

[zsn]

It’s not like 1956 when speech “disappears” once the TV cameras turn off - regardless of how badly the MAGA want to return to 1956. Heck, you can look a few posts above and watch it, even 5 years from now! It’s all every news outlet was talking about (maybe not Faux News or Newsmax - they were probably talking about transgender Mexican doctors forcibly doing abortions on Evangelicals or something).

Anyway, if you’re even peripherally following the news you couldn’t miss the highlights or the analysis.

[Overlander]

I apologize, I had no idea that you guys don't have access to youtube, or news sites, or any other goddamn place you can watch the speech, probably for the next 50 years.

You dumbasses act like Presidents are giving speeches off of the back of rail cars.

[RainbowsandUnicorns]

It’s not like 1956 when speech “disappears” once the TV cameras turn off - regardless of how badly the MAGA want to return to 1956. Heck, you can look a few posts above and watch it, even 5 years from now! It’s all every news outlet was talking about (maybe not Faux News or Newsmax - they were probably talking about transgender Mexican doctors forcibly doing abortions on Evangelicals or something).

Anyway, if you’re even peripherally following the news you couldn’t miss the highlights or the analysis.

I didn't say the speech disappeared or would disappear.
I didn't say more than 5% of American voters didn't or wouldn't miss the the "highlights" or the "analysis".
I did say, "Less than 5% of voters will watch/read the speech". Meaning the entire speech.

[Overlander]

It’s not like 1956 when speech “disappears” once the TV cameras turn off - regardless of how badly the MAGA want to return to 1956. Heck, you can look a few posts above and watch it, even 5 years from now! It’s all every news outlet was talking about (maybe not Faux News or Newsmax - they were probably talking about transgender Mexican doctors forcibly doing abortions on Evangelicals or something).

Anyway, if you’re even peripherally following the news you couldn’t miss the highlights or the analysis.

I didn't say the speech disappeared or would disappear.
I didn't say more than 5% of American voters didn't or wouldn't miss the the "highlights" or the "analysis".
I did say, "Less than 5% of voters will watch/read the speech". Meaning the entire speech.

In my small circle, 6 out of 9 saw the video within 1 hour of it originally airing.
2 are GOP.

[RainbowsandUnicorns]

I apologize, I had no idea that you guys don't have access to youtube, or news sites, or any other goddamn place you can watch the speech, probably for the next 50 years.

You dumbasses act like Presidents are giving speeches off of the back of rail cars.

I have access to television, the internet, radio, etc., etc., etc.
Most Americans do too.
I am a dumbass but I don't act like President's are giving speeches off the back of rail cars.
I do act (yes - "act" ) like I know A LITTLE BIT more than the average American does in regards to how many people view, read, hear, about political speeches and ads.
I don't doubt more than 5% of American voters are aware Biden gave the speech yesterday.
I have some justifiable doubt that more than 5% of American voters will watch or read the entire speech. Hey, I could be wrong.

As I said to zsn...
I didn't say the speech disappeared or would disappear.
I didn't say more than 5% of American voters didn't or wouldn't miss the the "highlights" or the "analysis".
I did say, "Less than 5% of voters will watch/read the speech". Meaning the entire speech.

I'm not too sure why anyone would have an issue with that. If you disagree, great. That's a beautiful thing about our country. Two people can disagree without shooting each other. Oh, wait, in too many instances they can't. That's a whole other subject.

Moving on......

Has Joe Biden ever dated a Black Woman?

https://twitter.com/keithboykin/status/ ... 8968371481

[MICHHAWK]

since the beginning of time. if the White House wants to release something. and they don’t want anyone to see it. they release it on friday afternoon.

[randylahey]

We need more "funding" for everything. That's the problem.

No we don't. We just need to stop funding so much stupid shit

[DeletedUser]

We need more "funding" for everything. That's the problem.

No we don't. We just need to stop funding so much stupid shit

It was sarcasm.

Whenever something isn't working the way people want the first thing that's needed to fix it is always funding it seems like.

[randylahey]

We need more "funding" for everything. That's the problem.

No we don't. We just need to stop funding so much stupid shit

It was sarcasm.

Whenever something isn't working the way people want the first thing that's needed to fix it is always funding it seems like.

Gotcha. Yes do you want to stop climate change? Raise your taxes and give the democrats more money

[twocoach]

since the beginning of time. if the White House wants to release something. and they don’t want anyone to see it. they release it on friday afternoon.

It was a speech at a campaign event not a press release.

[jfish26]

since the beginning of time. if the White House wants to release something. and they don’t want anyone to see it. they release it on friday afternoon.

It was a speech at a campaign event not a press release.

Don’t think too hard on what might make someone mistake a pro-democracy speech for a bad news drop.

[twocoach]

since the beginning of time. if the White House wants to release something. and they don’t want anyone to see it. they release it on friday afternoon.

It was a speech at a campaign event not a press release.

Don’t think too hard on what might make someone mistake a pro-democracy speech for a bad news drop.

The guy who reads lots of news sources so he gets all the facts he needs doesn't even bother to know where the speech was given and instead chooses the dumbest possible angle to bad mouth it.

Shocking.

[RainbowsandUnicorns]

I live in a country where our Secretary of Defense can be in the hospital for 4 days and our President doesn't know it. What good reason could there be for Joey bag of donut holes to not be told?

[jfish26]

It was a speech at a campaign event not a press release.

Don’t think too hard on what might make someone mistake a pro-democracy speech for a bad news drop.

The guy who reads lots of news sources so he gets all the facts he needs doesn't even bother to know where the speech was given and instead chooses the dumbest possible angle to bad mouth it.

Shocking.

I think you're wrong - I don't recall MICH ever saying he reads much of anything. Or, really, takes in any "facts" other than those in the Fox feeding tube.

I think it's more that MICH assumes that the state of play, as he understood it as of the first time he voted for Reagan, calcified and remains the same.

In other words, MICH should (but does not) identify with the common complaint that "I didn't leave the Republican party, the Republican party left me."

[Sparko]

I live in a country where our Secretary of Defense can be in the hospital for 4 days and our President doesn't know it. What good reason could there be for Joey bag of donut holes to not be told?

Elective surgery over a holiday. Complications that did not interfere with his decision making. I find your both sider stuff disappointing. Help! I am being repressed!

[Overlander]

I live in a country where our Secretary of Defense can be in the hospital for 4 days and our President doesn't know it. What good reason could there be for Joey bag of donut holes to not be told?

Elective surgery over a holiday. Complications that did not interfere with his decision making. I find your both sider stuff disappointing. Help! I am being repressed!

Yeah, kind of a grey suit level controversy

[RainbowsandUnicorns]

I live in a country where our Secretary of Defense can be in the hospital for 4 days and our President doesn't know it. What good reason could there be for Joey bag of donut holes to not be told?

Elective surgery over a holiday. Complications that did not interfere with his decision making. I find your both sider stuff disappointing. Help! I am being repressed!

I find your lack of knowledge on the subject to be disappointing.

A. His surgery was when? That's right! December 22nd. What holiday is that? I mean, other than National Short Person's Day, National Cookie Exchange Day, and National Nut Bread Day.
He returned home on December 23rd. He was admitted to the hospital due to complications on January 1st. He was placed in Intensive Care.

B. The President should have been informed he was hospitalized (and in Intensive Care) for an extended period of time. That's how it's supposed to work.

C. "Complications" or not, it DID interfere with his decision making enough that Hicks (Deputy Defense Secretary) took over and assumed some of his duties (and actually made decisions).

[Sparko]

You know this how? Indirect reporting. He was admitted on a holiday again. Walter Reed reports all VIPs. The substance of the report is wrong. Probably the truth is in between somewhere regarding HIPA

[RainbowsandUnicorns]

You know this how? Indirect reporting. He was admitted on a holiday again. Walter Reed reports all VIPs. The substance of the report is wrong. Probably the truth is in between somewhere regarding HIPA

I know more than you give me credit for.

[twocoach]

I live in a country where our Secretary of Defense can be in the hospital for 4 days and our President doesn't know it. What good reason could there be for Joey bag of donut holes to not be told?

You would have to ask the Secretary of Defense that question. I am quite confident that the President will be asking him.