2024

[KUTradition]

zing!!!



mich calling anyone a pea brain is a compliment

[KUTradition]

c’mon, mich…how about you provide us all with another thinly-veiled racist or misogynist post

you’re so very good at them

it’s almost like you don’t have to try and they’re second nature at this point

[twocoach]

in your pea brain. is a vote for a third party a vote for dt or a vote for old uncle.

It depends on where you live.

[jfish26]

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/donald ... 024-05-17/

"Some of Donald Trump's allies are assembling proposals to curtail the Justice Department's independence and turn the nation's top law enforcement body into an attack dog for conservative causes, nine people involved in the effort told Reuters.

If successful, the overhaul could represent one of the most consequential actions of a second Trump presidency given the Justice Department's role in protecting democratic institutions and upholding the rule of law."

Anyone who thinks this election is just about "my opinion or yours" isn't paying attention. It is not TDS in saying that Trump wants to fundamentally dismantle our system for his own benefit and turn us more into a system run like Russia and North Korea.

Stakes, not odds. There is no gray area whatsoever about what Trump intends to do.

[Sparko]

A vote for a Third Party is a great way to celebrate the dismantling of your own propsperity and freedom.

[TDub]

choices! Just as intended.

[zsn]

choices! Just as intended.

Take it up with the Founding Fathers.

[TDub]

choices! Just as intended.

Take it up with the Founding Fathers.

the founding fathers stipulated that we be limited to 2 "choices" bought and paid for by lobbies?

[Shirley]

choices! Just as intended.

Take it up with the Founding Fathers.

the founding fathers stipulated that we be limited to 2 "choices" bought and paid for by lobbies?

If the issue of how money impacts American elections is important to you, your "choice" is clear:

The 2010 Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, reversed century-old campaign finance restrictions and enabled corporations and other outside groups to spend unlimited funds on elections.

While wealthy donors, corporations, and special interest groups have long had an outsized influence in elections, that sway has dramatically expanded since the Citizens United decision, with negative repercussions for American democracy and the fight against political corruption.

Citizens United is a conservative 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization in the United States founded in 1988. In 2010, the organization won a U.S. Supreme Court case known as Citizens United v. FEC, which struck down as unconstitutional a federal law prohibiting corporations and unions from making expenditures in connection with federal elections. The organization's president and chairman is David Bossie. David Bossie was a deputy campaign manager for the 2016 Donald Trump presidential campaign.

Citizens United lifted the limits on how much individuals can contribute to PACs, and allowed corporations, non-profit groups, and unions to give to PACs for the first time (also in unlimited amounts).

The result? A tidal wave of money flooded subsequent elections. For the first time in history, anyone – and any group – could spend unlimited amounts of money promoting a political candidate via super PACs.

It’s important to understand we’re not talking about unlimited campaign contributions here. Citizens United impacted independent political spending only.

A candidate’s official campaign is a whole other animal. PACs are not supposed to coordinate with candidates’ campaigns at all.

What’s the difference between a PAC and a super PAC?

The new rules put in place by Citizens United allowed for the creation of a new kind of PAC known as a “super PAC.”

Super PACs can raise unlimited amounts of money, and can accept unlimited contributions from corporations, wealthy individuals, non-profit groups, and unions.

Unlike traditional PACs, however, super PACs can’t contribute funds directly to the candidate’s campaign.

[...]

[zsn]

choices! Just as intended.

Take it up with the Founding Fathers.

the founding fathers stipulated that we be limited to 2 "choices" bought and paid for by lobbies?

As Shirley points out FF indirectly gave room for the corrupted SCOTUS to give us a perverse interpretation of Election Law.

Directly, the Electoral College, a racially based anachronism, allows for a tyranny of the minority, and thus prevents any meaningful reform in beating back the power of the lobbies.

[jfish26]

You know what should put this argument to bed? When Trump ducks debating even Biden. And I think the odds of that happening are now well in excess of 50%.

How will we know who is ducking who? Neither side wants their guy on stage. At least nobody reasonable. It was embarrassing last time and it'd be even worse this time.


God it's depressing to think these are our 2 choices.

Got my eye on this.

“I’m going to demand a drug test.” Trump demands President Biden take a drug test before the debates, claims Biden was “high as a kite” during the State of the Union. (Video: RSBN)

https://x.com/mikesington/status/179178 ... q_-8Yt1KMA

[Sparko]

Trump projects. He was high on something for his debates, probably Adderall.

[DeletedUser]

Isn't Adderall used for improving focus and decreasing impulsivity? Seems like a good thing for Trump to take before a debate/rally.

[KUTradition]

like Sparko said…projection

[Overlander]

So, Tim Scott and Matt Gaetz are jockeying for that coveted “I would be proud to pee in your cup for you Donald” spot?

[DeletedUser]

Tim Scott seems to make the most sense.

[Sparko]

Tim Scott seems to make the most sense.

Ironic choice of words for a group that elevates those who make no sense. Trump knows cans.

[RainbowsandUnicorns]

I'm not smart. Explain it to me like I am a stupid 2nd grader. How/why does having Tim Scott as Donald Trump's running mate help Donald Trump get elected?

[KUTradition]

i think illy is of the opinion that scott being black will garner trump the black vote

(despite that portion of the electorate not being a monolithic voting block, in addition to scott himself have issues with support from that community…even black republicans. his relative lack of support from that community is nothing new, but rather goes back decades)

i could very well be wrong, though, and illy has something else on his mind

[jfish26]

I'm not smart. Explain it to me like I am a stupid 2nd grader. How/why does having Tim Scott as Donald Trump's running mate help Donald Trump get elected?

This is fun - the answer happens to rhyme with exactly four other words that happen also to be pertinent to the 2024 election, being gerrymandering and philandering and slandering and meandering.