Here's a wacko theory to laugh at me for

[mrkelley23]

Arnold Palmer, the enemy within, they're eating the pets, he's exhausted, etc.

I think he's establishing the groundwork for a diminished capacity defense if he loses.

His team has already figured out he can say whatever he wants, and his supporters won't leave him, so why not sow a little confusion?

It's a last resort only, and he can always deny it if he wins.

Sadly (IMO), I think it'll be moot, because I think he's going to win. But if he does lose, you heard it here first.

[BackInTex]

Arnold Palmer, the enemy within, they're eating the pets, he's exhausted, etc.

I think he's establishing the groundwork for a diminished capacity defense if he loses.

His team has already figured out he can say whatever he wants, and his supporters won't leave him, so why not sow a little confusion?

It's a last resort only, and he can always deny it if he wins.

Sadly (IMO), I think it'll be moot, because I think he's going to win. But if he does lose, you heard it here first.

Are you of the belief no pets were eaten? I know folks getting money from the government are saying it didn't happen, or at least at levels of concern. Maybe so, but then again, lots of folks are saying the immigration and crime problems are not at levels of concern, either. So it's a choice on who to believe.

Trump has been called similar and worse things and treated as the enemy within since elected in 2016. He's being cast as a threat to democracy by the folks who ignored their own election process and appointed a candidate.

I've never saw Arnold naked so I don't know anything about his package, though if I did, it would not be a topic of any of my discussions. But Trump is and has always been crass, so I don't think that would qualify as evidence of any diminished capacity.


I know you intended this as tongue in cheek, somewhat.

[mrkelley23]

Arnold Palmer, the enemy within, they're eating the pets, he's exhausted, etc.

I think he's establishing the groundwork for a diminished capacity defense if he loses.

His team has already figured out he can say whatever he wants, and his supporters won't leave him, so why not sow a little confusion?

It's a last resort only, and he can always deny it if he wins.

Sadly (IMO), I think it'll be moot, because I think he's going to win. But if he does lose, you heard it here first.

Are you of the belief no pets were eaten? I know folks getting money from the government are saying it didn't happen, or at least at levels of concern. Maybe so, but then again, lots of folks are saying the immigration and crime problems are not at levels of concern, either. So it's a choice on who to believe.

Trump has been called similar and worse things and treated as the enemy within since elected in 2016. He's being cast as a threat to democracy by the folks who ignored their own election process and appointed a candidate.

I've never saw Arnold naked so I don't know anything about his package, though if I did, it would not be a topic of any of my discussions. But Trump is and has always been crass, so I don't think that would qualify as evidence of any diminished capacity.


I know you intended this as tongue in cheek, somewhat.

I know we have differing notions of credible sources, but I have seen no credible reporting of pets being eaten by Haitian migrants in that town in Ohio. The closest I found referred to a woman who was not of Haitian ancestry, lived in Canton, over a hundred miles away from the town of Springfield, and is not any kind of immigrant, legal or otherwise.

We also have widely differing opinions of threats to democracy. Or Republicanism, for those who want to act like I did as a 19-year-old political science minor and explain that we don't really live in a democracy. Trump is a clear and present danger, and his own words prove it. The Democratic Party followed the only practical process for the circumstances; namely, the presumptive nominee choosing not to run after the primaries, but before the convention. That's not a threat to democracy, that is democracy.

And yeah, now that you mention it, just about everything I post here is a little bit tongue-in-cheek. I'm certainly not brash enough to post this anywhere that has more than a few hundred readers, at most. But I can't think of Trump without thinking of Roy Cohn, and Roy Cohn automatically brings up Vincent Gigante, in my head at least. So that's how I got there.

[Beebs52]

MrK, during trump's first presidency what clear and present danger did he manifest?

[Weyoun]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 33842.html

It would be a very long con. See this stuff from the first go around.

[Beebs52]

While I don't condone his statements they're pretty tame compared to this.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/ro ... ard-hitler

[Weyoun]

It’s almost like FDR didn’t have the benefit of decades of retrospect.

[Beebs52]

It’s almost like FDR didn’t have the benefit of decades of retrospect.

Like a world war or so. Right.

[tlynn78]

It’s almost like FDR didn’t have the benefit of decades of retrospect.

Like a world war or so. Right.

right? So wide-eyed ingenue-esque! Ffs.

[wbtravis007]

Arnold Palmer, the enemy within, they're eating the pets, he's exhausted, etc.

I think he's establishing the groundwork for a diminished capacity defense if he loses.

His team has already figured out he can say whatever he wants, and his supporters won't leave him, so why not sow a little confusion?

It's a last resort only, and he can always deny it if he wins.

Sadly (IMO), I think it'll be moot, because I think he's going to win. But if he does lose, you heard it here first.

Are you of the belief no pets were eaten? I know folks getting money from the government are saying it didn't happen, or at least at levels of concern. Maybe so, but then again, lots of folks are saying the immigration and crime problems are not at levels of concern, either. So it's a choice on who to believe.

Trump has been called similar and worse things and treated as the enemy within since elected in 2016. He's being cast as a threat to democracy by the folks who ignored their own election process and appointed a candidate.

I've never saw Arnold naked so I don't know anything about his package, though if I did, it would not be a topic of any of my discussions. But Trump is and has always been crass, so I don't think that would qualify as evidence of any diminished capacity.


I know you intended this as tongue in cheek, somewhat.

I know we have differing notions of credible sources, but I have seen no credible reporting of pets being eaten by Haitian migrants in that town in Ohio. The closest I found referred to a woman who was not of Haitian ancestry, lived in Canton, over a hundred miles away from the town of Springfield, and is not any kind of immigrant, legal or otherwise.

We also have widely differing opinions of threats to democracy. Or Republicanism, for those who want to act like I did as a 19-year-old political science minor and explain that we don't really live in a democracy. Trump is a clear and present danger, and his own words prove it. The Democratic Party followed the only practical process for the circumstances; namely, the presumptive nominee choosing not to run after the primaries, but before the convention. That's not a threat to democracy, that is democracy.

And yeah, now that you mention it, just about everything I post here is a little bit tongue-in-cheek. I'm certainly not brash enough to post this anywhere that has more than a few hundred readers, at most. But I can't think of Trump without thinking of Roy Cohn, and Roy Cohn automatically brings up Vincent Gigante, in my head at least. So that's how I got there.

Thank you, mrk! I literally got a belly laugh out of this:

We also have widely differing opinions of threats to democracy. Or Republicanism, for those who want to act like I did as a 19-year-old political science minor and explain that we don't really live in a democracy.

And, I’m sure that this will be a gift that keeps on giving when I think of the proud-of-himself-19-year-old mrk every time that “someone” mentions this over and over again from now on.

You’re probably too young to have watched the Dean Martin variety show, where he always said: “Keep those cards and letters coming!”

Anyway, please do.

[Pastor Fireball]

It’s almost like FDR didn’t have the benefit of decades of retrospect.

Like a world war or so. Right.

Which, the last time I checked, Hitler and his generals lost. Just like the confederates lost a certain war eighty years earlier. Doesn't surprise me anymore that the orange loser admires so many historical losers. What a loser. An out-of-touch, minuscule, losing loser.

[Weyoun]

It’s almost like FDR didn’t have the benefit of decades of retrospect.

Like a world war or so. Right.

At this point, it is implied, since tlynn liked your post and agreed with it, but I did want to make it clear that your above comment was maybe the most fucking idiotic thing I’ve ever read here. The idea that FDR in 1935 should be a held accountable for his opinion about Hitler in a way that excuses Donald Trump is hilariously stupid.

This is especially since Trump wanted Hitler’s generals because, of all things, they would refuse to pay for the funeral of an American soldier who tragically died, but who had the mistake of being a woman and Mexican.

The best thing you can say for Donald Trump is that he probably doesn’t want to start a World War or gas anyone, because he’s too distracted by being a garden variety old man racist.

[mrkelley23]

MrK, during trump's first presidency what clear and present danger did he manifest?

I said "is," meaning the present tense. He may have been a threat then, if you listen to guys like Milley or Kelly, but I wasn't privy to those conversations, so I'm not passing judgment. But his own words for the last two years or so are right out of the Fascist playbook.

[BackInTex]

MrK, during trump's first presidency what clear and present danger did he manifest?

I said "is," meaning the present tense. He may have been a threat then, if you listen to guys like Milley or Kelly, but I wasn't privy to those conversations, so I'm not passing judgment. But his own words for the last two years or so are right out of the Fascist playbook.

But you won't give any examples of what you think is right out of the Fascist playbook. I don't have one, maybe you do, but please enlighten us on his words. I'll then reply back with actual actions from the Dem side that are, I assume, in that same playbook.

[mrkelley23]

MrK, during trump's first presidency what clear and present danger did he manifest?

I said "is," meaning the present tense. He may have been a threat then, if you listen to guys like Milley or Kelly, but I wasn't privy to those conversations, so I'm not passing judgment. But his own words for the last two years or so are right out of the Fascist playbook.

But you won't give any examples of what you think is right out of the Fascist playbook. I don't have one, maybe you do, but please enlighten us on his words. I'll then reply back with actual actions from the Dem side that are, I assume, in that same playbook.

Sure I can give them to you. I already did, some of them, but you're looking past them, I guess.

"vermin"
"the enemy within"
"infested"
"bloodbath"

But if you're also acting like 19 year old me, and insisting that these don't fit the precise definition of fascism (which I think has probably been twisted so much that it means whatever a person wants it to mean, kind of like racism), I'm okay with that. We can call it authoritarian, or wannabe dictator, or whatever word fits your political dictionary. My contention is that he's a clear and present danger to the country, no matter what political philosophy you attach to it. Ultimately, I kind of agree with John Bolton (maybe the first time that's ever happened), who said Trump's "not capable of having a philosophy," adding, "You know, Adolf Hitler wrote a profoundly troubling book called Mein Kampf—“My Struggle.” Donald Trump couldn’t even read his way all the way through that book, let alone write something like it."

[tlynn78]

I said "is," meaning the present tense. He may have been a threat then, if you listen to guys like Milley or Kelly, but I wasn't privy to those conversations, so I'm not passing judgment. But his own words for the last two years or so are right out of the Fascist playbook.

But you won't give any examples of what you think is right out of the Fascist playbook. I don't have one, maybe you do, but please enlighten us on his words. I'll then reply back with actual actions from the Dem side that are, I assume, in that same playbook.

Sure I can give them to you. I already did, some of them, but you're looking past them, I guess.

"vermin"
"the enemy within"
"infested"
"bloodbath"

But if you're also acting like 19 year old me, and insisting that these don't fit the precise definition of fascism (which I think has probably been twisted so much that it means whatever a person wants it to mean, kind of like racism), I'm okay with that. We can call it authoritarian, or wannabe dictator, or whatever word fits your political dictionary. My contention is that he's a clear and present danger to the country, no matter what political philosophy you attach to it. Ultimately, I kind of agree with John Bolton (maybe the first time that's ever happened), who said Trump's "not capable of having a philosophy," adding, "You know, Adolf Hitler wrote a profoundly troubling book called Mein Kampf—“My Struggle.” Donald Trump couldn’t even read his way all the way through that book, let alone write something like it."

Did 19 year old you understand context?

Or, how did you feel about "Deplorables" or "they are STUPID" (regarding 18-24 year olds in general) or "I'm friends with school shooters?

We get it. You hate Trump. Don't vote for him. The hysteria gets old.

[BackInTex]

I said "is," meaning the present tense. He may have been a threat then, if you listen to guys like Milley or Kelly, but I wasn't privy to those conversations, so I'm not passing judgment. But his own words for the last two years or so are right out of the Fascist playbook.

But you won't give any examples of what you think is right out of the Fascist playbook. I don't have one, maybe you do, but please enlighten us on his words. I'll then reply back with actual actions from the Dem side that are, I assume, in that same playbook.

Sure I can give them to you. I already did, some of them, but you're looking past them, I guess.

"vermin"
"the enemy within"
"infested"
"bloodbath"

But if you're also acting like 19 year old me, and insisting that these don't fit the precise definition of fascism (which I think has probably been twisted so much that it means whatever a person wants it to mean, kind of like racism), I'm okay with that. We can call it authoritarian, or wannabe dictator, or whatever word fits your political dictionary. My contention is that he's a clear and present danger to the country, no matter what political philosophy you attach to it. Ultimately, I kind of agree with John Bolton (maybe the first time that's ever happened), who said Trump's "not capable of having a philosophy," adding, "You know, Adolf Hitler wrote a profoundly troubling book called Mein Kampf—“My Struggle.” Donald Trump couldn’t even read his way all the way through that book, let alone write something like it."

Oh my gosh! I guess I'd better get me a copy of that Fascist Handbook. They have "vermin" but not "deplorables". Wow. The subtlety is confusing. And saying "the enemy within" makes someone a facist vs "a clear and present danger" a patriot. I have some studying to do.

And "bloodbath". Do you know/understand the context Trump used that word in? I'm sure you know what a metaphore is.

Words vs actions Mike. Trump's words, Biden's (and Pelosi and Schumer) actions.

[BackInTex]

Damnit TLynn. You stole my thoughts. I had most of my response typed up but had to take a phone call. Then I post and see you've covered most of what I said.

[tlynn78]

Damnit TLynn. You stole my thoughts. I had most of my response typed up but had to take a phone call. Then I post and see you've covered most of what I said.

Sorry - been dealing with jail mail all day and it makes for fast fingers.

[mrkelley23]

I'm not trying to change anyone's mind about whom to vote for, especially here. That ship sailed many moons ago. The original post in this thread was me setting myself up for some ridicule because I know I have an unhealthy attraction toward some wacky hypotheses. Then I posted an honest answer to what I thought was an honest question, and it immediately devolved into another session of patronizing and attempted gotchas. So let's go ahead and address your concerns, at least a little, just so you know where I'm coming from.

First: yes, I'm voting for Harris. I believe Trump is a clear and present danger to our health, our welfare, and our economy. Even more more important, I think he's a threat (heck, by this point it's more of a fait accompli) to our general culture. It may not apply to anyone here, but in my area of the country, Trump followers will seize any opportunity to attack anyone they see as "the other side" in language as crass and crude as Trump's. He has set an example that too many people are willing to follow. But all of that is opinion, and you are free to disagree. I'm sure that when the debt and deficit start to explode again, you'll find some way to blame Democrats.

Second: Let's talk about this whole deplorables thing, because it seems to be a real sore point with y'all. All Trump supporters seem to think that Hillary said that anyone who is a Trump supporter is deplorable. Here are her actual words from that interview:

"You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right?” Clinton said. “The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up."

At the time, Trump's support was at about 40% of the country, maybe a little less. So she was calling fewer than 1 in 5 people of voting age "deplorable." And she was specific about what sorts of behaviors she found deplorable, as well. And as much as I disagree with Hillary on a lot of things, well, in my pool of acquaintances, those numbers pretty much track. And the word deplorable, which y'all find so offensive as to be on the same level as vermin? Seems a little pearl-clutchy to me. Deplorable is something Scarlett O'Hara, (or Lindsey Graham) might call the conditions at a country roadhouse. Vermin, on the other hand, has a clear track record. "... should I not also have the right to eliminate millions of an inferior race that multiplies like vermin?" --1942

As to the whataboutism, I'm willing to play that game. But this time, you have to start (and as you'll see later, it will need to be a new thread). You list one action of Biden's, Pelosi's, Harris's, or anyone else you think is as harmful as Trump, and I'll list three of his that are as bad or worse. Actions, not words. If it will make you feel better, we can play that game. But that's for a new thread, and probably a new week.

Because these will be my last words for this thread.

[wbtravis007]

Damnit TLynn. You stole my thoughts. I had most of my response typed up but had to take a phone call. Then I post and see you've covered most of what I said.

Looks like y’all aren’t keeping up very well with current events and what not.

And I know why.

[Weyoun]

BiT knows better than Trump’s former chief of staff John Kelly, who is just a swamp monster anyway.

[Beebs52]

Or Republicanism

Exactly. Republic, not democracy. Like state's rights and that?

[tlynn78]

Or Republicanism

Exactly. Republic, not democracy. Like state's rights and that?

C'mon, man. Standards are good - even if they're double, I guess.

[tlynn78]

Borrowed with permission from a friend more eloquent than I: Why I voted for Trump/ Vance to lead the country. (I am not looking for a debate, just sharing my reasoning for my vote):

1. Loved ones fought in a war for this nation that was terribly mismanaged by leaders from both political parties. Over the course of my adult life, every single President, except one got America into another war, at great cost in lives and treasure. I believe the world is on the edge of being more destabilized than anytime since World War II and we need a President who has a track record of peace through strength.

2. The American Dream and our economic future are at a major inflection point. Inflation has routed the middle class of its stability and Generation Z is facing a world that will be unaffordable and unworkable. While I am not a huge fan of tariffs, I am a believer that the decades of poorly negotiated free trade agreements that didn’t protect the value of workers making an honest living has caused major damage to America’s citizens.

The fact that we can buy all the European Cars we want in America, but there are no American cars sold in Europe is exhibit A of a trade policy that is neither free nor fair. It is also clear that the Biden Adminstration maintaining the tariffs on China, even today, tells us all we need to know about whether they work or not, at least in a targeted manner.

3. Having experienced the media in a pandemic and how they covered up the clear decline of President Biden, I do not trust them to hold a President accountable that they are trying to protect. The fact that he is still the President today, when our world is so destabilized, and the sitting Vice-President still won’t acknowledge his decline means something is very broken in journalism.

They clearly will not protect President Trump. They will do their job of speaking truth to power and they will ensure their role as the 4th estate.

There is no perfect candidate for the Presidency and our choices certainly aren’t perfect this year, but they are our choices.

I will add that I don’t believe the Dems have EVER fielded a poorer candidate, and one more likely to cause terrific damage to this country.