|
Posted by: Ihavenoname ®
03/31/2023, 11:27:11
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
"In reality, they're not after me, they're after you. I'm just in the way."
|
Posted by: DeeDee ®
04/03/2023, 09:27:30
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
already know whatever they have is manufactured, but they are turning the country on its head, while the Saudi's cut oil production and the US dollar is under severe attack. There is genuine trouble on the horizon and most are ignoring it.
|
Posted by: Ihavenoname ®
04/05/2023, 16:47:10
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
I'm just as worried as you are, but knowing that worrying doesn't help much, I'm seriously considering survival plans if that happens.
I wish I could wake up now and realize I was just having a bad dream.
|
Posted by: LateForLunch ®
04/01/2023, 02:33:07
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
President Trump was even with Xiden BEFORE the indictment. It is difficult to imagine that his popularity with undecided voters will decline after this entire shit-show. I have Democrat neighbors who just look SICK lately when I see them outside their homes. They are self-described "moderate" democrat party members. I think they are finally understanding the magnitude of infamy and wickedness they are supporting when they vote for these vicious, cowardly swine. Between the trans mass murder(s) the nearly incomprehensibly stupid indictment and the horrifying, ever more odious corruption of the Xiden family there is some discomfort in their households these days I'll warrant
|
Posted by: Ihavenoname ®
04/01/2023, 16:56:30
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
Wait, I'm confused. Did Trump do something with Xiden recently? Just wondering.
I usually don't believe anyone who claims to be a moderate (or a.k.a. a centrist). What constitutes a moderate Democrat or Republican?
To me, a real moderate (or centrist) means someone who wants to look as sane and rational as possible without going far-left or far-right. Or simply someone who doesn't take either sides. But can you really avoid bi-partisanship completely? Nope.
Of course, I try to hold sensible and reasonable views, but would that necessarily make me a moderate? I don't think so. At least, not everyone would think I am.
So far, I don't know of any true moderates in existence (maybe I'll make an exception for former Canadian PM Jean Chrétien, but I don't like his time as PM).
Being a moderate nowadays is more of an excuse to justify supporting Democrats. I'd rather hear a simple and straightforward answer. Supporters are either on one side (Trump) or the other (Xiden).
I still don't know what people really mean by being a "moderate Democrat." That essentially means "I'm a Democrat."
Modified by Ihavenoname at Sat, Apr 01, 2023, 17:07:28
|
Posted by: LateForLunch ®
04/01/2023, 23:52:55
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
More often than not, truly moderate Democrats register as non-aligned (independent) or simply don't show up on election day to vote for some candidates. I know such people exist, because some of them are family members. One for instance is a very serious Christian who dislikes the anti-Christian slant of the democrat party and also has no patience with the pandemic debacle (Fauci and all of the nonsense associated with the so-called "vaccine"). She refused to get the shots and resented being threatened by 'Crats in many ways. Some registered Democrats are really non-aligned but retain their registration in order to vote in some closed election systems (where you cannot vote in a primary race unless you are registered as a Democrat. I often refer to 'Crats, but that is a term I personally reserve only for democrat party members who are anti-conservative- fanatics (radical revolutionary socialists, anarchists or anti-white racialists/racists). The term seeks to align the 'Crat with people who behave like rodents (vicious, cowardly, verminous, filthy, destructive, dangerous creatures which only show courage in packs, never as individuals).
Modified by LateForLunch at Sun, Apr 02, 2023, 02:05:59
|
Posted by: Ihavenoname ®
04/02/2023, 12:31:37
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
If I had the option to register as an "Independent Libertarian," then of course I will. I'd rather differentiate myself from other independents. But, there's nothing wrong with being an independent voter. I actually think it's a good idea that people think and stand up for themselves rather than spontaneously supporting a party.
I just don't want people to think that I would support Sanders! He's an independent too! There's no way that I would vote for him!
|
Posted by: LateForLunch ®
04/05/2023, 12:12:49
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
One may also register as a (big- "L") Libertarian or as an American Independent party member (it's called something else in every state except Mexifornia), but that makes you an "aligned" voter. In open primary states, any registered person can vote in any primary election (though some vary in this policy). Just a note on political history no big-"L" candidate has ever won high office in the USA. Same for American Independent party member except when it was a national party in 1968 when George Wallace won 46 electoral votes for president. Since that time, the the most any such candidate has accomplished was to help one of the other candidates win. Third parties have a dismal track-record - the last presidential candidate to win more than a single electoral vote was Ross Perot, which likely only helped elect Slick Willie Clinton to his first term by taking a significant number of votes from George Bush XLI. The American Independent Party in California is an off-shoot (now wholly separate) from the national Constitution Party and has never had a successful candidate in any state. Check your state for the current local incarnation of the American Independent or Constitution or Conservative party.* *In local, state and national congress, candidates running/elected without party affiliation are denoted in media with the letter "I" by their names, instead of "D" or "R". That is somewhat misleading since they are technically "non-aligned - so it should really be abbreviated as "NA".
Modified by LateForLunch at Wed, Apr 05, 2023, 13:14:22
|
Posted by: Ihavenoname ®
04/05/2023, 16:38:05
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
I'm going to guess that "non-aligned" means nonpartisan, right? Or perhaps, one that isn't on anyone's side? But it seems hard to be completely non-aligned if these groups share some overlapping views with others. I could be wrong.
About the 1968 Presidential election: I heard it was a pretty rough election when tensions were high in the late 60s (I wasn't alive back then, so I only know this from history).
I have mixed opinions about George Wallace (and things I don't like about him). What's unusual was that his running mate, Curtis LeMay, was a Republican! This is the only election I know where both a Democrat and Republican ran together in a presidential race (only as a third party).
I've heard about the American Independent Party before. It was a far-right party with controversial views. That's all I know.
Unfortunately, third party candidates these days will only split the votes from GOP nominees. The two party system only favors Democrats or Republicans (or the uni-party swamp from how I see it).
|
Posted by: LateForLunch ®
04/06/2023, 12:21:23
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
The effect of Wallace's candidacy is inconclusive, because he ostensibly took many voters from both parties. Nixon won vastly more electoral votes than Humphrey so even though the margin of popular vote was small, Nixon is considered to have won decisively mostly due to president Johnson's terrible unpopularity and Humphrey's alignment with him as his VP.
Modified by LateForLunch at Fri, Apr 07, 2023, 11:26:54
|
Posted by: LateForLunch ®
04/10/2023, 19:36:05
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
The guy who shot Wallace (Arthur Bremmer) seemed to be a textbook case of a loser who wanted attention and revenge against society. He stated repeatedly that he chose to shoot Wallace only because he couldn't get close enough to president Nixon.
Modified by LateForLunch at Mon, Apr 10, 2023, 22:59:17
|
Posted by: LateForLunch ®
04/14/2023, 12:21:33
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
He doesn't have to depend on government SS agents of questionable loyalty - he has his own security staff to protect him.
Modified by LateForLunch at Fri, Apr 14, 2023, 12:22:36
|
Posted by: LateForLunch ®
03/31/2023, 00:35:33
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
It is in the character of 'Crats, when weighing the alternatives of acting with rational motive or vindictiveness to go with spite, not reason. Long-term they may well regret this decision because it could cost them dearly with a significant number of voters. I will also make a prediction - Xiden will declare his candidacy either immediately or just after the moronic, treasonous arraignment. He'll want to ride the wave of inevitable euphoria that will sweep through the ACF True Believers. He (which is to say his handlers) know that he's unpopular, so this will be a way to steamroll over 'Crat detractors. It also makes sense politically because that way if he loses in '24, he can blame it on the "interference" of Bragg's investigation. 'Crats ALWAYS look for a way to be victims. I've given up making long-term prognostications about who will win, because I am a graduate of the EIB Institute of Advanced Conservative Studies and we are taught that the issues which usually are key to deciding elections do not emerge until well into the cycle.
Modified by LateForLunch at Fri, Mar 31, 2023, 01:13:02
|
Posted by: robertb ®
03/31/2023, 01:12:18
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
Desantis is backing him.Vivek is backing him. Even the unwashed masses understand this is purely political corruption at the highest levels.
Of course the cacogens will celebrate, but not the rest of America. I suspect this is going to scare the rank and file democrats across the country. Not those in DC, but those across the states who don't really pay attention to politics much. This blatant of an action is enough to wake a lot up.
Of course that still might not change things, and I have been wrong before (on rare occasions).
It is going to be interesting, in the same way watching a train wreck is interesting.
|
Posted by: LateForLunch ®
03/31/2023, 01:14:24
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
It's possible this is exactly what DJT wanted to happen (see Brer Rabbit) but more-likely it was just typical fearless engagement, which has been his style from day one of his first campaign. It sort of makes him the underdog, and the American people love supporting underdogs sometimes. Will a conviction disqualify him from serving as POTUS?? So far I have not heard this discussed.
Modified by LateForLunch at Fri, Mar 31, 2023, 01:18:27
|
Posted by: LateForLunch ®
04/10/2023, 19:52:22
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
DJT came late to the party as a conservative. He was brilliant in his first term except in politics, for which I give him a "C-". Party-building and cementing the non-aligned vote were two pieces of low-hanging fruit he failed to pluck. In any sane world, Xiden would never have beaten DJT - so the world needed reappraising after the 2020 debacle. DJT could have backed off the polarizing rhetoric, but he chose instead to ratchet it up. I believe there is strong evidence that was a major mistake - 'Crat voting shenanigans to the side.
|
|
|
