2024 US Presidential Election Thread
- Thread starter ryzno
- 3,494 comments
- 182,010 views
Joey D
Premium
- 47,155
- Boyne Falls, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
There's some weird idea among conservatives that Google can't nor shouldn't suppress results. Google probably suppresses conservative content, but they're a private company and not a government search engine, so they can do that sort of thing. It's just conservatives still not understanding what free speech or free market means.
Danoff
Premium
- 33,576
- Mile High City
That was my suspicion. Although if @Yard_Sale is suggesting that, I'd prefer that he just suggest it straight instead of relying on implication and winks. I asked for a link because if we're going to entertain conspiracy theories, evidence is critical.
McLaren
Premium
- 45,185
- Texas
She wants his voting base, that's the only reason she caved and endorsed him b/c she had one of the best shots at being the Republican nominee behind Trump. If he wins, that's 2 terms & she'll feel his base will move towards her in 2028. If he loses, it'll probably be nigh improbable he runs again & she can still get in his voter base's good graces by being the next nominee and speaking highly of him.
UKMikey
Premium
- 17,457
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
Judging by the number of times I've seen MAGAs online complain about the lack of a transparent nomination process, it sounds like they all want Biden back in.
This is probably what @Yard_Sale or the guy who writes his morning paper must have been watching:
Modern American conservatism...
Last edited:
- 29,444
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
And then you've got this rat bitch:
No, Miss Lindsey, a private individual* or entity using speech absent fraud to, even legitimately and sincerely**, persuade others to vote for a particular candidate is not election interference. "Election interference," like "communism" and "treason," is something which has an actual meaning that doesn't correspond to how you want your idiot base to understand it.
*Necessarily including those who may represent a public entity but are not speaking in an official capacity. Even one representing a public entity speaking in an official capacity to advocate for a particular candidate isn't likely to be election interference (but for specific circumstance unrelated to their representing a public entity) even if it may be wildly inappropriate.
**Which is to say, in this instance, Amazon itself and not some individual within it but not in any legitimate representative role. Just the optics of Amazon using its devices in this manner suggest this was the result of a bad actor with the ability to affect programming seeking to harm Amazon rather than one sincerely advocating for a particular candidate, though the latter remains a possibility.
I suspect video of this exists somewhere but I haven't been able to find it and the post linked to in the screenshot has been deleted.
UKMikey
Premium
- 17,457
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
And then you've got this rat bitch:
No, Miss Lindsey, a private individual* or entity using speech absent fraud to, even legitimately and sincerely**, persuade others to vote for a particular candidate is not election interference. "Election interference," like "communism" and "treason," is something which has an actual meaning that doesn't correspond to how you want your idiot base to understand it.
*Necessarily including those who may represent a public entity but are not speaking in an official capacity. Even one representing a public entity speaking in an official capacity to advocate for a particular candidate isn't likely to be election interference (but for specific circumstance unrelated to their representing a public entity) even if it may be wildly inappropriate.
**Which is to say, in this instance, Amazon itself and not some individual within it but not in any legitimate representative role. Just the optics of Amazon using its devices in this manner suggest this was the result of a bad actor with the ability to affect programming seeking to harm Amazon rather than one sincerely advocating for a particular candidate, though the latter remains a possibility.
I suspect video of this exists somewhere but I haven't been able to find it and the post linked to in the screenshot has been deleted.
When I saw her on Tuesday I got Pixies Here Comes Your Man video vibes.
Last edited:
- 29,444
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
Jeebus.
I love that video so much. Have since I first saw it (I guess on MTV's 120 Minutes?) however many years ago.
Edit: I think this isn't an exhaustive archive (it's still good!), but 1994 certainly seems more likely than 1989 because I wouldn't have had MTV at 17, and that puts it at almost exactly 30 years ago.
Search: “here comes your man” | The 120 Minutes Archive
The definitive library of music video nostalgia. ’80s, ’90s, and 2000s music videos, playlists, and interviews from MTV’s 120 Minutes and MTV2’s Subterranean
Man I am having some pretty good memories right now.
Last edited:
- 2,384
- The failed experiment entitled “California”.
It was a joke.
Entirely based on the conservative media headlines that have come across the wire the last couple days.
I still maintain that my homeboy Tex is the only one with a sense of humor in here.
…and that college education doesn’t guarantee critical thinking skills.
…and intellectualism inherently precludes the possibility and ability to possess a sense of humor
But now I’m rambling.
Just dropping in for my weekly ✋🏼😎
Edit:
I’ll admit it, Famine is a great sense of humor too
Entirely based on the conservative media headlines that have come across the wire the last couple days.
I still maintain that my homeboy Tex is the only one with a sense of humor in here.
…and that college education doesn’t guarantee critical thinking skills.
…and intellectualism inherently precludes the possibility and ability to possess a sense of humor
But now I’m rambling.
Just dropping in for my weekly ✋🏼😎
Edit:
I’ll admit it, Famine is a great sense of humor too
Last edited:
McLaren
Premium
- 45,185
- Texas
I mean no doubt, but I'm disappointed that it won't be one of the old "normals."
...
A bunch of rambling nonsense that reinforces he might have growing health concerns with his brain, just to basically say, "Yeah, I support child care & taxing other nations will pay for it" as his answer for a specific legislation.
Yeah, they'll be paying for it as soon as Mexico gets done paying for the wall....
Jessica Tarlov serves as the Democratic opposing voice on the panel so The Five can pretend to be some "balanced" discussion, so her job is safe. You'll know it's "bad" b/c Jesse & Jeanine will try to "counter" her at the same time so she can't focus on 1 point.
Obelisk
Premium
- 9,621
- United States
- RMedia_Obelisk
I've known you for quite a while, man. We share a racing community on here and I have to say... I don't know why you can't seem to meet the members in this discussion as equals, but it's massively soured my opinion of you.
Just a reminder to you: In any general discussion, you are responsible for backing up your own points. It's called the burden of proof, and you cannot pass it to another person by asking them to look it up after you make the claim. (like you did with your comment about the Alexas)
I am asking you, as a friend, to please just engage this thread normally like everyone else.
- 29,444
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
I'm not certain I know what this non-engagement engagement is. It comes off as a sort of trolling but with a partisan angle. Actual trolling is baiting entirely absent desire for anything more than personal entertainment. There's an alternative wherein the party engaging in this manner has a political agenda and is attempting to ridicule, for personal entertainment, those viewed as having an opposing political agenda whether they do or not. When ventured by connie types, it has been labeled (originally by those engaging in this manner though the phrase has been accepted by others) "owning the libs." The voids necessitating additional scrolling without substantive interaction seems more in keeping with actual trolling.
Okay, yeah, I'm less uncertain about what this is and more certain that my assessment hit the nail on the nose.
Last edited:
Danoff
Premium
- 33,576
- Mile High City
My "cause" with that response was to help you understand why you got the response you did. If I wasn't helping my cause it's because I didn't get the message through. I'll try again, because I'm apparently a glutton for punishment.
If you're not a conspiracy theorist about alexa or whatever, which I'm still not entirely sure of, just say so. If you are a conspiracy theorist about that, just say so. Nothing about that exchange helped any of us detect future sarcasm (if that's what it was), so if you try again, it will get similar results.
- 843
- PA
- attilag78
- TheHun99
So true
www.salon.com
Donald Trump's incoherence makes the media's double standard hard to hide
Joe Biden and Kamala Harris curiously don't get the same coverage
www.salon.com
Last edited:
That’s why I posted the seismic graph. I’ve seen him this way after The Apprentice and I laugh and cry and say what in thee hell is keeping his brain alive? This dude can not be sitting in the Oval Office ever again. He needs to be sitting in his jail cell where he can properly spit his own deranged knowledge.
- 29,444
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
Fake Bake bitch: "Think of me. I got shot at. Won't somebody think of me?"
Fake Bake bitch: "Hehe. Nancy Pelosi's husband was assaulted with a hammer."
Also, the crowd are cops. This was an address to the FOP, a police union, in North Carolina.
Fake Bake bitch: "Hehe. Nancy Pelosi's husband was assaulted with a hammer."
Also, the crowd are cops. This was an address to the FOP, a police union, in North Carolina.
Similar threads
- Poll
