The Frankish Reich Posted August 6 Posted August 6 4 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said: Scott Adams? Really?? No fool like an old fool. 1 1
Orlando Buffalo Posted August 6 Posted August 6 For an explanation of why Kamala has improved so much in the polls without doing one interview or saying one intelligent thing it is simple. Dems prefer candidates without a history because anyone who actually stands for anything they have a hard time defending. Clinton did not stand for anything before being president, Obama was a great speaker without any important votes, Biden has not done anything since 2007 that anyone could remember, and Kamala is the same. Liberals know how to complain, but they can't complain about someone so vapid. 5 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: Scott Adams? Really?? No fool like an old fool. He did screw up his life by taking in a gold digger but Dems seem to like nominating them, Kerry and Kamala 1 1
The Frankish Reich Posted August 6 Posted August 6 2 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: For an explanation of why Kamala has improved so much in the polls without doing one interview or saying one intelligent thing it is simple. Dems prefer candidates without a history because anyone who actually stands for anything they have a hard time defending. Clinton did not stand for anything before being president, Obama was a great speaker without any important votes, Biden has not done anything since 2007 that anyone could remember, and Kamala is the same. Liberals know how to complain, but they can't complain about someone so vapid. I agree about Obama and late period Biden, but Clinton had a record as Governor (even throwing the switch on that so-called IQ 70 murderer to show his death penalty support) and policy positions and papers on damn near everything. Bush 43 was a far better example of an empty suit.
Starr-Bills Posted August 6 Posted August 6 40 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: For an explanation of why Kamala has improved so much in the polls without doing one interview or saying one intelligent thing it is simple. Dems prefer candidates without a history because anyone who actually stands for anything they have a hard time defending. Clinton did not stand for anything before being president, Obama was a great speaker without any important votes, Biden has not done anything since 2007 that anyone could remember, and Kamala is the same. Liberals know how to complain, but they can't complain about someone so vapid. He did screw up his life by taking in a gold digger but Dems seem to like nominating them, Kerry and Kamala I mean she is no Donald Trump am I right…
Orlando Buffalo Posted August 6 Posted August 6 8 hours ago, Starr-Bills said: I mean she is no Donald Trump am I right… You obviously have not watched ANY of Kamala if you think that was meandering and pointless. It is not Trump and his best but the short version- Zuckerberg called Trump, called Trump brave, Zuck will not endorse anyone, and will not suppress politics.
Orlando Buffalo Posted August 6 Posted August 6 9 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said: I agree about Obama and late period Biden, but Clinton had a record as Governor (even throwing the switch on that so-called IQ 70 murderer to show his death penalty support) and policy positions and papers on damn near everything. Bush 43 was a far better example of an empty suit. Clinton is from the time period before I could vote, so I will freely admit my recollection is probably flawed. As for Bush he had been governor of Texas for 6 years, we knew what he had done there and his education, energy, and debt policies. His debt policy did not transfer to being president, especially after 9/11, the rest of his policies were expected.
Backintheday544 Posted August 6 Posted August 6 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: You obviously have not watched ANY of Kamala if you think that was meandering and pointless. It is not Trump and his best but the short version- Zuckerberg called Trump, called Trump brave, Zuck will not endorse anyone, and will not suppress politics. But that is Trump. There’s thousands of clips now of him talking like that and going on crazy rants. Hell we still don’t know if Trump thinks Hannibal Lecter was a real person. Polls before Biden dropped out and pundits on both sides before Biden dropped out already point to why Kamala is winning. It’s because she’s not in her 80s. I forget which R said it but before the debate even pointed out the first team to lose their candidate will win. edit: it was Haley: https://www.businessinsider.com/haley-first-party-to-ditch-80-year-old-candidate-wins-2024-1?amp Edited August 6 by Backintheday544 1
Orlando Buffalo Posted August 6 Posted August 6 1 minute ago, Backintheday544 said: But that is Trump. There’s thousands of clips now of him talking like that and going on crazy rants. Hell we still don’t know if Trump thinks Hannibal Lecter was a real person. Polls before Biden dropped out and pundits on both sides before Biden dropped out already point to why Kamala is winning. It’s because she’s not in her 80s. I forget which R said it but before the debate even pointed out the first team to lose their candidate will win. Your entire argument for is Kamala is that that Trump sometimes rambles, while Kamala always rambles? As for Hannibal Lecter, you are aware that he based on a real person, Just as Texas Chainsaw is based on Ed Gein?
Starr-Bills Posted August 6 Posted August 6 14 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: You obviously have not watched ANY of Kamala if you think that was meandering and pointless. It is not Trump and his best but the short version- Zuckerberg called Trump, called Trump brave, Zuck will not endorse anyone, and will not suppress politics. Trump whisper. My point is not that Kamala is some super great orator (we know that doesn’t really matter to you, see Obama) it’s that this guy is off/on his meds and can’t hold a coherent point. You can see it in his repetition and trying to sound cool, did you her zuck called HIM, like three times and he miss have said it 5/6 times. 1
Orlando Buffalo Posted August 6 Posted August 6 The top three things she accomplished are basically nothing and the next few are utter failures, like her border policy. 6 minutes ago, Starr-Bills said: Trump whisper. My point is not that Kamala is some super great orator (we know that doesn’t really matter to you, see Obama) it’s that this guy is off/on his meds and can’t hold a coherent point. You can see it in his repetition and trying to sound cool, did you her zuck called HIM, like three times and he miss have said it 5/6 times. Discussing Trump being less than great off the cuff sometimes is hilarious when you are promoting Kamala is hilarious. Being a great orator, of which Obama was probably the best I have seen, is not that important to me except when you are so bad that virtually everything you say is word salad
Backintheday544 Posted August 6 Posted August 6 8 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: Your entire argument for is Kamala is that that Trump sometimes rambles, while Kamala always rambles? As for Hannibal Lecter, you are aware that he based on a real person, Just as Texas Chainsaw is based on Ed Gein? No my argument for Kamala is she isn’t 80. That’s what the polls argued too. No one wanted an 80 year old President. Yea I’m sure that’s who Trump is referring to. Honesty, do you want Trump talking to other world leaders without you their to interpret what he means? 1
Irv Posted August 6 Posted August 6 2 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: The top three things she accomplished are basically nothing and the next few are utter failures, like her border policy. The problem with Harris is that she's a complete moron. Dumber than a bag of hammers. How can she possibly be President? Another Obammy puppet, yes. But not an actual President. Just too stupid. What a mess.
Backintheday544 Posted August 6 Posted August 6 Also to the Trump doesn’t mean the real life Mexican surgeon Lecter was based on. - he apparently talks to Trump on TV - Trump mentions Silence of the Lambs
Starr-Bills Posted August 6 Posted August 6 8 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: The top three things she accomplished are basically nothing and the next few are utter failures, like her border policy. Discussing Trump being less than great off the cuff sometimes is hilarious when you are promoting Kamala is hilarious. Being a great orator, of which Obama was probably the best I have seen, is not that important to me except when you are so bad that virtually everything you say is word salad And pence did what again, or Quayle or Biden or Mondale etc… (when vp). Note I didn’t say she was. But there is more to the job than being a great orator or joke teller.
AlBUNDY4TDS Posted August 6 Posted August 6 2 minutes ago, Starr-Bills said: And pence did what again, or Quayle or Biden or Mondale etc… (when vp). Note I didn’t say she was. But there is more to the job than being a great orator or joke teller. https://www.indianapolismonthly.com/news-and-opinion/politics/pences-accomplishments-as-vp/
Orlando Buffalo Posted August 6 Posted August 6 11 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said: No my argument for Kamala is she isn’t 80. That’s what the polls argued too. No one wanted an 80 year old President. Yea I’m sure that’s who Trump is referring to. Honesty, do you want Trump talking to other world leaders without you their to interpret what he means? Your entire argument for her is simply she is younger than Trump?
Recommended Posts