leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 2 Posted October 2 2 hours ago, Starr-Bills said: Yea he was a whiny ass who got caught lying and proceeded to try and shout down two women. I see why you like him. Sad. What a misogynistic point of view. Interesting.
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 2 Posted October 2 4 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said: 10.3 million views. and you’re right. Our country can’t survive if politicians think they can’t be fact checked on TV. It’s a scary thought that they think they can just lie like that. Scary. The challenge isn’t fact checking, it’s that inevitably, partisan political perspective is introduced into what is supposed to be two or more partisan individuals so that the citizens can look at each candidate through their lens, not the lens of a journalist with substantial skin in the game. Inevitably, certain statements are fact-checked, other statements are not, and the appearance of bias rears its head. In many cases, post-debate, the fact checkers are fact checked, context is introduced and the fact-checkers misspoke, misunderstood or were incorrect.
boyst Posted October 2 Posted October 2 2 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: The challenge isn’t fact checking, it’s that inevitably, partisan political perspective is introduced into what is supposed to be two or more partisan individuals so that the citizens can look at each candidate through their lens, not the lens of a journalist with substantial skin in the game. Inevitably, certain statements are fact-checked, other statements are not, and the appearance of bias rears its head. In many cases, post-debate, the fact checkers are fact checked, context is introduced and the fact-checkers misspoke, misunderstood or were incorrect. yes, but i promise you that Walz was in Tianamen Square serving in active combat with bullets whizzing over his head while he was a lt. general. and if he wasn't... well, we'll give him a soft opening to apologize if he misspoke and let us know how nice of a guy he is because, darn it, people like him. at this point fact checking is opinion. nothing more. even if it's right, accurate, and God's honest truth people don't care if it doesn't align with them.
The Frankish Reich Posted October 2 Posted October 2 26 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said: The best description of Vance I heard was a guy who looks like he can’t figure out if he popped or farted. Now I can’t unsee it. The dreaded shart.
SCBills Posted October 2 Posted October 2 This is where we’re at with the media. Leftists trust them implicitly and demand we all do the same. Except they do things like this: ”fact check”, except be misleading about it to benefit the Democrat point of view. Then Walz can claim their misleading claim as the truth. When in reality, Vance was completely correct in his assessment of the issue. 3
Joe Ferguson forever Posted October 2 Posted October 2 1 hour ago, K D said: You picked the wrong topic to debate me on when I actually own a construction company lol. 1. It would take MANY YEARS to build enough new housing to even make a meaningful dent 2. Please tell me which construction company is building low income houses? We build the best of the best which is not going to be affordable to most people 3. New housing is expensive because materials are expensive because gas is expensive, something Kamala will not help with 4. Rates are crap because inflation is high so nobody can afford a loan on a new house even if they need one. My brother and his wife had their 2nd baby and both make 6 figures and they can't afford to move to a house with more beds and baths because their mortgage rate would double 5. The best thing you can immediately do for lower income housing is kick out the illegals and then you have less demand and prices will stabilize. Trump's plan wins why do you build only high end houses? more profit? so incentivize building low end houses. it's not rocket surgery.
The Frankish Reich Posted October 2 Posted October 2 WSJ's headline sums it up: "Vance's Version of Trump Better Than the Real Thing." 1
All_Pro_Bills Posted October 2 Posted October 2 (edited) 6 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: WSJ's headline sums it up: "Vance's Version of Trump Better Than the Real Thing." And the professional grade Hollywood type marketing campaign complete with scripted and rehearsed appearances and focus group tested positions and policies that is manufacturing the image of a new and improved Kamala Harris is more or less, what? The equivalent 100x more intense. She's a complete phony, fake, illusion, take your pick. Edited October 2 by All_Pro_Bills 1 1
Roundybout Posted October 2 Posted October 2 14 minutes ago, LeviF said: Stop posting the neonazi. Look at his bio. You really want to be like this guy?
LeviF Posted October 2 Posted October 2 6 minutes ago, Roundybout said: Stop posting the neonazi. Look at his bio. You really want to be like this guy? AJAB? If you search his post history for that you'll figure out what that means rather than what your fever dream appears to be indicating. And regardless of whether he's a neo-National Socialist German Workers' Party member, is he right?
Doc Posted October 2 Posted October 2 48 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: Their campaign strategy is in a word unique. They keep hammering away at Trump's record but he's not the President. They skip over and ignore the fact that Biden has been President for 3 1/2 years, the shelf life of blaming the last guy has expired, and the Biden/Harris administration owns whatever problems exist now. Basically, they're attempting to run against the record of their own administration by saying we can do so much better. But if they win, it will be more of the policies and agenda of Biden's term. It’s no surprise they want to run away from their record but claiming they’re moderates is the biggest lie of anything that’s been told so far. Never mind that they have a vision to fix things when they couldn’t do anything the last 3 1/2 years and she’s doing nothing about it while she’s the de facto President. What’s scarier is how many people believe it.
B-Man Posted October 2 Author Posted October 2 1 minute ago, LeviF said: And regardless of whether he's a neo-National Socialist German Workers' Party member, is he right? Thats not how they work here. They get to ignore whatever argument that they don't like / or can't disprove, merely by claiming the author is not on their approved list.
dickleyjones Posted October 2 Posted October 2 watched it all. both did well. they are a cute couple. let them run your country together and toss the bosses.
Roundybout Posted October 2 Posted October 2 54 minutes ago, LeviF said: AJAB? If you search his post history for that you'll figure out what that means rather than what your fever dream appears to be indicating. And regardless of whether he's a neo-National Socialist German Workers' Party member, is he right? Oh my god it means “all Jews are bastards” you imbecile
Recommended Posts