Tywin et al. Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 2 hours ago, Fez said: The upside is that he (and importantly, many of his advisors) think that Biden can barely string a sentence together and that the debates will be a knock out to clinch victory. Trump can't either and recently in clips he looks like he's melting (obviously mentally, but his face too). There's no reason to want him to debate anyone even if you think Biden is weak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteGabriel Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 8 minutes ago, ThinkerX said: Is it just me or does Trump look like somebody slugged him in the eye? Face looks a bit swollen. It's a flattering angle. Hides his chins and wattles, and makes his diaphanous comb-over sparkle. It has a chance of looking strong and defiant instead of grotesque as a decal on the back of a coal-rolling pickup. JGP 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThinkerX Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 15 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said: It's a flattering angle. Hides his chins and wattles, and makes his diaphanous comb-over sparkle. It has a chance of looking strong and defiant instead of grotesque as a decal on the back of a coal-rolling pickup. Take a second look. The right side of his face below the eye looks swollen. And there is that chasm between his eye and nose. Other side looks normal enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varysblackfyre321 Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 1 hour ago, ThinkerX said: Is it just me or does Trump look like somebody slugged him in the eye? Face looks a bit swollen. That was Hillary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 (edited) It was a doctored mug -- nobody looks good in a mug, and he looks better in this photo than he does on tv. Trump returns to X, the site formerly known as Twitter, shortly after surrendering in Georgia (msn.com) Quote On social media site formerly known as Twitter, firing off his first message in 2 1/2 years shortly after he surrendered at an Atlanta jail on charges he conspired to overturn his election loss. He posted a photo of his mug shot and the words, “Election interference. Never surrender!” along with a link to his website, which directs to a fundraising site. It was Trump's first post since Jan. 8, 2021, when Twitter suspended his account indefinitely, citing fears he would incite additional violence following the deadly storming of the U.S. Capitol building. His account was reinstated last November shortly after Elon Musk took over the company, but Trump had refrained from tweeting, insisting that he was happier on his own Truth Social site, which he launched during the ban. The message marks a homecoming of sorts for Trump to one of his most important megaphones — one he used to dominate his rivals in the 2016 primary and to command the news cycle for years. Trump, who is running again for the White House in 2024, often marveled at how quickly his missives would travel from his account to cable news stations, under the banner, “BREAKING NEWS.” The return to X — and the inclusion of a link to a fundraising page — is also a reflection of just how much money Trump’s campaign has been burning on lawyers representing the candidate and allies as he battles criminal charges in four jurisdictions. Trump’s political operation entered the second half of the year in a strained financial position with its bank account drained by tens of millions of dollars that were directed toward defending the former president from mounting legal challenges as he seeks the White House again. .... Edited August 25 by Zorral Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varysblackfyre321 Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 2 hours ago, DanteGabriel said: It's a flattering angle. Hides his chins and wattles, and makes his diaphanous comb-over sparkle. It has a chance of looking strong and defiant instead of grotesque as a decal on the back of a coal-rolling pickup. True, though if playing into it helps with anyone outside his base will have to be seen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadlines? What Deadlines? Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 11 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said: Does it matter? People not getting indicted doesn't mean she shouldn't get indicted, because she's a trans woman. Not what I meant. I'm just asking what are the odds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 9 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said: Anyway, on last nights pageant, no wrong word, it's start with de... debacle, no, that's not it either debate. I think that's the word I was looking for. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar rated the participants. He's already ruled out Haley as the possible candidate, what are the chances the only other candidate he gave a high rating to has a realistic shot? Quote Nikki Haley: Will Republicans ever vote for a woman as president (let alone a woman of color)? Maybe someday. But not today. Refreshingly, she blamed Republicans in Congress for spending too much. She also held Ramaswamy’s feet to the fire about Ukraine (which he wants to abandon), revealing just how scarily uninformed he is. She pandered to conservatives with her trans position, but came across as informed and intelligent in other issues. Score: 8 Chris Christie: Probably the most entertaining performer among the group. He has an energetic confidence, like Jackie Gleason as Minnesota Fats gliding determinedly around the pool table. He’s a political animal, sure, but he’s not evil like Trump and DeSantis. And he’s much smarter than both of them. His criticism of Trump had the crowd against him all night, but he held his ground. He even defended Mike Pence when he didn’t have to. Score: 8 I'm guessing the people likely to vote in the primaries rated most of the candidates in reverse to his ratings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 Re: the debates, a reminder that it doesn't matter whether Trump takes part or not (he won't) because the debates don't matter. There is scant evidence that they affect the election at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaston de Foix Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 2 hours ago, mormont said: Re: the debates, a reminder that it doesn't matter whether Trump takes part or not (he won't) because the debates don't matter. There is scant evidence that they affect the election at all. There is always the Kennedy-Nixon debates that are trotted out to suggest they can make a difference. Nixon ugly, Kennedy gorgeous. They still dine out in my neighborhood on the fact Kennedy lived here half a century ago even if he was a real scumbag. Anyway, the point is not so much that they matter but that they are wrestlemania for politics junkies. Particularly in multi-member debates with the whiff of desperation on the stage emanating from everyone apart from Vivek the qualm-free opportunist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaston de Foix Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 13 hours ago, Mindwalker said: Hmmm...CheeseBro files for a speedy trial in Atlanta. And the judge has agreed. This is a really interesting development. Even if his legal fees are being paid by MAGA-PAC (and I'm not sure they are), his demand for a speedy trial and a conviction could be complicating for Trump in a variety of ways. Doubtful the Oct. 23 date will actually take place but this will essentially be a dress-rehearsal for the bigger trial. The judge's decision to grant the motion (essentially unopposed by the DA) without doing so for all 19 defendants is only preliminary, but is likely to hold good. Hard to see him reversing course and rejecting motion after motion for delay from Trump. A conviction could be problematic for Trump. An acquittal would be fantastic. But basically a lot of procedural motions in the Chesebro trial will inform how the Trump and associates trial is handled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorn Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 4 hours ago, mormont said: Re: the debates, a reminder that it doesn't matter whether Trump takes part or not (he won't) because the debates don't matter. There is scant evidence that they affect the election at all. They matter in the primaries (maybe not these primaries where a Trump win is a foregone conclusion). A bad debate can end a candidacy, see Rick Perry. They might also matter in this general election, since Biden's performance will be thoroughly analyzed due to his age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 22 minutes ago, Gorn said: They matter in the primaries (maybe not these primaries where a Trump win is a foregone conclusion). A bad debate can end a candidacy, see Rick Perry. They might also matter in this general election, since Biden's performance will be thoroughly analyzed due to his age. Primaries fuck everything up by empowering the most radical of the two major parties. They damage everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorn Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 16 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Primaries fuck everything up by empowering the most radical of the two major parties. They damage everything. What would be the alternative? Ten guys selecting candidates in a smoke-filled room? At least primaries are democratic. They select radical candidates because voters have radical stances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 41 minutes ago, Gorn said: They matter in the primaries (maybe not these primaries where a Trump win is a foregone conclusion). A bad debate can end a candidacy, see Rick Perry. They might also matter in this general election, since Biden's performance will be thoroughly analyzed due to his age. They don't and won't matter. Trump has 'lost' every debate he participated in and it didn't hurt him one bit. His supporters don't care. There's no reason to believe Trump will bother, no reason to pay attention to the Republican debates that occur without him, and no reason to think there will even be a general election debate. I appreciate I sound like Kal here, but on this one I agree. Kalbear and Mindwalker 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorn Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 52 minutes ago, mormont said: They don't and won't matter. Trump has 'lost' every debate he participated in and it didn't hurt him one bit. His supporters don't care. There's no reason to believe Trump will bother, no reason to pay attention to the Republican debates that occur without him, and no reason to think there will even be a general election debate. I appreciate I sound like Kal here, but on this one I agree. I disagree that he "lost" the primary debates in 2016. He stood his own against the rest of the candidates, successfully humiliated his rivals on the national stage ("little Marco", "lying Ted"), and went from a joke candidate that had to pay people to attend his campaign announcement to someone with a serious following. I agree that he has no reason to participate in this set of primary debates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry of the Lawn Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Primaries fuck everything up by empowering the most radical of the two major parties. They damage everything. Joe Biden? Hillary Clinton? Obama? John Kerry? Al Gore? Bill Clinton? Dukakis? Bunch of radicals. Gorn and Mindwalker 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 @Gorn The State has no business funding the election of two major party nominees for various elections. You complain about “smoke filled rooms” ignoring the fact that these “elections” aren’t for any public position. This is an election for the… nominee… for a general election. Why are we as the general public paying for these elections? Why the fuck, given that I’m paying for them, don’t I have the ability to vote in both major party primaries? If the point is to “promote participation” and to allow the public to pick these nominees then fucking let the public pick these fucking nominees don’t limit the public to either one primary or another. We are paying for the privilege of radicalized candidates because of the stupid way primaries are run. hauberk and Ser Reptitious 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry of the Lawn Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: @Gorn The State has no business funding the election of two major party nominees for various elections. You complain about “smoke filled rooms” ignoring the fact that these “elections” aren’t for any public position. This is an election for the… nominee… for a general election. Why are we as the general public paying for these elections? Why the fuck, given that I’m paying for them, don’t I have the ability to vote in both major party primaries? If the point is to “promote participation” and to allow the public to pick these nominees then fucking let the public pick these fucking nominees don’t limit the public to either one primary or another. We are paying for the privilege of radicalized candidates because of the stupid way primaries are run. It doesn't have to be that way, and that's not how it works everywhere. California has jungle primaries, I think a few other places. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Larry of the Lawn said: Joe Biden? Hillary Clinton? Obama? John Kerry? Al Gore? Bill Clinton? Dukakis? Bunch of radicals. That’s just the Presidential primary. Look at the House. Wouldn’t Republican nominees be less likely to be radical if non-Republicans were allowed to vote in Republican Primaries? Wouldn’t all nominees be more Likely to reflect the entire community they are being nominated to represent if they are elected by everyone in the community rather than party members or only people who choose to vote in that primary waving their right to vote in then other primary? Edited August 25 by Ser Scot A Ellison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts