21,461 votes, or, "Good news everyone! You don't have to worry about saving democracy, because it's already dead!"

On December 5 at a Los Angeles fundraiser, Joe Biden told donors that he may not even be running for President if it wasn't for Donald Trump. It sounded the kind of admission the elderly make aloud instead of in their head. It also sounded like Chekov's gun.

I could not wrap my head around the things that happened this week, why Merrick Garland permitted the start of the January 6 investigation to lag for so long, yet wasted no time in appointing the special council to investigate Biden, which resulted in the damaging report about his memory. Why his staff let him give that angry press conference which damaged him even more.

Why did this happen, and who benefitted? Donald Trump benefitted, of course. But why?

To give Republicans a false sense of security about Donald Trump. This would allow Donald Trump to prevail in the primaries against Nikki Haley, damaging her electability, even though polls show she is widely considered more electable in the general.

I thought Donald Trump was a stalking horse for Nikki Haley. I still do. But so is Joe Biden. Joe Biden is a stalking horse for Gavin Newsom. This was a game of chicken to see who would pull out first. They are waiting for this Tuesday, Super Tuesday, for Trump to overwhelm Haley in the Republican primaries, damaging her even more. The State of the Union is this Thursday. That is when Biden will announce he is dropping out of the race. Or they may wait til March 31 like Lyndon Johnson.

But why would Biden do this? Could he have just not dropped out last summer and allowed Democrats to choose their nominee in the primaries? No one would have questioned an 82 year old President stepping down. No one wants to work at that age. Newsom may have prevailed in primaries, or maybe someone better would. Who benefitted from this?

The donors. Joe Biden is raising ludicrous amounts of money from donors, despite the absurdity of an 82 year old man with plummeting popularity and an even more unpopular vice President getting reelected when a margin of 21,461 votes is all that was needed to have flipped the last election to Trump. If Biden drops out, the donors will get the money returned because only Kamala Harris would be able to use it, and she would never get elected. The donors would simply send the money back to Newsom. Most of Biden's fundraisers are in California. Those donors are Newsom's donors.

The Panera Bread incident from yesterday revealed exactly how donor friendly Gavin Newsom is. This is the type of candidate donors want. Republican, Democrat, doesn't matter.

Gavin Newsom was selected on the basis of what is known about successful Democratic nominees in the age of television - that they need to be charismatic and not too old (the exceptions, Johnson and Biden, were elected under extraordinary circumstances), and if possible, good-looking (Kennedy, Clinton, Obama. Carter was charismatic but only photogenic.) Nominees who did not fit this mode have failed. Despite the high amount of negatives around him, Newsom possesses qualities which make him well suited to running for President in the post-Trump era: the ability to bring attention to himself, and the capability to be both charming and confrontational and vicious. At six foot three and a very physically fit 56, Newsom would dominate any debate against Trump or Nikki Haley. Nikki Haley, while very good looking, may not be able to overcome society's bias towards a dominating man, as the 2016 election proved. Especially a white man.

By executing this scheme, the Democratic donors are in fact saving themselves money. Republicans donors wasted tons of money on unsuccessful primary campaigns this year. Doing it this way is simply more cost effective and efficient.

It also means we are now living an oligarchy. I had always thought the United States would have to eventually capitulate to Parliamentary Democracy due to the present government's dysfunction and abuse of rules meant to ensure checks and balances (the Supreme Court.) But Parliamentary Democracies allow their voters to decide their national leaders at the local level. This is much, much worse.

The spreadsheet will be uploaded upon request.

[italic]Jake Gittes: Why are you doing it? How much better can you eat? What could you buy that you can't already afford?

Noah Cross: The future, Mr. Gittes! The future![/italic] - Chinatown

There's just no stopping you, is there, OP?

But it didn’t.

R3,

You repeatedly use the same GIF. Consistently. Over and over again. For months.

You are also a hardcore Biden supporter, which means you are likely to have personality traits in line with authoritarianism.

When were you diagnosed with autism?

OP is on a warpath, trying to convince everyone that Trump has already won and so there's no use in voting anyway. Which is an interesting use of one's free time.

R3 In addition,

You are posting the link incorrectly. Links to GIFs from Pinterest won't animate with Datalounge's inline formatting. It needs to be saved to your harddrive, and uploaded to a host with compatible image hosting for a GIF to properly animate within this site's embedded links.

Since you are not that Internet savvy, or you would have realized this, you are older, probably older than 55. You would have rehosted the GIF and saved that link, instead of just bookmarking the link to Pinterest, like an older person would do.

[quote]You repeatedly use the same GIF. Consistently. Over and over again. For months.

Actually, OP, for *years*. It does the job. Like a Sure, Jan gif. If you want to talk autism/spectrum...look in the mirror.

[quote]You are posting the link incorrectly

I see OCD is also part of your psychopathy, r7.

R6 I don't think Trump has already won. In fact if he is the nominee, he won't win. But he won't lose to Biden. He will lose to Newsom.

well duh it should be fairly obvious I'm the ASD troll. And obsessive compulsive behavior is usually comorbid with high functioning autism, like this:

r3 you need to take this link and bookmark it. Since you are likely on the Spectrum you most likely have an Apple product, and will be using Safari. So you will need to use the command D function to add it to your bookmarks. The command button is the button to the left of your spacebar.

The fact that you have been posting the same GIF for years, along with Sure Jan, is not a surprise for someone on the autism spectrum who leans toward authoritarianism, as lack of creativity is a sign of authoritarian personalities.

Girls, girls, we're all cunts!

R9 the correct word is pathology. Even if you intended to associate it with psychopathy, the usage of the word is incorrect since psychopathy could not posses a pathology which it is not associated with. You should have said, “I see OCD is also part of your pathology, in addition to psychopathy.”

[quote]you most likely have an Apple product, and will be using Safari

Wrong on both counts, r11.

R14 I don’t need to prove it. You don’t need to prove it. As an authoritarian you would be fundamentally dishonest, so if I asked you to prove it you would simply lie.

I mean even if I did believe you were honest, which I don’t, the only means to prove it would be to open this page and take a screenshot and upload it to an image server, but given your technology limitations I’m not sure you would be capable of doing that.

Either way, many people own both Apple products and PCs. I do. You would favor the Apple for leisure web usage.

NY Times backbending to find “Biden In Trouble” headlines for clicks in the horse race that isn’t a horse race,

I never used to get overwrought about politics until Trump came along. I wish a switch could be flipped to undo him.

R17 you’re half right. They aren’t backbending. But this isn’t a horse race. It’s more like a Puerto Rican knife fight.

I'm picturing a fat, pasty-white closeted unfuckable troll parked at a basement of the Federalist Society headquarters, feverishly churning out "OMG BIDENZ OLDD!!1!" shitposts to social media while furtively masturbating to shirtless pics of Chris Hemsworth.

Am I close, OP?

I prefer Liam r20.

Buy are you going to be pissed when you realize what Biden did to ensure a Democratic victory. Betraying his biggest supporters! Oh the beautiful tantrums that will be thrown here! It will make Hillary’s capitulation look like teatime at the Plaza.

Here it comes!

This is proof that the electoral college is a mess since Biden had nearly 7 million votes over Dump.

Well yes the electoral college is terrible. Everyone except Republicans hates it.

But why hasn’t any Democrat done something? For twenty years since Bush V Gore we’ve heard of its evil. Nobody got rid of it, or tried.

Please FF this OP before blocking him. He’s spreading his feces all over DL and posting only anti-Biden shit. He needs to be red-tagged and/or given the boot.

Op—doesn’t even understand how the vote in the House works. Each state delegation gets a single vote. Thus it takes 26 votes to elect from the House. Trump would have won that vote.

The American President made a strong and compelling argument for Americans to vote for him rather than the Huckster from Queens.

Blue tecktonic shift in November.

That's why Joe should be nominated for Sainthood.

R26 and THAT was the Sedition in a nutshell. The overthrow of the government by illegal manipulation of the process.

Trump now leading by 1 point in ave of polls

R28 the difference between actual conservatives and liberals is we find opinions like that depressing

“Well, just act like a dictator! That’ll fix everything!”

Then when Trump does it:

“Hitler has risen from hell!”

Polls are no longer important.

Actual governance counts.

Plus, Democrats are raking in donor cash, while broke-ass Trump is scrambling all over Hell looking for a cosigner.

R29 no—that is the process as set out in the Cobstituition. What are you smoking?

R26 the votes would be up to the state delegations. I don’t feel like looking up the majorities of each state delegations of the 117th Congress, forgive me for not being aware that a tie breaker for the electoral college would require the entire 52 member delegation of California to have an equal say as the sole representative of Wyoming.

[quote]Polls are no longer important. Actual governance counts. Plus, Democrats are raking in donor cash, while broke-ass Trump is scrambling all over Hell looking for a cosigner.

Once the Dems start spending their mucho bucks showing tv ads of Dump melting down (we all know he has dementia), the numbers will only get better.

The sadness of the post of r35 is that this person has already accepted that wealthy people using media paid for by dark money is the only way to preserve democracy.

Wealthy people do not care for your hopes and dreams, they just want your stem cells.

R33 sorry, I don’t forgive you for posting incorrect info and then acknowledging that you don’t even know the basic Constitutional process for electing our President. In general—not even accounting for what happened in 2020—this is an expression of your own ignorance…. broadly speaking, this is why we were (are) in a mess. Educate yourself—

R32, the illegal insurrection causing a delay in the Electoral College tally is how throwing the count to the House IS the Sedition.

Just like fucking up Florida's hanging chads, and by empowering the Supreme Court, resulted in the Sedition of electing W Bush. In order for a Sedition to be put in motion, there has to be some major fuck up that proceeds the opportunistic crime of Sedition.

R37 it cuts both ways —if dialing for $ will rid us of Trump…I’ll pay that price. Fair trade, at this point in history.

Don't forget to include in your calculations the missing votes from those extra million deplorable antivaxxers Trump killed during Covid.

R39 that was not the question posed—get a grip.

And, as you know, it did not happen in 2020. And, as you may know, under the amended Electoral College Reform Act, the chances of it happening are more remote than before.

Jesus Fucking Christ. The death of democracy in my lifetime. A fucking crying shame. Idiots.

God help us.

I just blocked OP. Half the thread disappeared. Whoever he was yapping at was already blocked.

You blocked yourself? ;)

R44 what a big man you are with your little cursor hitting the yellow button

Don't have to be a big man to do that, troll. It's pretty easy to block trolls like you.

Yellow button?

I don't have a yellow button.

I want a yellow button.

How do I get a yellow button?

Orange!

R38 let me correct my hypothesis then.

If a House tiebreaker would indeed have resulted in Trump’s election because Republicans would have controlled the majority of the state delegations, then the amount of votes needed to win in 2020 would have been 21,462, as Nebraska 2 would not be needed. And yes you are correct, the Republican composition per state delegation would have ensured a Trump victory by that state breakdown.

Therefore, assuming he is not engaged in subterfuge, Joe Biden’s rationale for running for reelection is based on a victory so small that everyone who would be capable of swinging the 2020 election would be able to sit inside Los Angeles’s soccer stadium with some seats left to spare. As of the 2022 election, which saw Republicans regain the House, Biden would then be gambling that he would maintain that margin of 21,614 people in 2024, when his age of 82 and the unpopularity of Vice President Harris would certainly become issues in the election.

Furthermore, in 2022, the enormous 20 point margin of Ron DeSantis’s reelection in Florida led most people to assume that he would be the Republican nominee. At that point, Biden would have gambled that an 82 year old man would be more appealing than a young, relatively physically attractive Xennial with photogenic wife and young children, and with a Trumpian personality.

Nevertheless, only after the 2022 election did Merrick Garland appoint Jack Smith Special Counsel on November 18. It was not a priority for Garland’s Justice Department until immediately after the 2022 election. Why? For a man who constantly tries to terrify Americans with the thought of another Trump Presidency, he appears to have been an inconvenient issue for him. Unless having Trump as an opponent over DeSantis was seen as beneficial to Biden.

R41 Yes I included them but offset them with the antipathy and ambivalence the youth vote has toward Biden.

“No Republican candidate for president has won most voters under the age of 30 since 1988. But a poll by the New York Times and Siena College published on December 19th found Donald Trump leading Mr Biden by 49% to 43% among voters aged 18 to 29. That is a swing in this poll to Mr Trump of ten points since July. According to the Pew Research Centre, in 2020 Mr Biden won that age group by 24 points, 59% to 35%.

The polling has been so dismal for Mr Biden, and also so erratic, and confidence in polling has been so shaken in recent years, that a debate has broken out among political obsessives over whether to trust the numbers. Within national polls, subgroups such as young voters comprise smaller samples and so yield larger margins of error. To control for this, a group called Split Ticket in early December aggregated subgroups across numerous national polls. The results showed Mr Biden leading Mr Trump by a diminished but still substantial margin of 16 points among voters under 30, yet by only three points when young voters were defined as those under 34. That is a sign both that there is static in the numbers, and that the danger to Mr Biden’s re-election is real.”

Well, in 2000 the election was decided by 500 something votes. Biden will come out on top. It's barely March, regular ppl are into St Patrick's day, lent, March Madness.

R44, I know, there are giant gaps in this thread. Make sure you FF the troll before you block. He really is off his rocker.

R53 I ff’d you too. I recognize you. You are the poster who uses MAGAT, Dump and Repuke a lot. You use idiosyncratic language so you likely have autism and you also have an obsession with bodily waste, regurgitation and infection, so you likely have obsessive compulsive disorder. OCD would also be indicated by the fact that you have been keeping the “Treason” thread alive, and in numerical sequence, for 66 iterations.

R52 regular people are so into Lent right now! You went to Sunday School with Biden didn’t you?

R53 furthermore the act of policing threads and telling other people what cannot be posted and must be blocked, which you do constantly, shows an irrational fear of infection, as well as the obsession with body waste. You’re a hypochondriac.

This thread is almost all two autistic trolls arguing or one with multiple socks.

The premise upon which OP is basing his entire analysis is flawed:

[quote]21,461 means that, in 2020, Joe Biden was an exceptionally weak candidate.

You're imposing demographic shifts on an electorate that has undergone extremely significant changes in behavior that were wildly influenced by the pandemic. When we voted in 2020, the pandemic was raging and people were locked down tighter than a drum. And then the housing market exploded as everyone left cities, shifting suburban and even rural behavior dramatically.

We live in a divided country in which one of the two divisions (the Democrats) see roughly a third of its members (for lack of a better word) not voting on a regular basis. This is not the pattern for Republicans which tend to vote regularly and in lock-step. It's going to come down to a very close race once again (unless the Dems can motivate those who seldom vote to come out). Everyone, myself included, frets over the polls showing it 45-45 with 10 points undecided. Well, there's good news there: the undecideds break for Biden by 2 to 1 and even 3 to 1 in some regions.

At the end of the day, the Democrats need to ask one basic question: are you better off today than you were 4 years ago? And post it next to the pictures of people covered head-to-toe in PPE, others laying in hospital beds, still more coping with uncertainty, graphs of the sudden and completely preventable decline in employment, and then compare them to the same statistics and situations today. Thanks to President Biden's leadership, we haven;t just survived the pandemic, we've thrived with the lowest sustained unemployment since the 1960s, the lowest Black unemployment [italic]ever,[/italic] inflation nipped in the bud thanks to competent leadership at the Fed, crime (and specifically violent crime) is down, wages are up, manufacturing has returned to America, and were on firm footing.

Yes, we have problems to solve, but even there is opportunity. How about this one: we solved abortion 50 years ago and had a working compromise in Roe until Trump overturned it dredging up the same arguments and conflict we thought we'd put behind us. Well, we don't have time to rehash problems of the past because we're faced with crises that approach and are existential. The slogan is simple: give Biden a functioning House and Senate and he'll put 50-year-old conflicts back to bed and take on and solve systemic issues staring us in the face.

R50 you did not actual correct your faulty hypothesis. 🤷🏻‍♂️You just gave us all more grist for the mill, e.g. that the Veep will be a major issue, etc. IMHO, your analyses are neither on point nor especially interesting in their own right. Others’ mileage may vary, as always.

Is OP a stupid Russian cunt bot? If so, it's pretty lame.

[quote] You're imposing demographic shifts on an electorate that has undergone extremely significant changes in behavior that were wildly influenced by the pandemic.

Except the demographic changes for those three states would not be significant in a direction that favors Democrats. Population growth to the sunbelt is leading to those states becoming increasingly conservative. For example, 90,000 New Yorkers resettled in Florida, but Florida is becoming increasingly conservative and has not been a swing state since 2012. The reason? Retirement and seniors being the most conservative of all voting blocks. Population growth in Arizona would therefore favor a conservative trend. Conservatism is also becoming more pronounced among Mexican Americans who comprise a significant portion of Arizona voters.

As for Georgia, Brian Kemp was handily reelected in 2022 and expanded his victory over Stacey Abrams to 54.5/46 from 50/49.

Where do Democrats replenish their voters in these swing states?

Youth and occasional voters. But look at Georgia. How could the gulf widen in four years?

Ambivalence for the rematch.

R60 cahnttt bawttt

Yellow button?

I don't have a yellow button.

I want a yellow button.

How do I get a yellow button?

“The sad part of it is, Mitch McConnell knows full well that the president was guilty of a crime on Jan. 6. So for him to know how bad the president’s predecessor was on all of this, and then come to the conclusion that he would endorse him when we thought he was going to convict him — the word was, he was close to conviction, and now he’s endorsing — it’s really very, very sad.”

Well perhaps Merrick Garland shouldn’t have waited until November 18, 2022 to assign the special counsel.

[quote] At the end of the day, the Democrats need to ask one basic question: are you better off today than you were 4 years ago?

Is it possible that you don’t realize that people will answer that question in terms of inflation, and not the other factors? It’s the question you don’t want voters to be asked.

I hope that President Biden, in his second term, replaces Garland with Sally Yates.

Sally Yates, whom Trump fired because she would not conform to his criminality.

THAT is who we need as the next Attorney General of the US!

Assistant U.S. Attorney, Deputy Attorney General of the United States, Acting Attorney General SALLY YATES!

r66, As opposed to remembering the million Americans who were dying of Covid and stacked like corpseicles in temporary freezers?

If every eligible American who leaned left, liberal, Democratic, etc. would vote... we'd win every election. They just don't.

R67 and yet he did not. When the opportunity presented itself, he chose not to give attorney general to a qualified woman, but to a conservative white male judge who by the nature of the role would not especially be suitable as attorney general.

Very few people I think, other than an old white man, would be given the benefit of the doubt that he would do things correctly on his second attempt, after so monumentally screwing up that he has unleashed Trump onto the country again.

Some of you would vote for the EPA from Ghostbusters.

r69, or if every debilitated Republican, who could not vote for Biden, stayed home, we LANDSLIDE.

r70, Biden appointing Garland for AG kept Trump and McConnell's Supreme Court corruption front and center.

It was brilliant.

Keeping Trumps corruption and criminality AND ALL OF HIS CONSPIRATORS front and center for the Second Biden Administration by nominating Assistant U.S. Attorney, Deputy Attorney General of the United States, and Acting Attorney General SALLY YATES(!), ushers in President Harris.

It would be brilliant, and she would fly through confirmation.

R68 unfortunately, yes..more than them. That’s America at this moment in time.

When the opportunity presented itself, he chose not to give attorney general to a qualified woman, but to a conservative white male judge who by the nature of the role would not especially be suitable as attorney general.

...what a strange lens you look through. That wasn’t it, at all.

[quote]When the opportunity presented itself, he chose not to give attorney general to a qualified woman, but to a conservative white male judge who by the nature of the role would not especially be suitable as attorney general.

He used the same political logic that got him elected. It was pragmatic to get an old white, skilled man into a position to contrast with all the corrupt Trump old white male AGs, appointed or acting. People trust old white men.

When the opportunity is presented to appoint an aggressive, qualified woman, we shall see if it is Sally Yates.

Trump appointed to the DoJ: Jeff Sessions, William Barr, Sally Yates, Dana Boente, Rod Rosenstein, Matthew Whitaker (remember him, the toilet guy!), and the defective list goes on and on. The only two who were subsequently fired by Trump were Sally Yates and Preet Bharara.

Either one would be a good AG to prosecute the Sedition and Trump's Republicans in Congress.

[quote] Biden appointing Garland for AG kept Trump and McConnell's Supreme Court corruption front and center.

…how? Mitch McConnell served an additional eight years as Senate Republican leader. He saw no repercussions.

Merrick Garland was unwisely used as bait by Obama to tempt McConnell into accepting a centrist Republican nominee from him or risk a liberal nominee from Hillary Clinton. McConnell gambled wisely and now women have no rights to their bodies. But he did not break any laws; merely decorum. Trump doesn’t even figure into this at all. He merely chose the selected jurist upon entering office.

This only happened because the husk of Ruth Bader Ginsberg was implored by Obama to retire for the good of the nation, and she refused. Sound like a comparison you want to make?

Merrick Garland was rewarded with a position he was not suited for because Biden sympathized with a longtime Washington apparatchik, an older white man, who was not getting his dues. Garland did not appoint a special counsel until after the 2022 midterms, which would certainly ensure that, with Trump’s Supreme Court likely to interfere, any trial for Trump would not happen until after this year’s election. At best, it was an incredibly naive and foolhardy strategy.

[quote]People trust old white men.

……..

I believe that Nominating Garland, the Obama nominee that was corruptly kept off of the SCOTUS, for AG, was a daily reminder of Trump/McConnell corruption. When McConnell rammed Amy Barrett through, Garland was silent testimony to the corrupt SCOTUS.

Nobody had to ask, who was the guy that McConnell screwed out of a seat on the SCOTUS when he is corruptly changing policy for Trump to appoint Amy Barrett? He was to be up front and center: AG Garland. Garland is the personification of McConnell policy corruption in action.

…… .

r77, If Wisconsin Democrats had nominated some old white liberal Democrat instead of Mandela Barnes, Moscow Ron would not have been reelected. Old white men, mirror the entire Republican Party and tend to minimize gerrymandering.

People in swingy districts during swingy times find comfort in old white men.

[quote] You are also a hardcore Biden supporter, which means you are likely to have personality traits in line with authoritarianism.

Yes because supporting your party’s incumbent president is a clear sign of autism.

….

^^^ authoritarianism

Zzzx

This year, I hope every Republican Senator up for reelection has an old white Democratic WOMAN as an opponent.

We see you Marsha Blackburn and we are following the formula.

.

r82

……..

Do any of you folks get the concept of realpolitik? Don’t they teach that idea any more in history or civics class?

[quote] [R77], If Wisconsin Democrats had nominated some old white liberal Democrat instead of Mandela Barnes, Moscow Ron would not have been reelected.

Your hood is showing.

r84, so funny, he looks like Moses Mike.

[quote] Do any of you folks get the concept of realpolitik?

Yes. This thread is about it.

What are we failing to understand?

Wait...some troll is accusing Biden of authoritarianism when Plumpy guzzles Pootie's cum and aspires to be just like him?

As Buckwheat would say "oh tay".

Too, too much 92.

Plumpy Guzzles

Pootie’s Cum

Would Say Oh Tay

R93, when you look in the mirror, how closely do you resemble this man?

Tell me honestly, do you talk like this in real life?

R93 how familiar are you with Lewis Carroll?

The patter of your thought-speech is very similar to jabberwocky

Good lord, did our resident troll say that, r83? I didn’t see it because I’ve blocked him, but sure, the authoritarian is the guy who didn’t foment an insurrection.

Supporting your party’s incumbent is not being an authoritarian

Besides there is a difference between political authoritarianism and the authoritarian personality type (hardline Bideners)

These are signs of an authoritarian personality:

Blind allegiance to conventional beliefs about right and wrong

Respect for submission to acknowledged authority

Belief in aggression toward those who do not subscribe to conventional thinking, or who are different

A negative view of people in general - i.e. the belief that people would all lie, cheat or steal if given the opportunity

A need for strong leadership which displays uncompromising power

A belief in simple answers and polemics - i.e. The media controls us all or The source of all our problems is the loss of morals these days.

Resistance to creative, dangerous ideas. A black and white worldview.

A tendency to project one's own feelings of inadequacy, rage and fear onto a scapegoated group

A preoccupation with violence and sex

These threads are a very elaborate ruse by Defacto to crowbar Democratic support from Biden.

Hmmm.

Instead of focusing on the two candidates, let’s think about the two parties. One party has gone all in on conspiracy theories, lacks faith in the democratic process and gets its support from folks ready and willing to ignore their own fundamental moral and ethical beliefs in order to secure power and victory—and, or, to fuck over the entire system (and the country)…just, because. In essence, that is the party platform. The other party and its supporters does not buy into any of that shit.

So, setting aside the particular personalities (since they’ll all be dead inside of a decade), what ARE you willing stand up for?!

No one is going to take support away from Biden here.

[quote] folks ready and willing to ignore their own fundamental moral and ethical beliefs in order to secure power and victory

That certainly describes people who embraced Liz Cheney.

That’s a bizzare reply —okaayy^

Ate you well?

[quote] No one is going to take support away from Biden here.

I have a family member with whom it is impossible to discuss politics. One reason is that she gets emotional about it like people on DL do and can’t discuss it calmly and rationally. The other reason is that she treats any presentation of views that differ from hers as being somehow an attempt to change her views. That is so incredibly bizarre to me. Two people with different views should be able to share their views with each other with no thought that one is trying to change the other person’s views. She’ll shout out, “You can’t change my mind!” and I’m like, WTF are you talking about.

I’ve asked her why can’t there be two people just sharing their views. Her response was that there’s no point in discussing politics unless you’re trying to get people to see things your way. That’s another bizarre thought.

Do people on DL who hate seeing views other than their own also feel like the family member I’m describing?

[quote] That’s a bizzare reply —okaayy^ Ate you well?

I see you have started your weekend by hitting the sauce early, eh?

Sorry r104 I can’t see you because I blocked you. You said Audra McDonald gave the best performance at the Sondheim birthday concert 13 years ago.

You are WRONG and must be punished.

Whoever this troll is it's like the recipe it. Posting one post after another. On and on and on and on. Meth?

[quote] You said Audra McDonald gave the best performance at the Sondheim birthday concert 13 years ago.

I don’t think I knew who she was until The Sound of Music Live.

Every accusation is a confession, R98.

[quote]These threads are a very elaborate ruse by Defacto to crowbar Democratic support from Biden.

No, these threads are very subtle chipping away at the concepts that there are differences between the democracy loving Democrats and the Tax Hating Capitalist Republicans who have fucked up the Senate, the Supreme Court and the House of Republican Theatrical Clowns.

So sad that they sacrificed America's Karen Senator Britt, who in one fell swoop stated how ineligible for reelection she will be in 2028.

I hope Biden has knee replacement surgery in his second term.

Hur testimony today, Biden passes the delegate threshold tonight. Plausible deniability.

March 13, March 31?