2024 Election Season

[Boyst]

3 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Now, a check in with ATOP

 

 

Get this guy on an FBI watch list. 

[Chandemonium]

10 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Now, a check in with ATOP

 

 

Nailed him right in his mind!

 

[devnull]

19 hours ago, Boyst said:

Get this guy on an FBI watch list. 

 

More likely to get air time on MSNBC

[devnull]

 

[Hedge]

 

 

[Spartacus]

On 4/7/2024 at 11:20 AM, Hedge said:

 

 

good chance Trump's haul was in cash

Biden's in unfilled promises of corruption and kickbacks

[IDBillzFan]

After announcing last week that states should make their own decisions on abortion, Trump apparently changes his mind and says states should make their own decisions, but only if they agree with him.

 

Thank God he's running against a phucking vegetable or this election would have been over a month ago.

 

He's gonna FUBAR this before it's all over and we're going to get four more years of Biden's puppeteers.

 

It's like watching the second half of the Falcons/Pats* SB.

 

 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

20 minutes ago, IDBillzFan said:

After announcing last week that states should make their own decisions on abortion, Trump apparently changes his mind and says states should make their own decisions, but only if they agree with him.

 

Thank God he's running against a phucking vegetable or this election would have been over a month ago.

 

He's gonna FUBAR this before it's all over and we're going to get four more years of Biden's puppeteers.

 

It's like watching the second half of the Falcons/Pats* SB.

 

 

 

In this particular case, I'm not thinking those are incompatible statements.

 

I certainly agree with states determining abortion laws and regulations.  And I'm in agreement with what the AZ Supreme Court on a narrow procedural basis: law was on the books, the law's the law, and it's up to the legislature to change it, not the courts to say "Nah, it's 160 years old, we can ignore it."  But I can also think that 1864 law goes too far, and should be amended or thrown out by the appropriate state body. 

 

It's as though people think each state is a monolithic entity that makes decisions AS a monolithic entity, and state governments don't have checks and balances of their own.  Trump, surprisingly, seems to understand that.  He's just too much of a simpleton to explain it without sounding like a ham-head.

 

[IDBillzFan]

Just now, Crap Throwing Clavin said:

 

In this particular case, I'm not thinking those are incompatible statements.

 

I certainly agree with states determining abortion laws and regulations.  And I'm in agreement with what the AZ Supreme Court on a narrow procedural basis: law was on the books, the law's the law, and it's up to the legislature to change it, not the courts to say "Nah, it's 160 years old, we can ignore it."  But I can also think that 1864 law goes too far, and should be amended or thrown out by the appropriate state body. 

 

It's as though people think each state is a monolithic entity that makes decisions AS a monolithic entity, and state governments don't have checks and balances of their own.  Trump, surprisingly, seems to understand that.  He's just too much of a simpleton to explain it without sounding like a ham-head.

 

 

Exactly. Even a slightly more articulate person would be closing the deal by now. I almost wish he's trip over stairs, like Biden, instead of his own moronic tongue. But in the end, what Hot Pockets heard was "States should have their own say" followed immediately with "Except Arizona."

[snafu]

4 hours ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said:

He's just too much of a simpleton to explain it without sounding like a ham-head.

The Great Miscommunicator.

 

[The Guy In Pants]

On 4/3/2024 at 10:51 PM, Boyst said:

Get this guy on an FBI watch list. 

 

I wonder how he found that much energy after that sweet ass cross fit course in the men's locker room. Brutal. 

[Ann]

 

 

 

[Ann]

 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

31 minutes ago, Ann said:

 

 

Not nearly as portentous as it seems, when you read the entire order, and don't just cherry pick that single line out of context.

 

There's much bigger problems with that order than "all agencies will consider if alternative federal documents can be used by the states as ID."  (I'd list them, if I weren't typing on my phone.)

[Ann]

 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

4 hours ago, Ann said:

 

 

So I can get a Wisconsin voter ID too?

[IDBillzFan]

1 minute ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said:

 

So I can get a Wisconsin voter ID too?

 

No, because you have to be an illegal.

[Billsandhorns]

24 minutes ago, IDBillzFan said:

 

No, because you have to be an illegal.

How about if I go into Mexico and just walk back across? 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

38 minutes ago, IDBillzFan said:

 

No, because you have to be an illegal.

 

Doesn't say that.  Just says you have to fill out forms if you don't have the required documentation.

 

And I don't have proof of residence in Wisconsin.

[IDBillzFan]

55 minutes ago, Billsandhorns said:

How about if I go into Mexico and just walk back across? 

 

Fair enough, but does that make you a Latinx?