Politics

[LivingTheDream]

I think it is great, it goes back to the big tent principle. Trump has a Kennedy and a former Democrat 2020 presidential candidate endorsing him. Two things I wouldnt have said in 2023. You are also starting to see "unity" party starting to pop up and I do think that means something and throws off the extreme right narrative. Personally, I like Tulsi more as a leader than Nikki, but that is just my opinion.

I also feel there is some gaslighting going on regarding Kamala and the polls, I haven't met really anyone who is super enthusiastic about her, maybe one or two people but they were all in on Biden anyway. I probably have more liberals in my social circle than conservatives. There is a lot more of, "well she isn't Biden".

As far as polling, one of the snap polls showed 36% of those polled said Joe Biden won the first debate vs Trump. So just think about that.

 

[Red Leg]

I get your point. But my question was, how do you feel about this in regards to helping or hurting Trump’s chances with people who are on the fence? I know you are a republican, as am I, so I in turn would like our republican candidate to win. Does this help or bender his chances?

Fair question. Can't hurt.

 

[freefall]

I am not a never Trumper - merely think he is a flawed candidate and will be a marginal president. I am convinced Halley would be ahead by 10 now and would not have support from either RFK jr or the fetching Ms. Gabbard. You tell me what that says about Trump, clearly grateful for democrat support, who is either within the margin of error or behind Harris at this point depending upon the poll.

I thought you had clearly stated that your Sacred Honour would not allow you to vote for Trump.
Either I'm vastly misunderstooken or Sacred Honour is less binding than I'd thought.

 

[Ridge Runner]

I do not think it is bold at all. I base it on the her polling vs Trump's polling against Biden. On January 18th she polled 17 points ahead of Biden in the WSJ Poll. In the same poll Trump had a four point lead (as did DeSantis). Trump remains plateaued under 50%, and is behind Harris in most national polls. Yet the republican party, because of its primary format, seems to have picked the least competitive candidate to oppose Biden and now Harris because of the don't confuse me with facts 35% who are totally committed to Trump. Or perhaps you have other evidence or another interpretation of that polling.

Polls are Polls and whoever conducts the Polls can interpret the Polls as they want for who they want.....or for whom ever is paying them.

I don't believe in Polls telling me or the nation who or what is best. We know MSM is a propaganda machine for the dems and their socialist, neo naziz, anti American controllers.

Their is in no logical way Polls can subvert the fact that Trump has more people attending his rally compared to the number of people Sleepy Joe had at his rallys and what Cackling Harris has at hers.

How can 50, a 100, a 1000 or even 10,000 people claimed to be polled represent 100% of the millions of the voting population?

Are these Polls 50% Republicans and 50% Demcommies?

What are the percentages of these people being polled: unemployed? living off various government handouts? minimum wage earners? middle class? top 1% class? retired? nationality? race? rural? suburban? urban? small town? big town? major city? metropolis? etc., etc.,etc..

Polls are for sheep to believe they are not being led to the slaughter house.

Saying Polls are accuracy margin is 2%, 3%. WTH does that even mean when there is or has never been a direct correlation to actual numbers.

Before I or anyone believe in Polls; I want, we should want, actual reliable numbers! I want to be able to fact check the Polls numbers and people polled.

Fictitious Example to make my point.

MSM Report: A Poll shows:
48% vote for Republican, 48% vote for Democrats 4% undecided

98% vote for neither Trump nor Harris
2% margin of error

What's not said; the Poll was conducted in the office by anonymity of 10 employees. Thirty minutes before going on the air.

The Poll was (ironically) done by Greenspan. Henrik Greenspan the newly hired mail clerk who just happened to be delivering the mail in the area. He was provided the polling questionnaires to hand out to 20 random office workers, but only 10 office workers bothered to fill out and return the polling questionnaire.

Before anyone says it. But...But....but polls are done by ____________ and they can be trusted. Or well that's not how polls are conducted. Or any other such nonsense.

I say BULLSHIT!!....Prove It!! Poll 100% of the voting population! Give me real numbers!! And only then will any Poll be within 2%, 3% margin.

 

[ActionBob]

Honest question here... Is there any value to adding Waltz to the ticket?

MN had ALWAYS voted blue. You don't pick up anything from MN, where they maybe could have from a swing state. His handling of Covid, BLM riots, voting record, spending, increased crime rates, etc will all be so easy to attack.

Is he simply a martyr that they are throwing on the ticket so that they can preserve some "better" candidate in the future? One they actually hope to run successfully in the future?

Beyond pushing their agenda even further to the left, is there any upside to campaign? I'm struggling to see any reasoning on why he was selected. Did he endorse her during her early (failed) presidential run? Outside of the riots, he really doesn't have any National brand/positioning.

What am I missing? Is this a simple way to lose to Trump and blame a bad ticket?

I think they fell for their own game... flat out lying about facts. I believe they actually thought he would appeal to the average balding white male. The believed him that he has that great service record, I mean what does the Harris campain know about honor and stolen Valor? He's their "hunter and gun owner", coach, teacher.... so what if he's a commie China lover ass hat who lies through his teeth? Thats the normal Democra t candidate these days... They got blind sided by their own ideals.

 

[VertigoBE]

I say BULLSHIT!!....Prove It!! Poll 100% of the voting population! Give me real numbers!! And only then will any Poll be within 2%, 3% margin.

That's not a poll, that's a vote if you require 100% participation.
The whole idea of a poll is by taking a sample set, you can predict to some accuracy what the result of the general election will be. It is a very proven and very much used technique and has all the validity it needs for real world application. On one condition however. That the sample set is homogenous and representative of the general population.

For example: If you have a country consisting of 20 young adults and 80 senior citizens, a sample of 10 should be ideally 2 young adults and 8 seniors. Probably 3 young adults and 7 seniors as a sample will still work. But going only to university campuses or retirement homes for your sample group will of course skew your data enormously. This is why normally any sample set and results should also come with a "confidence level" indicator.

 

[Altitude sickness]

Not sure what more he needs to do or can do. I know lots of Jewish folks and I can count on one hand the number that will vote R. The rest are voting D.

Every president that I can remember has promised to move the embassy to Jerusalem and only one did, and that was Trump. Started the Abraham Accords, again Trump. And still won’t vote for him.

Some groups demonstrate Stockholm Syndrome by their voting records. Almost purposely wanting to be in a perpetual state of victim hood. Intentionally caused by the captors.

Oh well ours is not to question why, but to keep sending money. To keep supporting these many groups of victims.

 

[bob meadows]

Some groups demonstrate Stockholm Syndrome by their voting records. Almost purposely wanting to be in a perpetual state of victim hood. Intentionally caused by the captors.

Oh well ours is not to question why, but to keep sending money. To keep supporting these many groups of victims.

blacks and jews.....2 groups that always seem to vote contrary to their well being...bob

 

[bob meadows]

You could be right, but that's a bold claim!
The vote R no matter who crowd would pull the lever for either obviously. But I'd wager there's more people in the "screw it, this country is f'ed under Harris, I'm voting Trump" Libertarian/ Independent crowd than there is in the disgruntled "Trump is nothing like Reagan" Republican crowd.

very bold. I am on other forums and they despise haley, as far as saying they would not vote for trump if she was vp.......there are a lot of people out there that are fed up...bob

 

[bob meadows]

I do not think it is bold at all. I base it on the her polling vs Trump's polling against Biden. On January 18th she polled 17 points ahead of Biden in the WSJ Poll. In the same poll Trump had a four point lead (as did DeSantis). Trump remains plateaued under 50%, and is behind Harris in most national polls. Yet the republican party, because of its primary format, seems to have picked the least competitive candidate to oppose Biden and now Harris because of the don't confuse me with facts 35% who are totally committed to Trump. Or perhaps you have other evidence or another interpretation of that polling.

wasn't hiliary up by 16?.......bob

 

[bob meadows]

I am a Reagan conservative. In RFK Jr and Gabbard, Trump has support of two progressives who represent almost nothing I support with respect to the economic and national interests of this country. You tell me what that means.

I like Reagan a lot.....probably better then just about anybody......but that was Reagan then, how would Reagan do in this super hostile political environment today?......bob

 

[bob meadows]

Honest question here... Is there any value to adding Waltz to the ticket?

MN had ALWAYS voted blue. You don't pick up anything from MN, where they maybe could have from a swing state. His handling of Covid, BLM riots, voting record, spending, increased crime rates, etc will all be so easy to attack.

Is he simply a martyr that they are throwing on the ticket so that they can preserve some "better" candidate in the future? One they actually hope to run successfully in the future?

Beyond pushing their agenda even further to the left, is there any upside to campaign? I'm struggling to see any reasoning on why he was selected. Did he endorse her during her early (failed) presidential run? Outside of the riots, he really doesn't have any National brand/positioning.

What am I missing? Is this a simple way to lose to Trump and blame a bad ticket?

what is the value of waltz?.....he is a dem that has chosen to stay where he is at in his thinking....

therefore being a dem he brings value to nothing.....unless you need a tampon in the mens restroom.......think about that, people are going to vote for a guy that thinks tampons belong in men/boys bathrooms...bob

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

Another interesting interview.

 

[Red Leg]

I thought you had clearly stated that your Sacred Honour would not allow you to vote for Trump.
Either I'm vastly misunderstooken or Sacred Honour is less binding than I'd thought.

I normally wouldn't respond to this sort of infantile, syntax challenged ad hominem BS, but because I know a little bit about sacred honor, I'll make an exception for you. I swore an oath to defend the constitution this nation against all enemies foreign and domestic and lived that oath for three decades - so I don't think I'll let you lecture me on the subject of honor. Second, and I realize this is difficult analysis, I have many times said that I held my nose twice and voted for Trump. By definition, I think that rather decisively disqualifies me as a never Trumper. In November, I intend vote for every republican down ticket.

 

[Datchew]

wrap that flag tight buddy.

On another topic, I found the fact that this occurred old news, but the fact that he came out and sent a letter in this way really surprised me. I'm torn between thinking this is a behavior due to the changing winds and the guy being genuinely trying to own up to his mistakes.

He's still young and perhaps still capable of turning over a new leaf.
Zuck sends letter to Congress

 

[lwaters]

Well Lenny you got that point right. But on the deer meat and fish..... those populations would be decimated. Eat chicken if you want, it ain't really meat though

Yes chicken is pretty close to lab produced meat. Pigs and chickens are not the same animals that we ate 50 years ago.

 

[WAB]

I normally wouldn't respond to this sort of infantile, syntax challenged ad hominem BS, but because I know a little bit about sacred honor, I'll make an exception for you. I swore an oath to defend the constitution this nation against all enemies foreign and domestic and lived that oath for three decades - so I don't think I'll let you lecture me on the subject of honor. Second, and I realize this is difficult analysis, I have many times said that I held my nose twice and voted for Trump. By definition, I think that rather decisively disqualifies me as a never Trumper. In November, I intend vote for every republican down ticket.

Those of us with any common sense appreciate your service and your contributions to our discussions.

 

[BSO Dave]

The derogatory comment many here (perhaps not you) about people getting their feelings for being the reason they don't vote for Trump...what's the point?

I think your comment was aimed at me albeit backhanded... But, that's okay...LOL.. I have yet to hear arguments from anyone here on this forum to date who is so intelligent and well-informed that is qualified to deem anyone else's comments stupid...

I don't believe I have ever made a derogatory comment about anyone here for making an emotional decision, but I certainly have questioned their purpose and even pointed out their hypocrisy... Nobody gets the right to bitch and complain unless they are active participants in the process...

I normally wouldn't respond to this sort of infantile, syntax challenged ad hominem BS, but because I know a little bit about sacred honor, I'll make an exception for you. I swore an oath to defend the constitution this nation against all enemies foreign and domestic and lived that oath for three decades - so I don't think I'll let you lecture me on the subject of honor. Second, and I realize this is difficult analysis, I have many times said that I held my nose twice and voted for Trump. By definition, I think that rather decisively disqualifies me as a never Trumper. In November, I intend vote for every republican down ticket.

I would never question your honor or morality... I sincerely believe both have been well-established...
However, you have stated to me directly in past exchanges that if Trump was the republican nominee for 2024, you would not vote for either candidate. I called you a hypocrite for it for the exact reason I stated above...

If you mind has since changed, I am glad to hear it... But you need to own it because you did indeed say it...

 

[MD Driver]

Well summarized Rook. Another company that has desperately tried to reach other markets is closer to our subject and that is Purdey guns. Their adverts went decidedly woke a while back, man buns and the like. And more focused upon the clothing, not a gun in sight. You will recall that Holland and Holland did the same in the Chanel era and it killed them off.
I am pleased to see that Rigby and Westley Richards have stuck to the Africa image, the market has shrunk and some of the old companies will fall by the wayside, or necessarily shrink. But I contend that diluting to appeal to all and forsake your core will be fatal in the end.

I can only offer the smallest of anecdotes from my recent experience with Purdey. Traveled there last fall to get fitted, and just recently received my beautiful bespoke Sporter over/under. The entire experience was fantastic. Their people were dignified, very friendly, and seemed conservative (whatever that might be in England today). I didn’t detect any modern DEI at all, but not that I was particularly looking for it. Haven’t seen their recent advertising, but in person at least, they were all very squared away people. FWIW.

 

[Altitude sickness]

wrap that flag tight buddy.

On another topic, I found the fact that this occurred old news, but the fact that he came out and sent a letter in this way really surprised me. I'm torn between thinking this is a behavior due to the changing winds and the guy being genuinely trying to own up to his mistakes.

He's still young and perhaps still capable of turning over a new leaf.
Zuck sends letter to Congress

Zuckerberg is concerned with the government regulating Social Media. Both sides of the isle have discussed it. After the damage is done. He now wants to pretend to be fair and balanced.

Google and Facebook are a huge threat to democracy and are now more influential and powerful than either of the 3 branches of Government.

Now team up rouge government agencies with Google or Facebook and it’s not hard to see where we are headed. Total surveillance. Total propaganda, totally F’d

Break them up now !