nobody's_hero
Member

*That* would probably convince him to resign, LOL.

It's like during that one interview when Chuck Schumer warned Trump about going after intelligence agencies.

Sucks that Lily didn't win the US Rep race. Daniel McAdams is a douchebag for that one. Not sorry for saying that. Ripped into her over the Israel issue, and now you've got a dem in that seat who's unconditionally supportive of Bibi *and* sucks at damn near everything else. I mean, I don't think his attacks on her made the difference, but good grief, pick your battles. We'll take her down here in Georgia if you don't want her.

Host: "And hopefully no one's life is in danger, as a result of these documents coming out. That would be . . . pretty scary." Bruh.

I don't think the enthusiasm was there in 2020. I mean . . . 1321170629136175104

NO, haha. No tricks to those questions, but you see the point is that most people know who the speaker of the house is, but they'd have to cheat (search) to find out who Ag Sec is. In that regard, it would be a demotion. I honestly don't know which would be better. There's definite benefits to being head of a bureacuracy, but if no one knows it was 'that crazy libertarian in the back room' slashing all the regulations, well . . .

A safe view to have. An anecdote: I was actually having this conversation with my mother, who was a 'Trump supporter' before I was (she voted for him in 2016, I didn't vote at all that year). EDIT: To add: She was encouraging regarding my interests in politics, but not altogether interested in Ron Paul. I would share his speeches and all that with her, but it never sparked passion the way it did for me. So she calls me into the living room yesterday morning, (she lives with me, she can't live alone on a social security check), and she's holding the smart TV remote with real excitement in her eyes, and she's like "YOU GOTTA SEE THIS!" She has this video pulled up on the Youtube App (I already knew about the Elon-Ron exchange, but it was news to her):

1854277549536469150

And yet at the same time, Elon tags Ron Paul in a post on X and propels Ron's follower count over 1 million and lights up the 89 year old doctor's eyes with hints of optimism in a way I haven't seen since 2012. .

And if you put him in charge of a bureaucracy, he goes into some back hall in a D.C. office and no one (outside of our bubble) ever hears from him again. Heck, he gets more of the spotlight as a rep from Kentucky than he would get as Secretary of Ag. Again, it's a simple experiment by asking yourself questions: When was the last time you watched a speech from the Secretary of Agriculture? (if you failed the previous experiment that I posted, then it's entirely possible you have heard such a speech from a S.o.A. and didn't realize it, but to my knowledge it is not very common for the Secretary of Agriculture to give speeches). ^^This is, however, true.

Can you literally not see the double-speak in that one phrase? 'how to give an answer without actually giving an answer.' This guy is brought in front of cameras on mainstream networks for interviews to sell snake oil to the viewers. Nate Silver *is* the very definition of a grifter. You can subscribe to his website to see his latest and greatest prediction models to be told either: 'hey it could be anyone's ball game'

Such as?

I agree. Rep. Massie needs to stay in the House, and they need to nominate him for Speaker.

IMO there's not enough publicity with that position. Let's do a quick experiment: How many of you can name the Dept. of Agriculture head, right now? (No googling. If you know the answer, don't share it. If you don't know the answer . . . I rest my case.) (I can't) How many of you can name the Speaker of the House?

To truly 'put it in the past' as far as 2020 goes, pardons should be issued. I'm going to also state that a good number of democrats probably did not flip for Trump, but rather, simply stayed home. As the leftists are re-examining 'what went wrong', I will urge us not to gloat. Sure, if it's the media talking heads, the pay-to-play pollsters, the establishment frauds . . . rub it in their faces—hold up the burning ashes of their credibility for all the world to see. But for a liberal on the verge of losing faith in what they currently believe, don't antagonize. We need that link to break. They cannot be reached unless that first step of disillusionment happens, and it must be theirs to experience.

yeah, and did you know you can accurately predict the results of a football game when there's 3 seconds on the clock in the 4th quarter, and one team is leading the other by 3 touchdowns? Nate Silver is a clown. Not some guru. The polling industry needs to collapse. 1853932488672026780

It's like weed legalization to me. Yeah okay, it's great if it happens; I'm definitely not going to oppose it, but I don't toke. My only motivations for legalizing it would be (1) I don't see drug usage as a criminal issue, but rather, perhaps, a medical one (the War on Drugs is a failure) and (2) so that we could put the issue behind us and focus on something that appeals to a broader number of everyday Americans. +1,000% to: Start tagging Thomas Massie on x if you got an account, along with one word: "speaker"

I'm just telling you what my first impression was looking into it, knowing nothing about the guy. 'He's a hitman-hirer.' I'm not just referring to what Trump promised, or what libertarians want, but how it's going to be perceived by nearly everyone else. I think it's pretty silly to make *this* the litmus test. You know what I mean? 'Why the hell are black people libertarians building statues of George Floyd Ross Ulbricht?' But I'll leave it at that. It won't be my big let down. (at the moment, honestly, the greatest concern weighing on my mind is that RFK,jr gets stabbed in the back by Trump and locked outside in the rain, that would be some sleazy-ass shit from Trump, considering especially that Kennedy probably gave Trump his biggest boost) I guess 'no opinion, don't care' was the choice I should have gone with. But 'I don't know, not sure' also applies.

Snowden then. (or is he free too, WTF have I been?) I checked out that thread as well and when it got into talk about Ulbricht putting out hits on people I was like, 'well, this is some fringe-ass sh*t.' (but then again, that's exactly what you'd expect libertarians to make their hill to die on, I guess). The only thing that sways me on that is Massie's support for him, and if he thinks the sentence is unjust, I'm gonna defer to his judgement. But you're right, it is as simple as signing a document.

oooh. That would honestly impress me more. I mean, Ulbricht seems like a George Floyd martyr for libertarians. He doesn't strike me as the most worthy guy to rally around. Just sayin' there's better options.

Not as much as Nate Silver's polls. Feel free to join in the Nate Silver bash fest on X. Hoping to end the guy's career.

I think Assange would be easier. (Seriously admitting ignorance on this: I didn't learn much about who Ulbricht even was until Trump went to the libertarian convention.)

I do expect that he's going to fly out to meet with Putin fairly soon after taking office. Not sure what will come of that. (if Pompeo is in his cabinet again, probably nothing, just like w/ N. Korea). At most I hope they will agree not to start flinging nukes at each other as a starting point. The thing about it is: He has nothing to lose on a 2nd and final term, he could go full-blown statist and we're stuck with him for 4 years. The other thing about it is: He has nothing to lose on a 2nd and final term, he could fulfill those promises and they're stuck with him for 4 years.

1853944431512314093 1853949139488309518

1853971590075273558 Quick reference: FL results at the moment with 99% reporting: Trump 56.2% Harris 42.9%

This is getting nuts. Check this out: 1853944431512314093 1853949139488309518

Well, now they've helped Trump make history as being the second president to ever serve two non-consecutive terms.