VakAttack

Seems purposely times do that Maine can't do the same thing to respond. And the rules are potentially being changed...for no reason at all, other than to benefit one particular party. Wild times. https://www.axios.com/2024/09/19/lindsey-graham-electoral-vote-change-nebraska

Firstly, not a term. Secondly,under this hypothetical, you're saying you support that if someone starts a fight, it's ok to kill their kids?

I would imagine so, he's polling so badly it's perceived to be having a negative effect on Trump, too. Robinson was polling in the mid 30s at one point, not sure about now, and Harris was polling very competitively with Trump. I think it's a fair assumption to make that he was pulling Trump down, somewhat like Mastriano was perceived to have done in PA.

Sure, I suppose. I would probably use the term "cunning" more than ingenious, just for connotations purposes.

Great. There are still actual children dead. So, no, I won't applaud.

https://www.carolinajournal.com/robinson-under-pressure-to-withdraw-from-gubernatorial-race/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=BreakingNewsAlert

No, I don't tend to applaud when children die.

A bold strategy! When you combine this with the concept of a plan that is percolating in Trump's brain for the last 9 years, this is going to be a doozy. https://www.axios.com/2024/09/17/trump-drug-prices-gop-concerns

Now nobody ask how these deductions got removed....

No easier mark then a particular strand of crypto bro.

I think there's a pretty big disconnect between most high level athletes (at least American athletes) and "mature perspective."

I know you're not quoting me, but yes, they're distinct as they're the one that attacked him, so they're the fanbase to which he is responding. He's not saying they're the only fanbase who ever ahs acted the fool, but they're the ones who reacted that way to him, and I think the only time I can remember him being booed was by them.

Burroughs experience is just that: his experience. There's obviously some inherent subjectivity to how each individual experiences what is happening in a situation. I do tend to agree w/ WKN that this is at least partially a Jordanesque self-motivation technique, but there also seems to be legitimately bad blood that goes back years, mostly from PSU and their alumni finally feeling like they have a leg up in this competition after years of Burroughs dominating them (and everybody). I'll say this, his perception of how he feels the fanbase treated him is likely not limited to just the OTT, but also includes that as the biggest data point; it's also where he suffered the greatest "embarrassment" of not even making it to the Best of 3, so that probably heightened how he experienced everything. The fanbase has the right to feel and act how they want, but he has a right to call them out. It's all shades of gray and opinions around "propriety." As long as nobody threatened or touched him, I have no objection to people reacting however they want to react, but we as a larger group (and Burroughs as arguably our greatest champion) have the right to criticize and mock them for the behavior.

Starocci was out there talking crap, too.

Bringing a 9/11 Truther to the 9/11 Memorial event. You know, like a true patriot.

The door was open for less than a second when one cop grabbed him by his head and threw him to the ground as he was getting out of the car. I've watched well over a thousand traffic stops as part of my job, this was completely unnecessary. The cops job is not to rough up people who are rude to them; they are supposed to be the professionals in these interactions.

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, Miami and the surrounding areas is particularly known for lack of police oversight and corruption, both in local government and in law enforcement. A couple of years ago they hired a police commissioner famed for rooting out corruption, and then fired him within like 6 months after he started talking about how high the corruption went.

It's not. It all started after these claims started being amplified and every single "report" is second and third hand. Where are all these actual victims? It's made up and, again, real people are suffering due to this. Real human beings, and you're attitude is part of the reason.

Stop. It wasn't true. Trump and Vance are the presidential and vice presidential candidates for the Republican Party, not a nobody on Twitter. This was easily verifiable and is having very real, very negative effects on very real Haitian immigrants in Springfielwd, OH.

What Trump (and presumably you) keep referencing is Ralph Northam, the former governor of Virginia (not West Virginia as Trump keeps saying) a pediatric neurologist, talking about what happens if a non-viable fetus or one with a severe deformity was born. The other stuff you're talking about "post birth neglect", I'll read whatever info you have, because I just spent the last 30 minutes Googling and using other search engines to find anything about "neglecting the baby" psot-birth other than the talking point similar to yours that there are "multiple real cases." There is one video, from Canton, Ohio of an apparently life-long Canton resident, not a Haitian immigrant, in the midst of either a mental health or drug-induced crisis. There is so far zero direct evidence of Haitian immigrants eating cats and dogs here in America, whether in Springfield, Ohio (where the original claim is made) or anywhere else. Every single "report" on this issue so far is somebody's neighbor who says they heard. https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/no-evidence-haitian-immigrants-stealing-eating-pets-ohio-2024-09-10/ AS near as I can tell, these claims started circulating around the time that this man, identifying himself as "Nathaniel Higgers", spoke at the Springfield County Commission. He self-identifies as Nathaniel Higgers, I have no idea if that is his actual name, and that he is a member of "Blood Pride", a Neo-Nazi group. Nate Higgers is a common theme/fake name used in these circles because...well, I think you can figure it out if you look at the name hard enough. This is it. These are the people that are originating the claims that have no basis in fact that you are accepting and that people on the right including the candidates for president and vice president are amplifying.

I think there's a difference between fact checking a framing of an issue, which should be left to the candidates, and fact checking just blatantly untrue, inflammatory things. The only place where I thought the fact checking was inappropriate was where David Muir said he didn't detect sarcasm when Trump said he was being sarcastic about saying he "lost by a whisker". I think Muir is probably right, having listened to Trump's Lex Fridman interview, but that's a matter of opinion and framing, and should have been left to Harris to address, if she wanted to. Just saying wild lies about Democrats allowing post birth abortions and that a whole swath of immigrants were eating cats and dogs in a local neighborhood required a fact check. The reason he got fact checked more is because he lied more. She played politics more. She was asked follow up questions on more than a couple of occasions, and she just did the same thing I sai above; she pivoted. I don't like that this is how our politicians debate now, but that's how they all do it. Trump did it to, when he wasn't saying his crazy shit. There were many fact checks that could have been put on Trump but weren't, because they were more about fraing and hyperbole, like him claiming this is the worst inflation ever (clearly not), or him claiming he "saved the Affordable Care Act", etc. None of those got moderator pushback, and there were countless other examples. Only the most egregious things (other than the Muir "no sarcasm detected" thing) received push back.

She didn't suck. She wasn't "amazing" either, but she had a plan and she executed it pretty flawlessly. She gave a standard debate performance where the candidate doesn't answer most of the actual questions and instead tries to pivot to an area where he or she feels they're stronger. This SOP for political debates for as long as I can remember, unfortunately. She set really obvious traps for Trump and he just stepped on the rake over and over again, because he's an easily-manipulated dope.

#Wishcasting Just take the L. She whooped his ass. It won't matter much in terms of what happens in the election, maybe a point or two temporary bump, but she demolished him.

You have still not been able to articulate a single reason why it was ok for these officers to escalate this situation into a physical encounter. Cops get people out of their vehicles all the time without doing what they did here. All of this happened because they felt disrespected, and so they abused their power. The punishment for what Hill allegedly did is a traffic citation. He got that. What will be their punishment for needlessly physically attacking a citizen? Typically nothing. Maybe forced desk duty for a month. Nope. Your common language argument means nothing here. These are officers of the law, and they operate under legal definitions under Flirida law. There was no crime committed. They don't get to arrest people or even detain people just for traffic infractions. They can't even extend a traffic stop to investigate for a crime. They have to have an immediate reasonable articulable suspicion of a crime, nitnjust vague fears about what "might happen", which they clearly didn't or they would have pulled him out of the car immediately. On a pure traffic stop, they have to write the ticket and let you go. The bad cops in society get away with violating people's rights because of attitudes like yours.