uncle bernard

@wrestlingguy To add on to this, Harris' loss is right in line with what we've seen all over the world this year, with few exceptions. Parties in power during inflation, conservative or liberal, lost major ground in their next election. Of all the insane stuff that happened in this election, likely none of it had anywhere near the impact as the Fed's handling of inflation. When there are rational, historically backed explanations for why things happen, there is no need to go hunting for conspiracy theories.

The people who stayed home aren't complaining. They didn't vote because they didn't care who won. There are million and millions of people in this country that feel that way. We have one of the lowest voter participation rates in the democratic world.

hmmmm

I think it’s more likely that the last 4 years were such a disaster that people didn’t see a real difference and stayed home. The dems strategy is 100% anti-trump. it didn’t work as well this time because he hasn’t been in office for 4 years and he didn’t have to deal with post-covid fallout. Last election, we were mid-pandemic spiraling and trump was in the news everyday being annoying and people hated it so they voted different. but then Biden didn’t actually do anything meaningful in office and inflation skyrocketed so what reason did those people have to come back out. Trump also lost votes this time too. Just not nearly as many. That’s the benefit of not having to own the current state of things.

Not that it matters but this was a mistake on CNN. She did outperform in several counties, but no states.

I don’t.

This was a well-deserved loss by the Democrats.

MSNBC is a joke in general but Joy is one of the stupidest people on TV. She’s claiming Kamala ran a “flawless” campaign lmao

So why wouldn’t they have done it again now that they actually oversee the elections in those states? Laziness?

Because historically it has.

Mail-in and early voting heavily skews older. Voting in general skews older, but it should even out a bit.

My guy, this is public knowledge. If you don't know it, that's because you've buried yourself in an insane Trump echo chamber. None of this is a secret. Black Book: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/22/jeffrey-epsteins-black-book-trump-clintons-prince-andrew.html Named Accuser: https://apnews.com/article/election-2024-trump-stacey-williams-5ab730ec694ef47e587e8f5ca4f1ad55 Full quote on Epstein in New York Magazine (2002): https://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/n_7912/ "I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy,” Trump booms from a speakerphone. “He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it — Jeffrey enjoys his social life.” This took two minutes to find. You and I both know, you would not feign ignorance if identical connections were exposed about Kamala Harris or any other democrat.

He is on the "list" and he has been "outed." What "list" are you referring to? Epstein's Black Book? Yes. The recently released court documents from the case? Yes. Accused by a specific witness on the record? Yes. Quoted referring to Epstein as a "terrific guy" who likes women "on the younger side?" Yes. So what list isn't he on? The flight logs? Newsflash, Epstein didn't limit his crimes to his island. He did them all over the place, notably Trump's two haunts, NYC and South Florida. The cognitive dissonance here is INSANE.

You're close here, but the actual reason Trump isn't attacked on Epstein stuff by the Dems is because - for God knows what reason - they aren't willing to cut ties with the Clintons. In general, neither party is willing to push hard on this because major players from both would be implicated. Rich people protecting rich people.

Trump is on the list. We have pictures and videos of them hanging out. What are you talking about? lol

I think he's going to thrive under Gilman. My first introduction to Spratley was actually him working out with Gilman during this video series at Eric Guerrero's club several years ago.

My favorite Elon fact is that he admitted in court, under oath, that this was his twitter burner. A deeply, deeply pathetic individual.

This happened years ago. Why are you bringing it up now? Qanon people being mentally ill isn't exactly breaking news.

And Israel is trying to annihilate Iran. At some point, if you actually care about this stopping, you have to acknowledge Israel's role in this disaster. They didn't accidentally double their control of the land since the partition, which itself was never agreed to by the people who already lived there. Like any country, Israel has its own goals and desires. From its inception, the goal of Zionism is to re-establish Jewish control of the region as possible, including southern Lebanon and western Jordan. As they continue to work towards those goals, the region will increasingly heat up. You can't take land like this without backlash. If the US occupied Ontario, nobody would pretend Canada doesn't have a right to oppose that occupation. That double standard only applies to Palestine.

That's not actually true. But yes, there is a Muslim anti-Semitism problem today that stems from the political situation forced on Palestine in the 1940s. They were essentially punished for Christian Europe's historic anti-semitism and as a result, anti-semitism has grown alongside the violence and land disputes. But it's mostly a modern phenomena and you asked about the video claiming to describe 1500 years of Muslim history and it was bunk. Sorry you didn't like the answer.

And just an overall note because she describes Islam as being particularly anti-Semitic, anti-Semitism is a largely Christian, European phenomena. Obviously, there has been anti-Semitism by Muslims historically, but it pales by comparison in scale and intensity to the anti-Semitism of Christian Europe.

I'll have to do some reading to check on the things I'm not sure about, but the most striking (and disingenuous) part of this is that almost every charge she levels at Islam's history can be equally, if not more so, levelled at the history of Christianity. Systematic persecution of Jews? Check (and far more intense). Religious conversion through military conquest? Check. Oppression of women and minorities? Check. Just on one topic I know she hilariously misrepresents, The Crusades. In the 630s, the Byzantines surrendered Jerusalem to the Muslims after a short siege, ending 500 years of Roman control. The transfer was peaceful. For the first time in hundreds of years, Jews were permitted to return to live in Jerusalem in peace under Muslim control. Muslims and Jews largely lived in peace for the next several hundred years. Prior to the First Crusade, the Seljuk Turks parts of the Holy Land and made pilgrimage more difficult. When the Christians launched the Crusades, persecution of Jews intensified in Europe and Jews in the Holy Land fought alongside Muslims to defend against the Crusaders. When the Christians took Jerusalem, they massacred the city's Muslim and Jews, including famously burning Jews alive in their synagogues. In contrast, when Saladin took the city back 100ish years later, he did not massacre the Christians. Instead, he allowed Christian pilgrims to continue to travel to Jerusalem and showed tolerance towards its Christian inhabitants. However, 50 years later, after 10 years of Christian control secured by a peace treaty, Jerusalem fell once again to a Muslim army and that army sacked the city and massacred 6000 Christians who were promised safe passage. Neither side is guiltless. It was a horrific cycle of violence. I don't have all day to pick apart the rest, but safe to say, anybody who claims to reduce 1500 years of complex history into 15 minutes is full of shit, and I think you probably knew that, which is why you asked. Neither Christianity nor Islam have a pure history. Both histories are filled with violence and oppression alongside incredible advances in art, philosophy, technology, etc...

Did you think my post was supportive of the Biden administration?