DEMOCRATS WORRIED that Joe BIDEN TOO FEEBLE lacks mental alertness to TAKE ON TRUMP

D

david starling

Well-known member
leomoon said:
As long as its a BLUE Democratic majority with POTUS, I'm cool with it ! :wink:


I think I'm going to write to Jake Tapper's Twitter OR perhaps his guest (or both of them) Dave Matthews. I use to enjoy his music in the 70s, but forget the titles now. :whistling:


Seems he was born on my birthday 20 years earlier then me but the same day as me and the late singer David Bowie, whose natal chart mimics my own and I can easily identify with (Bowie was also born the same year so we are astro twins) While I simply underwent operations during the transit of Pluto over my Mars, David Bowie died (12th house planets as opposed to my 6th house planets the same due to the Lat & Long of births)


The thing is, Dave Matthew being a careful Capricorn I suppose and not wanting a trump twitter put down during his new 2020 tour time? sort of put trump & Biden on the same level saying, "trump is charming":crying::sick::pouty:


I'm going to call him on it, at least be honest! He had similar blase' things to say about Biden, being careful not to choose one over the other like he did for Barack Obama's 8 years.......Although he is American, he was born in South Africa and used that as a deflective note.



Boo - on Dave Matthews I say!



Politics

Matthews published an Internet video prior to the 2000 U.S. presidential election, urging viewers to vote without advocating any candidate. He mentioned only Ralph Nader by name, and updated fans about the recording sessions for Everyday. Although his music often explores political and social issues, Matthews refrained from public campaigning for presidential candidates until 2004. He cast his support strongly with Democratic nominee John Kerry, performing at political events including the Vote for Change tour.
Matthews also supported Barack Obama for President in 2008, both in the primaries and in the general election.




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Matthews
Click to expand...

Bruce "The Boss" is calling for a national exorcism to get rid of the Trump presidency!
 
CapAquaPis

CapAquaPis

Well-known member
The WHO no longer recommend lockdowns as an effective method of controlling COVID-19, notably most of the US didn't lockdown a second time unlike the EU (Large sections of the UK, France, Germany, Spain, Ireland, Poland and Czechia) as of this weekend...and other European nations brought back restrictions instead (The Netherlands, Italy, Greece, Croatia, Denmark, Sweden and Russia) after the continent didn't have a summer spike the US did.

Biden as president wants to enact a better managed, federal government and 100% nationwide lockdown to end the pandemic. He urges the US population to wear masks and it should be an universal mandate for 6-12 weeks, the period of time when 95-99% of Americans wear masks in public, the rate of infection goes down by 90% to more manageable levels per state, county or major cities .
 
Last edited:
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
hell-no-joe.jpg
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
*



 Trump delivers remarks at a 'Make America Great Again

Victory Rally' in Arizona :smile:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLqG5Vg9KQI



blackbery said:
The Left have lost their minds; they are suffering acute phase of TDS.

In final stages of Trump Derangement Syndrome, Dems lie down like little shorn lambs
Despite threadbare attempts to smear Amy Cony Barrett, Democrats are out of ammo.

The couldn't stop Trump winning in 2016, they couldn't stop his SCOTUS nominations from being confirmed & they cannot stop the TRUMP TRAIN from rolling to VICTORY next week.

:biggrin::biggrin::biggrin:
Click to expand...
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
*





example shows a phrase
deliberately being used in a different sense :smile:
to change and dilute its meaning


example also refers to the US Supreme Court.
The phrase “...packing the court...” had a specific meaning
– to add more justices to the court
in order to shift its political orientation.
It has nothing to do with just filling a vacancy. :smile:



As part of the arguments
democrats accused the republicans

of “...packing the court...”
by appointing Barrett to give the court a conservative majority.
The term packing had nothing to do with filling a vacancy.:smile:
So the democrats respond to an accusation of court packing
by saying the republicans packed the court first.


Now the vaguer usage of the word is catching on

– in his podcast the morning after the confirmation
Scott Adams commented that the court is really packed now.
The phrase “...packing the court..” has been diluted
to the point that it is losing its specific meaning :smile:
it’s been blurred to mean, appointing someone on your team.
We’ve lost a perfectly useful word
and now it is harder to talk about that particular situation.

That is dangerous
because now talk about the Supreme Court
and its role is being diffused and obfuscated.

Those are a couple of cases from many
of language being deliberately blurred
to make clear and rational discussion impossible
and to hide what is actually happening.
It is language being redefined to fit an agenda.
Charles Obert




.
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
JUPITERASC said:
.


From Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton:

"....Your vote may not matter.
The Left is war gaming a revolution to take the presidency.

Some on the Left are planning a revolution if President Trump wins..." :smile:



.
Click to expand...
*



Racist.
If you pay attention
it is very clear that the word “Racism”
has been re-defined by one faction
to mean something very nearly the opposite of what it once meant.:smile:


One one side, to be Racist means
to judge a person based on their skin color
– making race an issue.


From the other side, to be Racist means
to dare to judge people by anything other than their skin color
– not making race the main issue.


If you don’t make race the main issue that makes you Racist.



This now means that the different sides politically
are using the same word without being clearly aware
of what it means
or without being aware that it is used differently by the other side. :smile:



You have people arguing over whether or not they are Racist
without realizing
that they are using the words in completely different senses.
Most likely the people hearing these arguments
have only a fuzzy sense of just exactly what the word means
or how it is being used in a particular context.


The word Racism has been weaponized.
Calling someone a Racist
is now a way to dismiss or belittle a person
without having to bother taking them or their positions seriously :smile:


People may be a bit fuzzy on just what being Racist means
but

they are pretty sure
they don’t want to come anywhere near a person
who has been branded Racist.
By being used so vaguely and indiscriminately
as a political weapon
the word has lost much if not all of its original meaning
and that is dangerous.
It used to be that
when I heard someone described as Racist
that it actually meant something specific
and I would pay attention.
Now I hear of someone being called Racist and I blow it off
It is now a vague perjorative term meaning next to nothing.
To become aware of this sort of deliberate
weaponized corruption of our language
I very highly recommend the book
– “...Cynical Theories...” by Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay.
It will open your eyes in a whole new way
to how language is currently being used
to coerce politics
and to muddy, confuse and control thinking and discourse. :smile:
Charles Obert






.
 
Last edited:
leomoon

leomoon

Well-known member
There is no question in my mind, IF Joe Biden gets the job, he must try and change the Supreme Court with 2 more judges added.


McConnell started this mess when he shoved Coney-Barrett down our throats. :devil: I hope its Merrick Garland who finally is given the position he should have been 3 justices ago but McConnell denied him that right.


Coney-B has no such experience as he does - to get trump's attention you only need to do with his last nominee did, or for sure, William Barr who wrote him a personal 19 page resume, unasked for!

Timeline

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland


1971:Garland had more federal judicial experience than any other Supreme Court nominee in history, and was the oldest Supreme Court nominee since Lewis F. Powell, Jr. in 1971.
2002:In 2002, Garland joined a unanimous court in ruling for two federal prisoners who were denied the right to consume communion wine.
2003:In 2003, Garland was elected to the Harvard Board of Overseers, completing the unexpired term of Deval Patrick, who had stepped down from the board.
2009:In 2009, following the announcement by Justice David Souter that he would retire, Garland was considered as one of nine finalists for the post, which ultimately went to Sonia Sotomayor, then a judge of the Second Circuit.
2016:In early March 2016, The New York Times reported that Garland was being vetted by the Obama Administration as a potential nominee.
2020:Garland's seven-year term as chief judge ended on February 11, 2020, with Judge Sri Srinivasan succeeding him.
 
Last edited:
D

david starling

Well-known member
The aggregate polls are holding steady regarding a landslide for Biden in the Popular Vote. They were correct in 2016 within a 2-point margin of error. It was the close races in the regional swing-States that made them look bad, regarding the Electoral College Vote.

The regional swing-State polls are still close and uncertain regarding the Electoral Vote. As Elena reminded us, a tie in the Electoral Vote would move it into the House, which would give Trump an advantage, although it would be dependent on the new, 2020 makeup there.
 
leomoon

leomoon

Well-known member
david starling said:
The aggregate polls are holding steady regarding a landslide for Biden in the Popular Vote. They were correct in 2016 within a 2-point margin of error. It was the close races in the regional swing-States that made them look bad, regarding the Electoral College Vote.

The regional swing-State polls are still close and uncertain regarding the Electoral Vote. As Elena reminded us, a tie in the Electoral Vote would move it into the House, which would give Trump an advantage, although it would be dependent on the new, 2020 makeup there.
Click to expand...




Que sera sera.......:pouty:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FKA-3uRdQY
 
Top