hail2skins

Arent the rules of the debate such so that interruptions are precluded? That probably helps Trump is that it lessens the degree he can come off as obnoxious.

27 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

 

If there is more cash competing to buy homes the cost of homes will go up. I mean, this is imperically proven time after time and these two yahoos are suggesting if we added a zero to the end of poor people’s paychecks they could magically afford housing in a sustaining way? I doubt it.
 

What you need a glut of housing supply. Of course, no one is building houses that won’t sell quickly. 

Was reading something yesterday where the 30 year mortgage rate was fairly constant at around 3.5 percent for just about all of Trump's presidency until the pandemic. And home price increases were on par historically. Then they dropped to like 2-2,5 percent and that, combined with the stimmy and all the WFH stuff, have us in the situation we are today.

Inventory has improved but is likely still about 30 percent below 2019. And in certain areas like the Northeast, including the DC area, it's like 50 percent below. Still anyone's guess what will happen if rates go down, and what the magic number is so things don't overheat again.

As far as existing housing inventory goes, according to analyst Lance Lambert, only 32 of the 200 largest markets in the country have returned to 2019 levels. And like 20 of the 32 are in Texas or Florida.

Remnants from the last regime:

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/40380865/commanders-pay-13m-settle-va-season-ticket-deposit-probe

Wasn't the second debate in 2020 (after the originally scheduled town hall debate got cancelled due to Trump's covid) a bit more civilized than the first one?

29 minutes ago, Fergasun said:

I really wish Trump is asked. 

 

"You keep saying Russia would have never invaded Ukraine if you were still President.  Can you explain that logic?"

He has already openly said that he would've threatened to bomb Moscow.

Now, that logic to me indicates that course of action would bring us closer to WW 3 than our current posture, but as you know, logic doesn't apply to those folks.

Washington inspired the Arizona team relocating to Utah to have the bland "hockey club" moniker for its first season in SLC. They better call them the Commanders in their second season 

https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/40344646/new-utah-team-use-utah-hockey-club-inaugural-season

47 minutes ago, Fergasun said:

 

At the same time, they have no idea how dumb, wasteful, and counterproductive electing him will be.  We are gonna go 2 levels deeper into a worse Constitutional crises than when Nixon resigned. 

 

I don't think independent voters who will decide this are dumb enough to vote for a President with pending trials for alleged crimes he committed in the White House. I really hope not. 

At this point the garden variety GOP voters and a bunch of independent voters don't care about the constitution or whether we have a dictator.

What's going to hurt the GOP heir apparent in 2028 (assuming Trump wins) is people will again get tired of the drama after another four year firehose of it.

7 hours ago, Jumbo said:

Same ole  trump/maga projection playbook: commit act/crimes, deny it, claim the Dems are the ones doing it, repeat process endlessly, count on maga media world to continuously confirm that it's reality.

Catoggio's article today is related:

https://www.macon.com/opinion/us-viewpoints/article289196199.html

I know people will be nervous when this thread gets bumped.....but just an update. It would be cool to see Jimmy somehow hang in there until he hits triple digits in the fall:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/jimmy-carter-99-no-longer-115558774.html

3 minutes ago, Larry said:

Is there a remote chance that Donald effing Trump is one of the Republicans smart enough to know that banning abortions isn't a winning position?  

 

(The guy who appointed 3 of the 6 justices who did it?  Who proudly took credit for it?)  

 

Yes, there is a strong chance. I just find it funny that his relative "squishiness" on the issue flies in the face of the "he tells it like it is" narrative. People in the GOP for who pro-life is their biggest issue will still choose Trump over other candidates who have more of a harder-line position on the issue.

29 minutes ago, skinsmarydu said:

Her:  Well, I was doing better under Trump

Pumping trillions of dollars (some of which was necessary) of covid stimmy into the economy would be inflationary? Who knew?

Article related to the discussion yesterday on whether this country is unifiable:

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/4703737-do-americans-hate-each-other-enough-to-tear-the-country-apart/

4 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

Like who? They. Don't. Exist. Anymore.

DeSantis or Haley each likely get more electoral votes than either Trump did in 2016 or Biden in 2020. I'm not saying they get to 350, but maybe in the 325-330 range.

I still think Trump wins in November, but would be very surprised if he gets to 300 EV.

Speaking of new stadiums being built next to old ones, absolutely crappy that this one (as well as Nashville) is underway while our situation has been floundering for god knows how long.

31 minutes ago, BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen said:

 

I honestly don't think MAGA cares. But I don't truly believe he'll nominate Don Jr....but if not then I think Noem is the choice.

Trump still needs independents to win the election. La Civita and Wiles aren't dumb. Vivek is too obnoxious. Noem turned off people with the dog incident.

Burgum is an interesting possibility. I still want to see someone like Scott or, as tshile just mentioned, Vance get the nod just to have (again, if Trump wins) their sycophancy go completely unrewarded in 2028. 

32 minutes ago, Califan007 The Constipated said:

Actually, he didn't quite say that. He said Americans come together (or do their best, something like that) in a crisis, then used 911 as an example. Then he said he thinks what will "break the fever" would be a unifying leader, someone out there with great leadership and ethics who can help guide the country through the mounting crisis occurring, and said someone like John F. Kennedy. He didn't quite say we needed another 911-type crisis.

True, but 9/11 was brought up first. GWB was 9 months into a presidency he basically won by 500 votes in Florida, and yet we seem so far from that political climate. The point about a unifying leader is a good one, but then Buck was at a loss to provide who he thinks would be a good one. It just seems that Trump has really exacerbated the divide, and it's tough to say when it ends.

1 minute ago, Califan007 The Constipated said:

 

It wouldn't be funny enough to be worth 4 more years of Trump in charge of the country.

True enough, but given that it's a real possibility, it's fun to think of what GOP figure deserves the comeuppance the most of either getting destroyed in the 2028 election or falling victim to Trump deciding to endorse someone else. Scott saying "I juuuust love youu" was so cringe.

4 minutes ago, Califan007 The Constipated said:

 

Well, unfortunately you could say that in this America it would be impossible for a black man to be seen as a unifying leader, no matter his leadership skill or high ethics.

 

I dont know a whole lot about Tim Scott, but the amount of sucking up he is doing to get that spot as Trump's VP seems to be disgustingly above and beyond. Good number of folks think Trump will pick him (who knows, but Trump did indicate a desire to have the VP debate at an HBCU). However, Scott has nowhere near the charisma of an Obama, and it would be funny to see him get his clock cleaned in 2028 (if he is chosen as VP and Trump wins in Nov). 

At the end of that Daily Show segment Stewart asked Buck how the fever breaks, and Buck opined another crisis like 9/11 would bring us together.

In 2024, does anyone actually believe that?

I'm sure we all have acquaintances that are pro-Trump.  I think he will win the election in November, but am optimistic that he will NOT try to retain power for himself in January 2029. However, just questions I have for you all regarding what you feel the thought processes are of the Trump supporters you know:

1) if he did try the same stuff in 2029 as he did in 2020, whether on behalf of himself or for the GOP candidate, would the Trump supporters you know rationalize it in some way?

2) Do you think these same people will ever consider a Democratic victory in a presidential election from this point forward legitimate, or will they always think that it was stolen?

11 hours ago, Califan007 The Constipated said:

Man, the names mentioned in the video...sheesh. I'm pretty sure I became a Redskins fan because of George Allen.

Love the music played in those videos from the 60s and 70s. Classic stuff!

One of the lines from Cowherd's video that resonates is regarding the people who are "not happy unless they're unhappy."

I get that there are a lot of folks that have less than optimal satisfaction with their jobs, and I often do wonder if we have enough "productive" jobs for the population we have. But what gets me is just the constant ****ing about how bad everything is. And that's what the cable news media, particularly the right-wing ones, do. Remember watching Hannity after Trump got elected and for a good at least six months he was still ****ing about Hillary every night.

I remember numerous instances where Trump supporters admit that a second term might indeed have less grown ups to reign in Trump.....but that it'll all be the Dems fault for persecuting him. Catoggio, as always, nails it:

Bone-deep dishonesty about respect for norms is the first thing to recognize in the dark warnings today that “two can play at this game!” from people who enthusiastically supported a coup attempt three years ago. Coup apologists do not care about norms, by definition. They’re not angry that Democrats haven’t shown proper respect for electoral fair play by convicting Trump, they’re angry that this was something done to their side rather than something their side did to the other.

The entire point of Donald Trump’s worldview is to be unapologetically ruthless in seeking advantage, norms be damned. And from the jump, the right has embraced it. “The party that has thrice nominated a greedy, prideful, mendacious, wrathful, bigot who gleefully slanders others, admitted to sexual assault on tape, [and] defrauded poor people who attended his fake university somehow believe they have been taking the moral high ground?” an astonished Tim Miller asked today about the sudden Strange New Respect for norms on the right.

I think they do believe it. I get the sense from many Trump supporters that they’d be willing to go much further than a coup or putting Joe Biden on trial in the name of excluding leftists from power permanently and should be appreciated for the “restraint” they’ve shown thus far. The sentiments we’re seeing on social media today, e.g., “I used to hate Trump but then he got convicted for a crooked cover-up of a hush-money scheme so now I’m a fascist,” suggest that the verdict in Manhattan has become a timely excuse to shed a little more of that restraint.

Being MAGA means forever blaming others for your own illiberal impulses.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/coups-norms-223839498.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

4 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

The biggest problem we have is the idea we have to vote for one of the two. Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

Pretty much. That's why that op-ed recently posted in the other thread with the conservative woman asking "if Trump is convicted, golly gee what am I to do?" was just laughable.

Her mind should've been made up long before this verdict. Nobody is forcing anyone to vote for either of these guys in November.

Good thread by Tom Nichols: