The Trump Riot Aftermath (Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes found guilty of seditious conspiracy. Proud Boys join the club)

[tshile]

2 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

So you didn't say he goes against 99% of what his party worships? 

I think the use of the word “worships” is important. 
 

for instance : voting against a clean energy bill

vs

supporting throwing out electors

 

These two are not the same type of issue. Yet, you treat them as if they are, and wonder why some people object to the idea. 

[The Evil Genius]

5 minutes ago, tshile said:

People who have a basic understanding of statistics, understand the problem with not weighting the items being measured in a way to reflects the actual argument that’s trying to be made. 
 

🤷‍♂️ 

 

Are you talking about heteroskedasticity? Been awhile (1998) since I had grad level statistics,  so maybe explain what I'm missing. 

[tshile]

2 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

Are you talking about heteroskedasticity? Been awhile (1998) since I had grad level statistics,  so maybe explain what I'm missing. 

I don’t think it’s makes you look better to point out you’re supposed to know better than to do the thing you’re doing

 

 

[Captain Wiggles]

Meh I don't need a degree in statistical analysis to understand Kinzinger voted against the Economic Equity Act and the Gas Price Gouging Prevention act in just the last month. 

 

Can't say I'm a fan. Much like Mike Pence the guy does the bare minimum requirement at his job n folks wanna pat him on the back. I appreciate him standing up to his party and all tho. It won't do any good in regards to fixing wtf is wrong with the Republican party atm.

[The Evil Genius]

3 minutes ago, tshile said:

I don’t think it’s makes you look better to point out you’re supposed to know better than to do the thing you’re doing

 

 

 

So that's a no?

[Califan007 The Constipated]

6 minutes ago, tshile said:

I think the use of the word “worships” is important. 
 

for instance : voting against a clean energy bill

vs

supporting throwing out electors

 

These two are not the same type of issue. Yet, you treat them as if they are, and wonder why some people object to the idea. 

 

You're overlooking, though, that both men were in total agreement on whether or not to ban flavored tobacco products. I mean, how much more proof do you need....

[The Evil Genius]

7 minutes ago, tshile said:

I think the use of the word “worships” is important. 
 

for instance : voting against a clean energy bill

vs

supporting throwing out electors

 

These two are not the same type of issue. Yet, you treat them as if they are, and wonder why some people object to the idea. 

 

His party worships guns. Kinzinger walked in line with his party. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

8 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

So you didn't say he goes against 99% of what his party worships? 

I thought it was rather clear that I was referring to the party worshipping Trump.  All the $ is in worshipping Trump and his delusion that he won the election.  There were no signs that going against him would be lucrative, as evidenced by 99% of the Republican Party still hanging on to his lies and seeking his endorsement for their own political dealings. 
 

The easiest thing to do was to latch onto the Trump train and even if you didn’t believe it yourself, skate around that stuff and moonwalk into re-election.  He chose not to do that and has never wavered.  
 

We’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one.  

[The Evil Genius]

I mean, August of 2020 Kinzinger publicly said his personal belief was that the country needed another 4 years of Trump. Honestly, let's not continue pretending that he is anything other than a Trump supporter most of the time, ok? 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

 

3 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

I mean, August of 2020 Kinzinger publicly said his personal belief was that the country needed another 4 years of Trump. Honestly, let's not continue pretending that he is anything other than a Trump supporter most of the time, ok? 

 

It's not September 2020, though. A whole ****load has happened in the two years since he said that.

[TheGreatBuzz]

1 hour ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I made no mention of how or what he voted on, only that he's financially clean as a whistle, a military vet, and still enlisted in the national guard.  While I may disagree with some of his politics, it would be unfair to suggest that what he's done is merely a ploy to get him a gig on liberal news networks.  It doesn't even make sense, considering all the money is in grifting with Trump.

 

 

 

Just as a point of detail, he did not enlist.  He is an officer and was commissioned. 

 

1 hour ago, mistertim said:

 

This is good to hear but I'll never understand how some people can get away with this stuff:

 

 

If you get a legal subpoena to testify about something, why exactly do you get to negotiate what you will or won't talk about? It's a ****ing subpoena, not a lunch invitation.

 

Rich, white, and powerful.

[Llevron]

1 hour ago, tshile said:

Your best case for ‘24 is someone like Cheney or Kinzinger winning the nomination. Your worst case is someone like Trump, DeSantis, or Cruz. 
 

when you act this way, you’re pushing people toward the later. 
 

it is in your best interest to at least accept standard policy disagreements as reasonable and work within that framework, than it is to do what you’re doing. 

 

I don't know. I think its fair for me to admit this is true and still not like them politically and give them their fair share of blame in this mess. Like someone said this is how politics works. 

 

1 hour ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I made no mention of how or what he voted on, only that he's financially clean as a whistle, a military vet, and still enlisted in the national guard.  While I may disagree with some of his politics, it would be unfair to suggest that what he's done is merely a ploy to get him a gig on liberal news networks.  It doesn't even make sense, considering all the money is in grifting with Trump.

 

I'm not sure its unfair to question his (or any politicians) motives. He can be doing a good thing and not be doing it because he is super patriotic or altruistic. Both can be true. I just don't trust either of them I'm not sure that's as menacing a thought process as yall are making it out to be. Were I arguing this with a bunch of Republicans then I would be singing their praises because context does matter for me.  

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

1 minute ago, Llevron said:

I'm not sure its unfair to question his (or any politicians) motives. He can be doing a good thing and not be doing it because he is super patriotic or altruistic. Both can be true. I just don't trust either of them I'm not sure that's as menacing a thought process as yall are making it out to be. Were I arguing this with a bunch of Republicans then I would be singing their praises because context does matter for me.

I don’t trust any politicians in general.  My point isn’t so much about trust as it is common sense.  
 

Kinzinger, at least, was against even the suggestion by Trump that the election would be rigged, before it even happened.  He didn’t start getting critical on January 7th.  There is nothing popular about what he was doing, hence why everyone else in his party was going the other way.  He has family that’s disowned him over this, death threats, etc.

 

I just don’t see how doing something so unpopular with the people he needs to be popular, is politically motivated when it’s the exact opposite.  Or worse, the suggestion that he’s motivated by TV $.  As seen by how he votes and what he’s said publicly, he’s far from a lefty - so the crossover appeal juice doesn’t seem worth the squeeze.

 

 

[Llevron]

2 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I just don’t see how doing something so unpopular with the people he needs to be popular, is politically motivated when it’s the exact opposite.  Or worse, the suggestion that he’s motivated by TV $.  As seen by how he votes and what he’s said publicly, he’s far from a lefty - so the crossover appeal juice doesn’t seem worth the squeeze.

 

There could be many reasons. Many of which you would probably call me silly for thinking about so we really don't have to go back and forth to get to the point where we agree to disagree on it. Honestly I hope you are right. I would be happy to be wrong about these people.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

2 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

There could be many reasons. Many of which you would probably call me silly for thinking about so we really don't have to go back and forth to get to the point where we agree to disagree on it. Honestly I hope you are right. I would be happy to be wrong about these people.

I don’t mean to suggest that the dude is going to flip and start authoring bills for trans rights, pay off student loans or anything like that.  As I said, he’s been pretty clear where he stands politically and it’s not on the left.

 

Just that in this instance, about this subject, he chose to do something massively unpopular with his base, family, etc.  If it was a calculated political move, I’d have to question his decision making.

[hail2skins]

Allahpundit on the increased frustration on the left towards Biden:

 

https://hotair.com/allahpundit/2022/07/06/democrats-and-the-media-are-giving-up-on-biden-n481019

[88Comrade2000]

When Biden gets impeached next year; bet you some Dem Senators vote to remove him.

[TheGreatBuzz]

8 minutes ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

bet you some Dem Senators vote to remove him.

 

I'll take that bet.  What's the terms?

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

22 minutes ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

When Biden gets impeached next year; bet you some Dem Senators vote to remove him.

On what grounds?

[CobraCommander]

11 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

On what grounds?

Hilary’s emails probably.

[PleaseBlitz]

29 minutes ago, The Almighty Buzz said:

 

I'll take that bet.  What's the terms?

 

I'll get in on this action too. 

[Captain Wiggles]

[PleaseBlitz]

50 minutes ago, hail2skins said:

Allahpundit on the increased frustration on the left towards Biden:

 

https://hotair.com/allahpundit/2022/07/06/democrats-and-the-media-are-giving-up-on-biden-n481019

 

Does everyone else see how ****ing stupid this is?  The only reason that Donald Trump became President, and therefore was able to appoint 3 hyper-partisan religious fundamentalists to SCOTUS, who then overturned Roe and a multitude of other SCOTUS precedents, is the exact people this pundit is talking about failed to show up in 2016 because of the exact same logic they are using now.  

 

If one party is fundamentally opposed to your core values, the solution is to do everything you can to fight that party.  The solution is not to blame the party that unsuccessfully fought to prevent that from happening and thus ensure that the party that is fundamentally opposed to your core values retains power. 

[tshile]

I actually think a dem might vote to remove him cause why not

 

but I’ll also take the bet cause you’re usually wrong about this stuff (which is usually good cause you tend to be more cynical than me 😂)

[Spaceman Spiff]

Are you guys doing sig bets?  Those were really popular around 2008 or so.