Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Election 2024 & Presidential Cage Match: Dark Brandon 46 vs Felonious Farty 45


88Comrade2000

Recommended Posts

41 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

F-sQsyza4AAxoUu?format=jpg&name=large

 

I'm sure we'll get articles titled like "Trump hits back at political enemies."

 

But...but...veterans are suckers and losers, remember you orange ****tard? And you don't want wounded veterans at your rallies cause it looks bad. Right, you ****ing delusional assclown?

 

This idiot is an abomination that needs a good curbstomping. Lol.

 

HTTR!

 

  • Thanks 3
  • Thumb up 1
  • Super Duper Ain't No Party Pooper Two Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, skinsfan4128 said:

But...but...veterans are suckers and losers, remember you orange ****tard? And you don't want wounded veterans at your rallies cause it looks bad. Right, you ****ing delusional assclown?

 

This idiot is an abomination that needs a good curbstomping. Lol.

 

HTTR!

 

The guy who bought me my second tat (armband that's all musical stuff) got one of those.  Needless to say, we didn't date much longer since his face was in a hockey mask.  After I realized how it happened, and what he did to get his ass in that situation, ...honest to God, he was gorgeous but I don't do that. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As we see articles talking up RFK Jr. and a potential No Labels ticket of Romney-Manchin, I want to throw something out here. 

 

1) Having the House determine the President, if there was no one who got the 270 electoral votes has previously been viewed as a Constitutional nightmare.  

 

2) The typical popular vote threshold for legitimate President is 40%.  If we have a President with less than 40% of the popular vote, it would also be a Constitutional nightmare.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

I've never heard that before. What's the constitutional source on that? 

This was the prevailing belief in the late 1960s and early 1970s.  I've been doing some deep research into the National Popular Vote movement.  The reason why the National Popular Vote movement was so popular at that time was due to the fear that the House would determine the President.  So point 1 was pretty obvious.  Point 2 underscores one of the biggest issues with the National Popular Vote.  You could potentially have 3 or 4 candidates with less than 40% of the vote.  The solution Congress spoke about was a run-off between the top 2 (although ranked-choice voting on election day would solve this).   

 

A Constitutional Amendment passed the House, was supported by Nixon - but the Senate filibustered it.  None of the actual complaints that the filibustered States/Senators had at the time are really what we are facing now.  They were concerned with loss of power of their vote -- but we already have that with 10 to 12 battleground states deciding the election.  Since that time we've had two Presidents who did not win the popular vote.  Again - this was also a perceived major Constitutional crises and it was termed "a minority President."   They never really thought about "what happens if the minority President nominates a controlling wing of the Supreme Court." 

 

I would consider Bush not really a "minority" since his popular vote margin so miniscule - but Trump vs. Clinton certainly falls in the "our politicians 40 years ago would have considered this a big deal".  Normalization or steamrolling of some of their concerns is a fascinating topic in the general sense (talking about their debates on debt limit, Social security, etc.).  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Voters are worried about Biden’s age. He knows it.

 

When the clatter of someone tripping interrupted President Joe Biden’s remarks at an Illinois event this week, he paused and asked, “You OK? I want the press to know that wasn’t me.”

His ad lib prompted a big laugh in an otherwise serious speech about his administration’s commitment to union jobs.

 

It was one of a handful of references he made to his age as the 80-year-old president spoke before a few hundred United Auto Workers employees Wednesday.

 

Biden’s age, of course, is no laughing matter these days. It’s at the heart of his precarious standing in the polls and he needs a strategy — something, anything — for addressing voters’ concerns about electing an octogenarian to a second term which will end when he is 86 years old.

 

Click on the link for the full article

 

Clearly he needs to drink some baby's blood to get some of the adenochrome.

 

  • Like 1
  • Super Duper Ain't No Party Pooper Two Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Evil Genius said:

Sure, let's focus on Biden being 3 years older. Not delusional dementia Donny. 

 

 

They focus on Biden because the news in the US doesnt try to report news, they try to make news.  Anyone that is voting for Trump, or even still open to the option, isnt going to be influenced by the news (they're already either brainwashed or braindead).  So news will focus on Biden...only way to "make" news.

 

Another way of thinking about it is that Trump and his supporters are already baked into the environment...news aint gonna influence that.  The only real variable is energy in the opposition and willingness to vote for Biden.  News can influence this, so thats where they are gonna play.

  • Thumb up 2
  • Super Duper Ain't No Party Pooper Two Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...