406
“Yeah but think of all those poor cats!!!” - the 37%
The 37% sayin' the same about trump, are those that would follow him to hell - literally. He could kill a kitten in front of them, they wouldn't mind at all.
Very smart move. Killing the cat before a dirty illegal immigrant cannot. Super smart.
because let's be honest they aren't worried about pets; it's that illegal immigrants are involved it.
Which, let's also be clear; they are not involved in any way.
Sure but that's why the message is being sold. The right wing is a post truth political movement. They are the alpha wave of the next global fascism movement.
Seeing the number of legal migrants who support Trump reminds me of the German Jews who supported the rise of Hitler.
It feels like a necessary step.
The genocide this movement is pushing for will not care about legal immigration status.
We're past the echo phase. We're deep into the, "I replaced Jew with Immigrant" phase.
He KILLED that Cat because there was 100000 ILLEGAL HAITIAN IMMIGRANTS coming in to Eat LITERALLY THAT exact Cat!
I really wish she got to go after Trump... His ending statement/question was the absolute perfect opportunity to stress the importance of voting for more than just the president!
"Why haven't you done all the things you say you want to yet?"
"People of the US: give me a Senate and House that will work with me and we can!"
It seemed like a mic drop for him but that's only because people don't understand all Republicans exist for is obstruction of democratic plans and to benefit the ownership class. Have a Republican lead House/Senate? You'll get nothing meaningful.
I fully agree, but a fully democratically owned house and Senate under Obama was pretty damn disappointing.
fully democratic by letter preceding their names only, they had a couple turncoats included in that
That's been the standard for a long time though, on both sides of the aisle.
If true, that would be exactly why you would need more than the exact bare minimum number of Democrats for what you want to accomplish, so that one or two can’t make a name for themselves by gumming up the works.
Are you a person who doesn’t appreciate the significance of the ACA, or are you a person that doesn’t realize that the supermajority only lasted something like 11 weeks (during which they managed to barely get the ACA to happen)?
But it's the only reason we have the ACA. Which, while only ok, is so much better than not having the ACA.
"No! You'll get something! I'm doing things! They're concepts of plans! We've got the greatest concepts!"
“you & president trump were elected four years ago”
What?
And he never corrected himself. Kind of strange, but I guess time is at a premium.
I noticed that she also called him "vice-president Trump" one time and didn't catch it.
But as usual, it's not a "both sides are the same" thing, when she slips up once and he does it 50 times.
Clearly she wasn't referring to the office of Vice President, but was acknowledging that he was a president beset with numerous vices
Useless noncontributory observation of the day. In the article, why is the "a" in "Wallace" randomly bolded...?
It's a trigger from a Deep State operative! It means they're going to start doing forced gender reassignment surgery on gay frogs in prison.
In prison? I thought that it was happening in the basement of a pizza restaurant that doesn't have a basement.
Oh yeah. I got my conspiracies confused.
Wallace
My guess would be the author originally typed "Wallece" and an editor corrected it but the bold slipped in?
I dunno, I'm just pulling that out of my ass.
It’s pronounced Wall-a-che
Got a link? Cant view twitter without account.
I'm watching it now without an account
https://xcancel.com/KamalaHQ/status/1833905765981003784
add 'cancel' after 'x' on any twitter link.
You're doing the lord's work.
Cool, got a link that works for me?
Try opening it in a browser instead of the app, just tried it on my phone and it still opened right up. Aside from that look for the video of the debate, that's literally all it is.
Stop explaining something I know to be false.
I cannot view Twitter on mobile on any browser.
This is by design. They want to monetize every impression. Stop sharing stuff on Twitter.
Mate, it seems to be just you. Firefox on mobile,clearly not logged in.
Private mode on a mobile browser works for me, try that one
. How's that design working out? For all the time you've spent responding, you could have just looked up a video of the debate.
this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2024
406 points (98.3% liked)
politics
18869 readers
3957 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS