Biden's running mate

[seanD]

This is what I mean. He's a master at ruining perfect opportunities. It's like he purposely does it.

[JimL]

Jim, we don't have democratic socialism now. We have a mostly free-market capitalist economy. The whole spiel of Bernie Sanders was that we shouldn't have billionaires and that the workers need to own the companies and not have super rich CEOs. He used to complain that we don't need any millionaires, but then be became one himself, so that was suddenly OK.

Under democratic socialism, the big corporations would be owned by the workers who would evenly distribute the profits among themselves. Any one who is considered "rich" would be taxed until they weren't. No more "1%"

Ask Starlight.


[ATTACH=CONFIG]47688[/ATTACH]

Places like Denmark and Sweden still have their millionaires and billionaires, Sparko. I understand that those countries are not what you would call Democratic socialist but they are what I am refering to as democratic socialism as opposed to the US. Yes, there would be higher taxes on the wealthy and more equity throughout, there would be living wages, unions, collective bargaining, affordable healthcare, social security etc etc all social programs that promote the general welfare which the Republican party and their wealthy backers have been fighting to diminish and abolish in this country since FDR started it off bringing the roaring 20's to an end. So, call it what you will, but it's about fairness, decency, and democracy over greedy plutocracy.

[Bill the Cat]

Places like Denmark and Sweden still have their millionaires and billionaires, Sparko. I understand that those countries are not what you would call Democratic socialist but they are what I am refering to as democratic socialism as opposed to the US. Yes, there would be higher taxes on the wealthy and more equity throughout, there would be living wages, unions, collective bargaining, affordable healthcare, social security etc etc all social programs that promote the general welfare which the Republican party and their wealthy backers have been fighting to diminish and abolish in this country since FDR started it off bringing the roaring 20's to an end. So, call it what you will, but it's about fairness, decency, and democracy over greedy plutocracy.

It's called earning your keep.

[Reepicheep]

How so? Has he said she wasn't born in the US?

"They're saying that she doesn't qualify because she wasn't born in this country." - Donald Trump

[Cow Poke]

"They're saying that she doesn't qualify because she wasn't born in this country." - Donald Trump

Did you actually watch the video? He was fed that question, and he basically said he didn't know.....

The quote attributed to Trump was restating what he was asked.

[Bill the Cat]

"They're saying that she doesn't qualify because she wasn't born in this country." - Donald Trump

That did not at all answer my question.

[seanD]

"They're saying that she doesn't qualify because she wasn't born in this country." - Donald Trump

I love how the commentators blame him for bringing up a subject that had nothing to do with the pandemic, yet he didn't bring it up, the reporter did. But that's CNN.

[oxmixmudd]

How so? Has he said she wasn't born in the US?

There are the liars, like Trump.

And there are those that enable the liars ...

Source: cnn

Trump was told about claims on "social media" that Harris might be ineligible to serve as president and vice president. He was then asked if he can definitively say that she meets the requirements.
Trump said, "I heard today that she doesn't meet the requirements." He referred to a lawyer who raised the issue in a Newsweek article, Chapman University professor John Eastman, as "very highly qualified."
Trump then said he has "no idea" whether it's true Harris doesn't meet the requirements. He then asked the reporter if she was saying Harris doesn't qualify because Harris "wasn't born in this country."
Facts First: Harris was born in Oakland, California. Therefore, as a natural born citizen, she meets the Constitution's requirements to serve as vice president or president. There is no serious question about this.

© Copyright Original Source

By calling it into question, when there is no question at all, he doesn't have to 'say she wasn't born in the US'. The nutters and the conspiracy whisperers will do the rest for him.

It's his standard tactic, and you and those like you that play the game you play above are his enablers.

[Cow Poke]

There are the liars, like Trump.

And there are those that enable the liars ...

Source: cnn

Trump was told about claims on "social media" that Harris might be ineligible to serve as president and vice president. He was then asked if he can definitively say that she meets the requirements.
Trump said, "I heard today that she doesn't meet the requirements." He referred to a lawyer who raised the issue in a Newsweek article, Chapman University professor John Eastman, as "very highly qualified."
Trump then said he has "no idea" whether it's true Harris doesn't meet the requirements. He then asked the reporter if she was saying Harris doesn't qualify because Harris "wasn't born in this country."
Facts First: Harris was born in Oakland, California. Therefore, as a natural born citizen, she meets the Constitution's requirements to serve as vice president or president. There is no serious question about this.

© Copyright Original Source

By calling it into question, when there is no question at all, he doesn't have to 'say she wasn't born in the US'. The nutters and the conspiracy whisperers will do the rest for him.

It's his standard tactic, and you and those like you that play the game you play above are his enablers.

Your "transcript" is not a faithful rendering of what the video actually shows, Jim. Anybody can watch the video and see that he was fed the question by a reporter, his 'statement' is him repeating the question.

[JimL]

Your "transcript" is not a faithful rendering of what the video actually shows, Jim. Anybody can watch the video and see that he was fed the question by a reporter, his 'statement' is him repeating the question.

Good thing you've let us know you're not a Trumpster, CP. We'd never have figured that out by reading all the excuses you come up with in defense of everything he does.

[Cow Poke]

Good thing you've let us know you're not a Trumpster, CP. We'd never have figured that out by reading all the excuses you come up with in defense of everything he does.

Facts, little - I care about the facts.

[seanD]

I'm going to push the issue further just because the resident TDS crowd here brought it up and to just irk them even more for the fun of it.

According to law professor John C. Eastman (and a pretty credible one at that), Kamala's eligibility is not a rightwing fringe conspiracy theory, but an issue that raises some legit legal issues, at least according to Eastman...

Newsweek

Now, as a TDS resident, the worst way you can counter this is to just handwave it off as "conspiracy nuttery," because, personally, that just convinces me even more the argument is legit and you have no legit counter argument. So let's how the TDS legal experts can respond to it.

[Cow Poke]

I'm going to push the issue further just because the resident TDS crowd here brought it up and to just irk them even more for the fun of it.

According to law professor John C. Eastman (and a pretty credible one at that), Kamala's eligibility is not a rightwing fringe conspiracy theory, but an issue that raises some legit legal issues, at least according to Eastman...



Now, as a TDS resident, the worst way you can counter this is to just handwave it off as "conspiracy nuttery," because, personally, that just convinces me even more the argument is legit and you have no legit counter argument. So let's how the TDS legal experts can respond to it.

JimL: Wake up, MoscowSean, you Trumpster idiot!
Ox: You are just playing games enabling the lying liar!

[Watermelon]

I'm going to push the issue further just because the resident TDS crowd here brought it up and to just irk them even more for the fun of it.

According to law professor John C. Eastman (and a pretty credible one at that), Kamala's eligibility is not a rightwing fringe conspiracy theory, but an issue that raises some legit legal issues, at least according to Eastman...



Now, as a TDS resident, the worst way you can counter this is to just handwave it off as "conspiracy nuttery," because, personally, that just convinces me even more the argument is legit and you have no legit counter argument. So let's how the TDS legal experts can respond to it.

[rogue06]

Your "transcript" is not a faithful rendering of what the video actually shows, Jim. Anybody can watch the video and see that he was fed the question by a reporter, his 'statement' is him repeating the question.

No different than when the MSM insisted that Trump called all Hispanics "animals" when he was clearly talking about MS-13.


When you have to deliberately lie in order to prop up your position...