You just KNOW this is making the vein in Trump's forehead throb like a hammer-struck thumb.

Harris-Walz Interview Ratings

Quote:Initial ratings released by Nielsen on Friday, which were expected to rise slightly in the final accounting, show that the interview of Harris and Walz drew in just under 6 million viewers.

In comparison, Trump's first televised joint interview with Vance, airing on Fox News' Jesse Watters Primetime on July 22, was watched by 4.266 million. The interview aired one day after Biden dropped out of the race and just over a week after Trump survived an assassination attempt.

Boru

'Trump Claims Schools Perform Gender Surgery: “Your Kid Goes To School, Comes Home With An Operation”

“But the transgender thing is incredible. Think of it. Your kid goes to school and comes home a few days later with an operation. The school decides what’s going to happen with your child and you know many of these childs [sic] 15 years later say, what the hell happened? Who did this to me? They say, who did this to me? It’s incredible.” – Trump, going on to tell the Moms For Liberty audience that public school boards are “like dictatorships.”

^We dissected frogs and worms and such but I don't recall there being a surgical theater at the school.

What little mind he may have had left has left the building.

(August 31, 2024 at 10:19 am)arewethereyet Wrote: ^We dissected frogs and worms and such but I don't recall there being a surgical theater at the school.

What little mind he may have had left has left the building.

His mind is one thing but if person can hear this and still vote on him? Compared to people voting on him he is genius.

(August 31, 2024 at 11:22 am)Ivan Denisovich Wrote:

(August 31, 2024 at 10:19 am)arewethereyet Wrote: ^We dissected frogs and worms and such but I don't recall there being a surgical theater at the school.

What little mind he may have had left has left the building.

His mind is one thing but if person can hear this and still vote on him? Compared to people voting on him he is genius.

He allows the hate that is usually hidden out in the open.  That will always keep some people in his camp.

As for the genius part...I think there are a lot of people who see someone who is wealthy (even if only on paper) as someone who has to be smart.

I am most boggled by the number of women that back this imbecile.

(August 31, 2024 at 11:26 am)arewethereyet Wrote:

(August 31, 2024 at 11:22 am)Ivan Denisovich Wrote: His mind is one thing but if person can hear this and still vote on him? Compared to people voting on him he is genius.

He allows the hate that is usually hidden out in the open.  That will always keep some people in his camp.

As for the genius part...I think there are a lot of people who see someone who is wealthy (even if only on paper) as someone who has to be smart.

I am most boggled by the number of women that back this imbecile.

Of course people chose politician in their own likeness so shitty people want to vote on shitty candidate. Still it is beyond insane that this idiot have any kind of support - dumbest people I personally know wouldn't be able to utter such idiocy and yet there are even greater fools who deem him presidential material.

I was reading about Trump's attempts to square the circle of Trump's views on abortion. The article pointed out that while some view his backpedaling on abortion as a betrayal, others believe it's just an act he's using to secure his election, after which, he'll return to radid pro-life policies and views that his pro-life followers want him to have. The stunning part of this is how entirely fact-free such a position is, that no matter what views he publicly espouses, one should have faith in him regardless, that he's ultimately got a plan and will take all these extreme right ideas and people and bring them to the promised land. It's essentially religious, believing on faith, not just in the absence of evidence, but in the very teeth of evidence to the contrary. It is truly nothing more than a cult.

During a recent interview on Fox, Trump said this:

Quote:“Whoever heard, you get indicted for interfering with a presidential election, where you have every right to do it, you get indicted, and your poll numbers go up,” he said. 

I'm not a lawyer, but that looks an awful lot like a confession.

Boru

Quote:Vice President Harris is trouncing former President Trump among young voters in the latest polls, a promising sign as her campaign courts the demographic that’s been energized online by coconut tree memes and jokes that the Democratic nominee is “brat.”

A USA Today/Suffolk University poll released Thursday found young people swung a massive 24 points between June and August, from favoring former President Trump over President Biden by 11 points to picking Harris over Trump by 13 points.

Still, organizers face the challenge of harnessing online excitement and translating it into action at the ballot box from an age group that tends to turn out at lower rates than older counterparts.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/48...ald-trump/

It's about time they pull their heads out of their asses.

In 2016, when Clinton campaign emails were leaked, the press ran with them hot and heavy. But today, the same outlets are sitting on a Trump campaign hack. Why?

The coverage wasn’t just high-volume; it was sensationalized. Many outlets focused on cherry-picked quotes taken out of context, fueling controversy and speculation. The constant drip of new information kept the story alive, dominating headlines and shaping the narrative of the campaign’s final weeks.

The press absolutely helped Assange and WikiLeaks achieve his unstated objective of tanking Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign and elevating Trump to the presidency. There’s really no question about that.

While there were early suspicions of Russian involvement in the hacks, many media outlets initially treated the leaks primarily as a political story rather than a potential act of foreign interference. It wasn’t until after the election that the full scope of Russia’s role in the hacking and distribution of these emails became clear.

Now let’s look to 2024 and examine the alleged hack of the Trump campaign.

In late July and early August of this year, several major news outlets, including Politico, The Washington Post, and The New York Times, received emails from a mysterious figure calling himself “Robert.” This individual offered internal Trump campaign documents, most notably a 271-page dossier listing J.D. Vance’s potential vulnerabilities as a running mate. Unlike in 2016, when similar leaks were quickly published and dissected, these news organizations chose a different approach.

This cautious approach represents a significant shift from 2016. Matt Murray, executive editor of the Post, explained their reasoning: “This episode probably reflects that news organizations aren’t going to snap at any hack that comes in and is marked as ‘exclusive’ or ‘inside dope’ and publish it for the sake of publishing.”

The decision not to publish the Vance materials seems to have been influenced by their perceived lack of newsworthiness. Murray noted, “In the end, it didn’t seem fresh or new enough.”

This stands in untenable contrast to the way these same outlets responded to the hacking and leaking of Democratic emails in 2016. Precious few reporters have retrospectively acknowledged that their 2016 fixation on emails (both the ones on Hillary Clinton’s personal server and the ones that were stolen from her colleagues) fell beneath professional standards. Most reporters, and nearly all decision-makers, insist they did nothing wrong—at most they’ll allow that their failures that cycle were garden-variety.

If the press wants to do things differently this time around, fine. But if they’re going to do that, then they have a responsibility to both explain the change and make it clear that they botched 2016. It’s as simple as that. If they can’t do that, then I think there’s an obligation to treat this leak the exact same way they treated the 2016 email leak: nonstop negative coverage that played up the very existence of a leak as a scandal in itself. But they won’t.

https://newrepublic.com/article/184916/l...p-campaign