Sunday, February 16, 2025

Focus Group: Arizona Swing Voters to Trump, Musk: Keep it Coming

Every Arizona swing voter in our latest Engagious/Sago focus groups said they approve of President Trump's actions since taking office ...

Posted by Bluewaffles at 12:33 PM | 139 COMMENTS | permalink

More

Only president with a lower net approval this early in their term was Trump in 2017[image or embed]

-- G Elliott Morris (@gelliottmorris.com) February 12, 2025 at 8:26 PM

Comments

God forsaken echo chamber.

osted by Bluewaffles

Well. you sure seem to be trying to prove something here.

#1 | Posted by Zed at 2025-02-16 08:14 AM

When things crash burning to the ground only the dead-enders will approve. Like you.

That crash and those flames are already in progress.

#2 | Posted by Zed at 2025-02-16 08:15 AM

"said they're good with Trump aggressively testing disruptive, expansionist expressions of presidential power that are piling up in court challenges"

They haven't been mugged yet.

#3 | Posted by Zed at 2025-02-16 08:17 AM

Posted by Bluewaffles

1) Donald has promised us a "Golden Age" more than once. Even you know that he is full of sh--.

2) Many of your posts have a "whistling past the graveyard" quality. You keep coming to this site because you feel the need to whistle.

3) "Success" when it comes to Donald is among the most flexible, malleable of all concepts. Who knows what MAGA will eventually define as being a success? And it's really not credible that anyone will agree with them.

4) All the omens are for a Donald Disaster. Pick virtually any topic. This Administration already smells like death.

#4 | Posted by Zed at 2025-02-16 09:25 AM

It takes time for some idiots to realize the damage they've done. The others never realize, because they're idiots

#5 | Posted by hamburglar at 2025-02-16 09:46 AM

Posted by Bluewaffles

Gee, I wonder if that Hegseth fellow is drunk today?

#6 | Posted by Zed at 2025-02-16 10:00 AM

What did we learn from this article?
Stunningly, incredibly stupid people remain stunningly, incredibly stupid people.

They don't mind that Trump hasn't bothered with inflation, though they pretended it was the single thing that mattered before the election.
They don't have a clue how tariffs work.
They idiotically believe "waste, fraud and abuse" is ubiquitous and they aren't going to be hurt by killing the agencies and department that provide services they need.
On subverting the judiciary? "That wouldn't happen. I'm not even thinking about it"
oh - and 8 of the 11 are total morons. Seriously deluded.

This is brilliant, though. It shows what the Democrats and true patriots for the ideals of the United States are up against. It helps to see if there's any chance of saving this union or if it's too late.

Damning.

#7 | Posted by YAV at 2025-02-16 10:47 AM

"While a focus group is not a statistically significant sample like a poll, the responses show how some voters are thinking and talking about current events."

Yeah.... next, pls.

"A survey from The Economist/YouGov released Wednesday revealed the president's net favorability rating among those aged 18-29 is minus 18 points. This is a drop from the plus 19 favorable rating he scored among this demographic in the days following November's race."

www.newsweek.com

40 point drop... Bill Maher said, "C'mon, kids! The time to think is BEFORE the election!".

"His personal favorability has also declined, with 52 percent of respondents viewing him unfavorably, compared to 46 percent who see him favorably."

dailyvoice.com

'

"Well, the most popular living president, per Gallup's findings, is Barack Obama, who was viewed favorably by 59-percent of the people surveyed.

Second?

Well, that would be George W. Bush, who is viewed favorably by 52-percent of the people surveyed. Trump is tied with Bill Clinton for third after being viewed favorably by 48-percent of those surveyed."

www.pennlive.com

Just sayin'.

#8 | Posted by Corky at 2025-02-16 11:00 AM

Is it any surprise ? American voters are stupid as hell.

#9 | Posted by jpw at 2025-02-16 11:28 AM

Zero self reflection in the comments, blame others with zilch for how do democrats as a party change to become more desirable to these voters. Very interesting, very interesting indeed.

#10 | Posted by Bluewaffles at 2025-02-16 11:38 AM

Oh, so... electing Traitor Trump is the Dem's fault?

Velly interesting... but shtupid!

#11 | Posted by Corky at 2025-02-16 11:42 AM

Obama's favorability rate now is 59 percent. GW 53, and Trump tied with Bubba underwater at 48.

#12 | Posted by Corky at 2025-02-16 11:44 AM

Well Corky you lost, so yes ... there would be fault within the DNC as a whole.

#13 | Posted by Bluewaffles at 2025-02-16 11:47 AM

Yeah, so Dems didn't LIE as much as your Cult Leader, who's promises have turned to nothing.

But hey, Russia is gleeful that he is destroying the Western Alliance for them, which they have failed at for 75 years.

Thanks for your support of that.

#14 | Posted by Corky at 2025-02-16 11:59 AM

Continued deflection and failure to have accountability ...

#15 | Posted by Bluewaffles at 2025-02-16 12:03 PM

failure to have accountability ...
#15 | Posted by Bluewaffles

It's the Dem's fault that Trump is attacking our allies and NATO while surrendering to Russia?

Thanks for clarifying!

#16 | Posted by censored at 2025-02-16 12:23 PM

@#34 ... who's promises have turned to nothing. ...

You mean Pres Trump didn't lower prices on Day 1?

Regarding the thread title, my view is that it is too early for people to see the resulting effects of what Pres Trump has been doing.

Indeed, I doubt if many (most?) even follow the news closely enough to understand the ramifications of what Pres Trump is doing.


Time will tell.


#17 | Posted by LampLighter at 2025-02-16 12:35 PM

Continued deflection and failure to have accountability ...
#15 | POSTED BY BLUEWAFFLES

Thanks, but I think your m.o. is already pretty well understood around here.

#18 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2025-02-16 12:39 PM

---------- is impressed by all of the orange pedo's aviation fatalities.

#19 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2025-02-16 12:41 PM

Zero self reflection in the comments, blame others with zilch for how do democrats as a party change to become more desirable to these voters.

#10 | Posted by Bluewaffles

I know that you don't consider yourself a fanatic, but you are.

It's much more sane to help these voters see how much people like you are causing them pain. They'll get there in time.

Unless they're fanatics like you.

#20 | Posted by Zed at 2025-02-16 12:43 PM

15 | Posted by Bluewaffles

In Georgia, as we speak, MAGA politicians are begging Donald not to ruin MAGA peach farmers.

BEGGING.

That's how low you've some, to have to BEG one man for the scraps off his table.

I dunno, maybe you people will get those scraps. Feed Donald's ego; it might work.

But it won't be the last time you beg.

#21 | Posted by Zed at 2025-02-16 12:47 PM

Zed, I think you fail to grasp the situation as a whole of what's occurring here. This all goes back to the Democrats raiding Mar-a-lago and going through Melania's panty drawer for the purposes of intimidation and embarrassment. Enough American people saw what was occurring (thankfully) and said, yeah this isn't okay. No matter what you personally think about Trump, enough voters saw the failures of the Biden administration for what they were. They saw oppressive lawfare tactics being employeed by the Left as you sought out revenge for him knocking Hillary out in 2016 and realized if the Democrats can go to such lengths to destroy someone they can and will do it to regular citizens.

Enough American's said this isn't what our government is here to do and thus, gave Trump the ability to light the match. Enjoy the bonfires my friend because he's going to burn the whole rotten thing down and rebuild.

#22 | Posted by Bluewaffles at 2025-02-16 01:05 PM

As I've stated so many times before ... Mar-a-lago was the dumbest move the Democrats could have engaged in and the easiest unforced error to avoid. Hubris got the better of you all collectively and now you're about to lose the whole damn thing.

#23 | Posted by Bluewaffles at 2025-02-16 01:08 PM

Democrats raiding Mar-a-lago

The FBI raided Trump because he lied and obfuscated and refused to return stolen documents. He brought it on himself by not cooperating. Pence cooperated and nothing happened to him. Merrick garland
went well out of his way to help trump (out of fear of being seen as political) and you idiots cry "Witch hunt"! anyway.

#24 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-02-16 01:11 PM

Ah yes Alex ... The FBI is to blame, not the Biden administration officials who authorized it: www.foxnews.com

So silly of me to forget.

#25 | Posted by Bluewaffles at 2025-02-16 01:14 PM

Trump is to blame for breaking the law so flagrantly.

Then he claimed the FBI agents were there to shoot him.

How did that lie taste? Like all the others I presume.

#26 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-02-16 01:17 PM

Again the deadly force the Biden admin authorized on a former head of state? www.msn.com

Again are you guys truly this ------- stupid to not see how bad this would look to the normies who aren't ideological Left or Right?

#27 | Posted by Bluewaffles at 2025-02-16 01:19 PM

apnews.com

#28 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-02-16 01:19 PM

-----------s continues to lie.

CLAIM:
The Biden administration authorized the use of "deadly force" against former President Donald Trump during an FBI search of his Mar-a-Lago estate in 2022.

THE FACTS:
The policy statement on the "use of deadly force," which appeared in an operations order for the Mar-a-Lago search, is not evidence of a plot to kill Trump. It is a Department of Justice policy that is standard to include in such documents.

"The FBI followed standard protocol in this search as we do for all search warrants, which includes a standard policy statement limiting the use of deadly force," the agency said in a statement. "No one ordered additional steps to be taken and there was no departure from the norm in this matter."

As it appears in the operations order, the policy stipulates in part that Department of Justice officers "may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person." The policy is in the department's Justice Manual with only minor differences in wording to what is included in the order and is summarized on the FBI's website.

Frank Figliuzzi, a former assistant director for counterintelligence at the FBI, reiterated in an X post what the agency said in its statement.

"Yep, every FBI operations order contains a reminder of FBI deadly force policy," he wrote. "Even for a search warrant. Deadly force is always authorized if the required threat presents itself."

A motion that Trump's lawyers filed in his federal classified documents case, also unsealed Tuesday, asserted that the August 2022 search was unconstitutional and "illegal," misquoting the operations order as saying that "law enforcement officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force when necessary."

Trump wasn't at Mar-a-Lago, which was shuttered for the season, at the time of the search. The Associated Press reported at the time that the FBI reached out to the Secret Service detail that provides protection to the former president and his homes shortly before serving the warrant.

The facts did not stop Trump and his allies from spreading the erroneous allegation.

A Trump campaign fundraising email with the subject line "They were authorized to shoot me!" was sent soon after he posted on social media and made even more outrageous claims.

"I nearly escaped death," it reads. "You know they're just itching to do the unthinkable. ... Joe Biden was locked & loaded ready to take me out & put my family in danger."

Asked if Trump stands by the false claims, campaign press secretary Karoline Leavitt wrote in an email: "This is a sickening attempt to run cover for Joe Biden who is the most corrupt president in history and a threat to our democracy."

Hard-right Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican, wrote in an X post that "the Biden DOJ and FBI were planning to assassinate Pres Trump and gave the green light."

Kari Lake, a Republican Senate candidate in Arizona, wrote in her own X post: "The sicko Biden FBI were ready to use deadly force during the Mar-a-Lago BS raid. That tells you everything you need to know about this criminal Biden admin."

Trump was charged in June 2023 with illegally retaining classified documents taken with him from the White House to Mar-a-Lago after he left office in January 2021, and then obstructing government demands to give them back. Additional related charges were filed a month later. The FBI searched Mar-a-Lago as part of a probe that led to the indictment.

#29 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-02-16 01:20 PM

That's great Alex, Newsweek is saying otherwise.

#30 | Posted by Bluewaffles at 2025-02-16 01:21 PM

"The FBI followed standard protocol in this search as we do for all search warrants, which includes a standard policy statement limiting the use of deadly force," the agency said in a statement. "No one ordered additional steps to be taken and there was no departure from the norm in this matter."

have a good day, liar.

#31 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-02-16 01:21 PM

Again, deflection instead of ownership for piss poor strategic thinking on how to beat Trump. Like I said back in 2022, you should have left the man alone he was all but a footnote in History. Per usual the Left couldn't help themselves and unwittingly made him the 47th President of the United States and on to demolish the bloated administrative state.

#32 | Posted by Bluewaffles at 2025-02-16 01:29 PM

BlewLuftwaffer is hilarious... everything DJT is doing wrong couldn't possibly be Dear Leader's Fault, so it must be the Dem's Fault!

It's like when all those Trump Aides testified under Oath against him.... obviously that was also the Dem's Fault.

#33 | Posted by Corky at 2025-02-16 01:41 PM

Corky, what I'm saying is you guys could've been smart, dropped it and moved on. You didn't and now here we all are.

#34 | Posted by Bluewaffles at 2025-02-16 01:43 PM

Again, deflection instead of ownership for piss poor strategic thinking on how to beat Trump. Like I said back in 2022, you should have left the man alone he was all but a footnote in History. Per usual the Left couldn't help themselves and unwittingly made him the 47th President of the United States and on to demolish the bloated administrative state.

Posted by Bluewaffles at 2025-02-16 01:29 PM | Reply

It's never wrong to hold our elected officials accountable for their crimes. If only you MAGA Trumpers understood that.

#35 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-02-16 01:47 PM

#34

You are still blaming anyone other than Trump for Trump.

Which is a pathological self-lie.

#36 | Posted by Corky at 2025-02-16 01:57 PM

Enjoy the bonfires my friend because he's (Donald) going to burn the whole rotten thing down and rebuild.

#22 | Posted by Bluewaffles

1) But the whole thing isn't rotten by one very long shot. He's bulldozing EVERYTHING.

2) You people find a name to call someone or something and then you use that name as an excuse to persecute and destroy.

3) Oh, yes. Donald is setting fires.

4) But that sorry, incompetent, evil sumbitch has no talent or desire to build or re-build anything.

5) And you are sorry, incompetent, evil sumbitch yourself---On a mission.

6) Yep. Called you a name. Three of them.

7) I have as much interest in persecuting or destroying you as MAGA has an interest in persecuting and destroying me.

8) So if MAGA is full of good and sane people, neither one of us has anything to worry about.

#37 | Posted by Zed at 2025-02-16 01:59 PM

he's going to burn the whole rotten thing down and rebuild.

POSTED BY BLUEWAFFLES

The "whole rotten thing" you are referring to is our democracy.

And our democratic institutions.

So what do you think he is going to replace all that with? An Oligarchy? A facist dictatorship? Do you really think Americans will allow that?

And do you really believe that Trumpy is smarter than all the founding fathers combined?

Time will tell.. but I am pretty sure things are not going to turn out the way you think they will.

#38 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-02-16 02:44 PM

Burning down functioning systems that helped keep peace and keep people alive, will result in death and violence. Blood on all of our hands, because we didn't fight hard enough to stop it, or we stupidly and cruelly encouraged it.

#39 | Posted by hamburglar at 2025-02-16 02:57 PM

things are not going to turn out the way you think they will.

#38 | Posted by donnerboy at

That's already happening.

The man is consciously ignoring that. It's part of his job.

And will until events make his brains run from out his ears.

#40 | Posted by Zed at 2025-02-16 02:58 PM

Continued deflection and failure to have accountability ...

#15 | POSTED BY BLUEWAFFLES

Keeps acting as if the cult of room temp IQ MAGA idiots isn't the problem ...

#41 | Posted by jpw at 2025-02-16 03:16 PM

Per usual the Left couldn't help themselves and unwittingly made him the 47th President of the United States and on to demolish the bloated administrative state.

#32 | POSTED BY BLUEWAFFLES

The only as per usual is a lack of responsibility for being a giant pile of
S%*.

You've destroyed this country. Be proud of it, dumbs%^*.

#42 | Posted by jpw at 2025-02-16 03:17 PM

Donner, your question is an interesting one so I'll answer with my thoughts on the matter. There will be certain departments that are eliminated and need to be USAID clearly needed to go. Now I do not think he will be replacing our form of government which I think is what you're asking about (nor does he have that ability). With that said, he's burning down the executive apparatus that has become bloated through decades of mismanagement. When I say burn it down, I mean those that have run the con and hold the keys will be replaced by new people, with new ideas, they will be spread out across the country to remove the power of concentration that is held within DC.

#43 | Posted by Bluewaffles at 2025-02-16 03:36 PM

#43 | Posted by Bluewaffles a

Why is Donald burning down the NIH, you bloody-minded barbarian?

Why is he damaging Avian flu resources prior to a pandemic?

He's not rational. He's an unwashed heathen. You're worse for going along with him.

#44 | Posted by Zed at 2025-02-16 03:54 PM

#43 | Posted by Bluewaffles a

There's no evidence that Donald has thought any of this through.

He's Leatherface, chasing the rest of us with a chainsaw.

#45 | Posted by Zed at 2025-02-16 03:56 PM

Many in the political know today state that zero Democrat policies today would get any majority approval from the masses.

Democrats promoted a new identity of woke PC weirdness that usurped common sense and normal. It started out with dislike of PC culture to creating actual despise of anything having to do with progressivism and Democrats and their divisive counter culture. It will take a significant healing of society to ever forget and forgive.

Will society ever again tolerate abnormal and plans for liberal urban politics, open borders, sanctuaries for criminals and doing irreversible sex change surgery on young kids, and allowing males in female sports.

#46 | Posted by Robson at 2025-02-16 10:41 PM

Seriously, a f*g "focus group" of 11 gd people and you idiots spent 14 hours arguing it. I mean for the lawd's sake do math, 11 divided by the Buffoons popular vote is so minuscule its not even a blip on any f*g radar. Give me something less anecdotal and more empirical. Thanks.

#47 | Posted by et_al at 2025-02-17 02:00 AM

This all goes back to the Democrats raiding Mar-a-lago and going through Melania's panty drawer for the purposes of intimidation and embarrassment.

BlueWaffles

Right, and Jan 6 was all about mail-in ballots.

#48 | Posted by Dbt2 at 2025-02-17 11:16 AM

#46 | POSTED BY ROBSON

In your ordinary life does anyone ever call you intelligent?

#49 | Posted by Zed at 2025-02-17 11:26 AM

#49 Well.... Normally they go directly to "brilliant".

Seriously, Democrats have lost the ability to identify with Americans. They've lost it along with most important of all, our national culture.

#50 | Posted by Robson at 2025-02-17 12:50 PM

- our national culture.

By which he means beer and porn. And red caps.

#51 | Posted by Corky at 2025-02-17 12:56 PM

Most Americans recognize and feel comfortable with our culture of normal. The Democrats Version New feel comfortable only with weird.

#52 | Posted by Robson at 2025-02-17 02:10 PM

Most Americans recognize and feel comfortable with our culture of normal.

#52 | POSTED BY ROBSON

MAGA isn't normal.

MAGA is the sick counter-culture.

MAGA is the one without any values.

At least, any values that can't be ditched in an emergency.

I know that you people wish desperately to feel good about yourselves.

But your imaginations will never be any substitute for reality.

#53 | Posted by Zed at 2025-02-17 02:25 PM

52 | POSTED BY ROBSON

Would you care address the mighty battle MAGA wages against measles?

How about its pogrom against air traffic controllers?

How about its mass censorship of libraries?

Would you care to address anything a all about MAGA that keeps it from being knee-jerk movement of emotional misfits?

I'll be around.

#54 | Posted by Zed at 2025-02-17 02:42 PM

Zed calls the removal of pornography from public school libraries "mass censorship of libraries."

#55 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-17 02:58 PM

BullBringer imagines school libraries to be full of pornography.

Because he's a fkkking moron.

#56 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-02-17 03:16 PM

Seriously, a f*g "focus group" of 11 gd people

Well, it's a troll thread posted by an expert troll.

#57 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-02-17 03:18 PM

Zed calls the removal of pornography from public school libraries "mass censorship of libraries."

#55 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

ZED calls you delusory, stupid, and dishonest.

If not for the sane people around you, you would have fallen down an elevator shaft before puberty.

#58 | Posted by Zed at 2025-02-17 05:18 PM

I remember when DeSantis started showing illustrations in some of these books to news outlets they had to cut their Fred because the material was too sexually explicit for their viewing audience.

Yeah, that happened.

#59 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-17 05:35 PM

#59 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

There is no insidious plot by (mostly female) school librarians to inject porn into schools.

It's more stupid MAGA mythology, created to confirm stupid MAGA paranoia.

#60 | Posted by Zed at 2025-02-17 05:39 PM

I remember when DeSantis started showing illustrations in some of these books to news outlets they had to cut their [feed] because the material was too sexually explicit for their viewing audience.
#59 | Posted by BellRinger

I remember that! Caught me mid-stroke. Really left me hanging, if you will... :(

#61 | Posted by censored at 2025-02-17 05:47 PM


Stunningly, incredibly stupid people remain stunningly, incredibly stupid people.
~ LyinYav

LyinYav, Lumpers won't win elections by calling constituents "incredibly stupid".

Are you even thinking writing this? I can only imagine you believe you're super intelligent, in which I guess this is some Dunning-Kruger effect, your cognitive bias overestimates your knowledge of people and politics.

#62 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-02-17 05:53 PM


Most Americans recognize and feel comfortable with our culture of normal. The Democrats Version New feel comfortable only with weird.
#52 | POSTED BY ROBSON

Common sense has its supporters.

#63 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-02-17 05:53 PM

Common sense has its supporters.

#63 | POSTED BY ONEIRONAUT

Yeah. It's been one hell of a posting day for your version of common sense.

Not admitting when you're wrong is how mediocre men cling to genius.

#64 | Posted by Zed at 2025-02-17 05:57 PM

It happened Zed. Deal with it.

#65 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-17 06:18 PM

I remember when DeSantis started showing illustrations in some of these books to news outlets they had to cut their Fred because the material was too sexually explicit for their viewing audience.

Yeah, that happened.

#59 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-17 05:35 PM | Reply | Flag

Was that one of the four documented times DeSantis violated the first amendment? No wonder the guy is your hero.

#66 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-02-17 06:20 PM

Was that one of the four documented times DeSantis violated the first amendment? No wonder the guy is your hero.

Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-02-17 06:20 PM | Reply

Eggactly.

#67 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-02-17 06:31 PM

I remember when DeSantis started showing illustrations in some of these books to news outlets they had to cut their Fred because the material was too sexually explicit for their viewing audience.

Yeah, that happened.

#59 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-17 05:35 PM | Reply

You're full of horse apples. It was Gender Queer and it's not sexually explicit. It has a 16+ rating but don't let facts get in the way of your MAGA Trumper ideology Jeff.

#68 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-02-17 06:38 PM

It happened Zed. Deal with it.

#65 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Laura dealt with it.

My heroine.

#69 | Posted by Zed at 2025-02-17 06:46 PM

" You're full of horse apples. It was Gender Queer and it's not sexually explicit"

The eff it isn't. Illustration of a BJ. Illustration of butt sex. Explicit sexual descriptions. The author rates the book as 18+

#70 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-17 07:47 PM

Gotta love AI

" Gender Queer includes a handful of sexually explicit illustrations which have been used to argue that the book is inappropriate for minors."

#71 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-17 07:59 PM

#71

It's just scraping the internet for language that's already been written on the subject.

You didn't know that? LOL : )

#72 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2025-02-17 08:38 PM

I remember when DeSantis started showing illustrations in some of these books to news outlets they had to cut their Fred because the material was too sexually explicit for their viewing audience.

Yeah, that happened.

#59 | Posted by BellRinger

See, if the viewing audience could just learn to keep their Fred in their damn pants ...

#73 | Posted by Dbt2 at 2025-02-17 10:26 PM

Yeah, that happened.

I live here. Did not happen that way, at all.

DeSantis issued a huge warning that they were going to show a video made by (who knows) of (who knows what) saying it was from books with graphic content and was "sexually explicit" - so *some* news (SOME, not all, not most, but *some*) cut their feed. One that was cited for cutting the feed said it was due to technical issues and started when Diaz was speaking. Another said that without prior warning and a review of the management of the station they preferred not to risk showing whatever it was that DeSantis was going to show since he had proclaimed it sexually explicit. Thank god we have DeSantis to be our big daddy and save us.

Apparently a lot of other news agencies didn't cut the feed. Bryan Griffin, DeSantis press sec't at the time, though, jumped on twitter talking about how the images in the books were so sexually explicit that they couldn't be shown on the news. Truth? It was all bullshht, but the message they sent made it to ears like Bellringers to trumpet, no matter how inaccurate or fake it is. And here he is, doing it.

Mission accomplished.

#74 | Posted by YAV at 2025-02-17 10:47 PM

Florida TV Cuts Feed as Ron DeSantis Shows Explicit Content in School Books

She later added: "I'll say it again. When we were told sexually explicit content would be shown"we went down. I am not disputing that. I emailed my newsroom, concerned. Then after that"around 11:21"we had a technical issue when [state Senator Manny Diaz Jr.] was speaking. True technical issue."

In another tweet, she wrote: "I am NOT saying we would air that content. It was explicit. I have not seen that on our news before" there would have to be a discussion and manager approval" however, the warning is why we did not show it."
www.newsweek.com

Hmm who should I believe LyinYav or Newsweek.

#75 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-02-17 11:01 PM

Comparing private conduct with government conduct in a First Amendment discussion? Nothing relegates you to children's table quicker.

#76 | Posted by et_al at 2025-02-17 11:28 PM

nothing you posted contradicts what I posted.

#77 | Posted by YAV at 2025-02-17 11:29 PM

" Comparing private conduct with government conduct in a First Amendment discussion? Nothing relegates you to children's table quicker.

#76 | POSTED BY ET_AL AT 2025-02-17 11:28 PM | FLAG: "

How about when a private tech company censors at the behest of government.?

#78 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-17 11:40 PM

How about when a private tech company censors at the behest of government.?
#78 | Posted by BellRinger

Acknowledge this as a hypothetical or offer some evidence suggesting it actually happened. Be specific or STFU.

#79 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2025-02-18 12:08 AM

How about the "test" for whether government conduct is prohibited government "coercion," behest I've not seen. Nor the court's for the most part.

#80 | Posted by et_al at 2025-02-18 12:19 AM

Wafflecone is a FAGAT

#81 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-02-18 12:26 AM

#78

---- off Jeff, you ----------- clown

#82 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-02-18 12:27 AM

Et Al,

Based on prior case law, my understanding is that the government cannot utilize the private sector as a conduit to act on its behalf to take actions the Constitution prohibits the government from doing on its own.

Apparently that happed with both Twitter and Facebook. And that's just what has been brought into light so far.

#83 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-18 12:43 AM

" Acknowledge this as a hypothetical or offer some evidence suggesting it actually happened. Be specific or STFU.

#79 | POSTED BY RSTYBEACH11 AT 2025-02-18 12:08 AM | FLAG: "

Twitter files. Zuckerberg flat out stating that it happened with META.

#84 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-18 12:45 AM

Twitter files.

LOL.

#85 | Posted by REDIAL at 2025-02-18 01:19 AM

Laugh away. It exposed a lot.

#86 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-18 01:32 AM

" Zuckerberg flat out stating that it happened with META."

What a riot. Did anybody notice the missing central part?

Zuckerberg claimed it happened ... but never stated exactly what was "censored". Odd, isn't it?

If it was something benign or innocent, you can bet Zuckerberg would've revealed an example. Since he didn't, it was no doubt something like one of those "No way to die from too much ivermectin!" sites.

Especially that one from the guy who pimped ivermectin, proudly claimed there was "no way" to overdose ... then died from too much of it.
www.unmc.edu

#87 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-02-18 02:00 AM

" It exposed a lot."

It "exposed" that Twitter's editorial boards were doing their jobs, and every now and then agreed with the government certain posters were violating Twitter's own Terms of Service.

You've been asked since day one to show a concrete example of the government overriding the editorial board, and threatening them as well, and you've failed to come up with a single instance.

Of ... you know ... actual censorship.

#88 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-02-18 02:08 AM

#88. This is such a circular discussion with you. I've cited Supreme Court rulings on this issue. 3 old school journalists were given unfettered access to what took place at Twitter. Zuckerberg gave examples to Rogan during a podcast.

The good news is that it's being halted, at least for now. My guess is you are thoroughly pissed off about that.

#89 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-18 02:16 AM

. This is such a circular discussion with you. I've cited Supreme Court rulings on this issue. 3 old school journalists were given unfettered access to what took place at Twitter. Zuckerberg gave examples to Rogan during a podcast.

The good news is that it's being halted, at least for now. My guess is you are thoroughly pissed off about that.

Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-18 02:16 AM | Reply

He asked for proof and you have none. Par for the course with you Jeff. Sadly

#90 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-02-18 02:36 AM

"said they're good with Trump aggressively testing disruptive, expansionist expressions of presidential power that are piling up in court challenges"

Until a democrat takes office. Then they world will be ending.

#91 | Posted by Nixon at 2025-02-18 08:02 AM

I've given all sorts of proof on several occasions, Laura Mohr.

His response always is, "Nuh uh!"

Regardless, things are changing for the better on this issue, at least short term.

#92 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-18 11:03 AM

I've given all sorts of proof on several occasions, Laura Mohr.

His response always is, "Nuh uh!"

Regardless, things are changing for the better on this issue, at least short term.

#93 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-18 11:03 AM

"Zuckerberg gave examples to Rogan during a podcast."

Zuckerberg is a stupid lying ---- and an idiot suck up.

No wonder you believe in his BS.

#94 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-02-18 11:20 AM

BullBringer posts bullshht he reads on rightwing conspiracy sources.

It's why he can't provide concrete proof for anything and only repeats the allegations he's been spoon fed.

He's a typical, brain dead republican.

#95 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-02-18 11:44 AM

Based on prior case law ...

Without a citation the reference is useless.

... my understanding is that the government cannot utilize the private sector as a conduit to act on its behalf to take actions the Constitution prohibits the government from doing on its own.

In the abstract, that is generally true. However, as applied that can be a difficult to decern. What you seem to overlook is that the government has the same right of free speech as you, me or anyone else. It can ask, it can demand, it can scream, holler and pound the table. What it can't do is coerce, do this or it will do that. Kinda like what happened with Eric Adams.

#96 | Posted by et_al at 2025-02-18 12:22 PM

"I've cited Supreme Court rulings on this issue."

Supreme Court rulings?!?

Link to the one proving censorship.

#97 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-02-18 12:58 PM

"Zuckerberg gave examples"

Zuck said they screamed and cursed. What "examples" of censorship did he provide?

And transcript, please. I'm certainly not going to take "your word".

#98 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-02-18 01:00 PM

What you seem to overlook is that the government has the same right of free speech as you, me or anyone else. It can ask, it can demand, it can scream, holler and pound the table. What it can't do is coerce, do this or it will do that. Kinda like what happened with Eric Adams.

Silence.

#99 | Posted by YAV at 2025-02-18 03:19 PM

Perspective:

When asked, Americans say they don't actually want to get rid of government programs. A late January poll from the Associated Press"NORC Center for Public Affairs Research"a gold-standard pollster for public attitudes"found that only about 29% of Americans wanted to see the elimination of a large number of federal jobs, with 40% opposed (29% had no opinion). Instead, 67% of adults believed the U.S. is spending too little on Social Security, 65% thought it was spending too little on education, 62% thought there is too little aid for the poor, 61% thought there is too little spending on Medicare, and 55% thought there is too little spending on Medicaid. Fifty-one percent thought the U.S. should spend more on border security.

mail.google.com

Still think that team Trump and the GOP aren't in the process of overplaying their hand? Unfortunately ,a lot of unnecessary pain is going to be inflicted on the American people, young and old, red states and blue states, Republicans, Democrats, Indepedents and nonvoters alike.

#100 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2025-02-18 04:50 PM

" What it can't do is coerce"

When they start issuing threats the coming coercion is implied. Do we really want social media companies doing the bidding of the federal government in terms of message control?

#101 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-18 11:16 PM

" And transcript, please. I'm certainly not going to take "your word".

#98 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2025-02-18 01:00 PM | FLAG: | "

In the sentence prior you acknowledged what he said. Obviously you know what I'm referring to so why ask for a transcript?

#102 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-18 11:20 PM

#101

Where is your link to the SCOTUS cases proving your claim?

Where's your transcript of the specific threats Zuckerberg got...and again, threats based on WHAT? (And why hasn't he revealed it?)

#103 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-02-18 11:26 PM

"you acknowledged what he said"

Not what he said, what he CLAIMED.

And still no example of what was "censored". Why is that? Obviously, if it was based on actual censorship, Zuck would be forthright with WHAT was being censored.

Again, it's probably the "Here's How to Eat Tide Pods" website. Or the "Here's How to Inject Bleach" guy.

#104 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-02-18 11:30 PM

@#103 ... Where is your link to the SCOTUS cases proving your claim? ...

OK, I will say up front, that I have a respect for the comments you post.

But sometimes you ask absurd questions. I don't think those questions are absurd because of what they ask, but more because of the expectoration of a rational answer from the person being asked.

OK, all that to say...

I'm laughing here, you asking the Bellringer alias for a link. That's a hoot.

#105 | Posted by LampLighter at 2025-02-18 11:35 PM

I'm not interested in relitigating the same argument over and over again.

The good news is, at least for now, the tide is turning. My guess is tamping back the censorship royally pisses you off.

Im also guessing you'd probably feel differently if Zuckerberg were to claim that members of the Trump administration were screaming at his team and demanding censorship and messaging control.

#106 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-18 11:48 PM

I'm not interested in relitigating the same argument over and over again.

The good news is, at least for now, the tide is turning. My guess is tamping back the censorship royally pisses you off.

Im also guessing you'd probably feel differently if Zuckerberg were to claim that members of the Trump administration were screaming at his team and demanding censorship and messaging control.

#106 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-18 11:48 PM | Reply

Danforth asked for proof and you have yet to proffer any. Why am I NOT surprised that you refuse Jeff??

#107 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-02-18 11:55 PM

#107. Danforth and I have had this discussion on several occasions. It's my fault for bringing it up. I won't do that again. For now, I'll take joy that the censorship industrial complex is winding down, at least temporarily.

#108 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-19 12:04 AM

" I'm not interested in relitigating the same argument over and over again."

I'm not asking to relitigate it over and over. I am asking for the link that proves your claim, something you've never done since I started asking.

You failing to offer proof again and again and again is not the definition of the word "relitigating".

#109 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-02-19 12:17 AM

"Danforth and I have had this discussion on several occasions."

And on every occasion, you've failed to prove your claims when challenged.

Much like the links to the SCOTUS decision(s) and transcripts where Zuckerberg reveals exactly WHAT was censored.

Link, or run away. Your choice.

#110 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-02-19 12:38 AM

At this point, I don't care. Again, I am happy to see the censorship industrial complex begin to crumble. Hopefully it lasts

#111 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-19 12:40 AM

There is a reason lefties were outraged when Zuckerberg ditched the so-called 'fact-checkers' and moved toward a X-model of community notes. It's a loss of control of the narrative and I am absolutely enjoying it.

#112 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-19 12:41 AM

Link, or run away. Your choice.

Posted by Danforth at 2025-02-19 12:38 AM | Reply

He'll run away as per the usual.

#113 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-02-19 12:42 AM

There is a reason lefties were outraged when Zuckerberg ditched the so-called 'fact-checkers' and moved toward a X-model of community notes. It's a loss of control of the narrative and I am absolutely enjoying it.

Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-19 12:41 AM | Reply

Zuckerberg switched teams so he could curry favour with Trump so he could get some lucrative government monies. It's not out of any desire to stop fact checking on his site.

#114 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-02-19 12:46 AM

"There is a reason lefties were outraged when Zuckerberg ditched the so-called 'fact-checkers'"

Yeah...he was capitulating to government censorship. Much like the "settled" bribe, er, lawsuit.

#115 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-02-19 12:47 AM

fortune.com

Elon Musk might have vowed to be a free-speech absolutist when he bought Twitter, but the number of accounts the site, now called X, has banned in the first half of this year are nearly three times the number from the same period in 2022.

X has released its first transparency report, which details its content-moderation policies, since Musk took control of the company. And in the first six months of this year, the social network has suspended 5.3 million accounts, compared to 1.6 million in the first half of 2022.

#116 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-02-19 12:49 AM

Zuck got taken into a closed door meeting with Trump where he got a shake down. He capitulated immediately before receiving the full brunt of the American department of justice breathing down his neck.

The fact you support such Gestapo tactics is what makes you an enabler for such acts of fascism.

#117 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-02-19 12:52 AM

"Yeah...he was capitulating to government censorship."

How do you figure?

#118 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-19 12:55 AM

You don't enter a closed door meeting and then come out agreeing with everything the other party is demanding unless there was some leverage applied.

#119 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-02-19 12:59 AM

For someone who is positive an email no one could ever find was proof Hunter Biden was guilty.

You sure do have a lot of difficultly understanding what the Trump/Musk administration is doing to America.

#120 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-02-19 01:01 AM

Even Joe Rogan called Zuckerberg a fraud.

#121 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-02-19 01:02 AM

"How do you figure?"

You're asking me a question before answering mine?!?

Go away, and don't come back without the links proving what you claimed.

#122 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-02-19 01:04 AM

I've given you links in the past and you dismissed them. I am not going to continually jump through hoops for you.

You expressed an opinion, all I am asking for is some clarification. Don't want to give it? Fine.

#123 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-19 01:13 AM

"You don't enter a closed door meeting and then come out agreeing with everything the other party is demanding unless there was some leverage applied.

#119 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK"

Interesting take. Everything Twitter Files exposed was behind closed doors. When Zuckerberg went on Rogan's podcast everything he claimed occurred behind closed doors. You and Danforth need to hash this out. Because he sees it VERY differently than you do.

#124 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-19 01:14 AM

www.theverge.com

Facebook implemented a fact-checking program, one that involved partners such as the conservative online magazine The Dispatch, Reuters, Agence France-Presse and USA Today. In a concession to Donald Trump's second presidency, implemented before Trump even took the oath of office, Zuckerberg has said Facebook will end the program. "We're going to get back to our roots and focus on reducing mistakes, simplifying our policies and restoring free expression on our platforms," Zuckerberg said in the video announcing the move.

On the Rogan show, Zuckerberg went

#125 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-02-19 01:20 AM

"I've given you links in the past and you dismissed them. "

Not to what you're claiming. Never, Not once. You keep CLAIMING you've done it, but when challenged, you never do...then next time, you claim you did.

If these things happened, links should be easy to produce. Link away.

"Twitter Files exposed was behind closed doors "

NONE of which was government censorship. There was not ONE SINGLE INSTANCE where the editorial board was forced to act against their will. You have NEVER shown proof of CENSORSHIP by the government...unless maybe it was Trump's government.

#126 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-02-19 01:22 AM

"When Zuckerberg went on Rogan's podcast..."

He never offered an example, did he?

From my viewpoint, "You can't post Trump is a weenie" is different than "That website advocating arsenic for curing COVID violates your own Terms of Service".

Why couldn't Zuck give an example which would make the government look ghoulish? Was he waiting for a platform?!?

#127 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-02-19 01:27 AM

Take it up with Clownshack, Danforth.

He's making at least as forceful of a case as I am.

I've moved on and am delighted that this garbage is winding down, at least for now. And you seem REALLY pissed off about losing the narrative due to a lack of coordination between government and tech giants. It seems very clear based on what you are getting upset about, but more importantly what you are NOT addressing by omission.

#128 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-19 01:28 AM

Jeff doesn't have the goods and it shows. Typical of Jeff. Not surprisingly however of course.

#129 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-02-19 01:34 AM

Take it up with Clownshack, Laura Mohr. He made the same argument I've been making although in my case the examples are WAY more numerous and more well-documented. He simply speculated but certainly wasn't naive with his speculation.

I mean.....

""There is a reason lefties were outraged when Zuckerberg ditched the so-called 'fact-checkers'"

Yeah...he was capitulating to government censorship. Much like the "settled" bribe, er, lawsuit.

#115 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2025-02-19 12:47 AM | FLAG: "

Exact same thing. Danforth doesn't even have Zuckerberg claiming to have been pressured by the Trump team, yet he's already drawn that conclusion with ZERO actual proof that he keeps haranguing me for on the other end.

But, that's (D)ifferent, right?

#130 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-19 01:39 AM

Many of the controversial moderation calls Facebook made in the pandemic were during the Trump administration

Rogan then asks who, specifically, was pressuring Facebook. And Zuckerberg has no answer: "It was people in the Biden administration," he says. "I think it was, you know, I wasn't involved in those conversations directly, but I think it was."

But the biggest lie of all is a lie of omission: Zuckerberg doesn't mention the relentless pressure conservatives have placed on the company for years " which has now clearly paid off. Zuckerberg is particularly full of ---- here because Republican Rep. Jim Jordan released Zuckerberg's internal communications which document this!

In his letter to Jordan's committee, Zuckerberg writes, "Ultimately it was our decision whether or not to take content down." Emphasis mine. "Like I said to our teams at the time, I feel strongly that we should not compromise our content standards due to pressure from any Administration in either direction " and we're ready to push back if something like this happens again."

#131 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-02-19 01:44 AM

You and Danforth need to hash this out.

No we don't.

he sees it VERY differently than you do.
#124 | POSTED BY BULLBRINGER

How so?

#132 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-02-19 02:15 AM

"How so?

#132 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK"

Scroll up. If you can't figure it out on your own, I am of no help to you.

#133 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-02-19 02:20 AM

Clownshack, Laura Mohr. He made the same argument I've been making

How so?

You've got nothing but conspiracy theories.

You have a nonexistent email and nothing to go off of.

I've got a closed door meeting between Zuck and Trump.

You're talking Twitter file blullshht, I'm talking meta.

You're a troll who says anything he needs to at anytime to keep trolling.

#134 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-02-19 02:22 AM

Scroll up. If you can't figure it out on your own, I am of no help to you.
#133 | POSTED BY BULLSHHIT

Nah.

You're just trolling by claiming we're all arguing against each other.

Because you've got nothing.

You're literally a waste of time.

#135 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-02-19 02:23 AM

I am of no help to you.

You're of no help to anyone but Trump and Musk.

#136 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-02-19 02:24 AM

"Danforth doesn't even have Zuckerberg claiming to have been pressured by the Trump team"

Huh? Zuck came out of the meeting, paid Trump a $25 million bribe, and decided to side with purposeful misinformation rather than losing mega amounts of business.

Used to be, when the letters after the name were reversed, you SCREAMED about much less than this.

But here it is, obvious, and right in front of your face. And you're silent in response.

What a partisan coward.

#137 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-02-19 02:33 AM

"You're just trolling by claiming we're all arguing against each other."

Yeah, I'm confused about that as well. I don't see any daylight between our positions.

"Because you've got nothing"

Sure seems like it, doesn't it? What's it been? Two dozen posts since I asked for simple proof? How tough are two links???

#138 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-02-19 02:38 AM

Sure seems like it, doesn't it? What's it been? Two dozen posts since I asked for simple proof? How tough are two links???

Posted by Danforth at 2025-02-19 02:38 AM | Reply

2 links are tough when they are up one's hiney. Just sayin

#139 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-02-19 02:45 AM

Drudge Retort Headlines

End of Rule of Law in America (60 comments)

Data Shows Boys and Young Men Are Falling Behind (34 comments)

Qatar's Jet for Trump Is a Gold-plated Security Nightmare (34 comments)

TikTok Vendor Announces $300M Trump Coin Buy (29 comments)

The Art of the Cave (27 comments)

Federal Judge Allows Trump to Use IRS Data to Track Illegals (23 comments)

Oklahoma says Students Must Identify 2020 Election 'discrepancies' (22 comments)

Perks Now, Pain Later (20 comments)

Intelligence Memo Undercuts Trump's Immigration Argument (18 comments)

Bondi Dumped $1 Million Trump Media Shares on Liberation Day (17 comments)