"He actually said he had a bigger crowd on January 6th than Martin Luther King Jr. had at his "I Have a Dream" speech. "

According to Republican Math, he did!

FTW: "Republican Math" is identifiable when you see the following equation: 1 + 1 = Whatever today's talking points require.

The phenomenon also expresses itself in the nomenclature. For example: Walz is THE MOST LIBERAL PICK, EVER! And if Shapiro would've been chosen, he would've been THE MOST LIBERAL PICK, EVER! And if Mark Kelly ...

...well, you get the picture. Republicans have called every Dem nominee the "most liberal", even back when William Proxmire was alive.

I've learned to take every claim of the Republican Party with a MOUNTAIN of salt.

"Would her other options have been attacked by Republicans?"

Of course.

Mark Kelly would've been called THE MOST LIBERAL PICK, EVER!

Gretchen Witmer would've been THE MOST LIBERAL PICK, EVER!

FFS, Roy Cooper would've been called TMLPE. We both know it.

Good God, man, you've been alive through it just like I have. Now you're denying what we both witnessed?!?

"YUUUGE sigh of relief went out when Walz was picked over Shapiro on the right side of the aisle."

Are you kidding? They were ready to break out the antisemitism, stored right between the racism and the misogyny.

Claiming Walz was a good pick for the Rs is whistling past the graveyard.

"Do you take any claims of the Democratic Party with any grains of salt (much less mountains)?"

Kids will eat, women will have self-control? Yeah, I take them at their word.

Just like I take the P25 folks at their word.

But you'd be okay if, after 47 was inaugurated, Dems used P25 as a blueprint going forward, right? Non-loyalists to the cause should be purged from government jobs, agreed?

Are you 100% with that, or 110%?

"In this instance you are completely wrong."

I've lived through it since Proxmire.

Or, more accurately, since JFK. EVERY Dem nominee was "THE MOST LIBERAL EVER!" Back in the Proxmire days, through (at least) the Kerry nomination, the self-appointed arbiters would retroactively change the determination of the nominee's vote to "the most liberal". And VOILA! That's how Dem nominees got labeled MOST LIBERAL despite legislating alongside known ultra-liberals.

Ultimately: Was Obama more liberal than Bernie Sanders?!? NFW.

"What are you even talking about?"

The fact that Dems want school kids to eat, and Republicans want retribution via weaponizing the Department of Justice.

Are you still butt-hurt you've never provided a single instance of lawfare?

"Has campaign season impaired you to a point where you can't just...talk with someone else?"

Oh, I'm more than willing to.

Can you see where Harris is going to cream Trump, and the polls don't represent the scale?

"Has campaign season impaired you to a point where you can't just..."

...admit what an old, doddering fool you're supporting?

...admit Vance is the ugly intersection between bad choice and non-vetting?

...admit a guy who tried over a half-dozen corrupt routes last time, shouldn't be allowed a "this time"...?

(d) All of the Above

"she's a tremendously weak candidate "

You keep lying about that. It doesn't change the fact: she's electric at rallies. Did you listen to Philly, where she introduced the next Veep? OF COURSE YOU DIDN'T. So you'll never (have to) admit the undeniable vibe of the crowd.

I'll never understand why you prefer self-delusion.

"neither you nor I are Nostradamus."

I'm not trying to be.

What do KS, OH, AL and OH06 say to you?

Maybe nothing, but they speak LOUDLY to this political junkie. What it tells me is there is a larger faction than we consider, of voters who might have a public persona one way, but vote differently when alone in the booth, and they realize their, their daughters, and their grandkids' rights are on the ballot. Women and men both.

I should start a website; I think I'll call it Unskewed Polls!
/s

"She's NEVER been "electric"."

Well yeah, if you didn't see Philadelphia, I guess you can claim that.

Did you see Philadelphia?

"Her rallies draw a crowd, in part, because they are dove-tailed with free concerts."

One was. Others aren't. Today's 15,000 rally had 47,000 requests for tickets. (And that was a few days ago; I'm sure 47K is a lowball).

Is Fox telling you that lie, or did you make that lie up on your own?

"Nothing about this is organic."

Tell us you didn't watch the rally in Philadelphia, without using those specific words.

Wow! You're really REALLY afraid of actually watching her! What an effing riot!!!

"a point where she failed upward into it because Democrats had no other option to insert"

What a riot, coming from someone who still supports the R who failed upward, yet admitted he desperately wanted ANY other option to insert.

"She has yet to face down any kind of meaningful challenge."

Trump had a presser today, and he lied for an hour.

Is that okay with you if Kamala does the same? Because there's your answer.

If I was the advisor...hell, if YOU were the advisor...we'd both give the same wisdom: don't go out there until the rules are the same.

Put another way...why are you okay with your nominee lying for an hour? His J6 crowd was NOT bigger than MLK's "I have a dream" speech...you know that, right?

"WHY has she avoided questions"

Probably having more important things to do.

She'll certainly sit down for questions at some point; will you retract then?

"It depends."

No it doesn't. Even if she takes tough questions and answers them honestly, you'll trash her. How do I know? Look what you've done without watching the rallies.

If you want respect, act respectfully. Watch the rallies, then if you want to trash, go ahead. But your pre-judging her just puts the "jerk" in knee-jerk.

"Should she be exposed to any kind of critical and perhaps hostile scrutiny at all?"

Absolutely.

So should Trump. How will you penalize him for LYING FOR AN HOUR today?

Oh, right, I forgot: by voting for him and his enablers as soon as you get in the booth.

"What are your expectations?"

That at roughly 7:01 Eastern, ABC will call the FL Senate race for Mucarsel. Then, at 7:02, the NC Governor's race.

Then at 7:03, i pop the cork.

Following that, results for the Dems will better polls by 5% on average, and pundits will marvel at "The Dobbs Effect".

====

What are your expectations?

"Ever notice you NEVER answer any of my questions except to deflect?"

Ever notice you're willfully ignorant on a very specific set of topics?

"Trump has had massive rallies"

Smaller than Kamala, if you'd bothered to watch.

"Show me something tangible."

I did. You refuse to watch it.

"Respect works both ways."

So will you stop posting purposeful lies, or is that "respect" in your world?

"As a political junkie I want substance wherever I can find it."

You're known for AVOIDING substance, and purposely keeping yourself ignorant for fear of losing your precious talking points.

"I will evaluate his (lying for an hour) against a performance by Harris.

You're no longer just a part of the problem, you're the problem.

"Right now, I don't have anything from Harris to compare"

Yet you've trashed her, at least a dozen times.

What's YOUR definition of a partisan hack? Because you seem to be the poster boy.

" I am not in the mood to deal with straw-man arguments"

Excuse me for laughing, but you keep proving you don't understand the definition.

Where, EXACTLY, is the strawman argument?

" Where, EXACTLY, is the strawman argument? "

Aaaaaaannnnd, this is where Belle runs away.

"I thought Trump looked great at his extended presser. "

Easy when you're not fact-checked.

Tell us: Were there more people at Trump's J6 speech than MLK's "I have a dream" speech?

In a related question:

If Kamala Harris did a 72 minute presser where she lied constantly...

...What's the over/under on number of states where they'd find pieces of your exploded brain?