Tuesday night was literally Kamala Harris coming out in a ---------- outfit holding the end of Trump's leash as he's crawling on all-fours behind her wearing nothing but his adult incontinence diaper.

She drug him that badly. In front of the entire world. Called him a disgrace. Told him other world leaders LAUGH at him while she stared him down as he never looked over at her.

One commentator said this: Kamala Harris did the best job of telling the audience who he [Trump] is - more effectively than any other political opponent, either Democrat or Republican.

If only Nikki Haley had the stones, charisma, and dynamism of Kamala Harris maybe Trump could have been metaphorically smothered in his political crib back in 2016.

Propaganda is protected speech. Both sides of it are protected speech.
That's what a free press is.

You continue to prove that you're not an American and you have no idea how to interpret our laws. The 1st Amendment isn't absolute. It is fully legal to criminalize speech meant to cause intentional harm to the unwitting. Even though it's thought of as "You can't yell fire in a crowed theater," that quote was only an easily understood example: there is no protection for speech meant to intentionally harm.

It is against the law to forward speech intended to cause harm to this nation or its people. It would be suicidal it that wasn't the case. What you wrote above is literally saying "Hey Americans, your 1st Amendment says anyone can say anything at any time and you can't legally stop them. So we're going use that freedom to bring down unity within your country and weaken it all around and there isn't a legal thing you can do about it."

Anyone with 2 brain cells knows that when a foreign nation pays an American citizen to put what they want into our media stream, that's an attack on this country. And the Number One charge in all of our federal oaths paraphrased is to protect and defend this nation, it's people and the Constitution.

There is no right to publish subversive speech to undermine the government or the welfare of the people. There is no right to brainwash people under the 1st Amendment when the source is maliciously and illegally foreign-connected.

The Harris campaign just announced they've raised $47 million in the 24 hours after the debate started.

Hell yes she wants to do another debate. Frankly, it was more entertaining than most pay-per-views, and the average donation is likely less than a UFC Mega Fight and Trump Chump Dana White isn't getting a cut.

Kamala's a bargain!

I was talking about going meta above. How about this?

I don't know if everyone follows Gal Thursday's postings, but she uncovered the real reason behind the right's fixation on Springfield and Aurora. The reason they keep doubling down on these narratives is because they're trying to energize and enrage voters already susceptible and exposed to right wing media/conspiracy circles to increase the numbers of nominally college-uneducated whites and any other individuals who typically don't vote.

They're using this propaganda to enlarge their voter base with those who'd never vote for Harris but might show up to vote for the champion who'll stand up and do something about immigrant hoards. This is why Trump chose to keep focusing on the crazy because the people he's really talking at understand the code of what he's saying and they like it.

And Trump also knows that his more conspiracy-resistant supporters will simply write Trump's seeming lunacy off as Trump being Trump, master strategist.

In my mind, the best way to counter the above is to use Harris' new Republican backers such as Liz Cheney and others to pull the covers off of Jason Miller's treacherous plan, because if the Harris campaign tries to take the lead, it plays right back into Trump's narrative that "those people" don't care about people like us that recognize the crisis when they see it. But if the Republicans bring it to the electorate's attention - and reinforce that there is no actual crisis and Trump saying so is endangering lives and dividing citizens and pitting them against each other for his own benefit - the champaign has clean hands. And such news coming from staunch Republicans aware of Trump's danger might bring otherwise loyal Republicans over to Harris in large enough numbers to offset traditional non-voters Trump is sure to gain.

This is politics on the meta-level sports fans as disgusting as it is if this indeed is correct. And to top it off, the entire line of immigrant criminals was started by Russia-backed disinformation outlets to help Trump. It never stops people and neither can we until the election is over.

When he does it'll fall into single digits

He won't sell them on the open market, he'll sell them privately to an individual or individuals, so at least the market price won't plummet until after the sale information becomes public.

Of course, this is nothing more than influence peddling of the highest order because the money being funnelled to Trump will come from people already invested in him and his ability to do what they need should he become President again because it's almost assured whoever it is will likely lose most of the money they spend to buy the over-valued failing stock.

And any transaction could also be a part of a money laundering scheme as well, depending upon its providence. Ultimately, taxpayers will be on the hoof when Trump's "investors" write off their capital loss.

If it isn't a grift, Trump ain't interested.

Or does he not understand basic logic,

That ship sailed long ago. Before when Trump did the same things, it was based on commandments taught to him by Roy Cohn which form the basis of the movie The Apprentice, iow, inside himself and his circles they knew he understood the difference between actual reality and the one Trump created towards his own ends, whatever that was in that moment.

Now, even to his financial backers, Trump shows no visceral understanding between what's real and what's not real. Whatever he puts into his mind informs all his beliefs and he does not waver from them. His current mental state is dangerous to this country without he being in the White House since many of his followers have no problem reacting to his deluded pleas by visiting threats and violence upon those his bigotry targets.

It's simply a matter of time before people are personally targeted for violent attacks due to Trump's delusional lies.

Trump is going to force the adults left in the GOP establishment to take a stand against his constant stoking of fear and calamity while touting himself as the only possible solution.

Frankly, he's deluded and becoming moreso everyday. His mind is going right before our eyes. His perspective is disconnected from reality, and that is simply something this nation cannot have at the helm of our government.

And my belief is that every single day moving forward, more and more Americans will independently arrive at the same conclusion just based on what Trump says and does as he fights to stay out of courtrooms and jails probably for the rest of his life.

While there were certainly problems and issues with gang members at the apartments, according to the majority of those commenting, both complexes were poorly managed by CBZ which allowed the situation to get where it is.

But the sensationalized frenzy implying that the gang had taken over is disputed by everyone outside of likely a few residents who rightly felt that way due to the disinterest CBZ showed in letting the property fall into disrepair, neglecting the security of residents affected by the gang activity.

But no one of substance considers the small number of gang members in the apartments - relative to the size of other organized criminal groups in Colorado - to be the type of siege/takeover conservative media is trying to portray the problems as.

And it definitely isn't related to the canard of open borders and uncontrolled migration. As the police tell it, the local members aren't comprised of new immigrants, they're simply an American branch of the Venezuelan-born gang.

If (when?) fmr Pres Trump starts selling his shares, I doubt if that will make the stock price rise.

I heard a financial commentator say that if/when Trump sells his stock, it would probably be to a single investor in a private transaction that wouldn't immediately tank the stock price on the market.

As I translate that, Trump is going to receive a direct windfall from someone(s) who certainly expect reciprocation - probably favorable legislation or policy - should he become President again.

With all things Trump, there's always a quid pro quo, since as he brags he's the best negotiator ever.

Next time I'll consider the source. But actually, I only saw Redial repost Fish's wrong post. That's why I started by saying that I didn't know if it was accurate, but if it was ... blah, blah, blah.

#15

Yeah, a 2 second search on Google. I'm fricking exhausted!

82

Sorry, I didn't see 80.

#81

That isn't what Fish wrote in #76 nor what you copied. It wasn't a question, it's a statement that he answered with an affirmative.

"People say they are better off 4 years ago then they are today." Trump: "That's correct."

That's why I questioned you. If you printed the accurate "question" in 81, then 76 and 77 are juxtaposed.

They are not the same as 81, they're opposite.

#76

You too need to reread my question. Trump answering 'yes' to that question is not 'answer(ing) with depth and detail'.

#77

It's the opposite. Reread what you posted. I don't remember the sequence from the debate, but what you wrote is Trump confirming that he thinks people say they were better off 4 years ago than they are today.

Maybe you meant to juxtapose the prefacing quote.

Republicans only care when it's politically convenient.

I'm surprised that no one in the media has yet focused on the fact Trump and his campaign are literal ghouls for using the tragic deaths of soldiers and others to forward their political agenda of blaming Biden for every tragedy that happened while he was President, ignoring that over 45 military were killed under Trump's presidency and he neither mentions nor grieves for any of them.

It's truly reprehensible, as the young father in Springfield publicly noted days ago when he called for right wingers to stop using his child's death in their anti-immigrant frenzied rantings.

But the money men and women behind Trump get to see him up close and many stories have already leaked about his disassociated state where he is untethered to reality while fervently believing nonsense grade school children would question.

I'm speaking to those in the GOP who've been supporters of Trump, not those who've come to the obvious conclusion that he's unfit for office. His degrading mental status will give Republican Harris supporters even more credibility in their efforts of giving sane, rational Republicans permission to abandon Trump - even if they support other Republicans up and down the ballot not named Ted Cruz.

I understand why she never takes responsibility for anything bad. Politicians have to politic and it is a strategy. Outside of politics, that behavior is a massive leadership failure.

But you're not taking in the situation this criticism is based on. Harris' job in the debate was first to let the 67 million learn about who she is and what she stands for - as polling showed almost a 1/3rd of the electorate wanted. Tuesday was not a "usual" debate in any sense of the word. Harris has been in elected government for 21 years. Anyone wanting to know how she deals with leadership responsibilities will learn that she's very hard on herself and equally so to those she leans on to support her. But shirking responsibility for mistakes has not been her trademark.

And the larger point really is that this is not a policy election, it's a personality election as Tuesday clearly showed. Trump openly refuses to take responsibility for any and everything that happens if it's negative. He blames those under him for coming up with flawed plans, he doesn't blame himself for putting those plans into action. So your lack of demand towards Trump - who already has a list of failures while he was POTUS - doesn't ring as important to the masses as it is to you.

Tuesday night, Americans saw one candidate in full command of her thought processes and another candidate unable to finish a cogent thought, much less give a single detail of any policies other than utterances of superlatives if he was musing about his own imaginary accomplishments and complete derision or intentional misrepresentation of his opponents.

This election is about the two candidates and their fitness and ability to at least look and perform presidential duties as Americans have always expected. Harris is passing her first tests, and if Trump manages to gather some coherence, then Harris can and should shift to explaining her evolution on particular issues. Hint, a lot of it has to do with matching where the voters are that she needs to win. And another factor is how much the world and global dynamics have changed in the aftermath of the global pandemic. How much today is totally different from 2019? Why should anyone be eternally married to positions that no longer represent what the nation wants or needs in our immediate present?

Admittedly, his critics on the right were correct about Joe Biden's unmistakable cognitive aging from the candidate he was in 2020. Now, it's the Trumpers and GOP left with the mess of having to confront their own candidate's decompensation, currently exemplified by his unshakable belief in crazy memes and conspiracies - many of them created through Russian disinformation fronts aimed directly at the gullible minds Trump openly tries to attract.

Trump's meandering gibberish and belief in non-sensical stories culled from social media are clear signs that his cognitive abilities are either in decline or are failing. And whichever of the two choices is correct, such a person at 78 has no business inside the Oval Office dealing with the tremendous pressures and decisions coming with the presidency.

And if the specter of Trump's decline isn't enough to scare voters, JD Vance's scant 2 years of government service as a Senator potentially having to step in as POTUS is almost as frightening of a thought as both of them clinging to their racist belief that Haitian immigrants are eating other people's cats and dogs.

The GOP is getting ready to have to confront their worst fears only 50+ days from the election.

Well average hourly earnings is a useless metric.

Not necessarily, if you use a large enough sample size, unlike your example based on only 10. If these numbers do represent the average of over 157 million American workers, then it's statistically certain that the average will be close to the mean because the vast majority of the sample's lower earning quintiles drag the earnings gap with the less numerous upper quintiles closer to an actually representative average.

On all the other stats, I fully agree.

Much of the time, following Trump's train of thought was difficult, if not impossible. In response to a question from the moderator David Muir about whether he regretted anything he'd done during the January 6 insurrection, Trump said:

I have said "blood bash - bath." It was a different term, and it was a term that related to energy, because they have destroyed our energy business. That was where bloodbath was. Also, on Charlottesville, that story has been, as you would say, debunked. Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, Jesse - all of these people, they covered it. If they go an extra sentence, they will see it was perfect. It was debunked in almost every newspaper. But they still bring it up, just like they bring 2025 up. They bring all of this stuff up. I ask you this: You talk about the Capitol. Why are we allowing these millions of people to come through on the southern border? How come she's not doing anything - and I'll tell you what I would do. And I would be very proud to do it.

Evading the question is an age-old debate-winning tactic. But Trump's response seems to go beyond evasion. It is both tangential, in that it is completely irrelevant to the question, and circumstantial, in that it is rambling and never gets to a point. Circumstantial and tangential speech can indicate a fundamental problem with an underlying cognitive process, such as logical and goal-oriented thinking. Did Trump realize that his answer was neither germane to the question nor logical?

Trump's speech during the debate was repetitive not only in form but also in content. In psychiatry, the tendency to conspicuously and rigidly repeat a thought beyond the point of relevance, called "perseverance," is known to be correlated with a variety of clinical disorders, including those involving a loss of cognitive reserve.

If a patient presented to me with the verbal incoherence, tangential thinking, and repetitive speech that Trump now regularly demonstrates, I would almost certainly refer them for a rigorous neuropsychiatric evaluation to rule out a cognitive illness. A condition such as vascular dementia or Alzheimer's disease would not be out of the ordinary for a 78-year-old. Only careful medical examination can establish whether someone indeed has a diagnosable illness - simply observing Trump, or anyone else, from afar is not enough. For those who do have such diseases or conditions, several treatments and services exist to help them and their loved ones cope with their decline. But that does not mean any of them would be qualified to serve as commander in chief.

The tables regarding Biden and Trump have taken quite the dramatic turn as Joe proved unable to counter Trump's bombast under the pressure of an intense debate. Tuesday night we witnessed Trump having the same types of difficulty with Harris. And based on the events of the last 60+ days, the GOP should clearly recognize how this is going to end.

What I don't understand is why she thought it was an insult.

Because it's mentioned in a derisive context to draw the distinction that Indians are different in a negative sense compared to 'real Americans' which they always falsely presume to monolithically represent.

You cannot analyze the comments from a neutral standpoint because the person making the comments is not neutral, she's an avowed bigot and unrepentant supremacist, and her goal is to promote the 'otherness' of Harris as a negative compared to her opponent's unspoken superiority representing their non-inclusive vision of the 'real America'.

CATFIGHT!