DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Joe Kent- current MAGA Republican Candidate

JMHO, please read about Joe Kent on WIKI- JMHO- he is EXACTLY the type of candidate who should NEVER be elected to public office- "Kent made false claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from Donald Trump a focus of his 2022 campaign. He labeled the perpetrators of the 2021 Capitol insurrection as "political prisoners" and spoke at a rally in defense of them organized by his top adviser. He supports impeaching Joe Biden and - in the wake of the FBI search of Mar-a-Lago - Merrick Garland." He's close to the "conspiracy groups"- "Graham Jorgensen, a member of the neo-fascist organization Proud Boys, was employed as a consultant for Kent's 2022 campaign. Joey Gibson, founder of the far-right group Patriot Prayer, has also been linked to Kent; Gibson heavily promoted Kent's campaign on social media and spoke at a fundraiser for Kent, in which Kent praised Gibson for "defend[ing] this community when our community was under assault from antifa."

So, vote for the guy who believes his own facts and supports bigotry over equal rights. Republicans- you can't win with these type of candidates- the left, Democrats AND the independents will beat you EVERY time- almost. Some how Greene is an exception- pray for her defeat.

The right loves authoritarian types. They like to feel the iron fist… on other’s throats. Too stupid to see that in time it’ll end up on their own.

Uhhh... nobody is voting for this guy.

But you should start a thread for every other candidate, just to make sure...

It's an ever increasing movement. It's an ever increasing threat to our democracy. And their numbers are growing. If this were an isolated case you could chalk it up to just some quack. But that's not at all what this is.

Unfortunately, the "main stream" are also, to use your term, "quacks."

I definitely won't be supporting Joe Kent. I just wish there was a candidate or party worth supporting. At least he/she isn't _____ is a pathetic reason to vote for someone. Yet, it seems to be a big part of most people's reasoning. Maybe we can somehow change our voting system to rule people out of the running, and the last person standing would win. i.e, if 25% of voters think you're unworthy, you're done. ...I'm really not sure if that percentage should be set higher or lower.

I'm praying you're wrong about it constantly growing- conservative Christians seem to flock to the guy and I can't understand why.

, this video shows the contrasts between former Presidents=which is more Presidential, which is inclusive and with the people.

The threshold has certainly gone from "who would do a good job" to "the lesser of the two evils". I know I'm not happy about that. But anyone trying to make a comparison between the MAGA crowd/trump won the election groupies and the "people who stormed the capital should be pardoned" crowd are seriously in need of taking another overview of the situation. While I agree with you that the choices we are being given aren't good, that's the choices we have.

I agree there should be a way to insure we have better candidates selected with which to choose from both sides. I'm just not sure how to go about insuring that happens. Leaving it up to the voters has gotten us where we are now.

What? Dems are the party of banning or making mandatory.

You have to wear a mask or carry this CDC card. You can't buy this type of gun...what the heck are you talking about?

You are the folks with bans or mandates. It's one or the other. You need to take a look at what the hell you are talking about. You say one thing, but demand the other.

Typical Communist BS. I do have to give you credit, you get the zombie vote..

You have to carry a baby full term if you are 10 years old and were raped. You have to teach children that slaves benefited from slavery. Of course I know you don't think that's communist BS because it's the party you support. I mean if making crazy BS mandatory is the road you wish to go down.

Zombie vote? Do you mean like the christian right and party of family values electing a guy and trying to elect him again, who cheated on all three of his wives and had to pay off a porn star? Who lies like a rug every time he opens his mouth? That kind of zombie vote?

You really need to stop acting like your side is so much better. It's not.

Amen, and have you seen the clip where one of his followers asked him a pretty simple religious question- name your favorite Bible verse/s and who mentored you in your religious journey-- he had NO answer- sipped it completely- uttered some left basking nonsense. Any Christian pastor who checked out his character could not support him.

Good thing the GOP didn’t ban abortion, ban books, ban Muslims, etc… or other fascist crap. You are a koolaid gulping GOPer.

That's why I'm saying there should be a way to get the choices thrown out, and make them come up with better ones.
,
If you only give bad choices to voters and their only option is to pick one, the results aren't really the voters fault. It's the fault of those giving the choices. We need to give voters the ability to get rid of bad choices.

Good luck with that. Centrist neocons rig the left’s primaries, Christian fascists rig the right’s primaries.

OCD, you're right about that- real problem is human condition- liars, cheats, money/power hungry players in both parties--where are the serve your country and fellow man types.....Jimmy Carter, great human being/ absolutely terrible President......anyone but Biden and Trump.

If Biden and Trump are the only choices, there is only one option. Trump can never rise to power again.

This type of thinking is why this country has gone to... the mess that it has.

The options have been/are so bad that people picked Trump to shake things up. Yet, the "only option" is one of the same bad choices that led there.

It's like the definition of insanity.

We can't have Trump, but let's keep doing the things that led to Trump.

We need to come up with a better system that leads to better choices being available. The choice between eyewateringly foul excrement and dry, crusty excrement isn't really a choice worth making. Regardless of one not smelling as bad, you're still voting for a porta potty environment. How do we get away from toxic sludge at the top and bring back some sanity?

Democrats and Republican parties are LONG overdue for a boot in the butt. Losing the Executive branch to a 3rd party just might do it.

While I certainly do not disagree with you, as I said, it's the voters who select these people. Republicans voters have their choice of who they elect as their nominee for president. They have current and former members of house, the senate and vice presidents to choose from. But to republican voters trump is the best person for the job. And the democrats aren't any better. Out of their rank and file they selected an 80 year old Biden to run.

So who other than their own party members do you think has the right to select who represents their party in an election? While I think your idea is sound based on principal, creating a process where you force a party to select someone not of their own choosing is a very slippery slope and one the people in power would never allow through the process. The best thing people can do thus far is vote third party in protest. And as we've seen that hasn't been a very productive path to walk down in order to solve the problem.

It shouldn't just be people voting for their own party. Democrats (or any segment of the entire voter base of large enough size) should have a way to vote out a Republican candidate. And the opposite. Eventually, once all the lousy candidates got voted as unacceptable, they'd have to give a sane/"compromise" candidate. Would it extend the voting process? Yes. You'd have to go multiple rounds. For me, the future of the country would be worth it.

Frankly, I'm of the opinion we should do away with both parties. I think there is an argument to be made that they violate antitrust laws. The two parties effectively have a monopoly and make it impossible for independents to have a realistic shot. Plus, the evidence of the past several decades should amply illustrate the dangers of groupthink in politics.

I actually don't disagree with a word you said. I have no idea how we could ever get the current power structure to allow such a process to ever occur but I would be all for it. Sadly it may cause an election cycle to extend for years every time a presidential election happened. Maybe even longer than the four year term they get elected to.

I'm pretty sure the process could be sped up, but the powers that be are indeed a problem.

An unfortunate side effect of military advancement is that resistance against those powers is largely futile. That's one of the difficulties I have with the gun debate. I don't like guns, but if those with power are going to have high powered weaponry, disarming the populace will only embolden the powerful.

I think the sense of futility people feel is feeding into the animosity we are seeing more and more of.

When it comes to guns I think it's exactly like everything else we have been discussing, there's no common sense middle ground. The problem I see with what you stated is that very few permits are allowed for fully automatic weapons. there aren't many privately owned tanks or missiles owned by every day citizens. The notion that citizens could rise up against the government is a pipe dream. The weapons the public buys has zero percent chance of actually standing up to the American military. That and as much screaming we've heard decade after decade now, since as far back as I can remember, Bill Clinton, nobody has tried to take guns away from Americans. Nobody has gone door to door to try and collect guns from citizen.

"They gonna take mah guns!" is nothing more than another false flag to instill fear. And I own a number of guns of different types.

It shouldn't be isn't an answer- reality- Biden or Trump PROBABLY-- unless sanity rules and Trump is in prison or is determined ineligible.....hope those are outcomes......Biden stinks, but Trump CAN'T HAPPEN.

I think the problem is those are the two choices it looks like we'll be left with more so than anything. I think you correctly made your point and I agree with you, but that doesn't change the fact that we as a nation deserve better choices coming from both political parties.

Wrong again. Both parties working only for corps and the rich for the last 40 years led to Trump. And the Trump did more of the same, much more. Making people feel like they can never win or get ahead, keeping them broke, is what led to trump. So if you want to point fingers, point them at the elite and corps who paid for congress to do all that transferring of wealth. The only reason people are truly unhappy with the government is the disparity in wealth and despair it has wrought.

Centrist were in charge for most if not all of those 40 years, working together to screw the working class.

You say wrong again, but nothing you wrote contradicts what I wrote. If anything, I'd say it supports what I wrote. Reading comprehension is apparently difficult when you have a preconceived notion about what someone will say.

OCD, you call out the corrupt politicians- both parties, then say Trump was "the answer"- non-politician who'd drain the swamp.....AND, he's worst than every politician. So, unfortunately, choices will PROBABLY be Biden vs Trump----and you stated Trump's worst (correct) than any other choice. Biden gets elected and dies in office- probably- does he keep Harris on ticket?

Lastly- I bash Trump for a reason- he's the ONLY reason I'm not a Republican. This is perfect example of why I detest the man---"During the call, Trump says Georgia elections worker Ruby Freeman is “a professional vote scammer” and says she is responsible for adding 18,000 votes for Biden from Atlanta’s State Farm Arena. Trump never produces evidence to back up this claim, and there is no indication Freeman did anything wrong. She and her daughter later testify to the U.S. House Jan. 6 Committee about harassment they endured from Trump supporters."

The quote is from Georgia indictment- Trump puts a death X on two law abiding citizens doing their civic duty. He knowns he's lying and doesn't care. Those two women could lose their lives doing good. Trump's a despicable human being and should be in jail.

Nobody has gone door to door because some people oppose any encroachment on the 2nd amendment which was included by the framers for a reason.

I don't know. The Private Military Contractor world is pretty wild.

Were you ever in the military, Pit? I think you'd be surprised what "civilians" can do with limited tech.

Now, I'm not promoting an uprising. Yet, the potential for one, to me, puts a damper on government excess. But, this is kind of getting off topic.

Lousy candidates like Mr. Kent add to the growing sense of futility felt by many Americans.

OCD, I'm just an old guy who remembers .15 cent burgers at MD and .25 chocolate milkshakes--your comment about wealth and destruction of middle class---ugh- just my observations- HS football games really crowded, college games overflowing, and pro stadiums packed. Stock market down a little recently, but came back STRONG after the pandemic- employers CAN'T find enough workers---lots of entitled sitting on their butts looking for government handouts. Plus we got lots of really smart folks doing incredible stuff- landing missile parts and using them over and over. Things are bad, but WOW- lots of folks living life big.

Sports/Entertainment are likely crowded because people are seeking more and more distractions from the rest of their (miserable) lives.

The stock market doesn't really reflect the economic reality of the average person. It shows the success of corporations, all too frequently at the expense of their employees and consumers. For example, Berkshire Hathaway stock is $473,000 a share. That looks great on a spreadsheet and can "show economic growth." But, most people can't afford that, nor do they have much hope of ever being able to do so.

If employers paid fair wages and didn't treat their employees on the spectrum of carelessly to horribly, maybe employers would find more workers. Lots of "entitled" corporations are getting government handouts, people wanting the wealth to be spread may have a point. Who wants to work for someone making 7 figures to treat them like cattle? As wages have stagnated, the cost of everything else is going up.

Can you define "lots" more precisely? Maybe present it as a percentage of the population. Is 1% lots?

Yes, some folks are living life big. Most people are not.

My grew up with a father that was a Master sergeant in the military, many of my friends are former military and living a stones throw from WPAFB many of the people i knew and met were military. Many of which told me themselves that there's no way any amount of civilian forces could ever rise up and win against the military based on equipment alone. Point being that nobody has even proposed "taking people's guns" in America. It's a false flag. It's a fear tactic. And let me remind you, when the forefathers wrote the second amendment they were shooting muskets and single shot revolvers. These men drew up a document based on the times in which they lived. The weren't psychics who could see into the future. If there way any way to prove it I would make a major wager they never envisioned someone having the ability to kill 59 people and injure over 500 in a matter of seconds at a music concert in Las Vegas or kill 32 and injure 23 at a college in Virginia in a matter of moments.

Like I said, I'm an avid gun owner but at some point, which we have long since reached, some common sense should apply.

I'm still confused about what all of these great "government handouts" people think they're looking for? All covid "handouts" are over and normal government programs barely give people enough to exist. Unemployment is below 4% and is close to being at historic lows.

Have to support off subject gun comments- I'm retired military- own shotgun for home protection- have very limited ammo---completely agree with comments about founding fathers never comprehending to possibility of one person using a machine gun to kill twenty/ fifty/ hundred- and rap the flag around gun supporters/using the 2nd amendment as justification for legalized murder. No sane gun laws is criminal.

In England and Wales in 2021/22, the police recorded 28 gun killings. In the last decade, the highest number of gun murders was just 40. And, more importantly, on average under 5% of all murders were with guns. Apr 19, 2023 Strict laws on gun ownership. Contrast- US gun deaths 2019 - United States — 37,038.

Ain't we great.

There's knowing someone that served and there's being someone who served. There's theoretical knowledge and there is visceral experience.

I'm not talking about farmers with pitchforks going against tanks. In a military engagement, civilians wouldn't stand a chance. Yet, soldiers aren't always in their tanks. You don't need missiles for an unexpected massacre. Single shot rifles can do plenty of damage in mass. Wars have been fought with little more and also less. Plus, the military isn't supposed to be deployed on US soil, and I'm not talking about a formal civil war.

Indeed there is a lot that could not have been foreseen. Yet, I don't think they were so much thinking of the weapons themselves as their intent was to put a check on abuse of power by the government.

Perhaps we need to look at leveling the playing field from the other end.

But again, getting those that have power to give it up is an unlikely proposition.

In the end, I think we're more or less on the same page. People don't need certain weapons for anything other than as much killing as possible.

I don't think we're far apart at all. A person who is a good marksman can use a 30 caliber rifle with a silencer to snipe someone and take the weapons they need from them.

Let's see if I can bring this back around full circle.

While I admit our gun laws could use looking at, I don't think gun laws are solely the reason for those numbers.

I think the futility we've mentioned earlier and a devaluing of human life in this country are also factors. Guns are simply the most expedient method for what might still be a problem in this country if guns had never been invented.

I don’t know how any of our forefathers could possibly not see what the future of weapons could be. They lived during a time of weapons making huge advances. I don’t buy they couldn’t read into the future a bit.

...What huge advances are you referring to?

They were still using (only) muzzle loaders in the Crimean War 80 years later. Percussion detonation wasn't a thing until the 1800s. Heck, the steel plow wasn't invented until 1837.

Technology can change rather quickly and drastically.

1776 was a rather long time ago. The first automobile wasn't developed until a good 100 years later. No electricity. Manual (often slave) labor was how things got done.

Education at that time mainly consisted of religious teaching.

Of course, they probably had an inkling that weapons would improve. Yet, I imagine mainly in a more incremental form.

An inkling is enough to know especially while heavy artillery was being refined. I don’t buy your argument.