This got more important with trumps health. I think Kamala is going to destroy Pence. This should pull Biden/Harris up in the polls.

Straight up, if she can’t wreck pence like Harrison did graham last night, Biden picked the wrong candidate.

Harrison destroyed Graham. Lindsey looked like a begging liar in the Trumpian whining mode.

Now this might be a debate I am willing to watch.

Pence straight up will not tackle any question that is tough ... bet the house on a lot of answers that have no relation to the question that is asked.

Kamala should ask him if they could have dinner together and talk shop...

i just hope they both act like adults, and that they talk policy

This will be a fear mongering christian incompetent suckup vs. a legal bulldog with that black female progressive (term used lightly) chip on her shoulder. If Kamala doesn't completely own this it will be a huge disappointment. AND before the GOPers start going "wHaT's HiS rElIgIoN gOt tO dO wItH iT?"... because that is his brand and what he is known for in the Trump era.

Hope she keeps her cool when Pence lies and insults ... she can be strong and aggressive, but don't come across like a Trump wanna be

She'll be ready. He will just parrot Trump's talking points. He has never had an original thought that I remember seeing. So it will be hard for him to catch her off guard, she's too smart for that.

I think we'll hear some policy from both of them.

It'll be also a lot of "representative republic" vs "Christian theocracy", too.

Can't win on merit so you need to make up a ridiculous fabrication to try to discredit.
Seriously, if you are going to do something like that, at least make it humorous.

This is what desperation looks like.

Soon we'll have another of George Soros controlling them both.

If only they understood the anti-antisemitism behind the Soros argument, though.

The George Soros thing is so freaking weird to me....

Michael Bloomberg is significantly richer, openly pumping tons of money into the election, and (though obviously this shouldn't matter) also Jewish.

Marc Cuban is similarly rich, openly pumping money into the election.

Why George Soros? Dude is 90 years old, give it a break.

They're stuck in rerun mode. Every Democrat since Bill Clinton was "Gonna' Take mah guns!" Hillary Clinton has needed to be locked up for years now even after the Trump administration investigated her after Trump became president and STILL couldn't get anything on her. They just keep repeating the same old tired BS year in and year out. Yet their followers keep believing them.

They won't move on from Soros until he's dead and buried. And even then it will take them a while.

Soros has been sticking it to republicans for a lot longer so he gets the conspiracy street cred from their base.

Also, Bloomberg has a major news outlet so nobody wants those problems.

I'm not as sure this will be a Pence beatdown. I mean, she was VERY disappointing during democrat nomination debates.

These are the same people who thought Tim Khaine was going to beat Pence down...

Prior to the 2016 election a lot of people who ended up voting for Trump were still a bit uncertain given his brash behaviors. After seeing Pence's cool, calm, colleccted demeanor in the face of Tim Kaines' jackassery, people felt better voting for Trump.

Pence's job is going to be pretty straight forward. All he has to do is start listing the administrations accomplishments. Past that I fully expect Harris to be dumb enough to play the "very fine people" card because they think that works. All Pence has to do is point out that is something debunked long ago and reference the dozens of times Trump has denounced white supremacy. This will provide the perfect pivot point for Pence to highlight all the work they've been doing with black Americans in juxtaposition to her record of locking them up. I'm sure it will be just as easy to watch him slowly gut her as it was when Tulsi did it to her face on this point.


The usual suspects here will of course be dismissive of all that. Be that as it may they can't hide the fact that Trump has been steadily gaining support among black Americans for a while now.

People don't vote for the vice president. At best they help you with a certain demographic or location.

It was only much later did they realize that the appearance of cool & calm demeanor was in fact an indication of spineless, emotionless puppet. 4 years on it should be interesting to see.

A demographic or location where people vote for them?

The vast majority of black Americans hate your leaders.

Yes, either and or. Like if they come from a swing state. LBJ helped Kennedy with the south. In the case of the Pence selection it was to solidify the evangelical/religious vote. I mean let's face it, Pocapornstar was going to be a tough sell to people who claim to vote on their principals.

Nahhhhh - those folks are the biggest hypocrites on the planet - bar none.

No, I think the left's "TrumPits" are at least as hypocritical. You know those people that blast out (trumpet) everything bad Trump does while performing the same behaviors while rationalizing that they have to punch first because they "know" he will. You know those people that like to titillate themselves by using sexually suggestive namecalling.

There are plenty of hypocrites on the right, too.

The left claiming the moral high ground because Trump did it first drives me bonkers. Wrong is wrong. Contrived political posturing is not a good excuse.

Look I want to support not-Trump. If that side is going to use the same tactics, I'd be supporting Trumpian behavior. If acting Trump-like, but at least not actually Trump, is good enough for you, there seems to be a disconnect somewhere. Sadly, our system doesn't provide a "side" (one with A legitimate chance of winning an election) that isn't actively driving (and being driven by) a mob mentality in its supporters.

A continual hyper-partisan, anything to win approach by both major political parties is how we ended up with this nut job as President in the first place.

But feel free to keep polarizing politics more. Entrenching the divide is sure to lead to better results
The growing divide provided such a great leader the last time. Things are setting up for nasty backlash no matter who wins the upcoming election.

When you see a bully staring you in the face, punch him in the mouth. Quit whining.

Fixed it for ya!

Fake pearl clutchers.

Tim Caine did make himself look foolish in the 2016 debates and that hurt him, no doubt. If Harris wants to win and make a statement, I think she's going to have to press Pence on policy-issues and actually make him account for some poor decisions the administration has made. Likewise, she will have to be able to provide satisfactory answers to questions about Supreme Court "packing" and other areas where Biden dropped the ball.

I expect Pence to be fairly bland, but safe. She needs to be assertive, but not overbearing. If she lets Pence get away with being non-committal, she's in big trouble.

What accounts for the vast majority is still less than it was 4 years ago. You can't get around the fact that he has been making gains. He only needs to pull an additional 5-7% from what the GOP usually gets in order to lock down the election. If the GOP doesn't blow its opportunity to retain such increase, it'll lock the White House down for years to come. Now does that shed a little light on why Dems have been courting the illegal immigrant vote?

based on what?

is your opinion gonna show up in the election? there's a good chance THIS election he actually gets less black support than Romney.

Yet he's turned suburban white women against him in droves.

If you wrote this 2 election cycles ago, it would still be true.

At this point I don't expect you to understand much less admit why people voted for Trump. You and the others have been completely tone def on the subject and its not worth the effort anymore.

Your comment holds even less water for the fact that every single one of you who are inclined to pull the lever for the Biden/Harris ticket fully expect for her to step in, and sooner rather than later. Even going by your old standard, Harris is a waste of a selection. She's from a state that can be counted to go blue no matter what, and she had virtually zero interest or support from black voters in the primaries.

I didn't understand the pick myself. And no, people don't think Harris is going to "step in sooner rather than later". She may be the candidate for the Democratic ticket in 2024 because Biden made it pretty clear he was a bridge to the next president. But running for president doesn't make her president.

You seem to be missing something in that all knowing view of yourself.

My candidates of choice for president were Mayor Pete and Amy Klobuchar in that order. Nothing about neither of those candidates scream far left liberal.

And let's look at your logic for a minute. Not only did Kamala do poorly with the black vote, she did poorly in the overall vote. So maybe you can explain why Biden selected her?

I know many think it was the "black woman card". But she does terrible in polling among blacks so I'm not sure what point that actually makes.

I'd argue that he's turned a significant portion of everyone other than his loyal base against him.

I think a large portion of that silent majority that voted for him over Hillary thought something along the lines of, "eh, why not. how bad can he be?". I don't see a lot of those people doing that again.

LMAO You might be suprised how many white woman support Trump.

Been there, done that. Have the broken metacarpals to prove it.

As I've matured, I've discovered hitting hardheaded individuals is counterproductive.

Bullies are used to getting punched. It's trying to help them that has a chance of changing their behavior.

Unfortunately, many bullies don't seem to understand the idea of trying to help someone and have a tendency to lash out.

Quit whining? More do what I say, not what I do from you? Color me surprised. One has to actually do something before they can quit it. Perhaps you should take your own advice. You certainly don't seem to have any intention of taking advice from anyone else.

Sadly, I find myself drawn to hopeless cases and allegedly impossible challenges. I'll try to resist yours again for awhile.

Most times don't know they're bullies, OR relish in it, or both.

Quoted for truth. Focused in the wrong direction, but true.

As long as you think you are qualified to judge other people and somehow think your approach is so far superior to other people, it will be a continual self inflicted wound of your own making.

Not my monkey. Not my circus.

Prefaced by this, and I quote:

As I stated earlier.

Exactly. You pointed it in the wrong direction. See, I don't take you or anyone else seriously on here. You even more than most others. So I'm not bothered by this issue.

We'll see in November.

https://www.blackenterprise.com/trumps-approval-rating-with-black-americans-grows-after-rnc/

As of 9/2/20... A new Hill-HarrisX poll showed 24% of Black voters approve of the job Trump is doing as president, up from the 15% approval rating he received in a survey conducted Aug. 8–11


https://www.westernjournal.com/trumps-bl...b27399d6c3d05e9

Sept 8, 2020... Rassmussen had him at a 42% approval rating among black voters...


Now, polls are polls and that is a big discrepancy between 24% and 42%. But there are a couple things you may wish to consider with this info: not all aspects of those polls were favorable toward Trump, so they don't appear to be purely partisan FoxNews polls. Second, keep in mind Trump only got something like 6% of black voters in 2016. And from some of the digging I did, it doesn't appear that Biden is enjoying any more support from black voters at this time than Hillary did in '16. People hardly wanted anything to do with Harris in the Primaries so it's hard to say just how much more she can squeeze out.

Its nothing I would encourage anyone to take to the bank and try to deposit but if you look out across the social media landscape, there's plenty to give credence to some of those numbers.

But as you say, how much of them will show up at the polls? At this stage given the current climate, I'd think that if you are black and have publicly supported Trump, you're probably going to go the whole 9 yards. Even if you take the pre-RNC 15%... that's not something to be ignored.

You got it wrong again. Very few take you seriously. You're like a predictable toy to play when I see fit. You also run willy nilly to every thread to tell people how awesome you are.

J/C

What a kind and considerate Christian our Vice President is!

I think you hit "Reply" to the wrong post ... I'm thinking your description matches someone else.

Nope, I was dead on correct.

this paragraph pretty much invalidated your sources, as i'm sure you're aware. It must also be further emphasize that you're picking and choosing now when to believe the polls, after a 4 year term of calling them fake news.

so if he got only 6% in 2016, when you account for everything thats happened, especially this year, you honestly expect trump to somehow clear that 6%?

that is a tough tough sell there, DD.

especially since if we're gonna use that standard, then lets say trump somehow increases the black support to 11%, is 6% of black voter increase the same as 6% drop of independent support? or 6% drop in support from whites?

if trump increases support from blacks from 6% to 11%, that won't make up the drop in support he will most certainly lose from white voters.

the current polls shows a drop in whites, women, independents, etc.

again, thats using YOUR standard.

from what i'm seeing right now, he'd be lucky if he gets Romney numbers in november. and that doesn't account for all the drops in other demographics that are stronger than the black vote.

No, you are wrong. And this should trigger some attack on me about 4 yrs... yada yada yada

Meanwhile you remain wrong.

j/c

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the...o-election-day/

If these numbers are even close to accurate, 1600 had better get a memo out to all those GOP-run states that are actively trying to suppress the vote. Trump needs 'his African Americans', you know-

Why would I attack someone that's been wrong on every prediction for over 4 years? I don't hit those that are down.

lol. SEE!

- Was I wrong that Trump is terrible?
- Was I wrong that this was just a heist?
- Was I wrong that he would be impeached?
- Was I wrong that he worked with Russia to win in 2016?
- Was I wrong that he acts like a damn traitor when it comes to Putin? Think Helsinki..
- Was I wrong that we would need socialism to fix this mess?

Tell me what I was so wrong on and let's keep it fact based. I know you are incapable of that but if you don't at least try, then shut up.


EDIT: I even liked your post for it's predictability. You are a broken record with insufficient thinking capacity to see truth through your bias.

You get a yes on all 6 of your questions.

Your predictions have not been correct, at all. And you've been wrong for 4 years.

These questions?

- Was I wrong that Trump is terrible?
- Was I wrong that this was just a heist?
- Was I wrong that he would be impeached?
- Was I wrong that he worked with Russia to win in 2016?
- Was I wrong that he acts like a damn traitor when it comes to Putin? Think Helsinki..
- Was I wrong that we would need socialism to fix this mess?

You live in an alternate reality arch. Maybe we should let the board decide if I was right or wrong. I'd love to see the spin from Trumpians and the left could use a good laugh.

Everyone, please be the judge and reply with your stance. I can't fathom how anyone could think I was wrong on any of these.

Wait according to our wifes. We are always wrong

I think you're giving more weight to my commentary than even I am lol

I even said it wasn't something I'd tell people to take to the bank. 42% just sounds ridiculous, 24% probably requires some amount of illicit drugs to believe, but 15%? I don't think that's far fetched in light of the historically low unemployment rates pre-Covid.

Again, while I think 15% is in the realm of possibility, I'm still not telling anyone to take that to the bank. My whole point is that there has been an upward trend of support.

And all your questions are valid: whatever the actual number is, will it show up as votes? Would any increase he gains be able to off set losses elsewhere? At this stage I think the only thing polls are good for is showing possible trends. Its no secret that a lot of Trump supporters won't take part in polls and the 2016 election showed just how wrong polls can be.

Past that I've got some anecdotal stuff that I've been seeing which I can touch on if you care to hear it, but I'm not going to try to present it as a foundational part of the point because it is anecdotal.

I was just reminded.

I've never told anyone "how awesome I am". I let them figure that out all on their own.

You can't even do your own homework Mr. Butifmasksdon'twork.

I don't care who takes me seriously. Most won't even confront anything when it's proven Trump does something wrong. They just bury their heads in the sand and pretend it never happened.

Tell his supporters to vote twice? Ignore.....

Tell them to crowd the polls on election day to sow confusion? Ignore.....

I could go on but you get it. Somebody needs to help you become aware. Because I don't know how you can possibly miss it, but most of the things like that you didn't even know happened unless you see it on here.

You're welcome.

Again, what a kind and considerate conservative Christian he is!

Being smart and sensible about a virus that's killed over 211,000 people and counting makes you look weak.

Never mind about looking smart. That means nothing anymore. Never mind about looking responsible. That Republican party has left the building like Elvis did.

What would a plexiglass divider do, honestly?

Unless it is floor to ceiling, and totally encases each candidate individually, as well as the moderator, and any person in attendance (all individually) and ALSO involves personal air ventilation heat/ac.........what would it do?

Nothing.

The Cleveland Clinic has recommended this as a way to keep all safe.

Also, as a Christian, shouldn’t he follow what Jesus asks of him?

It’s quite clear what Pence should do according to Mark 12:31.

Aren't you simply amazed that people, after over 211,000 American deaths still don't understand that a shield to stop droplets from continuing through the air would help? That if they hit the shield, the moisture would stick to the shield and not continue through the air?

I find that utterly amazing. They just don't care enough to find out or they think rather than finding out on their own someone else should explain it to them.

Ask Kamala about Civil Rights Mike



OAN Network rocks!

A mask would work better. Why don't they have to wear masks?

But I like how a person that denounces Christianity quotes the Bible when it suits them.

https://www.splcenter.org/search?keyword=One+America+News+Network

smh

Just more white supremacists that Trump has given a platform to...

Southern Poverty Law Center

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/southern-poverty-law-center/

https://thefederalist.com/2018/05/07/5-reasons-southern-poverty-law-center-hate-mongering-scam/

https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/03/16/southern-poverty-law-center-bias-exposed/

https://min.amac.us/southern-poverty-law-center-bias-exposed/


https://townhall.com/columnists/joshgoldstein/2017/07/26/splc-hate-group-n2360208




Townhall columnists Josh Goldstein


Southern Poverty Law Center Is a Hate Group

Josh Goldstein
|
Posted: Jul 26, 2017




Like many leftist organizations, the Southern Poverty Law Center, or SPLC, started out with good intentions. It was founded in 1971 by Morris Dees and Joseph Levin and is headquartered in Montgomery, Alabama. The Southern Poverty Law Center rightly condemned, as did conservatives such as the great William F. Buckley and Ronald Reagan, the American Nazi Party and the Democrat-affiliated Ku Klux Klan. A favorite SPLC tactic was suing Klan affiliated organizations for their crimes and then distributing the money to the victims. This strategy has been effective in financially hurting many Klan related organizations. SPLC, though always leftist in nature, bravely stood strong through attacks on its headquarters and threats against its leaders by Klansman. That is to be commended.

Sadly, the Southern Poverty Law Center has more than lost its way. The going astray from the original mission can be traced back to 1986, when most of the organization resigned, except founder Morris Dees, when Dees turned the focus of the group to strictly monitoring hate groups.

The list of hate groups has kept getting longer and longer while our nation has become more tolerant of those who are different. In March 2013, the publication Foreign Policy ran an expose on the methodology of SPLC’s listing of hate groups, noting that SPLC counted many groups several times.


The overall impression from SPLC’s list is designed to make Americans believe that America is a nation filled with racism, sexism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, and every other form of hatred that the conservative cause specifically disavows.

SPLC’s senior leadership is shameful. It uses its past legacy of fighting against racism to add legitimacy to their evolving agenda of hatred towards the large number of Americans who hold conservative and religious values.

In 2010, SPLC added the conservative Family Research Council to its list of hate groups.

In early 2015, SPLC added Dr. Ben Carson to its list of hate groups.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, an atheist, feminist, and former Muslim who speaks out against female genital mutilation, was added to the SPLC hate list in recent years. Ali has many death threats on her life by Islamic radicals but SPLC labels her, and not those who have made the threats, on the hate watch list.

The most recent SPLC controversy involves labeling the Alliance Defending Freedom, or ADF. Attorney General Jeff Sessions made a speech to ADF last week and was immediately vilified by the left wing media such as ABC for associating with an alleged hate group. How ridiculous.

Alliance Defending Freedom was founded to "advocate for the rights of people to peacefully and freely speak, live and work according to their faith and conscience without threat of government punishment."

ADF has won seven Supreme Court cases in the last seven years including the recent Trinity Lutheran v. Comer religious liberty case. ADF has also won over 400 victories regarding academic freedom in the university.

ADF consistently brings cases to the United States Supreme Court and wins. Regarding LGBTQ issues, ADF argues for the rights of Christians and others to practice their deeply held belief system. Even President Obama said that there are people of good faith on both sides of this issue as, indeed marriage between a man and woman has been enshrined for many thousands of years, but SPLC now has to be more progressive than even President Obama. Former Attorney General Ed Meese wrote recently in The Wall Street Journal, “One doesn’t have to agree with ADF’s views to see the problem of treating this law firm as the equivalent of the Ku Klux Klan.”

SPLC’s senior leaders simply do not believe the organization can survive merely by targeting the wickedness of the KKK and neo-Nazi organizations. Instead the leadership believes it must label conservatives and Christians as hate groups. SPLC leaders simply cannot accept that the overwhelming majority of Americans reject racism, sexism, and hatred of other people. SPLC Leadership cannot accept that America is an even more loving nation than when SPLC was founded. In 2014 the FBI, under President Obama no less, said they would no longer use the SPLC criteria of hate groups as its own. There is a reason for that.
Recommended
Cleveland Officials Traced COVID Cases Back to the Debate... Before Trump Was On-site
Beth Baumann

The Southern Poverty Law Center has become a leftist mouthpiece and, guided by its progressive evolution, a hate group. The SPLC evolution is not surprising. As clear as the laws of physics, where leftism is found, hatred, bigotry, and intolerance will soon follow. They have no tolerance for those who argue for religious freedom to Christians and even Muslims who are opposed to female genital mutilation.

Make no mistake, SPLC will continue labeling more and more conservative and Christian groups as hate groups. However, the real victim is not just conservative organizations. It is the those who need the services of a legal group to defend them because of real hatred. Because SPLC has cried wolf one too many times and it has diminished the definition of what a hate group is. They are too far gone now to turn back and will continue their slide into illegitimacy. They could, however, regain their legitimacy by listing a new group as a hate group. They could start by listing the Southern Poverty Law Center.

We can’t even get the KKK formally branded as a domestic terrorist hate group.

And this is now your targeted hate group?

The Fascist America That Kamala Promises
By Jack Cashill

I do not use the term “fascist” lightly, but when even the liberal Los Angeles Times opens an article with a paragraph like the one that follows, I think fascist is apt:

“California Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris is drawing fire from supporters of an anti-abortion activist whose undercover videos and identity cards were seized by the state Department of Justice this week after Harris’ political campaign sought to drum up support for Planned Parenthood.”

The activist is David Daleiden, 27 at the time of the April 2016 raid on his Huntington Beach apartment. In 2016, Harris was running for California’s open U.S. Senate seat. At the time of the raid, Harris’s campaign website was asking supporters “to take a stand and join Kamala in defending Planned Parenthood.”

In the course of Planned Parenthood’s history, no one had presented a greater threat to the organization’s federal funding than the young journalist whose apartment Harris’s agents had just raided.

In the way of background, Daleiden and his partner Sandra Merritt had gone undercover for two years posing as the brokers in the fetal tissue market.

In July 2015 Daleiden started dropping the undercover videos the pair had shot at Planned Parenthood clinics in several states, including California.

The combination of callow words and cruel images, repeated in one video after another, rocked Washington. The timing was good. The 2016 presidential campaigns were revving up, and many Republicans spoke out about what they saw.

“The out-of-sight, out-of-mind mantra that propelled the pro-choice movement for decades is forever gone,” Kellyanne Conway, then a Republican pollster, told the New York Times. Reeling from the blow, even the Times had to wonder whether “the new offensive will succeed in crippling Planned Parenthood.”

Obama, the first president to speak at Planned Parenthood’s national convention, kept his distance from the hubbub. An indifferent media got no closer to the president than his press secretary, Josh Earnest.

On July 30, 2015, a young reporter asked Earnest if Obama had seen the video that was released on that day. The video in question begins with interview footage of harried Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards insisting, “It’s not a fee. It’s not a fee. It’s just the cost of trans- mitting this material.” The undercover footage that follows undercuts everything Richards said.

A doctor at a Planned Parenthood megaclinic in Colorado is seen explaining the clinic’s traffic in body parts. Aware that it is illegal to transfer “human fetal tissue” for “valuable consideration,” the doctor plays semantic games with the would-be purchasers.

“We don’t want to get called on, you know, selling fetal parts across states,” she jokes, unaware she is being recorded. This interview is followed by an on-site review of actual body parts with the doctor and a clinician.

What is impressive is how well Daleiden and Merritt play their roles as buyers. What is unnerving is how casually the doctor and clinician pick through trays of baby parts -- a heart, a brain, a lung -- while talking about the commercial viability of the “fetal cadaver.”

Running for president at the time, Hillary Clinton could not afford to be so dismissive. Although her first instinct was to attack the video producers, Clinton herself began to waver as each new video dropped.

“I have seen pictures from [the videos] and obviously find them dis- turbing,” Clinton told the New Hampshire Union Leader late that July. No one knew better than Clinton, however, what overwhelming force Planned Parenthood and its allies in the Democratic-media complex could bring to bear against a pair of citizen journalists.

For immediate assistance, Planned Parenthood turned to the well-connected fixers at -- where else? -- Fusion GPS. The beleaguered organization contracted with Fusion to review the unedited footage Daleiden had posted online.

Armed with a ten-page report from Fusion, Richards went on the offensive. Convincing people they did not see what they saw would not be easy, but the networks made the task possible by refusing to show the actual videos.

As to the newspapers and online journals, they did their bit by leaving the assessment of the videos to Fusion GPS. Faced with real journalists doing real work, the Obama courtiers reflexively turned stenographer. They welcomed this “forensic study” as heartily as they would Fusion GPS’s notorious “Steele dossier” a year later.

To complete the rout, the ambitious Harris had her agents seize Daleiden’s multiple computers and hard drives as well as the materials he had gathered from Planned Parenthood conferences.

Alexandra Snyder, the director of the Life Legal Defense Foundation, told the Los Angeles Times that Harris’s “loyalty to Planned Parenthood” required “her to turn a blind eye to the organization’s criminal activities.” Harris did more than turn a blind eye. “Instead,” said Snyder, “she has launched an inquisition into David Daleiden.”

In 2017, Harris’s successor as attorney general, Xavier Becerra, filed 15 felony charges against Daleiden and Merritt and has tied them up in court ever since.

In May 2020, Daleiden filed suit against Becerra and Harris, claiming Harris violated his civil rights by conspiring with Planned Parenthood to silence him.

In Kamala’s America, killing and dismembering unborn babies and marketing their body parts is perfectly acceptable. Reporting on the practice is criminal. If that is not fascistic, I am not sure I know what is.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/10/the_fascist_america_that_kamala_promises.html

4chan reports.

Not sure why there is even a question about this. Geez.. at a time when the president admitted to a reporter he lied about Covid. A time when we find out that he paid $750.00 in Federal Tax two years in a row. In a time when he fights to keep his taxes private when every other president (as well as Candidate for President) have released tax return for at least 10 years prior. (what's he hiding)

all this stuff the Trump supporters are throwing out there is meant to distract..

It's not working.

in just 2 minutes, Pence proved that his only purpose is to serve as a human meat shield for Trump.

She needs to cut him off .... ridiculous

He lies and looks into the camera with that cheesy fake sincerity.... makes me feel unclean

in a weird way i feel bad for pence.

this gotta be a tough job under trump. dude is 61 years old looking 81 right now.

interesting he dodged the age question and went back to covid. he didn't make a good case at all.

he really comes off as one of those crazy evangelicals on TV

She is showing the American people why she cut her presidential bid short!

The moderator said no one had been informed of the questions, yet when the moderator just said to Pence, that is a good segway, Harris nodded and said a great segway, before the question was asked. Sure sounded like she’s aware of the questions coming her way.

L

By being salient and on point and doing it inside her time ?..

You couldn't make an honest observation about Lying Pence if we paid you

or she was nodding that it was indeed a good segway.

crazy.

She has to know the question coming, to understand the segway.

not really.

i thought it was a good segway. i didn't know the question was coming.

you're being absolutely ridiculous.

Not really?

What are you talking about?

That’s just a silly response Swish.

Or she was just being positive, smiling and trying to move on from Pence spew

Good...hit her with the Green New Scam

laying on that fear mongering thick tonight.

I've checked out of the issues for the week maybe but,

I've got to say, Everytime I ...
Kamala Harris, looks more like a Saturday Night Live impersonation of a candidate than the actual Saturday Night Live impersonators look:

So much so, that every time I've tuned in and seen her speak, I think I'm watching SNL, a sad, painful, not ever funny version, but I don't hear anything She says, because

They left reason years ago.
They- meaning, all the democrats.

He just said they're proud of their consolation in their environmentalism

Hahahahahahaha.... seriously why listen to anything this guy says

Found out today he was a paid mouthpiece for tobacco back in the day... so he is used to flat out lying

Once the moderator says great segway, it becomes pretty apparent what the next question is going to be. Doesn't even need require a HS education to figure it out

whats crazy is that Harris and Pence are better representatives of their bosses than the actual bosses.

Pretty apparent questions got leaked.

I wish she wouldn't do the whole, please let me talk\stop interrupting me thing. Don't like the look it portrays.

She should just keep talking, let the moderator chastise him, and people will see for themselves.


I do approve of the, he interupted me, i would like the opportunity to finish

If Biden wins, China Wins.

TRUMP! USA

China is winning now. Our trade deficit is growing, not shrinking. And we are bailing out our farmers because of the terrible deal that was made.

Very true. Both are presenting well, Pence better than I expected while Harris is competent and more than holding her own. What a difference this debate than the previous...

yea this is definitely a VP debate


so traditional.

gc. I Don't think Kamala Harris talking down to the American people, seeming to talk to America like some teacher addressing a kindergarten class is a good look.

Maybe it's just the Body Language, I've really put up with too much of that crap almost have to tune out,
they don't deserve the satisfaction of my hate for them.

...at least she stopped laughing at everything Pence says. That wasn't a good look. I hate when people do that and roll their eyes and whatnot while the other person it speaking. On the whole, this debate is much more civil that the presidential debate.

Pence must have forgot that trump's support from the military has plummeted.

Pence still takes more time than given, and Kamala has been respectful, but now needs to step over when she should. The moderator allows him to do what he wants.

Kamala is doing much better than Pence. I’m impressed with her.

and there it is. the good ole war on christianity rhetoric. he really tried it.

Far better than screaming over someone like Trump, or talking far over your time, or refusing to stay in the guidelines of the debate. I notice you’ve said nothing about how Pence has refused to stay in the guidelines of the debate over and over.

yea, she's clearly refraining from biting his head off. he keeps trying to speak over her.

Why can't she answer the damn question?

She is a bum! The moderator needs to do her damn job and call her out!

Are you going to pack the courts? Yes or no?

Is she going to pack the courts?

Are they?

Democrats always double down on the side of criminal behavior.

The moderator asks the questions ... The candidates don't have to answer questions that the other candidate asks. But don't let that get in the way of your rant.

They've both done this. They should call them both out, but stop acting like it's just her.

When asked how they expect the American people to follow his own recommendations when Pence and the whole White House ignore them, he never addressed the it. Just talked about how much they did to help "the American people."

You sound a little conflicted over who to vote for.

I would be terrible in the debates. I would actually answer the question asked.

Neither VP candidate, nor either candidate during the trump\biden debate actually answers the question asked.

They all have their talking points and turn to them forcing their points instead of letting those points come out organically.

I think that is a poor look for all of them

its very fitting that on a topic of racism, a fly lands on Pence's head while he pivots toward denying systemic racism and boot lick law enforcement.

very fitting, Demon.

I tend to agree - but from a Trump supporter perspective I expect they love that he talks over the woman and disregards the moderator.

The ONLY thing Pence said with 100% conviction ... the only time he looked like he had a pulse ... the only time he visibly looked to be telling the truth was when he talked about the military, his children serving and saying Trump reveres the Military. . . . Interesting because without question Trump has said disparaging remarks about fallen and captured American soldiers. Maybe Trump loves the notion of the Military without understanding it.

I think they have both done well for their perspective causes without any significant moment or turning point. I am done.

The moderator can follow up. I'm sorry that you're confused.

I had to turn this off, they're both horrible.

I'd like to see two things in 4 years.

1) The microphones turn off at 2 minutes and 10 seconds. If you can't finish what you were saying after you've been warned, you deserve to be cut off.

2) Shock collars for the candidates. You keep talking after your mic turns off...zap, and harder every second you keep talking. You lie and zap. Second lie, harder zap, etc, ... You interrupt and zap. You don't answer the question, zap. The last remaining of the 4 is president.

Pence, do you know how many racist old men have mixed grandchildren?

lmfao, what? hahahahahahahaha

Harris has been much better - even when she responds to a different point initially most of the time she wrapped it back around to the topic and then finished in time. There were a couple of times she didn't .... Pence went 'off script' / 'off question' a LOT more.

Harris is embarrassing as a national candidate.

Nothing confused me - you are the one that's trying to insist the Harris answer a Q that was asked by Pence. That's not the way it works. But you know - don't let facts get in your way, it hasn't stopped Trump or Pence.

And yet she's light years ahead of Trump ... and better than Pence. So what does that say about our choices.

Kamala had no answer for that question, not a clue how to answer it.

But you support socialist policies.

C’mon, you got the humor in that line.


By the way, I voted for Tulsi Gabbard in the primaries.

no one knows how to answer that question, because this isnt suppose to be a problem in this country.

but thanks to Trump, now we gotta worry about peaceful transfer of power.

Trump is garbage.

This debate:

Moderator: "Vice President Pence, is your first name Michael?"

VP Pence: "Let me tell you about President Trump. He did..."

Pence said all of that....

and in the next 24 hours, Trump is gonna completely contradict every last bit of that unity comment.

So you are saying the socialists are smarter and less embarrassing than Trump and Pence ?? Gotcha.

well, at least these two acted like adults.

i guess if that's the standard we're at, then whatever.

Mike Pence won this debate!

no. Harris definitely won.

Acting like adults is a good standard to start with.

I think if a candidate ever came in and answered the question asked, the American people would notice that and appreciate it and that candidate would look stellar.

j/c:

I am not going to keep posting in the Political forum much because it is far too despicable for me. I am only going to share a few thoughts on the debate and will not comment further.

--Both candidates did a much better job than the Presidential candidates.

--I think policy was covered more than personalities than the presidential debate, but it was still too personal.

--I appreciate talk about policy over emotions and feelings. I thought Pence won that battle.

--I thought the moderator was better than Chris Wallace.

--The highlight of the night by far was the question from the middle school girl that concluded the debate. It was something about how all she sees is both sides attacking one another and how are we supposed to come together when our leaders won't. Both candidates skirted around the question, but Pence did a bit better job of at least referring to it.

--I am voting for policy over feelings. I'm voting Republican.

Have a nice life.

Did they test that fly for Covid’s?

Such in depth perspective. Lmao.

For me, Kamala won hands down. Pence refused to stay on point, which some find to be a good debate strategy. I’ve always hated that form of debate. You are not winning, you are deflecting. He also refused to follow the rules as is typical with this administration. She came off far more informed and struck at the perfect times.

This debate matters a little more than usual, but this election is about whether or not you support a person named Trump to lead your nation. Plain and simple.

It was nice to see a debate w/o constant interruptions as much as Pence tried.

He was on his heels at time. Had to use time to new questions to follow up on previous topics.

He's bland, boring and attracts the white, evangelical vote which Trump needed in 2016 because he lacked the religious credibility. Trump already has the base locked up for 2020 which means this was a non-win for Trump.

Harris filled in talking points where Biden was unable to because of that debates disaster.

Minds were likely unchanged from this debate.

Nearly everyone has made up the minds already.

Pence has a career as a future Indiana senator.

Biden stands for:

-Curtailing the 2nd amendment
-Wants health care for all, including illegal aliens. He stood on the debate stage along with Bernie Sanders and raised his hands. He is a liar. Not economically viable. In addition for health care for all to work, it is mandatory to raise taxes on all, not just the wealthy. Only wealthy tax dollars would run the program for 4 months.
-Has no plan for illegal immigration, none.
-Supports Iran
-Supports China.
-Supports the green New deal. Not economically viable.
-Supports shutting down the country again.
-Does not believe in American exceptional ism.
-Controlled by Harris and special interest groups.
-Career politican who has gotten rich if special interest groups.

Trump isn't perfect but I still don't understand why the DNC picked Biden. If they had any balls they would have went with Bernie or mayor Pete.

Didn't watch it. Spent time with family, from out of state. Got to play some game - call it wall corn hole?, with my 3 year old cousin's kid. Well, I didn't play so much as I was the bag getter. He couldn't reach them after he threw them.

I was also the high five getter/giver. And after he got a 3 pointer, I showed him how to bow. He bowed after each scoring bag there after.

I feel I had a good night.

Bold claims.

Would love to see a breakdown from a reputable government agency that says these plans are not economically viable. Please use a source other than left-wing, left-center, center-right, or right-wing websites.

The answers to my questions, given the criteria I set, are out there if you look hard enough.

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
-Carl Sagan

Well gee, that elimiates 99% of websites.

My first- my very first thought was:

"Flies are genetically attracted to the scent of scat. Ain't no flies landin' on Kamala's side of the stage."

And that fly hung out for a goood long while too- did you notice that?
I'm sure you noticed that.

I'm sure that tens of millions of other Americans noticed it, as well.

Let's be clear: this creature, genetically hardwired to seek out DaS# didn't land on Pence's lectern. Fly didn't land on his suit lapel or his shoulder. Oh, no- that's not where Fly landed. Where did Fly land? Yup- that's right. Fly landed right on his head- the apex of the pile, while it was emanating at its most stank. The Mt. Everest of 'pileage.'

Fly be like: "Oh, man.... this the ish I been waiting for. Lemme get a fat meal over here on this. Mmmmm- nice. Warm- and fresh. Might also wanna drop a few of my eggs down in the toppa this one too- 'cause I'm pro-life, you know-"


Gimmeaminnit... I need to dab my cheeks with this Kleenex... catch my breath- O.M.G.

Dawg- I laughed so hard, I had to take clothes off, to keep from overheating.

2020... the insanity is unrelenting.

THAT was classic.

Am I the only one that thought Pence looked ready for embalming? He looked like a ghost. And his eyes were bloodshot. He may have to have Trump hook him up with his spray paint tan connect.

Come on Clem it's clear to everybody that the Fly is on Trump and Pences side. Was it wearing a mask or not? Nope

You forgot to mention he is honorary secretary in the secret Clinton child abuse Cabal.

Now this......

She sidestepped there like Biden did, and that's disturbing. However, Pence was far more guilty of avoiding answering the questions. I think it was the second or third question where he basically listened to the question and blatantly decided to discuss a previous question... He was dodging questions like Dante Hall dodged defenders on punt returns.

I didn't watch the Biden/Trump debate - but a couple of questions for you based on your comment:

1. You saw and noticed how Pence did this all night long too right? And you saw how Pence kept going over his time repeatedly. And you saw how he talked over Harris right? . . . But specifically to your point, Pence must have kept going about a previous or different point on more than 50% of his answers.

2. When you talked about Biden in the other debate answering or going back to previous topics .... I guess then that Trump didn't ? He always answered and stuck to the Q that Wallace asked?

Let me know.

You are the smartest person on this board, good sir. I wish I had spent my time watching "Building the Browns" instead. I heard it was a good one.

I honestly have no idea where you are going with this, or how/why you are inferring certain things from my brief comment, but I will go ahead and answer your questions:

1. I stated in my question how "Pence was far more guilty of avoiding answering the questions." I agree he was terrible at ending on time and he talked over Harris, and she was right to rebuke him. Pence definitely side-stepped the majority of questions. You could tell that he had a list of things/buzzwords/points he wanted to talk about, and he was going to use those as a backdrop to any question he knew was going to be difficult.

2. When did I talk about Biden in the other debate answering or going back on previous topics???? How did you infer that? I said "she sidestepped there like Biden did..." and that was specifically in reference to the court packing question. Biden definitely sidestepped that question. I don't think that's arguable. To your point on Trump, he was a complete hot mess in just about every aspect of the presidential debate.

That being said, one problem I have with both sides in these political topics is that when I or anyone makes a criticism of one side, there seems to be a perpetual recoil of "Wait, so are you saying the other side didn't do it too???? Should they get off the hook???"

Two people can both do things wrong in the same and different ways. If I ask two people to cross a street, and one of them lies down and the other one climbs a tree, then they both failed the task. What use is there in one person pointing out that the other did it wrong? As far as I'm concerned, I have two people who are incapable of crossing a street.

Pence epitomizes a lying, hypocritical politician.

He makes my skin crawl.

So appropriate that a fly finds what flies always look for.

Thanks for the clarification. I didn't infer - I asked questions.

From your original post - I think it's clear you said Biden went back to previous questions : ""Pence was far more guilty of avoiding answering the questions. I think it was the second or third question where he basically listened to the question and blatantly decided to discuss a previous question... He was dodging questions like Dante Hall dodged defenders on punt returns.""

I think they all do it. I thought Harris was significantly better at answering and responding to the questions the moderator asked. I think she was entirely correct not to answer a loaded question from Pence. . . . do you think there aren't dozens and dozens of "gotcha" questions Harris could have asked Pence if that was what the Debate was supposed to be about? . . . As I said- I didn't watch the Biden Trump debacle.

As for the answer of packing the courts ?

I hope that the Democrats - if they win all House, Senate and WH - play by the same rules and with the same ethics that Trump and this GOP have done for the last 4 years.

Swish,
I said the exact same thing to my wife while we were watching. Almost feel sorry for Pence. He's got a tough job.

We were laughing because he had that insincere, practiced sort of civility going on. "Thank you so much for asking that, Susan... now I'm going to talk about something completely unrelated". Some of those questions were almost unfair to Pence (and I don't mean that in a 'fake news' way... I mean defending parts of Trump admin's record is just not possible). What else was he going to do but deflect/ignore. Again, his job is not one I would want.

Still, Pence did better than I thought he would. And Harris wasn't anywhere near as aggressive as I expected. Pence got a couple shots in, which was more than I expected.

Overall, both did better than I thought. Pence, working from a disadvantage in having to defend his and Trump's record, was able to land shots and somewhat minimize the shots from Kamala. Having not been impressed AT ALL with Kamala's debate performances during the nomination, I thought she did very well. I think I need to temper my expectations when there are a number of people up on the stage (nomination debate). They're #1 priority is probably just fighting for screen time.

Agree with your sentiment in that post.


After taking some time to reflect on the debate, I would say things ended up pretty even.

If you are a Democrat I can how one would argue Kamala won. But I can also see how a Republican could argue that pence won

Sorry if I misunderstood you. My initial question there was not comparing Biden to Pence but Harris to Pence. She side-stepped the court packing is what I was referring to.

I agree they all do it. Harris was better at answering the questions and staying within the structural parameters than Pence, IMO.

i agree bro.

as i said last night, both harris and pence seemed to do a better job advocating for their bosses better than the actual bosses did.

none of them did anything to tank their campaigns, and i think in a worst case scenario, the country would be fine if either of these two needed to step into the position due to health concerns from the actual president.

I definitely agree that Pence has the tougher job in these debates. His insincerity and very canned, structured responses - in addition to his side-stepping - really irks me. However, it is not easy to be a flight attendant on a plane and justify to the passengers why the pilot has been doing barrel rolls.

My wife watched and was really annoyed at how Pence man kept talking past time and over Harris ....

My suggestion would be That a timekeeper tracks any talk past their allotment and interruptions they make. At the end of the debate whoever has transgressed the most has mic turned off and the other candidates gets the balance of time uninterrupted without any comeback... watch how they both adhere to time.... though I doubt Trump would be disciplined enough

Dude, you are on fire with the similes in this thread.

Between the barrel roll and the inability to cross the street you actually made me laugh out loud a little bit. Not quite a guffaw but definitely audible. Keep up the storng work.

If I were one of these candidates up on the stage, my one comfort would be that there really aren't many undecided voters left. All you really have to do up there is just get through the hour without a disaster.

Haha, thanks. When it comes to politics, I try to be as absurd as possible.

It certainly was annoying that Pence kept speaking over Harris, but the moderator did give her additional time on occasion to ensure even time.

At the end, both candidates were given nearly equal time...

Trump calls Harris a 'monster'
BY MORGAN CHALFANT - 10/08/20 09:32 AM EDT


President Trump on Thursday twice referred to Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) as a "monster" following her debate performance against Vice President Pence the evening prior.

“This monster that was onstage with Mike Pence, who destroyed her last night, by the way. This monster, she says, ‘no no, there won’t be fracking,’ there won’t be this. Everything she said is a lie,” Trump said during a phone interview on Fox Business.

Trump’s broadside against Harris, an elected member of the U.S. Senate and the first Black and South Asian woman to be the vice presidential nominee of a major political party, came not 12 hours after Pence faced her in a debate marked by sharp disagreements but also civility. At one point, Pence recognized the “historic nature” of Harris’s nomination.

Trump has a history of flinging controversial insults at women that have been criticized as degrading and sexist. He called 2016 Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton a “nasty woman” on the debate stage, a phrase that became a rallying cry for feminists opposed to Trump.

The 2016 campaign was also roiled when a tape was released of Trump boasting about grabbing women by the genitals in a conversation with Billy Bush of “Access Hollywood” in 2005.

Trump has struggled with female voters, and it's unlikely that his remarks about Harris on Thursday will help him among that group. Strategists say that white suburban women are key to Trump's victory in 2020. Trump currently trails Democratic nominee Joe Biden in national and swing state polls, less than four weeks before the November election.

Trump has previously called Harris “very nasty” and asserted that she behaved in a “disrespectful” manner toward Biden during the primaries.

Trump’s comments, made in his first interview since his coronavirus diagnosis, were made during an exchange about Biden’s fitness for office. Trump claimed that Biden “won’t be president for two months” if elected because he is not “mentally capable of being president,” before tearing into Harris.

“He is not mentally capable of being president. You know that, everybody knows that, everybody that knows him. He can’t be president," Trump told Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo.


https://thehill.com/homenews/administrat...QBj0ibwUQSikD2I

IIRC, the moderator gave Harris time at the end to make up the difference.

How does stating that Pence consistently broke the rules have anything about being confused about who you're voting for? We've seen it in both debates now. Trump only breaks the rules in a nastier, louder fashion. Yet Pence is just a kinder version of "I'm going to break all of the rules".

You do realize you can make an observation of the facts at hand without confusion on other things, right?

Pence's breaking of the rules was at least within the bounds of precedent. Debaters during pres debates have ALWAYS gone over their time limits.

The thing with Pence going over the time limit was that, in general, he was talking so slowly and not really saying a whole lot. I can see speaking over the moderator to land shots or refute a point the other person made, but he was going over time just to say fluff. It was kinda weird.

In response to your post I'll only make an observation about the fly.

The fly has better concentration abilities than Pocapornstar. The fly managed to concentrate long enough to stay on the head of Pence for over two minutes during a debate. Pocapornstar couldn't concentrate enough to shut the hell up for two minutes during a debate.


Advantage fly.

j/c...

I really don't disagree with you about it sometimes happening that candidates speak over their allotted time. However, when it becomes a consistent onslaught of it happening in the same debate, it isn't as typical as you seem to make it sound.

It's been consistent with both Trump and Pence.

j/c

Actually, after watching the debate I gave a slight advantage to Pence if you dismiss him consistently breaking the rules. Debates aren't about facts sadly. They're about talking points. Pence continued to spread many of the same lies about raising everyone's taxes, about not actually losing manufacturing jobs and what "a great response to Covid" even though Kamala did point out an irrefutable fact that per capita we've had twice the deaths than other developed nations.

It helped enforce their supporters beliefs but I highly suspect it didn't influence anyone in the middle.

Kamala left a lot of meat on the bone. The forest management BS that they keep putting out. The federal government owns 58% of the forests in California while the state actually only owns about 3%. So she should have pointed out that if forest management is what they feel the problem is, they've dropped the ball on that one too.

And of course pointing out the Merrick Garland verses Amy Coney Barrett process would have been a great comeback to packing the SCOTUS.

I could point to more such as these but as I said, I felt she left a lot of meat on the bone. Something I wouldn't have expected from a former prosecutor.

That's a great way to put it. Totally agree. Specifically, I was shocked she didn't come back with Merrick Garland when Pence inexplicably talked about packing the courts (as you said).

I was also surprised she didn't jump on him for abruptly switching topics. He was asking for her to zing him on not answering tough questions and filling time with fluff, and she never really did.

Another big point she missed was when Pence started talking about their environmental record. Man, Trump has overturned so many environmental regulations that have a long term negative impact on our environment that just a few of the major ones would have been a nail in his coffin.

I'm not talking about the tree hugger type regulations. I'm speaking of things like allowing coal companies to once again dump coal ash into our waterways.

It could have been a big winner she let slip by.

I often wonder who in the hell preps these people?

She told a lie on honest Abe.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/...braham-lincoln/

CLAIM: Abraham Lincoln declined to fill a Supreme Court seat because it was too close to the election.

VERDICT: FALSE. The Senate was out of session. He filled it — in one day — as soon as it was back.

Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) tried to argue in the vice presidential debate Wednesday night against the confirmation of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to fill the seat vacated by the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Harris appealed to history, arguing that Vice President Mike Pence and the Republicans are violating a precedent set by President Abraham Lincoln of not confirming a Supreme Court justice before an election.

Harris said:

In 1864 — one of the, I think political heroes certainly of the President, I assume of you also, Mr. Vice President, is Abraham Lincoln. Abraham Lincoln was up for re-election, and it was 27 days before the election. And a seat became open on the United States Supreme Court. Abraham Lincoln’s party was in charge, not only of the White House, but the Senate. But Honest Abe said, “It’s not the right thing to do. The American people deserve to make the decision about who will be the next president of the United States. And then that person can select who will serve for a lifetime on the highest court of our land.” And so Joe and I are very clear: the American people are voting right now, and it should be their decision about who will serve on this most important body for a lifetime.

However, Harris misrepresented what “Honest Abe” did, and why. As Dan McLaughlin of National Review noted, President Abraham Lincoln never said anything like what Harris said he did. He delayed sending a nominee to the Senate because it was out of session. McLaughlin wrote:

Lincoln, of course, said no such thing. He sent no nominee to the Senate in October 1864 because the Senate was out of session until December. He sent a nominee the day after the session began, and Salmon P. Chase was confirmed the same day. And Lincoln wanted to dangle the nomination before Chase and several other potential candidates because he wanted them to campaign for him. Lincoln’s priority was winning the election, which was necessary to win the war — and he filled the vacancy at the first possible instant.

Kamala Harris is simply inventing history.

As the Cato Institute’s resident constitutional scholar, Ilya Shapiro, noted recently (original emphasis): “[V]acancies have arisen 29 times in presidential election years, during the administrations of 22 of the 44 presidents preceding the current one, and those presidents made nominations all 29 times.”

She has about 20,000 lies and she'll be caught up with Trump.... she needs to increase her pace.

She made up a speech a president never gave, or repeated it because someone told her it was true. Either way, all of you whining about Trump lying must have no integrity if you'd still vote for her. This wasn't even a good lie.

The ole "they did it too" argument.

Isn't that what the libs refer to as a "whataboutism"?

Yes. I think in this case it's entirely deserved.

Hypocrite much? Call out Harris over a lie when Trumpo's told 20,000 ???

Now I went and looked at fact checkers for Harris and Pence and looked already to see what porky pies they told ... so I knew about the Abe fallacy.

Nope. Not at all.

When Harris or Biden gets to 20,000 we can say "they did it too." For now we'll just say that any Trump fan boy trying to accuse another politician of lying is just a hypocrite. Fair?

when her comments during a debate leads to over 200k americans dead, lemme know.

til then, Trump is a scumbag, and it says a lot about the people who defend said scumbag.

when her comments lead to a bunch of terrorist getting arrested for trying to kidnap a sitting governor, lemme know.

til then, trump is a scumbag, and it says a lot about the people who defend said scumbag.

Hypocrite? Not at all. I haven't been complaining. I've known for a very long time that all politicians lie. I look at it from the perspective of if they are lying to me, or for me.

As for that 20000 number you libs keep spouting, you call almost everything Trump says a lie, which is a lie in itself.

Tell me what the number is then....

As for lying to me or for me comment - are you suggesting as long as politicians tell lies that serve your self interest you don't care? The post/comment reads that way but I don't want to assume.

So, have you ever heard Trump? Every damn word is a lie or tied to a lie.

As I said when I voted for Trump in 2016. Trump is not smart enough to lie and get away with it. People will see right through him. Hillary however could look you in the eye and lie to you AND get away with it. She would be telling untruths just as much as Trump but she wouldn't be caught in most of them.

This election I can't make up my mind yet. Both parties bring something to the table that I am passionate about, but both parties bring things I despise. I still don't know if I am voting for Trump, Biden, myself, or not voting for either side. It is 100 percent disgusting and sickening that these are my only options

My take away.... you voted for a bad liar. Not a good look.

Trump made a few major promises to get elected. Lower taxes, build a border wall, get rid of obummercare, rebuild the military. He's done all of those with the exception of obummercare. That would have taken the cowardly Republicans to vote like they did when obummer was in office. They chickened out. He's kept those promises.

and those who voted for Hillary voted for a good liar. Not a good look either.

He’s not built a wall. Maybe a few miles but not nearly what he promised. Mexico didn’t pay for it either... another lie. He certainly lowered taxes too... so much so on corporations our tax revenue can’t possibly keep up with donny’s debt. Ooooo but I got a couple hundred dollars extra in my pocket this year.... I’m going to Europe with it.... oh wait. Donny’s bumbling of COVID has me locked within our borders... maybe he did build that wall he promised after all?

We've been hearing that argument for four years and you just now decided to call foul?

You forgot about his promise of infrastructure to rebuild highways. airports and bridges. His great "new healthcare plan" that was supposed to unveiled a “terrific,” “phenomenal” and “fantastic” new health care plan to replace the Affordable Care Act during his first 100 days in office. In January 2017 he told the Washington Post he would be announcing he was close to completing his health care plan and that he wanted to provide “insurance for everybody.”

These are lies he told to try and sucker moderates into voting for him. Part of the con job.

He tweeted Feb. 17 that while Democrats were delaying Senate confirmation of Tom Price, his pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, the “repeal and replacement of ObamaCare is moving fast!”

“… we will … have great Healthcare soon after Tax Cuts!” But in 2019, Trump again took up the health plan mantle with this March 26 tweet: “The Republican Party will become ‘The Party of Healthcare!’” Two days later, in remarks to reporters before boarding Marine One, Trump said that “we’re working on a plan now,” but again updated the timeline, saying, “There’s no very great rush from the standpoint” because he was waiting on the court decision for Obamacare. This was a reference to Texas v. U.S., the lawsuit brought by a group of Republican governors to overturn the ACA. It is currently pending before the Supreme Court.

Backtracking from his earlier promises to repeal and replace Obamacare within his first 100 days in office, Trump on April 3 tweeted: “I was never planning a vote prior to the 2020 Election on the wonderful HealthCare package that some very talented people are now developing for me & the Republican Party. It will be on full display during the Election as a much better & less expensive alternative to ObamaCare…”

June 16:

In an interview with ABC News, Trump again said a health care plan would be coming shortly.

“We’re going to produce phenomenal health care. And we already have the concept of the plan. And it’ll be much better health care,” Trump told George Stephanopoulos. When Stephanopoulos asked if he was going to tell people what the plan was, Trump responded: “Yeah, we’ll be announcing that in two months, maybe less.”

June 26:

But then, timing again changed as Trump promised a sweeping health plan after the 2020 election. “If we win the House back, keep the Senate and keep the presidency, we’ll have a plan that blows away ObamaCare,” Trump said in a speech to the Faith and Freedom Coalition’s Road to the Majority conference.

Oct. 3:

He reiterated this post-2020 election pledge in a speech to Florida retirees. “If the Republicans take back the House, keep the Senate, keep the presidency — we’re gonna have a fantastic plan,” Trump said.

Oct. 25:

Trump told reporters that Republicans have a “great” health care plan. “You’ll have health care the likes of which you’ve never seen,” he said.

2020: ‘Two Weeks’

Feb. 10:

During a White House business session with governors, Trump commented on the Republican governors’ lawsuit to undo the ACA and whether protections for preexisting conditions would be lost: “If a law is overturned, that’s OK, because the new law’s going to have it in.”

May 6:

During the signing of a proclamation to honor National Nurses Day, Trump again said Obamacare would be replaced “with great healthcare at a lesser price, and preexisting conditions will be included and you won’t have the individual mandate.”

July 19:

Trump told Chris Wallace in a Fox News interview that a health care plan would be unveiled within two weeks: “We’re signing a health care plan within two weeks, a full and complete health care plan that the Supreme Court decision on DACA gave me the right to do.”

July 31:

With no sign of a plan yet, reporters asked Trump about it at a Florida event. Trump responded that a “very inclusive” health care plan was coming and “I’ll be signing it sometime very soon.”

Aug. 3:

Pushing the timeline once again, Trump said during a press briefing that the health care plan would be introduced “hopefully, prior to the end of the month.”

Aug. 7:

Citing his two-week timeline once again, Trump said during a press briefing that he would pursue a major executive order in the next two weeks “requiring health insurance companies to cover all preexisting conditions for all customers.” Trump also said that covering preexisting conditions had “never been done before,” despite the ACA provisions outlining protections for people who have preexisting conditions being among the law’s most popular components. The Trump administration has backed the effort to overturn the ACA — including these protections — now pending before the Supreme Court.

Aug. 10:

In response to a reporter’s question about why he was planning to issue an executive order when the ACA already protects those with preexisting conditions, Trump said: “Just a double safety net, and just to let people know that the Republicans are totally strongly in favor of … taking care of people with preexisting conditions. It’s a second platform. We have: Preexisting conditions will be taken care of 100% by Republicans and the Republican Party.”

Just before publication, we asked the White House for more information regarding when exactly the plan might be unveiled. The press office did not respond to our request for comment.

https://khn.org/news/back-to-the-future-trumps-history-of-promising-a-health-plan-that-never-comes/

And that great wall Mexico was going to pay for?

Border wall: Hundreds of miles funded, 5 new miles built

https://www.expressnews.com/news/us-world/border-mexico/article/Border-wall-progress-15467427.php

Still waiting on checks from Mexico. You've been lied to. Over and over again. Yet you believe them so much you're now helping spread them yourself.

Hahaha