2024 Field

Well then i commend you for your consistency.

I doubt thethe would say the same answer.

Luckily he gets to selectively not answer questions that he doesn't like

I voted for Romney and McCain and i don't regret it. They were far from my first choice.
 
If I have choice between Haley and Biden I think the answer is obvious to anyone with an IQ over 80. Have you been awake the last three years?

Holy ****ing ****.

It doesn’t matter anyway. Haley has zero chance of being the nominee.
 
Don't you worry that'll be taken care of in due time

[Tw]1752480884182131152[/tw]

I said it last time with Trump and I imagine it will hold true this time as well. Since approval ratings have been recorded, no POTUS has won re-election with an average approval ratings below 45%. And they must reach 50% approval rating at least once in the full year before the election in order to have a shot. Biden's average approval ratings are literally the worst among any modern POTUS.
 
I said it last time with Trump and I imagine it will hold true this time as well. Since approval ratings have been recorded, no POTUS has won re-election with an average approval ratings below 45%. And they must reach 50% approval rating at least once in the full year before the election in order to have a shot. Biden's average approval ratings are literally the worst among any modern POTUS.

He has the luxury of running against one of the most hated people who ever walked planet earth

Biden is one of the worst presidents in history... he's one of the worst candidates in history, and we nominated a guy who already lost to him, is hated, is old, and will lose again
 
January 30, 2024
HEATHER COX RICHARDSON
JAN 31




Today, according to Clare Foran, Manu Raju, and Morgan Rimmer of CNN, House speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) told his Republican colleagues that he will not bring forward the bipartisan immigration bill senators have been working on for months, calling it “absolutely dead.”

Although Johnson insisted in November that border security was so crucial that he wouldn’t bring up aid to Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, and Gaza until such legislation was attached to it, Trump has made it clear he wants immigration and border security left on the table for him to use as an issue in his run for the presidency.

Instead of addressing border security through legislation, House Republicans instead are moving forward with their plan to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. They wrote articles of impeachment even before holding hearings. Today, members of the House Homeland Security Committee held a hearing to mark up those articles, which claim that Mayorkas committed high crimes and misdemeanors because he allegedly breached the public trust and refused to enforce immigration law.

In all our history, only one cabinet officer has been impeached. William Belknap, whose eight years as secretary of war under President U. S. Grant had been marked by ostentatious displays of wealth and apparent kickbacks from army contracts, was charged with corruption in March 1876 just hours after he tearfully handed Grant his resignation.

The House charged Belknap with “criminally disregarding his duty as Secretary of War and basely prostituting his high office to his lust for private gain.” The Senate agreed that it had jurisdiction to hold an impeachment trial even for a former government official, for an officer should not be able to escape justice simply by resigning. After hearing more than 40 witnesses, a majority of senators voted to convict Belknap on each of five charges, but no vote reached the necessary two-thirds threshold for conviction, and he was therefore acquitted.

Almost 150 years later, the impeachment of Mayorkas would be the second effort to impeach a cabinet member. Yet there is no suggestion that Mayorkas has done anything but try to implement the law, even as the administration has repeatedly asked for more funding to make it possible for him to do his job.

In the hearing today, Representative Seth Magaziner (D-RI) noted that “across the system, we are at and above capacity, and so, what should the secretary do? The secretary, because he has not received the funding to provide adequate detention capacity, has to use his judgment for who to detain and who to release. That is not illegal. It is certainly not impeachable. And it is the exact same kind of discretion that every other director before him has used. In the last two years of the Trump administration, 52% of migrants apprehended at the southern border were released, not detained…. Nearly a million people. I did not hear my Republican colleagues trying to impeach the secretary or acting secretary under the Trump administration during those years. But here they are, trying to impeach Secretary Mayorkas for doing the exact same thing.”

Rather than passing the laws the country needs, the extremist Republicans appear to be determined to tee up an issue on which Trump can run for president in 2024. House speaker Johnson has demanded “ZERO” illegal crossings into the U.S., but this is a standard that no previous homeland security secretary has met because it is impossible to wall off every single means of entering this country by water, air, or land. And—despite Republicans’ false claims that Biden has established “open borders”—immigrants were more likely to be released into the country during Trump's term than during Biden’s.

What is going on here is an attempt of the extremist Republicans to undercut the administration by attacking a key cabinet officer not for actual misbehavior but on policy grounds.

There is no chance the Senate, dominated by Democrats, will convict Mayorkas even if the House, with its razor-thin Republican majority, impeaches him, but the extremist minority in the House that is going after him is attempting to set a precedent that a minority can stop the government from functioning.

The cost of that obstruction has been clear in domestic politics over government funding, but it has now become a global issue over the question of U.S. support for Ukraine. Johnson had said he would not bring forward a bill to provide supplemental funding for Ukraine unless it included measures for increased border security; now his rejection of a bill to provide that border security threatens Ukraine aid.

Ukraine is defending itself against an invasion by Russia, but the struggle there is larger than one between two countries: it is the question of whether the rules-based international order put in place after World War II will survive, or whether the world will go back to a system in which stronger countries can gobble up less powerful ones.

Military aid for Ukraine is widely popular among Americans and among American lawmakers, who recognize the larger questions at stake. But extremist Republicans are siding with Trump, who has made his preference for Russia and its autocratic leader over Ukraine clear. The realization that a few extremist Republicans are scuttling Ukraine aid has prompted officials from both parties to warn of the consequences if the U.S. stops providing support to Ukraine.

In Foreign Affairs today, Central Intelligence Agency director Wililam Burns noted that the war has weakened Putin’s Russia significantly. Aid to Ukraine has amounted to less than 5% of the U.S. defense budget, “a relatively modest investment with significant geopolitical returns for the United States and notable returns for American industry,” he wrote.

“For the United States to walk away from the conflict at this crucial moment and cut off support to Ukraine would be an own goal of historic proportions,” Burns said. The secretary general of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Jens Stoltenberg, has been in Washington, D.C., this week, urging Republicans to back the aid, if only on the grounds that most of the money appropriated goes to support jobs in the U.S.

The man behind the extremists, Trump, was in the news today for the fact that the political action committees that back him spent about $50 million covering his legal bills in 2023. That money came from donors and arrived primarily in the months after the 2020 presidential election, when Trump lied that he had actually won the election and needed financial support to challenge the results.
 
" ... but the struggle there is larger than one between two countries: it is the question of whether the rules-based international order put in place after World War II will survive, or whether the world will go back to a system in which stronger countries can gobble up less powerful ones. "


quite a sentence
 
[tw]1752648175058325525[/tw]

Now they tell us!

It’s a trap!

I’m sure this poll will get as much attention as the clear outlier poll from PA two weeks ago.

Clowns.
 
Last edited:
He has the luxury of running against one of the most hated people who ever walked planet earth

Biden is one of the worst presidents in history... he's one of the worst candidates in history, and we nominated a guy who already lost to him, is hated, is old, and will lose again

As much as I don’t like Trump, I will thoroughly enjoy laughing at Biden if he loses.
 
As much as I don’t like Trump, I will thoroughly enjoy laughing at Biden if he loses.

Trumps going to win and it won’t be close. Then all these takes (not you) will live in infamy and people will know who to never take seriously again.
 
[tw]1752647474731209005[/tw]

This is why Biden is now talking about the border and as usual republicans trying to give him a lifeboat to damage trumps chances. Just like in every election since 2016.
 
It’s going to be called a lot earlier than it was last time.

Is it? Based on the one outlier poll?

Oh you meant it’ll be called for Trump earlier than normal because the full body of polling shows Trump up in all swing states.

Got it. My bad for not understanding.
 
While he wouldn’t get my vote, if I was placing a bet on Jan 31st, I’d put my money on Trump winning. Lot can happen between now and then, but I’d give him the slight nod at the moment.

No question things can change but IMO it’s not a slight nod right now. He’d get over 300 EC votes and potentially win the popular vote. The betting markets agree with me.

It’s a whiny little bitch take to be down on his chances right now. A common theme within the RDS simp population.

Eventually the messaging will move from “it’s a trap” to “anyone would have beaten Biden” which of course is a lie because nobody else would beat him but Trump.
 
Last edited:
He has the luxury of running against one of the most hated people who ever walked planet earth

Biden is one of the worst presidents in history... he's one of the worst candidates in history, and we nominated a guy who already lost to him, is hated, is old, and will lose again

Trump leads in virtually every single poll. Which is contrary to 2020 when Biden lead in most polls, sometimes as much as double digits. And the 2020 election was extremely close, with Biden winning key swing states by less than 30k votes. Trump quite clearly has the edge right now. That could certainly change as we get closer to election day.
 
Back
Top