*****The official 2024 Presidential election day and results thread*****
- Thread starter Chishawk1425
- Start date
Sadly, you are a dipshit that can't read a newspaper. Those are state charges. Guess what.... we "try" not to talk out of our asses here
For what sins? Disagreeing with some deranged lunatic named “Chis”? Hell, that’s a virtue.
I get a kick out of Taffer trying to figure out what happened. Racism, misogyny, bigotry?! No, you jammed the worst candidate ever down the throat without any real due process to get her there. Idiots
There isn't one. He just doesn't like anyone if they don't agree with him and his opinions 100% of the time.
I'm not Kim Reynolds the Governor of Iowa. I'm sure you voted for it. 😆
Because I can back up what I'm saying with cites?
Lulz.
Yes, and this isn't some kind of secret.
Hoover wrote about it in his memoir:
Hoover blames Roosevelt for turning the Nazis and the Japanese against the United States. Hitler attacked the democracies, he writes, only because FDR pushed France and Great Britain into guaranteeing Poland’s security in 1939 with bogus promises of eventual U.S. military backing. This would indeed explain FDR’s dismay at the rapid fall of France in 1940; the strategy assumed that the French could hold out until the Americans arrived—as France had done in 1914–16. As for Japan, “we stuck pins in the rattlesnake” with an injurious trade embargo, and at Pearl Harbor, the snake bit us hard.
I realize they don't teach this in K-12, but this isn't made up.
Again, they didn't want a war with the U.S. They were trying to have an empire on the continent of Asia.
I'd rather we let the Empire of Japan fight the Vietnamese war for independence than Americans.
They turned on us because we put an oil embargo on them that was going to cripple them if they didn't abandon the war in China.
So they seized the oil fields in SE Asia.
Our colony in the Phillipines was a threat to that move, so they devised a plan to seize a large defensive belt in the Pacific and hope to bloody our nose as they had the Russians in 1905 and avoid any kind of long war.
These ideas aren't really in dispute anywhere in WW2 scholarship.
Certainly not hundreds of thousands of dead Americans.
When Napoleon marched on Moscow we went to war over our right to trade with the Continent of Europe in spite of Britain's blockade policy.
Would we have been better of sending troops to Europe? Of course not.
Going to Europe to fight for the French and British Empires in WW1 made bankers and arms merchants rich, but it didn't make America better off.
If you think that Hitler would have ultimately been more successful than Napoleon in stitching together a European empire without it fighting him from every corner and falling apart, we'll have to agree to disagree. You just have more faith in totalitarian societies than I do.
He didn't even want to fight the Western Europeans. He wanted to strangle communism in the crib and create a German empire in the East.
Again, your faith in the ultimate victory of totalitarians exceeds mine. I believe you also underestimate the difficulty of the endeavor.
Only in propaganda movie reel cartoons. Not in reality.
Back up and imagine we never step into WW1, and the French sue for peace and the communist revolt in St. Petersburg is contained east of the Brest-Litovsk line.
How many millions more live in that timeline that sees no Nazi regime rise on hopes of vengeance?
Think of the millions of eastern European who might have avoided their eventual communist fates?
Again, the Japs don't even attack us without the provocation designed to elicit that exact response.
Sadly, I only learned to count in German during the three years I lived there.
Do you think we should involve ourselves in all the African conflicts next? You know, to make it 'better' like we have the Middle East?
If so, I'll again kindly agree to disagree.
Guess what...right as the two of of you posted.... finale of The Pacific creds with actual soldiers. Something we can all agree about.
I really dont understand why van Jones is wondering what happened? It's because SHE SUCKS! she would have never finished in the top 5 of any primary. Anyone else wins. Quit blaming racism, she lost because she sucks and she was jammed down the throat of half of the country without a choice.
She sucks. Apply your definition of she sucks to Trump and all he is and has done and give me your analysis.
Im just saying, If she was in a primary with... I don't know, Newsome, pete, spritzer, whatever.. you're choosing her last. Worst candidate possible... again
No Trump is the worst possible candidate ever. But you voted for it. Noted.
Uh, no i didn't. I voted for Caitlin God damn clark thank you
Thank you. I was wrong about your vote and I apologize. Trump was by far the worst possible candidate ever and should be in prison today for the record.
And you were robbed of the opportunity of choosing any other candidate. I'd be pissed. Hopefully that milf Bohannon won tho
I wasn't robbed a terrorist who should be in prison is now President. Bye Democracy
On point. As dishonest as an interlocutor comes. If you think that war wasn't coming for us eventually you are woefully misinformed. I'll note your opinion that the Allies' defense of freedom in the face of absolute tyranny was a fool's errand. Respectfully, I disagree.
Sad day for our nation. Hard to believe people want that grifter sicko back in.
hawkeyetraveler
HB Heisman
I disagree that Joe Biden was a winner last night. Biden had the chance to have one four year term. Clean up from Covid, bring Americans home from Afghanistan, fix the economy and set up a great slate of 2024 candidates (the Dems are loaded with good options like Beshear, Shapiro, etc).
Instead he was arrogant enough to think he was the only candidate capable of beating Trump. Had he bowed out pre-primary I think this election looks very different.
Biden’s legacy should be, and always will be, tied to Kamala’s loss.
Didn't have "The USA should've let Hitler exterminate the Jews" on my HBOT bingo card tonight....nice job!
Starting to look like Trump will win the national popular vote.
Sure as heck didn't see that coming.
Most of that was made up info, and even with asylum they generally are not granted asylum. If you have lists fine, however we all know if this truly happens (it won’t) you will crush the economy.
Yep.
Joe should have been a one term "save the nation" president and his VP pick should have been an heir apparent for 2024.
He picked Harris who was a terrible candidate as shown by her performance in 2019.
In addition the "red wave" that wasn't in 2022 made the D powers that be think they could just ride with 82 yr old Joe in 2024. Might have been better if the R's did have a "red wave" in 2022 so the D's could make a course correction. Basically set the table for the 2024 red wave.
Harris didn't win a single primary delegate in either 2020 or 2024.
Trump is not a good human or candidate. The tail risks with Trump are really bad. It’s clear democrats didn’t put up a good enough candidate. And republicans made enormous inroads with Latinos and blacks.
hawkeyetraveler
HB Heisman
Yep. Well now the GOP will have significant ability to push their platform forward. I personally believe many of these policies will backfire. So I think we will eventually hit that reset point you mention. We shall see if “drill baby drill” and “100% tariffs on China” will help the American consumer. If, as I expect, blue collar/middle class lives aren’t better in 2 / 4 years it gives the Dems an opportunity.
Part of the reason Trump became popular in 2016 in the GOP primary was the backlash against George W for Iraq, the 2008 recession, etc. I can easily see the same dynamic playing out, but in reverse in the next term as the GOP fails to deliver substantive change,
