I couldnāt stomach watching that first debate, so I wasnāt sure if you were messing around.
You were not: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUtVNEl9aJE
I couldnāt stomach watching that first debate, so I wasnāt sure if you were messing around.
You were not: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUtVNEl9aJE
Yeah, this is just down there with the right making fun of Kamalaās laugh.
That reminds me of the Obama/Romney debate
Yeah, definitely a double standard on mic control. Any time he opened his mouth they turned his mic on, she tried once and they did a hard pass. Hell, even while they refuted his dog eating claims his mic was on talking over the moderator.
And thatās because all of the media loves Trump. They have a bias, sure, but they know the crazy shit he says sells views/headlines and thatās their business, informing the public is a byproduct.
I hate to agree but I donāt think youāre wrong, and accept the down votes in advance. She did some things well though, the trolling on rallies was actually her sneakiest trick to rattle him. I think she couldāve performed better but maybe she learned some lessons for a second debate.
Overall I think there was a double standard on mic control, whenever he wanted to talk they let him. He even got to speak during fact checks, what the fuck is that? On the flip side, they didnāt unmute her on rebuttals and he made a point to tell her to shut up if she spoke over him.
FWIW I didnāt down vote you, but I donāt think all malice is equal. Driving with a heart condition or narcolepsy and killing someone isnāt the same as driving through a crowd to get revenge.
Yeah, I just donāt see the comparison the OP made here. Iām willing to relent that Britain has done more harm than good to India but Iām no expert so Iād defer to someone smarter here.
But the even crazier thing is that the article isnāt even talking about famine caused by the British Rajā¦ No, theyāre saying Churchill was the aggressor and Hitler was pushed into a fight he didnāt want. And the craziest part is the statement that the concentration camps were mercy kills to prevent starvation.
Looked it up, referring to this?
Churchillās policies to blame for millions of Indian famine deaths, study says
I think the major difference here is malice. Did Churchill set out cause these deaths or was it greed and/or stupidity? Honest question worth discussion, I havenāt heard of this prior.
I donāt normally reply with something so blunt but this is a pretty shitty comment. This kind of half speak rhetoric is a major issue causing misinformation and its usage is far too pervasive.
And Iām not even saying youāre wrong but if you want to prove the point the burden is on you.
I donāt think it bodes well she sat with Putin at a conference, whether there was ālanguage barriersā or not.
Saying the article is old is like saying donāt bring up Reaganomicsā¦ the impacts are still being felt, thereās still relevance.
And I linked it to suggest that these fringe candidates are still being picked and losing, perhaps as a long term effect of the strategy.
I would argue they were just better at hiding the same type of shit these modern politicians are thinking and saying. Now itās just acceptable. Then you had Howard Dean dooming himself for a cowboy scream.
Harris should hold a town hall at the exact same timeā¦
You nailed itā¦ āif youāre denying, youāre losingā
I can see this from your perspective now, perhaps my context was lacking. I felt it evident as a recollection but those without the context may misinterpret.
Edit: Iāve added context, thanks for pressing your point!
deleted by creator
Primarily because I was sharing how the photos are linked in my memory.
Theyāre also chronologically similar, happening within a week of each.
Lastly, they demonstrate stark differences in policies: a win for the new VP pick who, in my opinion, shows someone who actually cares about children and families.
I would also point out, not to give Huckabee any credit, but the silver lining of that bill might allow kids trying to gain freedom from abusive homes, permitting them to go job hunting on their own (although 14/15 seems super young regardless - they couldnāt without someone signing off otherwise). The downsides is parents forcing kids to go to work in dangerous jobs (to your point).
Yeah, and a side effect of refuting gosh gallop, if you even can, is that you end up wasting your time on the floor instead of discussing your points.