Well? Will he or won't he?

Absolutely! The anti-science, anti-democracy, anti-minority leanings as well as the demonization of valid news sources were all well established undercurrents prior to Trump that Trump brought to the surface. Of course there are still good Republicans but they are being shouted down and minimalized.

As an example of the crazy hysteria of Republicans, in Kansas they are recalling a school board member because she voted to make masks mandatory in schools.
https://ballotpedia.org/Amy_Sudbeck_recall,_Nemaha_USD_115,_Kansas_(2021)

Heaven forbid we protect our children from illness and death.

 

Yeah, Virginia's got all those rural counties who carry outsized weight. They didn't even hold a primary this season, fearing a "normal" Republican would win the nomination. Instead, the party held a convention and got who they really wanted. Good luck to them.

 

Why would anyone take anything this guy says seriously? It's Lyin' Ted.

 

Yes, shoot the messenger, the usual tactic. Why not address what the man had to say?
Yest its your right not to take him seriously.

------

POLITICO Playbook: Double trouble for Biden
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2021/09/21/double-trouble-for-biden-494411

Updated 09/21/2021 09:40 AM EDT

"FIRST IN PLAYBOOK — Ben Schreckinger’s “The Bidens: Inside the First Family’s Fifty-Year Rise to Power,” out today, finds evidence that some of the purported HUNTER BIDEN laptop material is genuine, including two emails at the center of last October’s controversy.

A person who had independent access to Hunter Biden’s emails confirmed he did receive a 2015 email from a Ukrainian businessman thanking him for the chance to meet Joe Biden. The same goes for a 2017 email in which a proposed equity breakdown of a venture with Chinese energy executives includes the line, “10 held by H for the big guy?” (This person recalled seeing both emails, but was not in a position to compare the leaked emails word-for-word to the originals.)"

Politico is considered factual

 

Smart thing for you to say but probably a very stupid thing for anyone to bother doing for two reasons.
First, because then someone would have to actually listen to Lyin Ted maybe even listen to it twice, YUCK!
Second, because it is very unlikely you would even read the post anyway.

 

Reading the post is not the same as agreeing with it.
In another tread I read posts and even posted some quotes from those posts especially the USA Today one.
Only to be told that I didn't read it.

Some times people debate and get to exited.
This became a political ping pong. But in reality its about our country and our kids future.
I think this is what motivates me in the discussions.

I would like to see a moderate Republican in WH in 2024.
And all my family is happy with president Biden performance, I'm the lonely wolf.
My concern is the far left in the Dem party.
Just like yours with far right at Republican camp.

 

The messenger is a liar. That means one must parse what he says to look for truth, if any. Pass.

 

This logic can be applied to many politicians..

I think he rases issues that can be explored further. Fact checked.
Conclusion made.

 

It is obvious that you don't really read the posts, even the one's that you copy and respond to. There have been too many examples where this has happened for it to really be anything else. Some might call it bad faith on your part but it's more commonly referred to on the Internet as trolling. I've come to the conclusion that responding to you with any more than one short paragraph is a waste of time.

P.S. I'll break my own new rule just to add that you are very good at what you do. Perhaps even having a Ph.D. trolling! Regards

 

I read all the posts, I simply didn't agree with the information in them.
Also some didn't address some facts from posts I posted.

Jerry Doyle a right - libertarian talk radio host once said on his program that Washington DC became a “Hollywood for ugly people.” I never thought much of it when he said that more than 10 years ago.
But now I completely understand what he was saying.
He died of chronic alcoholism.

 

I know that is what you say but your definition of "reading" a post is apparently not the same as most people. There are many examples, the most obvious recent one is I was discussing how untrustworthy the 24 hour news networks were and listed "Fox, CNN, and MSNBC". This was after repeating this same information a half dozen posts or so because I know you don't read the posts. You finally responded with the question, "What about Fox News?"

You are a very likable fellow but it just doesn't make sense to put much effort into any future discussions.

 

Yes, This is how I came to know him, not personally but via the character he played on Babylon 5.. I think he was right - Conservative but later became more or gravitated toward Libertarian.

 

I very much doubt Hunter Biden's dad will be the Dem nominee next time 'round.

I would love to see Beto on the ticket : D Shoot, Buttigieg would be great, but really I'd like to see a woman at the top of it.

 

Why?

Six sitting presidents have declined to run for a subsequent term. But only 3 of those were elected president; the other three assumed the role after the death of the president, served out that term, and then served another on their own. So they served more than four years:

• Truman, who served nearly 8 years;
• Coolidge, who served nearly 8 years, and
• Johnson, who did consider running but pulled out in March due to his unpopularity regarding the Vietnam War.

The three presidents who served their initial four year terms and then declined to run for re-election:

• Polk, who pledged not to seek a second term when seeking office, and lived up to that;
• Buchanan, who decided not to run a full 3 years before his term was up, and
• Hayes, who pledged not to seek a second term as a way to get the office in the Compromise of 1877.

So, if Biden is in good health in 2024, he's very likely to run unless he announces something different.

So, again, why?

 

Interesting point about HST. The 22nd Amendment exempted Truman from the two term limit and history suggests that he considered running in 1952. He was very unpopular by then and after some polling decided not to run. Only later did he say that he felt he'd had two full terms. Well, he in fact DID have very close to two full terms in office and he had always respected the country's institutional history so the sentiment might have been there all along. Maybe.