And those people don’t see how those two things don’t make sense when viewed together?
Based on what? On the belief that Trump would have refused to help Ukraine? So Ukraine would be even weaker than they actually were when the real invasion happened? Say that out loud & tell me how it sounds, then tell me again why we shouldn’t question anyone who says it with a straight face.
He wouldn't have provided any sort of arms to Ukraine, to think the opposite is foolhardy. He would have been permissive of Putin invading.
The war the conservatives backed by a larger % than Labour MPs at the time? 38% of Labour MPs voted against or abstained. Only 12% of the Tories did the same. So if that was your sole reason for voting Tory then you were heavily misinformed or just ignorant back then.
Because of Trump, I’m going to vote for this…
I think "notwithstanding the shady phone call" is playing that aspect down a little too much. Trump's support was capricious at best and there's a "decent chance" he wanted to use it as leverage for personal political favours: Trump administration broke law in withholding Ukraine aid, watchdog says as Senate prepares for impeachment trial
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Excellent drink choice.
The last 15 pages of this thread, especially those since the debate have really shown that a lot of people commenting genuinely have no clue about the true dangers of another Trump presidency, Project 25 or how long this has all been planned and how deep this goes.
It is.Also, proffering the idea that Putin wouldn’t have invaded Ukraine if Trump had been in power is hardly a sign of stupidity or far right sympathies.
harris been invisible for the last 4 years she ain’t in the race
The whole idea rests on Biden administration acknowledging they can’t win. That administration includes Harris. If she doesn’t pull out of the running with him, the whole excercise is pointless.
Has to be Newsom if that were to happen, right? He's been very visible, going abroad meeting leaders etc.
He’s one out of a handful of options but it could just as well be Whitmer, Shapiro or Buttigieg.
reckon he would rather wait why waste your shot at the title
Were the Javelins approved, can't remember (yes they were)? Not really a lurch towards full arms shipments to Ukraine. Any weapon to Ukraine under Trump was news but it was misleading; in fact, the Obama admin apparently sent hundreds of millions more in aid to Ukraine than the Trump admin (non-lethal mind, but a few hundred sniper rifles really isn't a tide turner)...
Good point
If the Dems truly believe it when they say Trump is an existential threat to democracy, there may not be another shot.
Trump has pretty much said it himself. His plans are batshit but achievable, especially with the help of more competent allies like the Project 25 crew. But as I said, they are looking long term while Trump is really only looking for the next 4 years, but the damage he will cause with the changes could last for decades.
If democrats were serious they would have asked Biden to step down months ago
That’s what I mean. If the Trump administration manage to pull off Project 25 or something to that effect, I shudder to think what they can do to rig future elections in their favour. That’s why stopping him now is so important.
I actually believe that until recently, Biden (and those close to him) believed he was the best positioned candidate to beat Trump and that he was in fact sacrificing his senior years and four of his final years with his family by not dropping out.
There is also an argument that both Crimea annexation and Russia invading Ukraine happened under Democrat watch, and nothing like that happened under Trump.
But why though? California cities have become a shithole under his watch, close to unliveable. Just post videos of San Francisco, LA and San Diego with the countless homeless in drugs and attack him all day long.
Palpatine about to execute Order 66 with his clone army over here.
I don't have enough knowledge about California locally to address that - the US posters would have to answer how culpable Newsom is in that. I am aware of the homeless situation though.
The free market seems to disagree with your assessment that Californian cities have become unlivable: https://usatoday.com/story/money/2024/03/12/most-expensive-housing-markets-in-america/72930811007/
Basically where it's at now. He has been stage-handled throughout the entire electoral process. Covid helped him the first time round when he was more cognitively active. It made traditional campaigning less necessary (or legal). The man is out on his feet. Trump might be lying on his feet but what people, generally, see is a man which can stand up all the same. Should have switched and done so according to Biden's own pledge.
That's not a good thing. Driven by more than just local Californian economics but 40% of the population considering relocating due to a state-wide inaccessible housing market is scarcely a bonus.
Uhm… but wouldn’t that mean we’d immediately have crazy ass Robinson as our Gov? I can’t see Cooper full time campaigning without stepping down.
The price is a function of demand.
Is that a good thing if the result is an exodus of long-term residents? A kind of double gentrification. It's not Newsom who created that demand, either. It's the job market if we really are going there and the high-tech saturation of SV.
Palpatine was a pretending to be a democrat
I stated that Californian cities are hardly unlivable and supplied the facts that I think support my theory. I'm not interested in much more, and especially not interested in discussing the allocation of living space in a high demand area, to be perfectly honest.
California has still a very strong economy and lots of cities there are industrial hubs (San Francisco and San Jose for IT industry, LA for music and movies). But the fentanyl and homeless crisis have skyrocketed under Newsom. Most people I know who live in SF absolutely hate SF nowadays and that was the nicest city in the US. Not surprisingly, despite having such a strong economy, California has been losing population over the last three years while states like Texas have been increasing their population over 1% yearly.
And also a republican.
