Like I said, you can dig up statements made by Republicans that the Republican Party would strongly disavow.  I don't even know exactly what Northam said, but just because Northam says something, that does not make it the official position of the Democratic Party.

As a current Governor of a state, his opinion held no value?.. Is that what you're trying to pass off?

Arguing with you is like trying to nail jello to a wall.  You dance and dance.  You asked if ABC News lied about late-term abortions.  They did not say anything about late term abortions.   They were responding to Trump's assertion that Democrats support killing babies after they are born.  The ABC Moderator said there is no state where that is legal.  That is true.

---

As a current Governor of a state, his opinion held no value?.. Is that what you're trying to pass off?

Arguing with you is like trying to nail jello to a wall.  You dance and dance.  You asked if ABC News lied.  They did not lie.  I showed you that.

Did the Governor of Virginia say that, or not?

---

Arguing with you is like trying to nail jello to a wall.  You dance and dance.  You asked if ABC News lied.  They did not lie.  I showed you that.

Did the Governor of Virginia say that, or not?

Yes, the evil demon infact said that, which was a main cause of him losing IIRC.

---

Arguing with you is like trying to nail jello to a wall.  You dance and dance.  You asked if ABC News lied.  They did not lie.  I showed you that.

Did the Governor of Virginia say that, or not?

I looked it up, and it's not really clear what he was trying to say.  But regardless, he is no longer the Governor of Virginia and he does not represent the Democratic Party.  The Democratic Party does not support killing babies after they are born.

You asked, did the ABC moderators lie when they said there is no state where post-birth baby-killing is legal.  There is no state where post-birth baby killing is legal.  Therefore, they did not lie.

---

Did the Governor of Virginia say that, or not?

Yes, the evil demon infact said that, which was a main cause of him losing IIRC.

Pretty good article from the NR on the subject.

https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morni...-abortion/

"When President Bill Clinton said that abortion should be “safe, legal, and rare” in 1996, he staked out what looked like something of a middle ground on the single most passion-stirring issue in American politics. In the eyes of one group of Americans, Roe v. Wade had finally ensured that no woman would face life with an unwanted pregnancy and child; in the eyes of the other, the American government had legalized the murder of children as long as the child was on one side of the birth canal — and later, in defenses of partial-birth abortion, as long as some part of the child was still in the birth canal."

---

Did the Governor of Virginia say that, or not?

I looked it up, and it's not really clear what he was trying to say.  But regardless, he is no longer the Governor of Virginia and he does not represent the Democratic Party.  The Democratic Party does not support killing babies after they are born.

Killing newborn babies and all illegal immigrants eating our pets.

What a time to be alive!

---

I looked it up, and it's not really clear what he was trying to say.  But regardless, he is no longer the Governor of Virginia and he does not represent the Democratic Party.  The Democratic Party does not support killing babies after they are born.

Killing newborn babies and all illegal immigrants eating our pets.

What a time to be alive!

I think the immigrants eating our pets all fits into the Hungary theme that was emphasized last night.

---

Yikes..

https://x.com/amuse/status/1833844205036...9wwHQ&s=19

FACT CHECK: In last night's three-on-one debate the ABC News moderators used misleading crime data from the FBI to 'fact check' @realDonaldTrump. The reality is that Trump (as he usually is) was right - crime is not down - it is up, way up.

Kamala Harris and her willing accomplices in the mainstream media would have you believe that violent crime in America is at a 50-year low, a narrative eagerly parroted by so-called fact-checkers at Politifact and now ABC News. The reality, however, is far from what they claim. The only thing at a 50-year low is the integrity of violent crime data. Less than a year after taking office, Biden-Harris's administration had the FBI dismantle the long-standing crime reporting system, replacing it in 2021 with a new, 'woke' system that is optional for state and local law enforcement agencies to use. As a result, at least 6,000 law enforcement agencies aren't providing data, meaning that 25% of the country's crime data is not captured by the FBI. This deliberate underreporting skews the statistics, painting a falsely optimistic picture of public safety while real Americans continue to suffer from rising crime rates.


Democrat-controlled cities from New York to San Francisco have effectively decriminalized violent crime. For instance, in New York City, 52% of violent felony cases are downgraded to misdemeanors, and offenders are typically offered diversion agreements that keep these offenses out of crime statistics. This manipulation alone could account for a 50% or more drop in reported violent crimes in the Big Apple. Across the country, Soros-backed prosecutors are refusing to prosecute violent criminals or downgrading their charges in record numbers. This systematic underreporting and leniency are tactics used by Democrats to create a misleading narrative about public safety, while communities continue to suffer from unchecked crime.

It's not far-fetched to imagine that the Biden-Harris regime and the Democrats replaced the FBI's universal crime data system with a new optional system to fabricate this massive decrease in 'reported' crime. The move raises serious questions about their motives and the integrity of the data.

Of course, the Democrats will argue that the new system is more inclusive, allowing law enforcement agencies to record pronouns and gender identities, including transgender and nonbinary, as well as the sexual preferences of both criminals and victims. The timing and optional nature of the new system suggest an ulterior motive: to obscure the real rise in crime and present a false narrative of improvement under Democratic leadership.


Additionally, we know that the 70 Soros-backed prosecutors, representing 72 million Americans and half of the nation's 50 most populous cities and counties, have made it their mission to implement so-called restorative justice. This approach often means refusing to prosecute violent criminals based on factors such as race and gender identity. The few criminals they do prosecute almost always have their violent felonies downgraded to misdemeanors. Both of these realities—the new optional reporting system and the restorative justice efforts—have led to violent crime data that fails to reflect the true state of our communities since 2021. These manipulations distort public perception and allow Democrats to promote a false sense of security.

National polls reveal that most Americans believe crime has increased significantly over the past four years. The situation is even more dire in large Democrat-controlled cities, where almost all residents report a massive surge in crime. Most residents even report that they or someone in their family has been a victim of crime.

Take Chicago, for example. Every weekend, approximately 70 people are shot. The crisis has escalated to such an extent that the mayor recently canceled the city's contract with a company that detects and reports gunfire. There are so many gunshots in Chicago that police can only respond if someone is actually hit by a bullet.

New York City is similarly experiencing a huge spike in robberies and assaults, often occurring in broad daylight. The situation became so severe this year that the governor had to deploy National Guard troops to the NYC subway system to deter criminals. Before District Attorney Alvin Bragg and Attorney General Letitia James took office, these violent crimes would have been prosecuted as felonies. Now, if they are prosecuted at all, they are often downgraded to misdemeanors with diversion deals.

There is also ample evidence that the FBI and the Biden-Harris regime are simply cooking the books. Watch Jesse Waters expose what he calls Enron-style corruption in their crime reporting.

The next time someone tries to tell you that Biden and Harris have reduced crime to its lowest levels in 50 years, let them know the truth. It's easy to claim a decrease in crime when you leave out data from 25% of the population living in major cities like Los Angeles and New York City.

The reality is, these omissions paint a misleading picture of the state of crime in America. Don't let them gaslight you with manipulated statistics. Demand full transparency and accountability in crime reporting to get the real story."

---

This is also interesting.. So did ABC flat out lie about late term abortions?

https://x.com/CrossPolitic/status/183368...w9UvA&s=19

Trump said Democrats support abortions after birth, and one of the moderators said there is no state in the country where killing a baby is legal after it is born.

Which would be all well and good for them to fact check him…if he had said it was legal somewhere, and not just that they supported it. He made no claims that it was legal anywhere.

---

You may be right, but it's also justification for my very low opinion of Trump.  Believe me, if the Republicans had nominated almost anyone else, I would not be voting for her.   I think the debate exposed him for what he is, which is- not mentally qualified to be President of the United States, which, by the way, dozens of former high-ranking Trump staffers agree with, including many former cabinet members.  

Like I said before, I agree with her on some issues, and I agree with him on some issues, so I have to base my vote on whom I think has the temperament, the brainpower, and the personality to function effectively as President.  And it's not him.  Kamala Harris pushed his buttons and played him like a fiddle, right there on stage, when he should have been prepared, so if you still think Kamala Harris is an empty suit, what do you think other people who are not an empty suit will do with him?

The President doesn't debate other people on an open stage.  Phone calls and one-on-one meetings are in a completely different environment and decisions made in the Oval Office can be considered with the input and benefit of staff, advisers, etc. 

Trump is far from eloquent, but he can deliver a prepared speech reasonably well.  In a debate, or Q & A session, he's terrible.  He simply can't stop talking about himself and insulting others, which is his greatest flaw in my opinion.  He could have, and should have, hit the ball out of the park on immigration and he got a weak single at best. 

Overall, neither candidate was smart enough to give a quick and concise answer to any question and stop there.  Just because you have two minutes to respond doesn't mean it's in your best interest to do so, especially when it's a subject in your favor.  Score the hit and get out and make your opponent play defense.  If you make the point, then ramble on about some none-related issue, you're minimizing the impact of your own primary point.

If only we had actual historical evidence of how Trump would deal with world leaders…

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

Trump said Democrats support abortions after birth, and one of the moderators said there is no state in the country where killing a baby is legal after it is born.

Which would be all well in good for them to fact check him…if he had said it was legal somewhere, and not just that they supported it. He made no claims that it was legal anywhere.

I was simply responding to WingerDinger's question, "Did they lie?"  No, they did not lie.  They stated a fact.  I suppose Trump could have responded, "I didn't say it was legal, I said they support it."  And then the conversation could have gone to, "Do Democrats support killing babies after they are born?"  And the answer to that is, in 2019, one Democrat said something that might be construed as supporting killing a baby after it is born.  But does that mean Democrats support that, as Trump alleged?  And we can argue that until the cows come home.  I don't think Democrats support killing babies after they are born, in spite of what one rather obscure Democrat said back in 2019.

---

Which would be all well and good for them to fact check him…if he had said it was legal somewhere, and not just that they supported it. He made no claims that it was legal anywhere.

I was simply responding to WingerDinger's question, "Did they lie?"  No, they did not lie.  They stated a fact.

A fact that didn’t need to be pointed out since it wasn’t what he claimed.

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

I was simply responding to WingerDinger's question, "Did they lie?"  No, they did not lie.  They stated a fact.

A fact that didn’t need to be pointed out since it wasn’t what he claimed.

So Marty's real name is Aesop?

---

I was simply responding to WingerDinger's question, "Did they lie?"  No, they did not lie.  They stated a fact.

A fact that didn’t need to be pointed out since it wasn’t what he claimed.

Then I suppose Trump could have responded, "I didn't say it was legal, I said they support it."  And then the conversation could have gone to, "Do Democrats support killing babies after they are born?"  And the answer to that could be, in 2019, one Democrat said something that might be construed as supporting killing a baby after it is born.  But does that mean Democrats support that, as Trump alleged?  And we can argue that until the cows come home.  I don't think Democrats support killing babies after they are born, in spite of what one rather obscure Democrat said back in 2019.

It's just another example of the lies and exaggerations that come out of Trump's mouth like water from a fire hose.  

---

That should be filed with The Pee Tape, Russia Collusion, Very Fine People, He grabbed the steering wheel, ect ect lol

---

A fact that didn’t need to be pointed out since it wasn’t what he claimed.

Then I suppose Trump could have responded, "I didn't say it was legal, I said they support it."  And then the conversation could have gone to, "Do Democrats support killing babies after they are born?"  And the answer to that could be, in 2019, one Democrat said something that might be construed as supporting killing a baby after it is born.  But does that mean Democrats support that, as Trump alleged?  And we can argue that until the cows come home.  I don't think Democrats support killing babies after they are born, in spite of what one rather obscure Democrat said back in 2019.

It's just another example of the lies and exaggerations that come out of Trump's mouth like water from a fire hose.  

So you think he should have debated the moderator? Shouldn’t that have been left up to Harris to debunk? Or is it okay for the moderator to inject themselves into the debate as long as it’s against Trump?

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

I won’t disagree about Trump, however, I will ask if you could provide an example of when he was goaded into making an irrational decision during his term. I’m not denying it happened, but an example to backup your assertion would be nice.

On the other side, Harris is an empty vessel. She may have sounded prepared last night because that’s exactly what she was; groomed and coached. On her feet she’s not smart. If she wins the election, she will be a willing figurehead for others to manipulate. Of this I have no doubt.

Valid point, but there's no way I could give you such an example because I couldn't possibly be in the room when or if it happened.  And I won't be in the room when Putin tells Trump he's the greatest President the US has ever had, and he's so handsome it's no wonder he beds so many women, and by the way, why not let me have Ukraine.  This person you call an empty suit, and not smart, played him like a fiddle last night.  You say she did that because she was groomed and coached, but if it's that easy to take this "empty suit" and "not smart" person and do that to him, what do you think a smart person would do?

I don’t know how to follow up on this. You can provide no examples for your assertion and then supported it with a scenario which borders on fantasy.

---

Then I suppose Trump could have responded, "I didn't say it was legal, I said they support it."  And then the conversation could have gone to, "Do Democrats support killing babies after they are born?"  And the answer to that could be, in 2019, one Democrat said something that might be construed as supporting killing a baby after it is born.  But does that mean Democrats support that, as Trump alleged?  And we can argue that until the cows come home.  I don't think Democrats support killing babies after they are born, in spite of what one rather obscure Democrat said back in 2019.

It's just another example of the lies and exaggerations that come out of Trump's mouth like water from a fire hose.  

So you think he should have debated the moderator? Shouldn’t that have been left up to Harris to debunk? Or is it okay for the moderator to inject themselves into the debate as long as it’s against Trump?

---

What frustrates me on the democrat position on abortion is that they purposely leave the term so vague that they are malleable. For example when they asked Trump last night why he disagrees with the Florida 6 week limit but also said he was going to vote against the amendment. They are trying to make it seem like he is flip flopping and that's not the case.

He says six weeks is not long enough, I completely agree. In fact I'm sure there are cases when a woman may not even be aware that she is pregnant at six weeks. However amendment 4 is terribly vague and its not on accident. They do not define what a health care provider is, they do not set a limit on time, the do not give guidance on what health conditions would allow for a late term abortion. If this were to pass a woman could technically go in at nine months to a planned parenthood (health care provider) and if she had decided that she no longer wanted the child they could justify a reason for the procedure. For example, you don't want to continue your pregnancy, I see that your blood pressure is elevated (common later in pregnancy, hmm that could cause you health care problems. They would have now met the criteria under amendment 4.

Just because Trump thinks 6 weeks is not long enough does not mean he should have to agree with this crap amendment. His point last night was that there have been some democrats that have argued there should be no limits and in Maryland Governor Nordstroms case he was even okay with after a successful birth the parents and the Dr. being able to at that point decide to make the baby comfortable and just let it die from lack of care. In fact there have been examples where during a partial birth abortion the baby ends up coming all the way out and is at that point a botched abortion and the baby has been left to die. When challenged on if they would oppose letting the babies die in these cases democrats will not take a stance and usually deny that this happens. The democrat led Senate in this administration has even fought against legislation that would require care for a child born during a botched abortion.

All that being said, I feel like Trump did a poor job explaining the facts and his position on this topic last night. I agree with the repeal of RVW, it should be a state issue and there needs to be some sensible common ground, but the democrats refuse to give an inch on the matter and want no limits. They then have the nerve to constantly lie about his position and claim he would sign a nation wide ban. The whole point of the RVW strike down was to make it a state and not a federal issue. He can only affect the outcome of the issue in his state of Florida and only has one vote as an individual to do so, just like everyone else.

The constant lies, hypocrisy, and gaslighting from the left is disgusting and flows like a river from the politicians and the media in lock step.

---

https://twitter.com/ARKloster/status/183...56npA&s=19

---

I do not believe this debate changed anyone's mind.

---