LOL  

You missed the obvious point that your decision making for your vote is at about the same intelligence level as a ten year old kids would be.

Some things really are simple enough for 10 year olds though.  Some election years are complicated.  This one's simple.

Glad to see you agree.

---

Looking to troll? Don't bother, we supply our own.

 

 

If I'm not mistaken, wasn't the original claim that people are voting for not Trump, which affirms the right wing narrative that this isn't a race about policy? It's simple logic.

---

If I'm not mistaken, wasn't the original claim that people are voting for not Trump, which affirms the right wing narrative that this isn't a race about policy? It's simple logic.

That's it. Some folks around here have admitted their vote is only based on " Not Trump".

I assume they fail to see or simply do not care that their ignorance is being put on full display.

---

Looking to troll? Don't bother, we supply our own.

 

 

I have a line though.
I wouldn't vote for Hitler or Stalin over Trump.
Any candidate I vote for has to express respect and deference to the constitution and to the process of voting.
In normal years that gives me two choices, and then I can think about other, less fundamental things.
This is not a normal year.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

So you're the one voting for your feels.

---

If I'm not mistaken, wasn't the original claim that people are voting for not Trump, which affirms the right wing narrative that this isn't a race about policy? It's simple logic.

That's it. Some folks around here have admitted their vote is only based on " Not Trump".

I assume they fail to see or simply do not care that their ignorance is being put on full display.

I am fairly evenly split between the two parties on policy.  Both parties have some policies I like and some I dislike.

---

So you're the one voting for your feels.

I'm voting for the candidate's feels.  Their feelings of respect for the constitution and deference to the voters.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

So you're the one voting for your feels.

I'm voting for the candidate's feels.  Their feelings of respect for the constitution and deference to the voters.

If that was really the case, you would never vote democrat again..

---

I'm voting for the candidate's feels.  Their feelings of respect for the constitution and deference to the voters.

If that was really the case, you would never vote democrat again..

There are certainly some Democrats who fail this test. 
But they aren't running for President.
Each candidate is tested on their own. They are not judged by their party for this.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

If that was really the case, you would never vote democrat again..

There are certainly some Democrats who fail this test. 
But they aren't running for President.
Each candidate is tested on their own. They are not judged by their party for this.

So Joe Biden's 50 years of ineptness in Congress just screamed for your vote for President in 2020?

---

That's it. Some folks around here have admitted their vote is only based on " Not Trump".

I assume they fail to see or simply do not care that their ignorance is being put on full display.

I am fairly evenly split between the two parties on policy.  Both parties have some policies I like and some I dislike.

I would say that sentiment would likely encompass about 95% of us.

I suppose everyone weighs policy different. I think some of the lefts policies are country killers as to say the rights policies that I disagree with being more personal. Abortion for instance. I feel government should have no say. That is either at the state or federal level maybe other than what they have in any medical application for safety sake. I don't like religion being pushed in my face as many on the right also tend to do. Although these couple examples are deal breakers for many I don't think they are country killers.

Edit- Man, way off the topic now.

---

Looking to troll? Don't bother, we supply our own.

 

 

There are certainly some Democrats who fail this test. 
But they aren't running for President.
Each candidate is tested on their own. They are not judged by their party for this.

So Joe Biden's 50 years of ineptness in Congress just screamed for your vote for President in 2020?

I'm not a Democrat so I didn't vote in the primary.  In the general election, yes, for similar reasons.  Trump had to be voted out of office at that time as well, in my opinion.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

So Joe Biden's 50 years of ineptness in Congress just screamed for your vote for President in 2020?

I'm not a Democrat so I didn't vote in the primary.  In the general election, yes, for similar reasons.  Trump had to be voted out of office at that time as well, in my opinion.

Your opinion was wrong..

---

You have either the reading comprehension skills of a two-year old or the memory of Joe Biden, perhaps both.  Do you not even understand your own query?  Reread post #745, including your quoted original question to me, and my response.  The conversation wasn't about Trump at all until your TDS kicked in.  The question, YOUR question, was about Harris.

I have been completely above board.
I am voting for Harris because she is the only one who has a chance of defeating Trump, and defeating Trump is my number one priority.
See post #743. 
It was already about Trump.
If I'm not allowed to bring Trump into a conversation about voting for President without you crying about TDS, which one of us is being irrational?

Unsurprisingly, you're once again confused.  Post # 743 is your response to Jagwired and irrelevant to the topic at hand.  Don't try to think it through on your own, just close your eyes, tighten down on that sphincter and focus really hard on post #745, which is where our debate begins.  It was YOUR question to me about Harris and contained no mention of Trump.

---

When you get into the endzone, act like you've been there before.

I have been completely above board.
I am voting for Harris because she is the only one who has a chance of defeating Trump, and defeating Trump is my number one priority.
See post #743. 
It was already about Trump.
If I'm not allowed to bring Trump into a conversation about voting for President without you crying about TDS, which one of us is being irrational?

Unsurprisingly, you're once again confused.  Post # 743 is your response to Jagwired and irrelevant to the topic at hand.  Don't try to think it through on your own, just close your eyes, tighten down on that sphincter and focus really hard on post #745, which is where our debate begins.  It was YOUR question to me about Harris and contained no mention of Trump.

I asked is there anything Kamala could do to earn your vote.  You did not answer that question.  The rest is just insults back and forth.  GIGO.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

So you're the one voting for your feels.

I'm voting for the candidate's feels.  Their feelings of respect for the constitution and deference to the voters.

Deference to the voters? So you're picking the one candidate that wasn't democratically elected? 

Lol. You have no principles. 

As to your stupid question, there's not a single conservative voter on this board who wouldn't vote for Kamala if she had a track record of conservatism and shown a penchant for pushing back against a corrupt oligarchy that is buying our government to advance a global agenda. 

But hey, you like the opposite of that.

---

I'm voting for the candidate's feels.  Their feelings of respect for the constitution and deference to the voters.

Deference to the voters? So you're picking the one candidate that wasn't democratically elected? 

Lol. You have no principles. 

As to your stupid question, there's not a single conservative voter on this board who wouldn't vote for Kamala if she had a track record of conservatism and shown a penchant for pushing back against a corrupt oligarchy that is buying our government to advance a global agenda. 

But hey, you like the opposite of that.

I'm picking the one candidate who didn't tell lies about votes that were actually cast.  The one candidate who didn't try to start a riot at the Capitol building for the purpose of overturning those votes.

As for pushing back against a corrupt oligarchy, you mean the way Trump seized the assets of known Russian and Egyptian kleptocrats? Oh wait no, he did the opposite of that.  Or do you mean the way he appointed qualified people to lead the Department of the Interior and the Department of Education instead of corruptly handing those jobs off to large donors with no experience in government?  Oh wait no, he did the opposite of that again.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Hey... remember that time you asked what policy positions Kamala would need to have for me to vote for her, so I gave you the policy positions she'd need to adopt and then you talked about Trump?

Oh... remember that time you said that conservatives had to concoct a fake world view to vote for a person, then you made up a whole story about an insurrection where the most armed populace in the world went home at 6 because Trump is a dictator who stepped down voluntarily?

And, I mean, it was only a post ago, but remember when you said you wanted to vote for a person with deference to voters who wasn't elected by the voters?

Pepperidge Farm remembers.

You are a lost soul.

---

Hey... remember that time you asked what policy positions Kamala would need to have for me to vote for her, so I gave you the policy positions she'd need to adopt and then you talked about Trump?

Oh... remember that time you said that conservatives had to concoct a fake world view to vote for a person, then you made up a whole story about an insurrection where the most armed populace in the world went home at 6 because Trump is a dictator who stepped down voluntarily?

And, I mean, it was only a post ago, but remember when you said you wanted to vote for a person with deference to voters who wasn't elected by the voters?

Pepperidge Farm remembers.

You are a lost soul.

I pointed out that Trump doesn't hold or advocate for those policy positions you would want Kamala to adopt.  And anyhow that question wasn't addressed to you.

The statement about believing in elaborate conspiracy theory lies also wasn't addressed to you. Unless you also believe Trump was right about there being no crowd outside Kamala's plane.  You would have to believe in an elaborate conspiracy where somehow only Trump's team has the real footage of Kamala's rally and everyone else is lying, to believe that.  

The word insurrection always seems to trip you up, but I did see thousands of civilians go to the Capitol, fight cops, break windows, chant about harming members of Congress and the VP, and steal stuff on live TV. Perhaps that was all created by AI and it never really happened like that, just like the crowd in front of Kamala's plane allegedly was created by AI.  But that doesn't seem to be your argument, you seem to agree they were there because you say they had few firearms and went home before 6 therefore it was definitely NOT an insurrection.  I'm not sure I see anything about time of day or number of firearms in my dictionary definition of insurrection.  I don't find that in the statute either.  Anyhow, going with what you said, complete this sentence: "They went home when _____ told them to, but he waited about four hours before telling them to, and he has never explained the delay."

It's Biden's fault that Kamala didn't go before the voters yet.  Any other candidate they might have picked, you could say the same thing.  You're making a point against Biden, not Kamala. And neither Biden nor Harris ever conspired to send fake documents to Congress that falsified the seals of Georgia, Arizona, Michigan, and other states, in hopes of overturning the vote of the people

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Care to retry using an actual substantive argument?

---