AgentDalePoopster

She didn't threaten to do shit, you just want to exonerate trigger-happy cop gangsters.

There is no fucking way that you can watch that video and conclude that she "brought it on herself".

No arguments from me. I wonder how long Biden's ego has been an impediment to Dems. Definitely for the past month but I suspect it's been a lot longer.

That's great and that's what every committed Dem voter is doing. Given that the race is more about stopping Trump than anything else, wouldn't the best way to approach that be to back the candidate who is most likely to beat him?

If you watch the debate, it's abundantly clear that Biden is not that candidate. Things like optics and vibes shouldn't matter in an election, especially when the other side's policy positions are as abhorrent as Project 2025. Unfortunately, when it comes to courting votes in battleground states, they do matter.

Yeah, sticking with the guy who is losing in all the polls and can't speak would have been a much better option.

Why don't you whip out the ol DSM and read about antisocial personality disorder? Call it psychopathy, or sociopathy, or APD. A rose by any other name.

No one is losing sight of that, they're correctly making the point that there is no justification for bombing a hospital full of patients and that the justification the IDF gave has been found to be false.

If your takeaway from that article is "the debate didn't hurt Biden", the article entitled "Biden suffers less polling damage than expected...", then I have some doubts about your ability to recognize your own bias.

Idk those are young people who already took the time to go to a Hillary Clinton rally. Maybe a few of them were inspired but the vast majority of young voters saw that as the pandering that it was.

Frankly I see a LOT more of that misunderstanding from people who think shaming others into voting blue is an effective strategy than I do from people who express that they want to vote third party.

I'm not trying to be argumentative here lol. I don't fundamentally disagree with you, and I think that some people, especially in the most recent few elections, have decided that the only options they find acceptable are to vote 3rd party or simply not vote at all. I hope we agree that a 3rd party presidential vote, in a solid blue state, ideally with blue down-ballot votes, is better than nothing. I'm just pointing out that some people can weigh that decision a lot less heavily than others.

If you're a New Yorker, then your 3rd party vote in 2000 did not result in, or contribute to, Bush "winning". All NY electoral votes went to Gore. Personally I think that if you live in a solid blue state, then you have the luxury of being able to vote your conscience.