Red Mosquito

Ha!

That feels like eight lifetimes ago.

tragabigzanda wrote:I have a hard time attaching sexuality to a woman who’s lost a child

If it helps, Beau Biden was her step-son.

I don't know where that lands on the trag sex-o-meter.

Birds in Hell wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:I have a hard time attaching sexuality to a woman who’s lost a child

If it helps, Beau Biden was her step-son.

I don't know where that lands on the trag sex-o-meter.

Trag’s in!!

I finally understand what traggish means.

B wrote:

Simple Torture wrote:

McParadigm wrote:The RNC doesn’t even seem to know much about their convention yet. How much time is left? Four days?

They're still scrambling to find an appetizer to upstage calamari; so far the choices are between C.W. Swappigan's mozzarella sticks and some wings from the dumpster behind a Hooters that was closed in 1995.

NPR reported yesterday that no other state or territory has designated a State Appetizer. They're fucked!

I wonder if staten island is upset that galamar got taken already

The overwhelming theme tonight is that Biden knocked it out of the park. I know that the left is drawn towards that opinion by its fear of Trump, but I wonder how much the middle/right’s response (Fox News even flattered him) is a result of Trump’s stupid “Biden is inept and senile” talk. He set the bar so low that coherence is a victory.*

*To be clear, I think Biden delivered an average-level nomination speech...which is to say, not a failure on any measure. But I also believe that an average-quality Democratic nomination speech is a complete disaster to Donald Trump because he is a barely-functioning sociopath, and because his campaign claim is that Joe Biden is more cognitively declined than his sloppy ass, which is pretty goddamn funny

I have just never understood the Trump campaign's determination that the best route of attack was going to be "Biden can't string two sentences together." Sure, his base can Jedi mind trick themselves into thinking the guy who gave the speech tonight is in late-stage Alzheimer's, but to everyone else, he was always going to eventually be giving nationally televised speeches and debates, when it would be apparent that he's not, whatever you think about the quality of the speech.

This happened to a degree in the primaries as well; everyone acted like he was going to be a tire fire in his one-on-one with Sanders, which meant he could walk away with a 'meh' as a victory. I know it's a fool's errand to attach long-term thinking or logic to the Trump campaign, but what did they think was going to eventually happen?

I'm honestly not convinced anyone at the Trump campaign has the capacity for "eventually."

durdencommatyler wrote:I'm honestly not convinced anyone at the Trump campaign has the capacity for "eventually."

Most of them will be arrested eventually.

McParadigm wrote:The overwhelming theme tonight is that Biden knocked it out of the park. I know that the left is drawn towards that opinion by its fear of Trump, but I wonder how much the middle/right’s response (Fox News even flattered him) is a result of Trump’s stupid “Biden is inept and senile” talk. He set the bar so low that coherence is a victory.*

*To be clear, I think Biden delivered an average-level nomination speech...which is to say, not a failure on any measure. But I also believe that an average-quality Democratic nomination speech is a complete disaster to Donald Trump because he is a barely-functioning sociopath, and because his campaign claim is that Joe Biden is more cognitively declined than his sloppy ass, which is pretty goddamn funny

Untangle your underroos McP, the good people are winning

is maga hat kid even old enough to vote yet? i can't believe he's a speaker

digster wrote:I have just never understood the Trump campaign's determination that the best route of attack was going to be "Biden can't string two sentences together." Sure, his base can Jedi mind trick themselves into thinking the guy who gave the speech tonight is in late-stage Alzheimer's, but to everyone else, he was always going to eventually be giving nationally televised speeches and debates, when it would be apparent that he's not, whatever you think about the quality of the speech.

This happened to a degree in the primaries as well; everyone acted like he was going to be a tire fire in his one-on-one with Sanders, which meant he could walk away with a 'meh' as a victory. I know it's a fool's errand to attach long-term thinking or logic to the Trump campaign, but what did they think was going to eventually happen?

I mean, to be fair, Joe Biden has been rarely capable of stringing two sentences together this year--the notable exceptions are his debate with Sanders and last night's speech. I agree that it's not a great strategy but the reason why it's tempting is pretty clear.

Mickey wrote:

digster wrote:I have just never understood the Trump campaign's determination that the best route of attack was going to be "Biden can't string two sentences together." Sure, his base can Jedi mind trick themselves into thinking the guy who gave the speech tonight is in late-stage Alzheimer's, but to everyone else, he was always going to eventually be giving nationally televised speeches and debates, when it would be apparent that he's not, whatever you think about the quality of the speech.

This happened to a degree in the primaries as well; everyone acted like he was going to be a tire fire in his one-on-one with Sanders, which meant he could walk away with a 'meh' as a victory. I know it's a fool's errand to attach long-term thinking or logic to the Trump campaign, but what did they think was going to eventually happen?

I mean, to be fair, Joe Biden has been rarely capable of stringing two sentences together this year--the notable exceptions are his debate with Sanders and last night's speech. I agree that it's not a great strategy but the reason why it's tempting is pretty clear.

I'd love to believe it had anything to do with your point, Mickey, moreso than some kind of "I'm rubber, your glue" defense mechanism. But there are too many instances of Trump accusing everyone else of his worst qualities for me to fully buy in.

durdencommatyler wrote:

Mickey wrote:

digster wrote:I have just never understood the Trump campaign's determination that the best route of attack was going to be "Biden can't string two sentences together." Sure, his base can Jedi mind trick themselves into thinking the guy who gave the speech tonight is in late-stage Alzheimer's, but to everyone else, he was always going to eventually be giving nationally televised speeches and debates, when it would be apparent that he's not, whatever you think about the quality of the speech.

This happened to a degree in the primaries as well; everyone acted like he was going to be a tire fire in his one-on-one with Sanders, which meant he could walk away with a 'meh' as a victory. I know it's a fool's errand to attach long-term thinking or logic to the Trump campaign, but what did they think was going to eventually happen?

I mean, to be fair, Joe Biden has been rarely capable of stringing two sentences together this year--the notable exceptions are his debate with Sanders and last night's speech. I agree that it's not a great strategy but the reason why it's tempting is pretty clear.

I'd love to believe it had anything to do with your point, Mickey, moreso than some kind of "I'm rubber, your glue" defense mechanism. But there are too many instances of Trump accusing everyone else of his worst qualities for me to fully buy in.

I'm not sure I'm following--it's not *just* Trump who has been attacking Biden's cognitive capacity, which I think if you watch videos from 2008 you can see is in clear decline. Maybe not dementia, but he's lost a step, he's a little slower, he trails off and gets distracted more easily. He (or his team) are able to get up for the big televised events but the videos from the campaign trail show that that's not a daily reality. So, yes, I do think the President himself doth protest too much (especially relying again and again on that "cognitive test" that he passed), but we're not dealing with 2008 Biden which makes it *very* tempting for any campaign matched up against him to rely on that attack, even if, again, it has a high potential to backfire.

Mickey wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

Mickey wrote:

digster wrote:I have just never understood the Trump campaign's determination that the best route of attack was going to be "Biden can't string two sentences together." Sure, his base can Jedi mind trick themselves into thinking the guy who gave the speech tonight is in late-stage Alzheimer's, but to everyone else, he was always going to eventually be giving nationally televised speeches and debates, when it would be apparent that he's not, whatever you think about the quality of the speech.

This happened to a degree in the primaries as well; everyone acted like he was going to be a tire fire in his one-on-one with Sanders, which meant he could walk away with a 'meh' as a victory. I know it's a fool's errand to attach long-term thinking or logic to the Trump campaign, but what did they think was going to eventually happen?

I mean, to be fair, Joe Biden has been rarely capable of stringing two sentences together this year--the notable exceptions are his debate with Sanders and last night's speech. I agree that it's not a great strategy but the reason why it's tempting is pretty clear.

I'd love to believe it had anything to do with your point, Mickey, moreso than some kind of "I'm rubber, your glue" defense mechanism. But there are too many instances of Trump accusing everyone else of his worst qualities for me to fully buy in.

I'm not sure I'm following--it's not *just* Trump who has been attacking Biden's cognitive capacity, which I think if you watch videos from 2008 you can see is in clear decline. Maybe not dementia, but he's lost a step, he's a little slower, he trails off and gets distracted more easily. He (or his team) are able to get up for the big televised events but the videos from the campaign trail show that that's not a daily reality. So, yes, I do think the President himself doth protest too much (especially relying again and again on that "cognitive test" that he passed), but we're not dealing with 2008 Biden which makes it *very* tempting for any campaign matched up against him to rely on that attack, even if, again, it has a high potential to backfire.

I mean ... he did agree to be interviewed by Cardi B.

Is Gary Johnson running again this year?

Bammer wrote:

Mickey wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

Mickey wrote:

digster wrote:I have just never understood the Trump campaign's determination that the best route of attack was going to be "Biden can't string two sentences together." Sure, his base can Jedi mind trick themselves into thinking the guy who gave the speech tonight is in late-stage Alzheimer's, but to everyone else, he was always going to eventually be giving nationally televised speeches and debates, when it would be apparent that he's not, whatever you think about the quality of the speech.

This happened to a degree in the primaries as well; everyone acted like he was going to be a tire fire in his one-on-one with Sanders, which meant he could walk away with a 'meh' as a victory. I know it's a fool's errand to attach long-term thinking or logic to the Trump campaign, but what did they think was going to eventually happen?

I mean, to be fair, Joe Biden has been rarely capable of stringing two sentences together this year--the notable exceptions are his debate with Sanders and last night's speech. I agree that it's not a great strategy but the reason why it's tempting is pretty clear.

I'd love to believe it had anything to do with your point, Mickey, moreso than some kind of "I'm rubber, your glue" defense mechanism. But there are too many instances of Trump accusing everyone else of his worst qualities for me to fully buy in.

I'm not sure I'm following--it's not *just* Trump who has been attacking Biden's cognitive capacity, which I think if you watch videos from 2008 you can see is in clear decline. Maybe not dementia, but he's lost a step, he's a little slower, he trails off and gets distracted more easily. He (or his team) are able to get up for the big televised events but the videos from the campaign trail show that that's not a daily reality. So, yes, I do think the President himself doth protest too much (especially relying again and again on that "cognitive test" that he passed), but we're not dealing with 2008 Biden which makes it *very* tempting for any campaign matched up against him to rely on that attack, even if, again, it has a high potential to backfire.

I mean ... he did agree to be interviewed by Cardi B.

Is Gary Johnson running again this year?

Nah, Scary Gary has ceded the ticket to Joanne Jorgensen, so all you "vote for women" folks know what to do!

Mickey wrote:

Bammer wrote:

Mickey wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

Mickey wrote:

digster wrote:I have just never understood the Trump campaign's determination that the best route of attack was going to be "Biden can't string two sentences together." Sure, his base can Jedi mind trick themselves into thinking the guy who gave the speech tonight is in late-stage Alzheimer's, but to everyone else, he was always going to eventually be giving nationally televised speeches and debates, when it would be apparent that he's not, whatever you think about the quality of the speech.

This happened to a degree in the primaries as well; everyone acted like he was going to be a tire fire in his one-on-one with Sanders, which meant he could walk away with a 'meh' as a victory. I know it's a fool's errand to attach long-term thinking or logic to the Trump campaign, but what did they think was going to eventually happen?

I mean, to be fair, Joe Biden has been rarely capable of stringing two sentences together this year--the notable exceptions are his debate with Sanders and last night's speech. I agree that it's not a great strategy but the reason why it's tempting is pretty clear.

I'd love to believe it had anything to do with your point, Mickey, moreso than some kind of "I'm rubber, your glue" defense mechanism. But there are too many instances of Trump accusing everyone else of his worst qualities for me to fully buy in.

I'm not sure I'm following--it's not *just* Trump who has been attacking Biden's cognitive capacity, which I think if you watch videos from 2008 you can see is in clear decline. Maybe not dementia, but he's lost a step, he's a little slower, he trails off and gets distracted more easily. He (or his team) are able to get up for the big televised events but the videos from the campaign trail show that that's not a daily reality. So, yes, I do think the President himself doth protest too much (especially relying again and again on that "cognitive test" that he passed), but we're not dealing with 2008 Biden which makes it *very* tempting for any campaign matched up against him to rely on that attack, even if, again, it has a high potential to backfire.

I mean ... he did agree to be interviewed by Cardi B.

Is Gary Johnson running again this year?

Nah, Scary Gary has ceded the ticket to Joanne Jorgensen, so all you "vote for women" folks know what to do!

Nice. I’ll be voting my conscience

Her running mate, btw, is the most libertarian-looking guy on the planet:

I honestly have no idea what that means

Mickey wrote:

digster wrote:I have just never understood the Trump campaign's determination that the best route of attack was going to be "Biden can't string two sentences together." Sure, his base can Jedi mind trick themselves into thinking the guy who gave the speech tonight is in late-stage Alzheimer's, but to everyone else, he was always going to eventually be giving nationally televised speeches and debates, when it would be apparent that he's not, whatever you think about the quality of the speech.

This happened to a degree in the primaries as well; everyone acted like he was going to be a tire fire in his one-on-one with Sanders, which meant he could walk away with a 'meh' as a victory. I know it's a fool's errand to attach long-term thinking or logic to the Trump campaign, but what did they think was going to eventually happen?

I mean, to be fair, Joe Biden has been rarely capable of stringing two sentences together this year--the notable exceptions are his debate with Sanders and last night's speech. I agree that it's not a great strategy but the reason why it's tempting is pretty clear.

He's had stumbles and gaffs, but nothing I would characterize as "rarely capable of stringing two sentences together." And he certainly doesn't make as many stumbles and gaffs and Trump. That's why it's such a ridiculous strategy. You're gonna put "Yo! Semite!" up against someone who tripped up his recital of the Declaration of Independence?