Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<vf6ab0$12ek0$6@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Yet Another Self-Burn from the Harris-Walz Ticket Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 19:33:53 -0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 37 Message-ID: <vf6ab0$12ek0$6@dont-email.me> References: <vf3cv3$g8jk$3@dont-email.me> <vf4osu$qqm1$1@dont-email.me> <vf63fk$11mff$1@dont-email.me> <vf64l3$11rqb$1@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=fixed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 21:33:53 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="7237b7e5d51c850f387aa8e4abaf69cb"; logging-data="1129088"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/Fmoes5gtnsvRdKxuy7bfZ" User-Agent: Usenapp/0.92.2/l for MacOS Cancel-Lock: sha1:J+pN47ktA1h1E8hBymgTMwlV1TY= Bytes: 2388 On Oct 21, 2024 at 10:56:51 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: > On 10/21/2024 1:36 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >> On Oct 20, 2024 at 10:30:06 PM PDT, "super70s" <super70s@super70s.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> On 2024-10-20 17:00:19 +0000, BTR1701 said: >>> >>>> "We can't afford four more years of this!" --Tim Walz, Green Bay, WI rally >>>> >>>> Either the dude is literally dunking on his own running mate or he's come >>>> over >>>> to Trump's side and now believes Trump won the 2020 election. >>> >>> He's obviously talking about 4 more years of Trump. >> >> But Trump isn't in office, so he can't be "this". > > Depending on the (missing!) context, of course he can... No, he can't. He's not in office. >>> Obvious to halfway intelligent and informed people anyway. >> >> Hardly. Kammie has been running as if she's challenging an incumbent since >> she >> was coronated. > > She's running against a known precedent/president. And yet she and her campaign keep saying she's the "candidate for change". Change from what? Who's currently in office? This is the first time in American history that an incumbent quixotically keeps beating the drum for 'change', which would logically imply that she's advocating voters to choose her opponent rather than her.