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.