Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
She deflected.
So she didn’t apologize for her role. Got it.
well it is you that keep bring genitals up in the conversation. I think Walz and Harris have creepiness pretty much covered
Should we ignore it? Pretend it didn't happen? Make believe that he doesn't say these things? Make it the new normal? Do you want to be lower the bar that much?
Hey, Bradskii, want to make a friendly wager? Wanna bet me that, if Kamala Harris ever mentions anyone else's genitals in a speech somewhere, positively or negatively, the GOP/right wing/MAGA contingent will be equally as unconcerned about it?
Maybe someone could use AI to get it to look like she's using Trump's words. Or the UK or Australian or French PM. Maybe the Canadian one. See what it looks like to have Trudeau talking about the size of a dude's genitals at a political rally. If you hadn't heard or knew about Trump doing it then you simply wouldn't believe that it was Harris or Trudeau. You'd assume some deep fake. Because normal people in situations like that don't talk like that. It would obviously be a fake.
I didn't bring it up, you all did and are obsessed with it for some reason...I don't care. In fact I had to go look it up and looks like he was just doing his usual joking, crowd seemed to like it though. He just said that AP was "all man". I mean he was in Latrobe where Palmer was from. Big deal...
And, again, you'd be wrong. Unless a survey sample was randomly selected and large enough to be representative of the universe it portends to characterize then I would not post such rubbish. As a rational person, I read before I post. Some just see a headline that seems supportive of their feelings and post it.
So, you don't need any facts? Therefore, you are biased and your feelings can just as easily be dismissed as rubbish.
1. She expressed her deepest sorrow for the deaths of those girls. Baier was wanting her to take the blame for their deaths. That she didn't do nor should she.
Then she should have had the courage to answer the question. “No, Brett, I do not owe them an apology.” See how easy that is? So stop pretending that she answered.
She could have answered the question.
Ah, semantics. Well, if disingenuousness is your plan, well played.
1. Christians, we are called to have compassion and she deeply expressed her compassion for the pain the families are going through. She doesn't have to answer the way Fox News was wanting.
Still didn’t answer the question.
No, she responded. It was a yes or no question.
No, she didn’t.
I wasn’t saying that she was disingenuous.
The universe of historians of US presidents and the US presidency? Sounds like a big universe to sample. Care to guess how big it is? And remember when all is finished what you get is an objective measure of the opinions of US historians, not an actual objective ranking of "bestness".
What people who are nearest to him say about him are facts. It is a fact that Kelly and Milley view Trump as a fascist. (And so do scholars of fascism.)
Uhh ... that's exactly the reason an unbiased sample is necessary.
Doesn't matter.
Only those who are unbiased count, both Kelley and Milley have axes to carry regarding Trump.
1. You've already proved that you don't know the definition of "answer". You don't have keep proving it.
IOW, you have no idea how many people are in the opinion group being surveyed.
I don't need to guess. I've read the fine print at the bottom. Do you think ~1000 registered voters are too few to make a national survey?
"axes to carry" -- now that is *your* opinion of them. On what do you base it?
It is a fact that they said those things.
Lol. Mkay.
The questions were yes or no questions.
Um…okay.
You think, despite the evidence to the contrary, that she actually answered questions. So it’s either ignorance or something else.
1. And neither do you. If otherwise then post your findings.
Instead of quote mining, how about answering my question honestly?
I haven't looked it up because I don't care. There are no attempt to create a statistical sample in the presidential historian polls of presidential "rank". If you don't like that, fine, but you are asking those informal surveys of professional historians to be something they never claim to be.
I literally gave a sample size, what do *you* think of that size. (What is your tolerance and desired confidence? I can't answer that question for you.)
Speaking of non-facts. Trump didn't "retire" Gen. Milley. He retire just over one year ago (sept 2023) after his standard 4-year term as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Nearly every Chairman of the JCS retires from service at the
Frankly you are doing a lot of demanding answers, but won't reciprocate and instead express your subjective opinions.
