Election Interference?

[Baggy]

Whomever , ( the MSM) sets the narrative for social media acolytes to follow. Their MSM directives come from WEF/ DNC.
Bottom line is one world government. That’s what they want and
they can’t achieve that with our country functioning as designed.
The goal is to “fundamentally change the USA “. Right out of Obama’s mouth. Most gave him the benefit of doubt : either because of respect for the office as most were raised to have, or fear of being deemed racist. He was successful. He kept his promises without questioning from the powers that be due to the fear of being deemed racist.

The political correct movement that started 20+ years ago was the beginning. They use normal people’s decency as weapon against us. Now days you’re in danger if you speak your mind. It’s gone if they win.
There are laws past in some European countries recently that can imprison American citizens that post disinformation. Look it up.
ELON is top of their list. I know a ton of things on X are BS, but a lot more true information is there than anywhere else.
The One World Government Cabal is showing their hand. Everyone worries about 2nd amendment infringement, all the while the 1st amendment is being taken away right out in the open.

[Baggy]

Well. if it's on "X" it's gotta be true

Hey Rick. Serious question, which news outlets , networks, reporters etc. do you trust are giving you truthful reports? Which don’t you trust.

[ecu1984]

Hey Rick. Serious question, which news outlets , networks, reporters etc. do you trust are giving you truthful reports? Which don’t you trust.

Trust? None, they each have their own Board of Directors' position to uphold.
The truth may be somewhere in the middle, I watch both sides and it's almost comical how 180 degree of different perspective they each can have on a single event.
I don't watch a lot of news, just when flipping around with the remote or will open a news article that's on my internet homepage if it catches my attention.

[2thDoc]

Hey Rick. Serious question, which news outlets , networks, reporters etc. do you trust are giving you truthful reports? Which don’t you trust.

holy fuck people. you dont trust any of them. and, holy shit, if your buddy sends you something and it "sounds interesting" you should be skeptical first. THEN forward to all the googans on here to rehash and repeat until its Gospel. Its like i'm on mars and martians are asleep or something.

[2thDoc]

Trust? None, they each have their own Board of Directors' position to uphold.
The truth may be somewhere in the middle, I watch both sides and it's almost comical how 180 degree of different perspective they each can have on a single event.
I don't watch a lot of news, just when flipping around with the remote or will open a news article that's on my internet homepage if it catches my attention.

hard core MAGAs think all democrats fit in one tiny cup. meanwhile, libs think all Rs are election deniers and wear Trump hats. while Rick actually thinks both sides are misrepresented and the media outlets do nothing more but to create some strange passionate anxiety for their side and against the other.

MANY of you would learn something from changing the channel but MOST of you would get so mad, its laughable.

Go Tigers.

[Black Bart]

You sure are pissy for someone who "works" four days a week.

[DRDUCK]

You sure are pissy for someone who "works" four days a week.

What I was thinkin. Do like me and just don't watch the news. Our tv comes on only when college football is on, golf or tennis. Never watched 1 second of the olympics or pro football.

[Catdaddy]

.

Sent from my motorola edge 2024 using Tapatalk

[JABIII]

Inglis endorses Harris, calling Trump ‘a clear and present danger’

by Jack O'Toole
September 17, 2024
FacebookX

Inglis, in a 2017 file photo
Former six-term S.C. Republican Congressman Bob Inglis is adding his name to the growing list of Reagan- and Bush-era conservatives who say they plan to vote in November for Democratic presidential candidate and current Vice President Kamala Harris.

Inglis is the state’s first prominent Republican to back Harris.

“Donald Trump is a clear and present danger to the republic,” Inglis told the Charleston City Paper in an exclusive Monday interview. “He’s disqualified based on character and rationality, so I’ll be voting for Kamala Harris.”

Inglis, who represented Greenville’s 4th congressional district from 1993-99 and again from 2005-11, pulled no punches with regard to the former president, calling him a narcissist who’s “completely consumed with himself.”

“I feel sorry for him,” Inglis said. “He’s really quite a sick puppy. He needs some help.”


And Inglis had a warning for Republicans who understand Trump’s flaws but see him as preferable to a Democrat.

“He’s been unfaithful to three wives,” Inglis said. “Why would we, at the altar with him as the fourth, think that he’s going to be faithful to us? Talk about irrationality.”


Inglis sees Trump as a symptom of a larger problem bedeviling the GOP – what he describes as a Fox News-fed refusal to see the world as it is. In fact, it was that concern that eventually led him to become the executive director of RepublicEN.org, a conservative nonprofit that acknowledges the evidence of climate change and promotes market-based solutions to address it.

Restoring rationality

“My party needs to restore its rationality to be the credible free enterprise, small government party again,” he said.

And that, Inglis makes clear, is his ultimate goal in endorsing Harris. He wants to see the party return to what he sees as its rational Reaganite roots on core conservative issues like immigration, free trade and limited government.

“If Donald Trump loses, that would be a good thing for the Republican Party,” Inglis said. “Because then we could have a Republican rethink and get a correction.”

An ‘avalanche’ of Republican endorsements
Inglis isn’t alone in hoping for a Republican rethink after the election. And more importantly, he isn’t the only prominent member of the GOP who’s prepared to endorse Harris to get one.

The Republicans for Harris movement that started last month has snagged an unprecedented number of high-profile GOP endorsements, political observers tell the City Paper. And the group only seems to be gaining momentum, with hundreds of new endorsers in the past two weeks alone, including former GOP Vice President Dick Cheney, former U.S. Rep. Liz Cheney, Bush Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, famed conservative columnist George Will, 17 Reagan administration officials and more than 200 presidential campaign staffers of George W. Bush, John McCain and Mitt Romney.

For its part, the Trump campaign has dismissed the effort as irrelevant.

“President Trump is building the largest, most diverse political movement in history because his winning message of putting America first again resonates with Americans of all backgrounds,” Trump spokesperson Karoline Leavitt told NPR. “Kamala Harris is weak, failed, and dangerously liberal and a vote for her is a vote for higher taxes, inflation, open borders, and war.”

A growing split
But political scientists say the Harris endorsements reflect a real and growing split between the conservative Reaganites who built the modern Republican Party and the Trump faction that’s now in charge.


Amiri
“The people making these endorsements represent the party before Donald Trump took it over,” College of Charleston political scientist Karyn Amira said. “And at their core, they just don’t agree with Trump’s more authoritarian, populist style of conservatism.”

Specifically, Amira says, these GOP leaders object to what they see as Trump’s betrayal of traditional conservative beliefs on one issue after another, from tariffs to abortion to the size and scope of government – a situation that Trump’s selection of U.S. Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio as his running mate only exacerbated.

“When he picked Vance, he was picking a protege, someone who personifies the complete 180 he’s caused in the party,” Amira said. “Choosing Vance was a signal to everyone, including older Republicans, that ‘when I’m gone, this is what my legacy will be,’ and that didn’t help in easing anyone’s mind about the future.”


Huffmon
Scott Huffmon, a political science professor and director of the Center for Public Opinion and Policy Research at Winthrop University, traces the roots of the split back to the latter days of the Trump administration.

“The first few pebbles of this avalanche really started close to the end of his presidency,” Huffmon said in an interview. “That’s when we saw more people from the Republican party start to speak out negatively against him.”

Nevertheless, Huffmon says he doesn’t expect the impact of the recent endorsements to reach beyond what’s left of the more traditional Republican base.

“If you are not a MAGA supporter, you are seen as and called a RINO,” he said, using the acronym for Republican In Name Only. “For Liz Cheney and Dick Cheney, who are so far to the right, to be called RINOs by folks today says a lot about the evolution of the party, and how it has come to be centered around the orbit of Donald Trump.”

At home on his small farm Upstate, Inglis doesn’t disagree. But he knows he doesn’t need every Republican, or even most Republicans, to reject Trump. He just needs a relative handful in key battleground states like Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.

“Hopefully enough,” he said, “to save the republic from a dangerous second Trump term.”

https://charlestoncitypaper.com/2024...resent-danger/

[Frank1]

I swear, if I couldnt vote for Trump I definitely wouldnt vote for Kamala, I just wouldnt vote at all