Trump picks Ohio Sen. JD Vance for vice president

[corbe]

   I've been telling you Trumpers since he became the darlin of your eye almost a decade ago, he's TOXIC, even in your language;    note below

[Hoodat]

There is going to be a Democrat or a Republican POTUS elected in November.  That's BINARY!

@DCPatriot

You are intermingling the word 'choice' with the term 'result'.  The two terms are not synonymous.  Nor is 'result' binary since a very remote possibility exists that neither candidate of the two major parties will be declared the winner.

[corbe]

   Thanks for trying to explain to a Trumper, Wilma, that the 'presence or non-presence of electricity in a magnetic field' is Binary.

[DCPatriot]

@DCPatriot

You are intermingling the word 'choice' with the term 'result'.  The two terms are not synonymous.  Nor is 'result' binary since a very remote possibility exists that neither candidate of the two major parties will be declared the winner.

@Hoodat

"Linda-Linda-Listen...Linda-Listen-Linda..."

You're purposefully contorted my post in order to give me an English lesson.  Eff off.

Don't care how many people are running for POTUS in November. 

The FACT is that the winner is going to be a Republican or a Democratic Party candidate. 

Any vote cast other than THAT BINARY choice we truly have is wasted and merely a protest vote.

[catfish1957]

@Hoodat

"Linda-Linda-Listen...Linda-Listen-Linda..."

You're purposefully contorted my post in order to give me an English lesson.  Eff off.

Don't care how many people are running for POTUS in November. 

The FACT is that the winner is going to be a Republican or a Democratic Party candidate. 

Any vote cast other than THAT BINARY choice we truly have is wasted and merely a protest vote.

Your posts have become such gibberish.  Do you need help?

[mountaineer]

Who Is J.D. Vance? Don’t Expect The Corrupt Media To Tell You
The leftist media’s coverage of J.D. Vance indicates something even more damning than its obvious, long-documented political bias.
By: Casey Chalk
July 24, 2024

Who is J.D. Vance? Millions of Americans have been asking this question since former President Donald Trump announced that Vance, a bestselling author and junior senator from Ohio, would be his running mate in the 2024 presidential election. Unfortunately, the majority of prominent media sources available to our nation’s electorate have already proven themselves unable (or unwilling) to answer it.

Given we are talking about the potential next vice president of the country — and, if history is our tutor, a likely future president — such malfeasance represents the embarrassing degree to which our establishment media have abandoned their mission.  ...

Not that The Washington Post is all that unique. CNN’s “Fast Facts” offers no information on Vance’s political positions — though, once again, you’ll learn he was once critical of Trump (aren’t people allowed to change their political opinions?). Another CNN piece analyzes Vance’s positions according to his autobiography, as if a 2016 book published years before he was even in politics is the best source available on that topic. ...

Who is J.D. Vance? Don’t bother asking legacy media — even if they knew, they wouldn’t tell you. Much better, in their view, to force-feed audiences on buzzwords (e.g., “election-denier,” “anti-immigrant,” “white nationalist”) aimed at ruining the Ohio senator’s reputation by November. Thankfully, fewer and fewer Americans are fooled by such journalistic chicanery.

Yet, as citizens of a free republic, we should expect more from our educated, professional class, who, whatever their personal political opinions, are supposed to be motivated by a patriotic, humble sense of service to all American citizens. As the framers understood, the establishment, because of its position of relative power, is supposed to strenuously labor to serve and faithfully communicate with the electorate in all its diversity, lest it be perceived by that electorate as a tyrannical oligarchy. And if you know much of anything about vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance, you’d know such motivations are central to his own meteoric entrance into public service.

https://thefederalist.com/2024/07/24/who-is-j-d-vance-dont-expect-the-corrupt-media-to-tell-you/

[Bigun]

Who Is J.D. Vance? Don’t Expect The Corrupt Media To Tell You
The leftist media’s coverage of J.D. Vance indicates something even more damning than its obvious, long-documented political bias.
By: Casey Chalk
July 24, 2024 https://thefederalist.com/2024/07/24/who-is-j-d-vance-dont-expect-the-corrupt-media-to-tell-you/

The mass media in this country has been public enemy #1 for as long as I can remember.

[DCPatriot]

Your posts have become such gibberish.  Do you need help?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFYsJYPye94&t=75s

@catfish1957

LOL!  You don't get around very much, do you?? 

[roamer_1]

Any vote cast other than THAT BINARY choice we truly have is wasted and merely a protest vote.

HAHAHAHAHA! you just described a non-binary category, added to your supposed binary choice.

 

And protest is not waste.

[Hoodat]

The FACT is that the winner is going to be a Republican or a Democratic Party candidate. 

Any vote cast other than THAT BINARY choice we truly have is wasted and merely a protest vote.

QED

[Right_in_Virginia]

QED

How?

[Hoodat]

How?

If there is a choice "other than" '0' or '1', then it isn't binary.

[MeganC]

If there is a choice "other than" '0' or '1', then it isn't binary.

The existence of an irrelevant or non sequitur choice does not render the effective binary choice (A or B) false.

For instance, if the question is who will win the boxing match between Mike Tyson and Oleksandr Usyk?

Then you can indeed choose Taylor Swift as your response. But given that Taylor Swift is not even a rational choice then the choice is moot and anyone betting on her to even be present for the Tyson-Usyk match is stupid.

[DCPatriot]

The existence of an irrelevant or non sequitur choice does not render the effective binary choice (A or B) false.

For instance, if the question is who will win the boxing match between Mike Tyson and Oleksandr Usyk?

Then you can indeed choose Taylor Swift as your response. But given that Taylor Swift is not even a rational choice then the choice is moot and anyone betting on her to even be present for the Tyson-Usyk match is stupid.

@MeganC

Thanks for taking your precious time to 'splain it to these trolls.   

It's Personal Freedom and Prosperity or Communism and Misery this November.

[Right_in_Virginia]

If there is a choice "other than" '0' or '1', then it isn't binary.

Only if you ignore reality and math. 

[roamer_1]

 

This is a laugh-riot.

Words mean things n'shit

[DCPatriot]

This is a laugh-riot.

Words mean things n'shit

That's right! Congratulations!  Now you have it!!

Ours mean things...yours mean sh*t!

[roamer_1]

That's right! Congratulations!  Now you have it!!

Ours mean things...yours mean sh*t!

If that was wit, you're halfway there.

Unless a vote is forced, there is always the ability to abstain - with no other factors at all, that is more than a binary choice.
Your glorious leader looks just like the other side to me... A distinction without a difference... So I will withhold my vote.

And in doing so, in reasonable numbers, even if he wins, denies him mandate. That is the purpose of abstaining -To deny mandate. That is an active, reasonable, and purposeful choice. And I will employ it.

[DCPatriot]

If that was wit, you're halfway there.

Unless a vote is forced, there is always the ability to abstain - with no other factors at all, that is more than a binary choice.
Your glorious leader looks just like the other side to me... A distinction without a difference... So I will withhold my vote.

And in doing so, in reasonable numbers, even if he wins, denies him mandate. That is the purpose of abstaining -To deny mandate. That is an active, reasonable, and purposeful choice. And I will employ it.

The only "half-wit" in this conversation is you!

You believe abstaining from voting for the top of the ticket prevents a mandate (how egotistical of you) and absolves you personally of any part of a negative outcome for the Republic...that it cleanses you of any blame for the current state of affairs since Biden stole the Oval Office in 2020.

All you do is exhibit the childish antics of a little boy who, because he can't set the rules...grabs his ball and runs home to his cabin.

GO!  I don't care!   

[roamer_1]

The only "half-wit" in this conversation is you!

You believe abstaining from voting for the top of the ticket prevents a mandate (how egotistical of you) and absolves you personally of any part of a negative outcome for the Republic...that it cleanses you of any blame for the current state of affairs since Biden stole the Oval Office in 2020.

Look, If he stole the office in 2020, then my abstinence means nothing - He stole it. Otherwise you are recognizing that abstaining can have a massive effect - The allusion that perhaps those who abstained, had they voted for your prince, would have overcome the cheat... That is a powerful bloc.

So pick your poison, because either way you're wrong.

As far as negative outcome for the country, either choice brings the same - Voting to give the most expensive administration in history another shot at it is absurd. Voting to return to an administration whose damage to libertarianism is also historic - Again, absurd.. Voting to restore an administration like that is beyond any argument. I will not vote for that. It doesn;t matter what the Democrats bring.

Voting for big government on the right (That's socialism)- Throwing Conservatism under the bus  -Who then will defend Conservatism? And if Conservatism is gone, then I have no interest in supporting Republicans.- There is no purpose.

All you do is exhibit the childish antics of a little boy who, because he can't set the rules...grabs his ball and runs home to his cabin.

GO!  I don't care!   

Oh bullshit. My position is well reasoned, and is well defined. You are welcome to challenge it at any time, as you have done so many times before with no success. Because mine is not an emotional decision. And the reasoning is impeccable.

I am not convinced by 'Because Democrats...' Your boogeyman looks a lot like you.

[LMAO]

I’ve decided I don’t care what you wanna call it whether it’s conservatism or something else


Just give me a candidate that’s fights to reduce the size of the federal government and fight against one to $2 trillion deficits

Deficits have gotten larger and roughly the last 20 years and government has gotten bigger. Is anybody going to argue that the American people are better  off as a result?

We’re printing money just to finance the debt. That’s got to matter a little bit, right?

[LMAO]

LOL!  Didn't realize that.  It's exhilarating, isn't it?   

In two years, I will be joining you and @massadvj  in that lifestyle


Nearly 40 years working for the American healthcare system takes its toll

And it isn’t getting better.

[massadvj]

In two years, I will be joining you and @massadvj  in that lifestyle


Nearly 40 years working for the American healthcare system takes its toll

And it isn’t getting better.

I waited until I was 68 to retire. I am now 71 and none of the fears I had about retirement have come to pass.  It's great.

[Bigun]

I waited until I was 68 to retire. I am now 71 and none of the fears I had about retirement have come to pass.  It's great.

I've been retired for sixteen years now and have not regretted it for a second.

[Hoodat]

If there is a choice "other than" '0' or '1', then it isn't binary.

Only if you ignore reality and math. 

This IS math.  'Binary' means two choices - by its very definition.  Not sure how anyone can screw that up.  Simple logic.


There are 10 kinds of people in this world:  Those who understand binary, and those who don't.