Trump picks Ohio Sen. JD Vance for vice president

[roamer_1]

There has NEVER been a 3rd Party candidate elected POTUS in history.

Perot enabled Clinton to defeat George Herbert Walker Bush in 1992. 

Nevertheless, still proving that throwing a personal tantrum...withholding your vote because you don't like the GOP candidate is a wasted vote with adverse consequences.

ERGO, the "Binary" argument still holds.

It does not. There are at least three choices. THREE.

The logic of 'withholding' a vote again implies an ownership that is false.

It appears to YOU that YOUR candidates attributes are self evident, and thereby the obvious choice... ergo the 'withholding' language - my vote ought to belong to Tumpy, according to you, and therefore I am withholding what is rightfully Tumpy's.

That is not true.

[Hoodat]

The women vote was put in extreme jeopardy when the 'Conservative' SCOTUS put the abortion issue in the hands of the States and not the federal government.

What does the Dobbs decision have to do with Vance's stupid, idiotic, asinine statement?

[Hoodat]

There has NEVER been a 3rd Party candidate elected POTUS in history.

[Hoodat]

Aside from fanciful speculation irrelevant choices have no bearing on a binary option.

@MeganC

When you say 'option', are you referring to choice, or are you referring to outcome?  Also, making yourself the arbiter of what is relevant does not change the fact that a third choice exists, thus making it non-binary by definition.

[Hoodat]

There was a vote between Hitler and Stalin.

The bullets, bombs, and blood chose Stalin.

How did Switzerland vote?  Option 1?  Option 2?  Or was there a third (non-binary) option?

[MeganC]

How did Switzerland vote?  Option 1?  Option 2?  Or was there a third (non-binary) option?

Switzerland bought and sold weapons to and from Germany during the war.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Is it time to lock this thread and make room for discussion on other topics?  Rumor has it there's a lot going on. 

@Cyber Liberty

Not yet.

What, if I may ask, is the objective of keeping this thread?  The Republican ticket is set ... the primary-style debate is finished.  Diminishing our candidates at this point and promoting not voting as virtuous  ----  and doing both over and over and over again seems counterproductive to victory in November. 

What am I missing here @Cyber Liberty ? 

[MeganC]

What, if I may ask, is the objective of keeping this thread? 

I'm personally hoping to hijack the thread into a lively discussion about Swiss-made arms in the WW2 era. 

[Polly Ticks]

I'm personally hoping to hijack the thread into a lively discussion about Swiss-made arms in the WW2 era. 

I can't help with WW2 era, but here are some nice Swiss-made arms:

[roamer_1]

What, if I may ask, is the objective of keeping this thread?  The Republican ticket is set ... the primary-style debate is finished.  Diminishing our candidates at this point and promoting not voting as virtuous  ----  and doing both over and over and over again seems counterproductive to victory in November. 

What am I missing here @Cyber Liberty ?

That might be true if we were a Republican house and not a Conservative one.

[Timber Rattler]

What, if I may ask, is the objective of keeping this thread?  The Republican ticket is set ... the primary-style debate is finished.  Diminishing our candidates at this point and promoting not voting as virtuous  ----  and doing both over and over and over again seems counterproductive to victory in November. 

What am I missing here @Cyber Liberty ?

You're really into that censorship thing, aren't you, when the heat in the kitchen gets a might toasty.

 

[Cyber Liberty]

What, if I may ask, is the objective of keeping this thread?  The Republican ticket is set ... the primary-style debate is finished.  Diminishing our candidates at this point and promoting not voting as virtuous  ----  and doing both over and over and over again seems counterproductive to victory in November. 

What am I missing here @Cyber Liberty ?

Briefers are still talking about it.

[DCPatriot]

What does the Dobbs decision have to do with Vance's stupid, idiotic, asinine statement?

The point is that Vance's statement isn't going to change anything.  You're just doing your standard criticisms because you're @Hoodat It's what you've being doing here since Ted Cruz did a face plant in 2016.

[Kamaji]

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.

[LMAO]

You're really into that censorship thing, aren't you, when the heat in the kitchen gets a might toasty.

 

Yup

[LMAO]

It's likely, but not reality until it actually happens.  You can help make it reality by participating in the farce. 

Joe Biden is unpopular.  Kamala Harris is unpopular.  All that was needed of republicans was to nominate someone with mediocre favorability.  That's all they had to do.  According to a recent AP poll, 57% of Americans want Trump to withdraw and allow his party to select a different candidate.  Now it's a coinflip between an 80 yr old child and a dingbat socialist.  The republicans chose poorly, and Trump chose poorly.  This is a pattern of behavior which has resulted in loss after loss in various contests.  And now instead of promising to change, they are exploiting your fear to bail them out again.  At some point you just have to walk away.

 

[Right_in_Virginia]

You're really into that censorship thing, aren't you, when the heat in the kitchen gets a might toasty.

Nonsense.  I am into strategic thinking.  There's no point to this obsessive debate when the selection process has ended and the outcome is set ---- unless you enjoy being part of the opposition's research ---- and I'm starting to believe that is your raison d'être.  You are rooting for a Republican defeat in November.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Briefers are still talking about it.

This is a non-answer to a specific and legitimate question.   

[jmyrlefuller]

Nonsense.  I am into strategic thinking.  There's no point to this obsessive debate when the selection process has ended and the outcome is set ---- unless you enjoy being part of the opposition's research ---- and I'm starting to believe that is your raison d'être.  You are rooting for a Republican defeat in November.

After your side sabotaged the primaries, this is revenge. Just remember that.

[Cyber Liberty]

This is a non-answer to a specific and legitimate question.   

 

[Hoodat]

The point is that Vance's statement isn't going to change anything.

Your 'reasoning' here, @DCPatriot , is that Vance is immune to any backlash for anything he does because Conservatives have poisoned the well by overturning one of the most unconstitutional rulings the Supreme Court has ever put out.  By that same 'reasoning', JD Vance could go on The View with Hunter Biden, strip down naked, and start smoking crack while jacking off to a photo of Herman Goering, and all of that would have no effect on voters.  No, the reason according to you why anyone would not want to vote for JD Vance is because Conservative Justices (three of which were nominated by Trump) overturned Roe.

What horseshit!

You're just doing your standard criticisms because you're @Hoodat It's what you've being doing here since Ted Cruz did a face plant in 2016.

I began criticizing stupidity long before you and your ilk began posting lies about Ted Cruz.  It's not about Vance.  It's about what he said.  Substance over style.  Just as the Trump-supporting author pointed out, Vance's comment is pushing women she knows away from voting for Trump.

[Hoodat]

What, if I may ask, is the objective of keeping this thread?

What is the objective of you trying to close it?

[Hoodat]

You're really into that censorship thing, aren't you, when the heat in the kitchen gets a might toasty.

What once were vices are now habits.  They've been getting threads that don't go their way locked out since I first arrived.

[Right_in_Virginia]

What, if I may ask, is the objective of keeping this thread?  The Republican ticket is set ... the primary-style debate is finished.  Diminishing our candidates at this point and promoting not voting as virtuous  ----  and doing both over and over and over again seems counterproductive to victory in November. 

What am I missing here @Cyber Liberty ?

That might be true if we were a Republican house and not a Conservative one.

The problems with your post are  1.TBR is a big tent forum (look around, if you doubt me), and 2. Conservatives make damn near any other political persuasion look like strategic geniuses.

[Hoodat]

I'm personally hoping to hijack the thread into a lively discussion about Swiss-made arms in the WW2 era. 

I'm down with that.  If the Swiss had shared a border with the USSR, they would have been trading with them, too.