^ This is the answer.

Didn’t Gawker get taken down by this guy?

I seem to remember it being a disappointing bothsiderist thing.

Remember that Taco rapes kids.

They’ll find the same amount of things Taco’s “investigators” found in Hawaii back in…checks notes…2011 (lol).

I’m not saying to ignore them. I’m just saying more people should press them on just what “maga” means.

As a for instance, does “maga” support or oppose tariffs in the amount and in the way that Taco is (illegally) doing them? Would that position be the same if it was anyone else other than Taco doing it?

LOL, I had to read the article just to see what his “summer victory tour” was supposed to be.

This guy thinks he should be thrown a parade every day, but apparently that awful bill was supposed to be something he thought people were going to be celebrating?

Anyway, it’s such a terrible shame that he’s had to experience the most mildest of consequences for raping children.

Toxic Taco.

Wait, 30%?

Btw from what I listened to Yarvin

I spent some time on an interview with Yarvin and I found him so completely underwhelming in that interview. I think the only time I’ve been less impressed with a so-called “intellectual” was when I heard Jordan Peterson being interviewed by Sam Harris some number of years ago.

Curtis Yarvin certainly struck me as someone very, very impressed with himself, but I saw literally no reason why anyone else should be.

LOL, good point. I stand corrected. I guess he did indeed do some real work the one time…and now that you mention it, he did that photo-op with the garbage truck, too, where he nearly missed the door.

Holy shit, I agree with one of the first comments, “Flagging this video for depicting a murder”.

JFC - “I know DAhnawld truhmp did it”.

And oh, that attempt at the “Merry Christmas” dig at the end. Real sick burn, dude. FFS, these people. They use a fucking holiday as a way to really stick it to others, just like Jesus would have done.

Thing about Kennedy that is so infuriating is that Foghorn Leghorn homespun salt of the Earth/local yokel act is even more ridiculous when you know he went to Oxford.

I don’t think anyone would necessarily be hoarding anything; I’m just pointing out that health spans are likely to change as things advance. Maybe the average American might lag a bit behind the top 10% or so, but I very much doubt that these people will be aging the same way that people age now or ten years ago.

Setting some hard-coded thing now will be hard to change later to adapt with the times.

I’d get behind this 100%. Maybe throw in some screening for things like the dark triad and a basic test on critical thinking as well.

Whoa. I think there is some amount of wisdom and experience people acquire and giving them until 25 to get that PFC thing going makes some sense.

I also said elsewhere in this thread that I think cognitive tests would be reasonable.

I don’t think lower age limits and upper age limits are the same thing at all. I suppose if people want to put it to voters, people could work on updating the Constitution to lower age limits to 20 or whatever for Senate, House and the WH and then let voters decide. I just don’t think it’s the main concern (or even a real concern at all) when it comes to our broken system, although I know it’s quite fashionable to blame older people for all the problems…I’d say the problem is making money = free speech and allowing legal bribery.

Having younger people being bribed vs. older people and having term limits on those younger people is supposedly going to accomplish something, but I’m not really sure what.

You and I might know it means the set of deplorables and their awful views on race and gender, but when they use that term, just what policies and principles do they want others to believe that “maga” stands for? I mean, it’s not 100% white people in the group calling themselves “maga”, so other than sucking up to Taco, what are the core principles that are the supposed cover story to pull in POC, women, LGBTQ and so on?

Same goes for other terms they use that sound like baby talk…like “maha”. Just how do they plan on making people “healthy”? What metrics will they use? Does “healthy” include things like reversing the recent trends in maternal mortality? Or is it just about lining the pockets of Big Wellness for RFK? No, we just get baby talk like “maga” and “maha” and very little discussion about real goals, real metrics, etc…I’m just tired of all the baby talk that passes for real definitions of anything. Nailing down what any of “maga” and “maha” are supposed to stand for is like nailing jello to a tree. It’s like when Orwell talks about losing the language. This mostly passes without comment, too, by the way. We are just supposed to accept terms like this…

When the likes of MTG claim they are the “real” maga, and those that don’t want to release the Epstein files are not, how can anyone really argue for either side, since “maga” means nothing at all other than loyalty to Taco, and the real meaning that most normal Americans know is behind “maga” (xenophobia, homophobia, misogyny, theocratic, etc.) doesn’t really enter into releasing information about pedos for or against. They are for it if they think it will mostly damage Democrats, but against releasing it if it would hurt Taco…

I will forever associate Foghorn Leghorn with reading about strap-ons, LOL.

Reminds me of the interview where he learned that you don’t need to swear on a bible. It broke his head. His jaw was agape while he struggled with that news.

Do you have a link? I’d like to see that.

There are still just a whole lot of dumbasses that think America - a secular nation - was designed to be, and is, a xtian nation. This gomer is just one of them.

One of my favorite things to ask one of these types is to tell me where their little book club - or the protagonist of that book club - is mentioned in the Constitution. I’ve seen multiple cases of them shorting out over this. Most of them just flat refuse to believe me. Of course. I tell them to “do their own research” on the matter. 🤣

I like the idea of primaries. As to debates, though - the way they are conducted (in the United States anyway) seems to be very problematic - comes down to quips and comebacks, talking over one another, going over allotted time, not really answering the questions and using prepared sound bites, and trying to go viral, all while lots and lots of logical fallacies are employed, and a populace that judges on the most arbitrary aspects of all this hot mess, such as who appeared to dominate or came off “strong”, etc.

I wonder if there is some other way(s) to have candidates express their platforms during primaries. I honestly don’t have a great answer for this. I suppose it still comes back to a rather tuned-out and generally clueless populace that will decide things largely based on “vibes” anyway…