packgrad said:

---

Pretending the right is not focusing on these issues is just pure stupidity.

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packofwolves said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Wufpack17 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packofwolves said:

---

Civilized said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

CoachCase said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Shapiro, Walz, and Kelly are all good picks.

Walz is down-home. Dad, high school teacher, football coach, veteran, hunter.

Harris' appeal so far is disproportionately about her not being a maladjusted or repressed weirdo like Trump or Vance.

A lot of America is hungry for someone that seems like a healthy, strong, well-adjusted human being.

Walz is even more relatable to middle America than Harris.

Her campaign obviously ran test polling on Walz and Shapiro and we can only assume Walz won out. We'll see how that conveys to a broader audience.

---

With all due respect Civ, if tampons in boy's bathroom, sex change for minors, and illegal immigrants getting drivers license, etc is your example of a healthy, strong-well adjusted human being than you are already too far gone. Praying for you.

---

Middle America.

---

He's been re-elected six times as Congressman and governor in a state that's not historically a Democratic stronghold.

How unappealing could his actual, non-dramatized stances on these issues be to the midwesterners he governs if he's six for six in his re-election bids?

---

What do you consider "not historically a Democratic stronghold"? Prior to 1932?

---

His rural congressional district in MN had only sent one other Democrat to Washington in the 114 years prior to Walz being elected.

---

Simple fact is this, he is okay with men competing in women's sports and frankly, that is anti woman. He is a danger to my child for that reason alone. He is a far left radical based on his social ideology alone.

Stop slapping lipstick on a pig.

---

Then why do women in Minnesota keep voting for him?

It sure seems like the right's projection over what women care about and feel threatened by, is not actually what women care about and feel threatened by.

Maybe men on the right need to listen to actual women that vote instead of projecting.

Keep getting bent over trans issues that women voters keep telling you they don't care about, and you may keep losing elections.

---

Have you followed any of the polls regarding transgender women playing in women's sports? Polls have shown the majority do not think transgender women/girls should participate in women/girls sports.

---

Yes. And I have zero problem with the majority position here, past rec sports or middle school or whenever. I'm not arguing the polling on this issue.

I'm saying that broadly, this issue moves the issue for women as a voting demographic exponentially less than reproductive rights, the economy, gun safety, threats to democracy, etc.

"Trans girls playing girls sports" doesn't make a top-10 list of things women voters are most concerned about.

Quote:

---

Inflation Dominates Top Issues For Women Voters; Younger Women Voters Also Identify U.S. Involvement in the War Between Israel and Hamas in Gaza as a Voting Concern

Four in ten women voters say inflation is the most important issue determining their vote in the 2024 presidential race. This is followed by about one in five (22%) who say threats to democracy is the most salient issue for them. Fewer say immigration and border security (13%), abortion (10%), gun policy (4%), the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza (3%), or the war in Ukraine (1%) are the most important issues for them headed into this election.

---

Recent KFF Survey of Women Voters

The right continues being obsessed with an issue that women keep telling you (in polling and in actual elections) is electorally inconsequential to them, to the right's signficant electoral detriment.

Look at the list of what matters to women. The opportunity for the right is to hammer immigration and economy. Those are electoral winners. Trans stuff is an electoral loser. It's nothing but a culture war distraction that takes away from time that would be better spent on other topics that women actually care about.

---

Civ, we get it. You don't want the right highlighting how much of a nut job he is. Too bad, snowflake. They're going to Highlight how anti woman your VP candidate is. How your candidate is for mutilating children. How your candidate is for taking children away from parents if they do not agree with the child and the child's nutjob teacher that the child is a boy or a girl. These are legitimate issues that no matter how much radical leftists like you want to normalize, real people don't want to normalize. The right needs to keep highlighting the lunacy of the left. Transgenderism isn't normal. Mutilating children isn't normal. It's 100% something the right needs to continue to hit on.

Do you really think the right isn't highlighting immigration and the economy? Are you just being willingly stupid here? Maybe watch a Trump commercial or speech. Pretending the right is not focusing on these issues is just pure stupidity.

---

Best of luck making your "Walz is a nutjob" fantasies stick!

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packofwolves said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Wufpack17 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packofwolves said:

---

Civilized said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

CoachCase said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Shapiro, Walz, and Kelly are all good picks.

Walz is down-home. Dad, high school teacher, football coach, veteran, hunter.

Harris' appeal so far is disproportionately about her not being a maladjusted or repressed weirdo like Trump or Vance.

A lot of America is hungry for someone that seems like a healthy, strong, well-adjusted human being.

Walz is even more relatable to middle America than Harris.

Her campaign obviously ran test polling on Walz and Shapiro and we can only assume Walz won out. We'll see how that conveys to a broader audience.

---

With all due respect Civ, if tampons in boy's bathroom, sex change for minors, and illegal immigrants getting drivers license, etc is your example of a healthy, strong-well adjusted human being than you are already too far gone. Praying for you.

---

Middle America.

---

He's been re-elected six times as Congressman and governor in a state that's not historically a Democratic stronghold.

How unappealing could his actual, non-dramatized stances on these issues be to the midwesterners he governs if he's six for six in his re-election bids?

---

What do you consider "not historically a Democratic stronghold"? Prior to 1932?

---

His rural congressional district in MN had only sent one other Democrat to Washington in the 114 years prior to Walz being elected.

---

Simple fact is this, he is okay with men competing in women's sports and frankly, that is anti woman. He is a danger to my child for that reason alone. He is a far left radical based on his social ideology alone.

Stop slapping lipstick on a pig.

---

Then why do women in Minnesota keep voting for him?

It sure seems like the right's projection over what women care about and feel threatened by, is not actually what women care about and feel threatened by.

Maybe men on the right need to listen to actual women that vote instead of projecting.

Keep getting bent over trans issues that women voters keep telling you they don't care about, and you may keep losing elections.

---

Have you followed any of the polls regarding transgender women playing in women's sports? Polls have shown the majority do not think transgender women/girls should participate in women/girls sports.

---

Yes. And I have zero problem with the majority position here, past rec sports or middle school or whenever. I'm not arguing the polling on this issue.

I'm saying that broadly, this issue moves the issue for women as a voting demographic exponentially less than reproductive rights, the economy, gun safety, threats to democracy, etc.

"Trans girls playing girls sports" doesn't make a top-10 list of things women voters are most concerned about.

Quote:

---

Inflation Dominates Top Issues For Women Voters; Younger Women Voters Also Identify U.S. Involvement in the War Between Israel and Hamas in Gaza as a Voting Concern

Four in ten women voters say inflation is the most important issue determining their vote in the 2024 presidential race. This is followed by about one in five (22%) who say threats to democracy is the most salient issue for them. Fewer say immigration and border security (13%), abortion (10%), gun policy (4%), the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza (3%), or the war in Ukraine (1%) are the most important issues for them headed into this election.

---

Recent KFF Survey of Women Voters

The right continues being obsessed with an issue that women keep telling you (in polling and in actual elections) is electorally inconsequential to them, to the right's signficant electoral detriment.

Look at the list of what matters to women. The opportunity for the right is to hammer immigration and economy. Those are electoral winners. Trans stuff is an electoral loser. It's nothing but a culture war distraction that takes away from time that would be better spent on other topics that women actually care about.

---

Civ, we get it. You don't want the right highlighting how much of a nut job he is. Too bad, snowflake. They're going to Highlight how anti woman your VP candidate is. How your candidate is for mutilating children. How your candidate is for taking children away from parents if they do not agree with the child and the child's nutjob teacher that the child is a boy or a girl. These are legitimate issues that no matter how much radical leftists like you want to normalize, real people don't want to normalize. The right needs to keep highlighting the lunacy of the left. Transgenderism isn't normal. Mutilating children isn't normal. It's 100% something the right needs to continue to hit on.

Do you really think the right isn't highlighting immigration and the economy? Are you just being willingly stupid here? Maybe watch a Trump commercial or speech. Pretending the right is not focusing on these issues is just pure stupidity.

---

Best of luck making your "Walz is a nutjob" fantasies stick!

---

Civilized said:

---

Wufpack17 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packofwolves said:

---

Civilized said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

CoachCase said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Shapiro, Walz, and Kelly are all good picks.

Walz is down-home. Dad, high school teacher, football coach, veteran, hunter.

Harris' appeal so far is disproportionately about her not being a maladjusted or repressed weirdo like Trump or Vance.

A lot of America is hungry for someone that seems like a healthy, strong, well-adjusted human being.

Walz is even more relatable to middle America than Harris.

Her campaign obviously ran test polling on Walz and Shapiro and we can only assume Walz won out. We'll see how that conveys to a broader audience.

---

With all due respect Civ, if tampons in boy's bathroom, sex change for minors, and illegal immigrants getting drivers license, etc is your example of a healthy, strong-well adjusted human being than you are already too far gone. Praying for you.

---

Middle America.

---

He's been re-elected six times as Congressman and governor in a state that's not historically a Democratic stronghold.

How unappealing could his actual, non-dramatized stances on these issues be to the midwesterners he governs if he's six for six in his re-election bids?

---

What do you consider "not historically a Democratic stronghold"? Prior to 1932?

---

His rural congressional district in MN had only sent one other Democrat to Washington in the 114 years prior to Walz being elected.

---

Simple fact is this, he is okay with men competing in women's sports and frankly, that is anti woman. He is a danger to my child for that reason alone. He is a far left radical based on his social ideology alone.

Stop slapping lipstick on a pig.

---

Then why do women in Minnesota keep voting for him?

It sure seems like the right's projection over what women care about and feel threatened by, is not actually what women care about and feel threatened by.

Maybe men on the right need to listen to actual women that vote instead of projecting.

Keep getting bent over trans issues that women voters keep telling you they don't care about, and you may keep losing elections.

---

Civilized said:

---

packofwolves said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Wufpack17 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packofwolves said:

---

Civilized said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

CoachCase said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Shapiro, Walz, and Kelly are all good picks.

Walz is down-home. Dad, high school teacher, football coach, veteran, hunter.

Harris' appeal so far is disproportionately about her not being a maladjusted or repressed weirdo like Trump or Vance.

A lot of America is hungry for someone that seems like a healthy, strong, well-adjusted human being.

Walz is even more relatable to middle America than Harris.

Her campaign obviously ran test polling on Walz and Shapiro and we can only assume Walz won out. We'll see how that conveys to a broader audience.

---

With all due respect Civ, if tampons in boy's bathroom, sex change for minors, and illegal immigrants getting drivers license, etc is your example of a healthy, strong-well adjusted human being than you are already too far gone. Praying for you.

---

Middle America.

---

He's been re-elected six times as Congressman and governor in a state that's not historically a Democratic stronghold.

How unappealing could his actual, non-dramatized stances on these issues be to the midwesterners he governs if he's six for six in his re-election bids?

---

What do you consider "not historically a Democratic stronghold"? Prior to 1932?

---

His rural congressional district in MN had only sent one other Democrat to Washington in the 114 years prior to Walz being elected.

---

Simple fact is this, he is okay with men competing in women's sports and frankly, that is anti woman. He is a danger to my child for that reason alone. He is a far left radical based on his social ideology alone.

Stop slapping lipstick on a pig.

---

Then why do women in Minnesota keep voting for him?

It sure seems like the right's projection over what women care about and feel threatened by, is not actually what women care about and feel threatened by.

Maybe men on the right need to listen to actual women that vote instead of projecting.

Keep getting bent over trans issues that women voters keep telling you they don't care about, and you may keep losing elections.

---

Have you followed any of the polls regarding transgender women playing in women's sports? Polls have shown the majority do not think transgender women/girls should participate in women/girls sports.

---

Yes. And I have zero problem with the majority position here, past rec sports or middle school or whenever. I'm not arguing the polling on this issue.

I'm saying that broadly, this issue moves the issue for women as a voting demographic exponentially less than reproductive rights, the economy, gun safety, threats to democracy, etc.

"Trans girls playing girls sports" doesn't make a top-10 list of things women voters are most concerned about.

Quote:

---

Inflation Dominates Top Issues For Women Voters; Younger Women Voters Also Identify U.S. Involvement in the War Between Israel and Hamas in Gaza as a Voting Concern

Four in ten women voters say inflation is the most important issue determining their vote in the 2024 presidential race. This is followed by about one in five (22%) who say threats to democracy is the most salient issue for them. Fewer say immigration and border security (13%), abortion (10%), gun policy (4%), the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza (3%), or the war in Ukraine (1%) are the most important issues for them headed into this election.

---

Recent KFF Survey of Women Voters

The right continues being obsessed with an issue that women keep telling you (in polling and in actual elections) is electorally inconsequential to them, to the right's signficant electoral detriment.

Look at the list of what matters to women. The opportunity for the right is to hammer immigration and economy. Those are electoral winners. Trans stuff is an electoral loser. It's nothing but a culture war distraction that takes away from time that would be better spent on other topics that women actually care about.

---

Civilized said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

Has Harris put her economic agenda on her page yet?

---

I heard she was having an economic agenda and MSM interview reveal party.

Going to be a banger.

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packofwolves said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Wufpack17 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packofwolves said:

---

Civilized said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

CoachCase said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Shapiro, Walz, and Kelly are all good picks.

Walz is down-home. Dad, high school teacher, football coach, veteran, hunter.

Harris' appeal so far is disproportionately about her not being a maladjusted or repressed weirdo like Trump or Vance.

A lot of America is hungry for someone that seems like a healthy, strong, well-adjusted human being.

Walz is even more relatable to middle America than Harris.

Her campaign obviously ran test polling on Walz and Shapiro and we can only assume Walz won out. We'll see how that conveys to a broader audience.

---

With all due respect Civ, if tampons in boy's bathroom, sex change for minors, and illegal immigrants getting drivers license, etc is your example of a healthy, strong-well adjusted human being than you are already too far gone. Praying for you.

---

Middle America.

---

He's been re-elected six times as Congressman and governor in a state that's not historically a Democratic stronghold.

How unappealing could his actual, non-dramatized stances on these issues be to the midwesterners he governs if he's six for six in his re-election bids?

---

What do you consider "not historically a Democratic stronghold"? Prior to 1932?

---

His rural congressional district in MN had only sent one other Democrat to Washington in the 114 years prior to Walz being elected.

---

Simple fact is this, he is okay with men competing in women's sports and frankly, that is anti woman. He is a danger to my child for that reason alone. He is a far left radical based on his social ideology alone.

Stop slapping lipstick on a pig.

---

Then why do women in Minnesota keep voting for him?

It sure seems like the right's projection over what women care about and feel threatened by, is not actually what women care about and feel threatened by.

Maybe men on the right need to listen to actual women that vote instead of projecting.

Keep getting bent over trans issues that women voters keep telling you they don't care about, and you may keep losing elections.

---

Have you followed any of the polls regarding transgender women playing in women's sports? Polls have shown the majority do not think transgender women/girls should participate in women/girls sports.

---

Yes. And I have zero problem with the majority position here, past rec sports or middle school or whenever. I'm not arguing the polling on this issue.

I'm saying that broadly, this issue moves the issue for women as a voting demographic exponentially less than reproductive rights, the economy, gun safety, threats to democracy, etc.

"Trans girls playing girls sports" doesn't make a top-10 list of things women voters are most concerned about.

Quote:

---

Inflation Dominates Top Issues For Women Voters; Younger Women Voters Also Identify U.S. Involvement in the War Between Israel and Hamas in Gaza as a Voting Concern

Four in ten women voters say inflation is the most important issue determining their vote in the 2024 presidential race. This is followed by about one in five (22%) who say threats to democracy is the most salient issue for them. Fewer say immigration and border security (13%), abortion (10%), gun policy (4%), the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza (3%), or the war in Ukraine (1%) are the most important issues for them headed into this election.

---

Recent KFF Survey of Women Voters

The right continues being obsessed with an issue that women keep telling you (in polling and in actual elections) is electorally inconsequential to them, to the right's signficant electoral detriment.

Look at the list of what matters to women. The opportunity for the right is to hammer immigration and economy. Those are electoral winners. Trans stuff is an electoral loser. It's nothing but a culture war distraction that takes away from time that would be better spent on other topics that women actually care about.

---

Civ, we get it. You don't want the right highlighting how much of a nut job he is. Too bad, snowflake. They're going to Highlight how anti woman your VP candidate is. How your candidate is for mutilating children. How your candidate is for taking children away from parents if they do not agree with the child and the child's nutjob teacher that the child is a boy or a girl. These are legitimate issues that no matter how much radical leftists like you want to normalize, real people don't want to normalize. The right needs to keep highlighting the lunacy of the left. Transgenderism isn't normal. Mutilating children isn't normal. It's 100% something the right needs to continue to hit on.

Do you really think the right isn't highlighting immigration and the economy? Are you just being willingly stupid here? Maybe watch a Trump commercial or speech. Pretending the right is not focusing on these issues is just pure stupidity.

---

Best of luck making your "Walz is a nutjob" fantasies stick!

---

I mean you're fine with men showering with little girls. I don't expect you to think he's a nut job. That would require you to do a little self examination.

---

LOL.

When do men shower with little girls?

How do you guys dream up this *****

---

Civilized said:

---

Wufpack17 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packofwolves said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Wufpack17 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packofwolves said:

---

Civilized said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

CoachCase said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Shapiro, Walz, and Kelly are all good picks.

Walz is down-home. Dad, high school teacher, football coach, veteran, hunter.

Harris' appeal so far is disproportionately about her not being a maladjusted or repressed weirdo like Trump or Vance.

A lot of America is hungry for someone that seems like a healthy, strong, well-adjusted human being.

Walz is even more relatable to middle America than Harris.

Her campaign obviously ran test polling on Walz and Shapiro and we can only assume Walz won out. We'll see how that conveys to a broader audience.

---

With all due respect Civ, if tampons in boy's bathroom, sex change for minors, and illegal immigrants getting drivers license, etc is your example of a healthy, strong-well adjusted human being than you are already too far gone. Praying for you.

---

Middle America.

---

He's been re-elected six times as Congressman and governor in a state that's not historically a Democratic stronghold.

How unappealing could his actual, non-dramatized stances on these issues be to the midwesterners he governs if he's six for six in his re-election bids?

---

What do you consider "not historically a Democratic stronghold"? Prior to 1932?

---

His rural congressional district in MN had only sent one other Democrat to Washington in the 114 years prior to Walz being elected.

---

Simple fact is this, he is okay with men competing in women's sports and frankly, that is anti woman. He is a danger to my child for that reason alone. He is a far left radical based on his social ideology alone.

Stop slapping lipstick on a pig.

---

Then why do women in Minnesota keep voting for him?

It sure seems like the right's projection over what women care about and feel threatened by, is not actually what women care about and feel threatened by.

Maybe men on the right need to listen to actual women that vote instead of projecting.

Keep getting bent over trans issues that women voters keep telling you they don't care about, and you may keep losing elections.

---

Have you followed any of the polls regarding transgender women playing in women's sports? Polls have shown the majority do not think transgender women/girls should participate in women/girls sports.

---

Yes. And I have zero problem with the majority position here, past rec sports or middle school or whenever. I'm not arguing the polling on this issue.

I'm saying that broadly, this issue moves the issue for women as a voting demographic exponentially less than reproductive rights, the economy, gun safety, threats to democracy, etc.

"Trans girls playing girls sports" doesn't make a top-10 list of things women voters are most concerned about.

Quote:

---

Inflation Dominates Top Issues For Women Voters; Younger Women Voters Also Identify U.S. Involvement in the War Between Israel and Hamas in Gaza as a Voting Concern

Four in ten women voters say inflation is the most important issue determining their vote in the 2024 presidential race. This is followed by about one in five (22%) who say threats to democracy is the most salient issue for them. Fewer say immigration and border security (13%), abortion (10%), gun policy (4%), the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza (3%), or the war in Ukraine (1%) are the most important issues for them headed into this election.

---

Recent KFF Survey of Women Voters

The right continues being obsessed with an issue that women keep telling you (in polling and in actual elections) is electorally inconsequential to them, to the right's signficant electoral detriment.

Look at the list of what matters to women. The opportunity for the right is to hammer immigration and economy. Those are electoral winners. Trans stuff is an electoral loser. It's nothing but a culture war distraction that takes away from time that would be better spent on other topics that women actually care about.

---

That doesn't make it right. In fact, it makes them wrong.

It is illogical. You can't be a proponent of reproductive/Womens rights while having no issue with men taking the place of women in sports and other areas of society.

Walz is dangerous because he shares this flawed logic.

---

What you're not wrapping your head around is that tens of millions of American women are directly impacted by the governance of their reproductive freedoms in ways that are truly existential and life-altering.

Only a tiny, tiny fraction of American women are directly impacted by trans girls playing sports, and those impacts are almost exclusively mild inconveniences in the grand scheme of life.

The right gets off track here electorally because they falsely equate the frequency and gravity of reproductive rights issues with trans sports issues.

---

Civilized said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

For some reason I can't find either. I see lots of statements from staffers.

---

Will make the reveal all the more exciting!

FTR, how many weeks after Trump entering the race in 2015 or 2016 did he publish his platform? For comparison.

---

Civilized said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

For some reason I can't find either. I see lots of statements from staffers.

---

Will make the reveal all the more exciting!

FTR, how many weeks after Trump entering the race in 2015 or 2016 did he publish his platform? For comparison.

---

Can we keeps this about Harris on the Harris thread? I'm asking do you know what her platform is, and what her economic agenda is? It's that easy.

---

And I'm asking you to benchmark the question against her opponent. It's that easy.

---

Civilized said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

For some reason I can't find either. I see lots of statements from staffers.

---

Will make the reveal all the more exciting!

FTR, how many weeks after Trump entering the race in 2015 or 2016 did he publish his platform? For comparison.

---

Can we keeps this about Harris on the Harris thread? I'm asking do you know what her platform is, and what her economic agenda is? It's that easy.

---

And I'm asking you to benchmark the question against her opponent. It's that easy.

---

So that is a no. Thanks.

---

Likewise!

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

For some reason I can't find either. I see lots of statements from staffers.

---

Will make the reveal all the more exciting!

FTR, how many weeks after Trump entering the race in 2015 or 2016 did he publish his platform? For comparison.

---

Since becoming the de-facto nominee, has she granted a single interview? A news conference? A town hall? Anything?

All the policy stuff is being brought to the media by her campaign staff. Shouldnt we be hearing this directly from a nominee?

---

Are you really concerned we'll get to election day and not hear from her on policy?

Why does it matter to you if it's last week, this week, next week, or next month?

Why does the timing make one iota of difference as long as she does so before people have to cast their votes?

---

Democrat influencer gets paid up to $10,000 per video by a dark money advocacy group to read pre-written scripts in her social media videos

The donors to the group are anonymous

Kamala is a manufactured candidate pic.twitter.com/0Epn8pFxSO

— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) August 7, 2024

Civilized said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

For some reason I can't find either. I see lots of statements from staffers.

---

Will make the reveal all the more exciting!

FTR, how many weeks after Trump entering the race in 2015 or 2016 did he publish his platform? For comparison.

---

Can we keeps this about Harris on the Harris thread? I'm asking do you know what her platform is, and what her economic agenda is? It's that easy.

---

And I'm asking you to benchmark the question against her opponent. It's that easy.

---

Civilized said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

Ncsufist said:

---

Oldsouljer said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Oldsouljer said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Oof. He lied about going to war. Thats a big no no.

Gov. @Tim_Walz: I spent 25 years in the Army and I hunt. I’ve been voting for common sense legislation that protects the Second Amendment, but we can do background checks. We can research the impacts of gun violence. We can make sure those weapons of war, that I carried in war,… pic.twitter.com/3IVaXi2RP2

— Kamala HQ (@KamalaHQ) August 6, 2024

---

Worse. It looks like he actually found a way to run away while everyone else got stop-lossed.

---

Tim Walz simps are claiming he just retired after 22 years of honorable service. But this is incorrect. The truth is he abruptly abandoned his unit after they received orders to Iraq. It was so disgraceful he was reduced in rank. Something very rare for a Sr NCO.

— Dale Stark (@DaleStarkA10) August 7, 2024

---

I've seen so-called soldiers get pregnant to avoid deployments, he was ahead of his time. If his Party had been all about gender ambiguity back then, he could have tried that and successfully stayed in the force without deployment.

---

We had a kid purposely fall down stairs and break his leg. Another had his wife puncture his ear drum with something. Can't remember what it was.

---

And one time there was this rich kid who dodged the Vietnam draft, pretending to have "bone spurs". And then you happily voted for him! Because you really care about this issue a lot.

---

Right.

A draft dodger lecturing a 24-year vet about military decorum.

A felon lecturing a former DA and AG about crime and punishment.

You can't make this stuff up!

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

For some reason I can't find either. I see lots of statements from staffers.

---

Will make the reveal all the more exciting!

FTR, how many weeks after Trump entering the race in 2015 or 2016 did he publish his platform? For comparison.

---

Since becoming the de-facto nominee, has she granted a single interview? A news conference? A town hall? Anything?

All the policy stuff is being brought to the media by her campaign staff. Shouldnt we be hearing this directly from a nominee?

---

Are you really concerned we'll get to election day and not hear from her on policy?

Why does it matter to you if it's last week, this week, next week, or next month?

Why does the timing make one iota of difference as long as she does so before people have to cast their votes?

---