“The rules were, you guys weren’t going to fact-check.” Oops. That was a Vance misstep in the debate. Not to think it, but to say it out loud. How does “you guys weren’t going to fact-check” NOT translate to “I need to lie to get anywhere?”

Of course, he doesn’t care about lying. He said in an interview that if he has to lie to get people talking, then he’ll lie. Except, won’t that have people talking about the lie or what an effing liar you are? How is that beneficial to the political discourse? I mean, I can see how it benefits YOU, personally, but how does it…?

Oh, I see. Never mind…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Trump is STILL obsessed with trying to prove nobody leaves his rallies, even as video floats around of people leaving his rallies and reporters interview people leaving the rallies to find out WHY they’re leaving the rallies early. Primarily, the interviews suggest people leave because Trump is usually late to take the stage, they don’t like the length of his speeches, and they don’t like his rhetoric. (That’s from the interviews.)

One of Trump’s spokespeople, Karoline Leavitt, claimed it’s not true that people leave and that Trump’s rallies are the “biggest political events in history!” That’s yet another example of MAGA not knowing their history. Hitler’s Nuremberg rallies, anyone? Anyone?

Isn’t it interesting that the two most reviled people in history, Hitler and now Trump, are BOTH so obsessed with having the biggest rallies? They BOTH insist that nobody should love anybody more. “Thou shalt have no other gods before me,” indeed…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Trump says the GOP is now the party of the working man and unions? Trump’s plan includes tax cuts for the rich and higher cost of living for the working man. How is that the “party of the working man?” Trump was giving a speech at one of his rallies and he said, out loud, to working people, that he hated to pay overtime, so he just didn’t pay it. Sure, he owed it according to the law. He just didn’t pay it – because he didn’t WANT to. HE said it, not me.

He was also quite specific that he doesn’t use union workers if he can avoid it. How is that the party of unions? That STILL seems anti-union, to me. You know what? I think I’m going to believe the plans they have written down (Project 2025 and Agenda 47) and not the words (or other sounds) coming out of his mouth. He’s a known liar. But he has a playbook and, like Tim Walz pointed out, one doesn’t make a playbook if they don’t plan to use it.

He’s just trying to tell you what he thinks you want to hear. He’s been doing that a lot recently. He’s promising anything, everything to everybody in an effort to convince them he’s on their side. He’s not on anybody’s “side” but his own. He’s not trying to help, he’s trying to deceive…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Okay, I have a question. How come Israel is the only group involved who “has a right to defend themselves?” Israel was attacked on October 7, but they weren’t “innocent victims.” Israel has been engaging in Micro-aggression since it’s founding, what with all the settlements, legal and otherwise being quickly built and occupied.

But still, the logic just doesn’t track. Hamas attacks Israel, Israel has the “right to defend itself.” Israel attacked Syria but the warning was, don’t strike back because Israel has the right to defend itself. Israel attacked Iran but the warning was, don’t strike back because Israel has the right to defend itself.

If Israel has the right to defend itself because Hamas turned to weaponry, doesn’t Syria have the right to defend itself because Israel turned to weaponry? Doesn’t Iran have the right to defend itself after Israel turned to weaponry? Israel seems to be the only group with a right to defend itself because it has a big, bad bully of a bodyguard in the US.

Israel and the US are NOT on solid moral ground in this whole thing. Setting up an obvious double-standard isn’t going to convince me of the righteousness of their cause. What a freakin’ mess…