This debate about whether the state is intrinsically purple or red doesn't mean much. Florida's population has always been more transient than the populations of most states, which means that things could shift in either direction over the next 20 years.

The immediate question is whether Florida is enough in play in the 2024 presidential election that Kamala should spend significant resources either trying to win the state or trying to force Trump to spend resources to protect his advantage in the state.

I am skeptical.

Many states can change in 20 year periods. Virginia was 8 points redder than the nation in the Bush years. You have to put in a token try in Florida even though you’re likely to lose. There are diminishing returns to spending every penny in AZ/GA/PA/WI/MI.

I agree with the bolded. The question is whether you spend time and money in Florida in a serious way, not whether you spend time and money in Florida at all.

is this true Lucium?

That’s not really a question. Florida will probably be the number 1 state in ad spending again, for the same reasons as always.

You meant selection on the title?

Do people still think that is one person that rules a country? Haven't we add the latest example of Biden? How can someone believe that a person that has clear cognitive lapses for so many years now can rule a country? Or that he was even elected and not very carefully selected for those who really want to rule others can have card blanch to do as they please?

I suggest people to see works of investigative journalists (like the one under) and stop waiting for narratives of the main stream media (many owned by those that wish to rule others) that are in the interest of the people.

https://corbettreport.com

Here is a quite interesting and seemingly on the point view about the nonsense of a man ruling a country and why the lame stream media is now finally pointing at it:
https://corbettreport.substack.com/p...aling-the-deep

kek

No, we don't have a monarchy nor a dictatorship. Is this news to you?

lol, you know it's going to be trash because it's trying to trade off of similarity to the colbert report like washington times tries to fool you it's washington post

vance bangs couches = weird

walz does horse bukkake = not weird

I would be surprised if Luciom disagrees with that sentiment. You and Karl are far from the only communists who post in this forum according to Luciom's definition of communism.

Technically it isn't communism no, not in the basic Marxist sense.

Communism can have extremely unequal outcomes , if your work is worth more you can earn a lot more, and there is no mandate for welfare actually in Marxism.

It's something more than communism which should be called redistributionism which can happen under socialism/communism, or under capitalism (most countries do that to some degree), it's bad, it significantly decreases aggregate production, incomes, wealth, it's destructive, deeply immoral, and distopian and disgenic, but it isn't necessarily communist.

It's leftist for sure.

Must be made clear at this point that evil Marxists added several monstrosities to the already deeply evil basic model written by Marx creating something that is a lot worse than the already horrific Marxist model.

vance bangs couches = funny
walz, surrounded by horse *****, takes an explosion of semen to the face from all directions = kinda weird?

I wonder how giving (or trying to level the field) for equal opportunity to anyone having the desire to achieve something is evil ….

How preventing (freedom ?) people to achieve their dreams isn’t allowed just because they lack the money because they have been born in an unfortunate geographical/familial situation is not evil .

Or permitting undeserved or bad people to do w.e they want just because they had money distributed freely to them just because they been born in a fortunate situation isn’t evil .

Vance funny
Walz funnier

I mean, Vance did write about banging couches in his book, so there is that.

Transparency FTW.
Walz tries to hide his horse bukkake fetish but got caught.

Well, so to answer your question, yes, it is a bit weird to dream up that someone has a horse bukkake fetish. I'd be asking some questions about the person who came up with it.

Republicans love to think about *****

No he didn't, a guy on twitter invented that editing a page of his book

Apparently the original 2016 edition had that part in but subsequent editions didn't. Although I guess that could be made up as well.

No lol

https://www.businessinsider.com/jd-v...-speaks-2024-7

Couch thing with JDV was completely made up, just like the horse thing with Walz.

Welcome to the modern world.