Point of Information:

"UP" stands for "Unstuck Politics". It's the discussion board where the lefties who apparently were disenfranchised from 2+2 years ago set up shop.

I don't think Hunter Biden moves the needle for anybody. The Fox bubble people obsessed with it are automatic R voters, dems don't care, and anyone lost enough to qualify as a swing vote has probably 20 issues and events far more visible to them. If we've learning anything it's that proximity to criminal or corrupt behavior just isn't a electability deal-breaker these days (and Republicans largely have themselves to blame for that).

Seriously, a crack-smoking probable tax cheat who violated a gun law and did some questionable business overseas seems almost normal. If he were a right winger they'd probably have him running for a House seat.

Well said.

If the GOP employs a Clintonesque "It's the economy, stupid" strategy they should easily take the House and Senate this November. The more time and effort the GOP spends on focusing on stuff that almost literally nobody cares about, the better the chances of the Dems at least holding the Senate.

As an aside, I agree with Victor that both parties are reprehensible.

you seem to care quite a bit. considering the pompous words you spew. and considering the shoehorn you use to attribute nonsensical aspirations to me.

well now you are lying. bc the last time me and you talked about UP, I ended up with death threats and threats at my job. something that you said definitely wouldnt happen and if it did then I deserved it.

but you def dont care about me lol.

ok so you were talking **** and making up fantasies. thanks for the confirmation.

you seem to really really really not care about me.

well the next time this factors into my posting will be the first.

you already turned down an easy bet. bc you were lying.

keep making things up. your accusations are only limited by your imagination.

if you mean the right by Trumpers, well they are a lost cause. if you mean the right by the Democrats, well "scratch a liberal". or should I say, "scratch a Monteroy".

I do understand that if you wanted to actually talk about issues and the state of the world and politics that you would realize quick fast and in a hurry how out of your league your are. so you gotta lie about my opinions and turn everything into an ad hominem attack with your cute little words like Derpy and Riggie.

I am truly sorry that the Bidens doing shady **** in Ukraine has caused you to get so unhinged that you are ranting about how much money you won 2 years ago and flailing about with accusations that people like me somehow support Trump.

one minute you dont care about politics and the next you are ranting about how Hillary emails and somehow thinking that leftish **** posters on 2p2 can shape national elections. in one sentence you dont care about me but the bulk of the thousands of words before and after will be about me specifically.

he knows that. we had a long back and forth about where it was explained in depth to him.

also, lol at calling them lefties. "scratch a UPer..."

I just have one question to ask you - are you looking forward to the mid-terms as much as me?

Monte knows about Unstuck Politics. He apparently didn't recognize the abbreviation "UP" being a reference to Unstuck Politics.

Didn't the disenfranchised crowd consider themselves lefties?

Honestly, I did not remember the name of that site and have not visited it in memory. Maybe I did around early Covid (mid 2020) to see how that niche of people would behave about it? I found most of them to be too whiny for my tastes, even if I agreed with many of their political beliefs. Still, they did what I always suggest people do when they whine about this place - they created their own space to do as they like, so good on them for doing that. I assume they never monetized it, because how could they, but I doubt that matters much in the end as a forum is a cheap thing to maintain.

I am not interested in politics anywhere close to most of the people here who are either alt right derps (or pretend to themselves they are not) or people who like to argue with alt right derps. No idea who you are to know which of those two categories you likely are, but guessing one category fits pretty well, just due to how this forum operates with the remaining small niche of old white dudes.

It will be interesting to see if the Republicans can steal defeat from the jaws of victory (as any incumbent should be destroyed in midterms) due to some of the extremely bad, derpy candidates they put forward in some Senate races, like the football guy and the TV personality guy, but other then that I can't say this particular cycle is of that much interest to me.

I might agree with that statement in its strictest sense but that's about it. As things are today I'd just as soon compare a headache to brain cancer.

parties are much closer than you realize

@David Sklansky, help me understand the below exchange then if that last post by you is correct?

You seem to be CLEARLY (to me) replying to Slighted that Democrats WOULD CARE if Hunter was charged if it increased the chance of Trump being President. You then reply your post has no connotations to any such charges and conviction of Hunter having implications on the election????

To me it seems clear the entire framing you created was to suggest Dems WOULD CARE about Hunter stuff if it ended up helping Trump win an ELECTION??

And again my point of rebuttal to all that is that you cannot frame a rhetorical question that way. I mean, you can, but it is not a smart way to do it. It would be similar to asking would he Dems care if Jeff bezos is arrested and convicted and you saying 'if they thought it would help Trump get re-elected they would'.

There is no reason Dems would believe that would help Trump's re-election so it is not really a consideration in this calculus.

Libs can just skip to the 45m where Cody goes buh buh Trump. Cody is such a lib smh. But even a lib can find 45 mins of corruption around these people.

I often use a news event to make a general point. In this case it was that Democrats mainly care about what will get them elected just like Republicans. They would oppose immigration if they thought it hurt their chances. I think that you didn't realize that I was using the Hunter story as an example of that general point because you, unlike many, liberals, consider that point so ridiculously obvious that you couldn't imagine that I would bother to point it out.

Ok. So it seems your thousand foot point is 'Politicians care about issues that can get them elected and don't care about ones that harm their election chances'.

I won't debate that as it is obvious. Just not much of a point to interject imo.

No, my actual point was not that they would just stop caring about an issue that won't help their election but that they would actually pretend to switch sides (if they can get away it without being obvious). That might not have been obvious in my original post but my comment about immigration above made it clearer

Why not just make your points obvious?

Various reasons. In any case I will this time. I think that if national Democrat lawmakers thought it would help them get elected if they called for Hunter's prosecution, that's what they would do. I also think that the main difference between almost all Republican and Democratic national lawmakers and pundits is simply a disagreement on the best guillotine prevention tactics.

They still let sklansky post here?

As long as he and others like him keep Hunter as an important issue then I am fine with it, whether it has his "OK, Boomer" weird slant or not.

I think there is a large degree of truth in this but also think the GOp is far more gone, in that regard. As i read it you are talking about shallow or non existent morals, that might lead a party (politician) to take the opposite position and even one many would consider deplorable.


I think the GOP has an extra pressure currently that the Dems do not have that makes them more compromised and dangerous. And that is that the GOP cannot win elections anymore (likelihood is plummeting) without fully embracing these aspects they KNOW are deplorable. When you know you cannot win, then doing something deplorable to win, becomes more acceptable.

I do not think the Dem are necessarily more moral, but because they can still win, they do not have to go anywhere near as deplorable as the GOP. Thus the Dem's can keep a better reputation generally and not lose a ton of Donor support, or suffer other consequences the way the GOP does. Again the GOP has decided better to win power first and then deal with all the fallout of how they won, after, then to lose and be irrelevant. Thus why Marjorie Taylor Greene is letting the Corporations know they are on notice that should the GOP gain power again, they are at threat for withholding donations to the them.

Both parties are power hungry frauds. Republicans are just batshit crazy taliban religious nutjob white nationalist loons, but Democrats aren't good.

https://www.msnbc.com/the-reidout/re...flop-rcna60111

The whitehouse has a dilema on releasing records. Should be straight forward as Joe Biden had no knowledge of his sons business activities or did he ?

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/other...8bf3fea7893cc3

"Dilema"... "Should be straight forward"

Source the right wing talking point source that has loaded your lip with those narratives as those OPINIONS you are saying are not rooted in any fact.

I mean it is fine for you to 'guess' it may be a dilemma and fine for you to guess 'from what you know it should be straight forward', but no one has to agree with you on either point.

This reeks of all the 'Twitter should release all the Biden/Hunter data exchange' Part 2.

Pre Elon buying Twitter, and then after Elon does buy and it releases with a Bill Barr type narrative suggesting 'lots of wrong here Biden needs to be concerned about', and then Matt Taibbi and those given the data say 'sorry nothing here re Joe Biden but Elon should release the Trump, White House exchanges too as it looks like the REAL government, at the time, the Trump WH, was active in trying to direct the speech of the platform'.


Any lozen, i look forward to hearing where you got that narrative from?