2024 Primary Elections.

How are these two things connected to each other?

You know, everyone can tell you're flailing when you start throwing out disconnected non sequiturs like this.

Stubbornly obtuse.

Dodge, deflect, deny.

Oh, I feel like that this is a good time to remind folks that because of the way the CO SCOTUS ruling was worded, Trump will be on the primary ballot. The US SCOTUS had to rule on the case before Jan. 9th (that's the last date before the state started printing the ballots) for him to be taken off. They didn't, so he'll be on it.

No for a lot of reasons:

1. People don't solely vote based on the economy and some don't even have it as a high consideration. Propaganda, single issues and tribalism on all sides are some of the factors that might get people to vote for one candidate or another. I will freely admit that even if the economy were in complete freefall and Trump had a plan that objective economists said would reverse things , I wouldn't vote for him because he is not fit to be president for numerous reasons not worth repeating.
2. Even among those who care about the economy as a huge factor, it is not as though they all look at the economy through objective indicators. They look at things like the price of gas and the availability of goods and services.
3. Along similar lines, it seems to me that many people are quick to blame the president when the economy is doing badly but not to credit him when it is going well.
4. It's possible that the economy overall to be doing well, and yet the economy in Dogpatch, Arkansas or Silicon Valley or wherever to not be doing as well.

Sean Hannity and Vivek Ramaswamy get into insane shouting match – and Hannity accidentally admits Trump isn’t qualified to be President.

You don’t see the Republican Party doing those same things?

Something to keep in mind about the economy:



https://x.com/axios/status/1747591594595762550

We are at a point where Republicans will reflexively say the economy is bad when a Dem is in office and where Dems have internalized the narrative that while it might be good for them personally they are a lucky exception and that overall it must be bad because there are still poor and struggling folks.

How does the 63% number compare to the past? Preferably to polls with the same wording.

No.

I mean, he doesn't even admit they tried to overthrow a legitimate election, or that those that did so committed insurrection (his reasoning being "well, they were shit at it, so it doesn't count" - by which logic, his preferred sports team never actually loses the league either), so why would he notice such trivial* shenanigans?

* Trivial when the right does it. Which they do.

Then you’re either deliberately lying to yourself by making up excuses when Republicans do such things. Or you’re in complete denial in which case …. How do you even function like walking and talking and typing and shit?

You need to read and understand the definition of insurrection.

insurrection
noun
in·sur·rec·tion ˌin(t)-sə-ˈrek-shən

Synonyms of insurrection
: an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/insurrection

Read it. Pretty clear your boys committed insurrection in support of your president staying in office after he lost the election.

It’s only insurrection if it’s antifa and FBI plants who did it, otherwise it’s a peaceful protest.

No. YOU need to read and understand the definition of insurrection. No where, in any reality, does the definition include the word “successful”.

I didn’t say anything about it having to be successful.

Again, not my boys and Trump was your president too. Anyway, the riot at the capital was to supposedly overturn the election not overthrow the government. But if Jack Smith is so certain that Trump was involved in an insurrection, he can charge him with it. In fact the DOJ can charge everyone that was there with insurrection if it’s such an airtight case.

Yeah I mean they engage in much more healthy things like gerrymandering and fake electors plots

Well I’m glad we got the Whataboutism out of the way.

I keep telling y'all, FF identifies with the idiots from J6 because they're his fellow travelers in Conspiracyland.

Does anyone have difficulty believing that he would've gotten caught up in the moment and pulled the same stunts those morons did?

I"m glad you were able to show how biased and limited you are for like the ten millionth time here

And nobody else is biased?

I don’t have easy access to any but I have seen similar polls the last six months or so following this trend of folks increasingly rating their own economic situation higher than their stated perception of the economy as a whole.

So … successful insurrections are well planned and well armed.

What would you call an attempt at an insurrection, but is not well planned and well armed?

And, if it’s not successful, do you think those people (liberals/commies/leftists) should be able to walk away?

Everyone has biases for sure but you're at the very worst end of the spectrum

If there’s an insurrection that’s not well planned out and well armed I would still call it an insurrection. Why anyone would attempt such a thing is beyond me.