Cory Booker Filibuster

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cory is adorably goofy. I think his earnestness is endearing. I wish he wasn’t so secretive about his dating life. Maybe if he was more open, he could find a special someone.

This is a weird post.

Why a lot of voters are into this. A lot of personal assessment goes into voting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cory is adorably goofy. I think his earnestness is endearing. I wish he wasn’t so secretive about his dating life. Maybe if he was more open, he could find a special someone.

This is a weird post.

It’s unusual for unmarried, unattached folks to become heads of state. Although there have been a few movies where a single President sneaks past the secret service to go on dates on the down low. [/quote

Nope. I don’t buy it. Mateless is very 2o25-2050

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cory is adorably goofy. I think his earnestness is endearing. I wish he wasn’t so secretive about his dating life. Maybe if he was more open, he could find a special someone.

This is a weird post.

It’s unusual for unmarried, unattached folks to become heads of state. Although there have been a few movies where a single President sneaks past the secret service to go on dates on the down low. [/quote

Nope. I don’t buy it. Mateless is very 2o25-2050

Hopefully! There are a lot of us aging singletons out here. Cory could represent that alternative lifestyle for us. Not every man wants a wife and kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cory reads as fairly masculine, in spite of apparently not being the marrying kind. We’re in desperate need of masculine candidates. It’s funny that two of our best are Buttigieg and Booker. No wives, but deep voices. We’ll take what we can get

Men don’t need wives. Or husbands. Instead of chatting with a significant other, Cory just had a 25-hour heart-to-heart talk with All Of Us. I’m fine with Cory doing whatever he does privately to blow off steam.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m watching right now. This ain’t it, sorry. Even at age 55, he still seems like that goofy college football player who was groomed for this role by the globalists via the Rhodes scholar program. He projects an unconvincing faux seriousness, and it just doesn’t quite work. This kind of fake-brave rambling grandstanding is very on brand for Cory.

Yes as you sit your half- employed arse at your home office escaping or answering to DOGE everyday. Yes, you can judge from your couch. How about you gather your mass and go down to DC and speak your mind there??? I thought so.

No-one is personally claiming to be better than Cory. I’m just noting that he doesn’t strike me as Presidential timber. YMMV. Granted, it’s slim pickings for Democratic candidates

I would disagree with this. Amy Klobuchar, Gretchen Whitmer, Roy Cooper, Joshua Stein and Pete Buttigieg immediately come to mind as not 70 year old + moderate liberals from the Midwest or purple states. AOC is once in a generation talent, if the voter base ever catches up to her policies (we’d need someone more moderate in 2028).

[Anonymous]

Presidents don’t need wives. Justin Trudeau and Vladimir Putin are both newly divorced. And American President James Buchanan was a lifelong bachelor like Cory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure how much longer he can go. But I’m impressed. He wants to make it to noon and he probably planned well. But his voice is scratchy.

Exactly what bill was he filibustering?

It wasn’t a filibuster. It was a speech from the Senate floor.

It did delay the Senate from taking other action today until after 8pm, which delayed the confirmation of the NATO ambassador.

So nothing constructive, just a distraction and disruption of the process. As always.

You just described your own comment. Well, except that it’s not interesting enough to be an actual disruption. Lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are we not doing the "the filibuster is an offensive vestige of our racist past and should be abolished" thing anymore?

It was not a filibuster! Try, with your shredded, addled MAGA pseudo brain googling "Filibuster" and then ask your kindergartener to explain what constitutes a filibuster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure how much longer he can go. But I’m impressed. He wants to make it to noon and he probably planned well. But his voice is scratchy.

Exactly what bill was he filibustering?

It wasn’t a filibuster. It was a speech from the Senate floor.

It did delay the Senate from taking other action today until after 8pm, which delayed the confirmation of the NATO ambassador.

So nothing constructive, just a distraction and disruption of the process. As always.

You just described your own comment. Well, except that it’s not interesting enough to be an actual disruption. Lol

+1,000,000,000,000 to infinity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The sad thing is that it’s just talk. Mire of the same. We disapprove of Trump. Everyone already knows that. Dems need to DO something to help working and middle class people. Mandate e-verify. Cut spending. Ban some toxic chemicals. Something. Anything.

It is a beginning to build on. WI voters could not be bought. Something more to build on. "A journey of a thousand miles begins with just one step." (Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu.). Yesterday Dems took two steps towards dismantling the fascist reign of Rump and Muck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m watching right now. This ain’t it, sorry. Even at age 55, he still seems like that goofy college football player who was groomed for this role by the globalists via the Rhodes scholar program. He projects an unconvincing faux seriousness, and it just doesn’t quite work. This kind of fake-brave rambling grandstanding is very on brand for Cory.

Yes as you sit your half- employed arse at your home office escaping or answering to DOGE everyday. Yes, you can judge from your couch. How about you gather your mass and go down to DC and speak your mind there??? I thought so.

No-one is personally claiming to be better than Cory. I’m just noting that he doesn’t strike me as Presidential timber. YMMV. Granted, it’s slim pickings for Democratic candidates

I would disagree with this. Amy Klobuchar, Gretchen Whitmer, Roy Cooper, Joshua Stein and Pete Buttigieg immediately come to mind as not 70 year old + moderate liberals from the Midwest or purple states. AOC is once in a generation talent, if the voter base ever catches up to her policies (we’d need someone more moderate in 2028).

I like all those people too, but I wouldn’t call them a deep bench of great Presidential candidates. Klobuchar and Buttigieg have already run unsuccessfully, Whitmer insults Christians and had herself kidnapped, Cooper isn’t even in politics currently and Stein is Jewish. And AOC’s looks are fading faster than her gravitas is growing.

Almost no-one begged any of these people to run against 80-year old Joe Biden in the primaries or to take Kamala’s spot this time. I don’t think any of these people are necessarily worse than Booker, but I also don’t think any of them could have done better than Kamala. (She got the second most votes of any Democratic Party Presidential candidate in history.).

Anyway, not to take anything away from these impressive public servants, but none of them are Obama electric or Bill Clintonesque. For any on your list to win, voters would have to strongly prefer our party, trust us more on the issues they care about most, etc. And that’s not where we are as a party right now. (Check out the results of Dem David Shor’s 26 million interviews). To sell our platform to skeptical voters would require a miracle worker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The sad thing is that it’s just talk. Mire of the same. We disapprove of Trump. Everyone already knows that. Dems need to DO something to help working and middle class people. Mandate e-verify. Cut spending. Ban some toxic chemicals. Something. Anything.

It is a beginning to build on. WI voters could not be bought. Something more to build on. "A journey of a thousand miles begins with just one step." (Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu.). Yesterday Dems took two steps towards dismantling the fascist reign of Rump and Muck.

To replace the Republicans, Democrats will have to deliver value to the swing voters. On the very issues where swing voters preferred Trump. It will be very hard. We don’t agree with swing voters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m watching right now. This ain’t it, sorry. Even at age 55, he still seems like that goofy college football player who was groomed for this role by the globalists via the Rhodes scholar program. He projects an unconvincing faux seriousness, and it just doesn’t quite work. This kind of fake-brave rambling grandstanding is very on brand for Cory.

Yes as you sit your half- employed arse at your home office escaping or answering to DOGE everyday. Yes, you can judge from your couch. How about you gather your mass and go down to DC and speak your mind there??? I thought so.

No-one is personally claiming to be better than Cory. I’m just noting that he doesn’t strike me as Presidential timber. YMMV. Granted, it’s slim pickings for Democratic candidates

I would disagree with this. Amy Klobuchar, Gretchen Whitmer, Roy Cooper, Joshua Stein and Pete Buttigieg immediately come to mind as not 70 year old + moderate liberals from the Midwest or purple states. AOC is once in a generation talent, if the voter base ever catches up to her policies (we’d need someone more moderate in 2028).

I like all those people too, but I wouldn’t call them a deep bench of great Presidential candidates. Klobuchar and Buttigieg have already run unsuccessfully, Whitmer insults Christians and had herself kidnapped, Cooper isn’t even in politics currently and Stein is Jewish. And AOC’s looks are fading faster than her gravitas is growing.

Almost no-one begged any of these people to run against 80-year old Joe Biden in the primaries or to take Kamala’s spot this time. I don’t think any of these people are necessarily worse than Booker, but I also don’t think any of them could have done better than Kamala. (She got the second most votes of any Democratic Party Presidential candidate in history.).

Anyway, not to take anything away from these impressive public servants, but none of them are Obama electric or Bill Clintonesque. For any on your list to win, voters would have to strongly prefer our party, trust us more on the issues they care about most, etc. And that’s not where we are as a party right now. (Check out the results of Dem David Shor’s 26 million interviews). To sell our platform to skeptical voters would require a miracle worker.

Right wing mis info

Thanks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure how much longer he can go. But I’m impressed. He wants to make it to noon and he probably planned well. But his voice is scratchy.

Exactly what bill was he filibustering?

It wasn’t a filibuster. It was a speech from the Senate floor.

It did delay the Senate from taking other action today until after 8pm, which delayed the confirmation of the NATO ambassador.

So nothing constructive, just a distraction and disruption of the process. As always.

You just described your own comment. Well, except that it’s not interesting enough to be an actual disruption. Lol

Nevertheless, it made you laugh and you bothered to answer instead of keep scrolling and singing the tune of your party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m watching right now. This ain’t it, sorry. Even at age 55, he still seems like that goofy college football player who was groomed for this role by the globalists via the Rhodes scholar program. He projects an unconvincing faux seriousness, and it just doesn’t quite work. This kind of fake-brave rambling grandstanding is very on brand for Cory.

Yes as you sit your half- employed arse at your home office escaping or answering to DOGE everyday. Yes, you can judge from your couch. How about you gather your mass and go down to DC and speak your mind there??? I thought so.

No-one is personally claiming to be better than Cory. I’m just noting that he doesn’t strike me as Presidential timber. YMMV. Granted, it’s slim pickings for Democratic candidates

I would disagree with this. Amy Klobuchar, Gretchen Whitmer, Roy Cooper, Joshua Stein and Pete Buttigieg immediately come to mind as not 70 year old + moderate liberals from the Midwest or purple states. AOC is once in a generation talent, if the voter base ever catches up to her policies (we’d need someone more moderate in 2028).

I like all those people too, but I wouldn’t call them a deep bench of great Presidential candidates. Klobuchar and Buttigieg have already run unsuccessfully, Whitmer insults Christians and had herself kidnapped, Cooper isn’t even in politics currently and Stein is Jewish. And AOC’s looks are fading faster than her gravitas is growing.

Almost no-one begged any of these people to run against 80-year old Joe Biden in the primaries or to take Kamala’s spot this time. I don’t think any of these people are necessarily worse than Booker, but I also don’t think any of them could have done better than Kamala. (She got the second most votes of any Democratic Party Presidential candidate in history.).

Anyway, not to take anything away from these impressive public servants, but none of them are Obama electric or Bill Clintonesque. For any on your list to win, voters would have to strongly prefer our party, trust us more on the issues they care about most, etc. And that’s not where we are as a party right now. (Check out the results of Dem David Shor’s 26 million interviews). To sell our platform to skeptical voters would require a miracle worker.

Exactly. Democrats must admit corruption with open border policies.