₦airaland Forum

Me still trying to understand how I entered this fight 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

raumdeuter, IjeBos

Maeve7:
I would like to give you a 100 likes for most of your comment.

Na which Harry Potter stunt you wan pull 🤣🤣🤣

However, Vance‘s biggest flaw is that he supports Trump and by doing so loses all credibility. I can’t trust anyone who can support and defend a criminal who was trying to steal an election and unleashed a mob on the Capitol. Vance is educated enough to understand how Hitler rose to power and this should be a warning to people who value the rights and freedoms of a democracy.

Everybody with their view on the issue. Same way a couple of folks I've engaged with told me Walz made an unwise choice being Kamala's VP. In their view, a man of his capacity should have been the main guy. That's just it.

This is election, so many likes and dislikes are flying all over the place, but one thing is certain, Vance and Walz, love them or hate them, are way more presidential than their principals. For Trump and Kamala, I'm so livid with GOP and DEMS.

Having said that, I pray that your decision not to vote will not lead to you not having the right to vote in 2028.

One, I don't vote who I feel is not worthy of my vote. I need to be at peace with my conscience.

Two, nothing will make Americans lose their power to vote, not now, not in the future, except you are trying to tell me that the democratic and governmental institution is weak. But, it's not, it's stronger than anyone, be it Trump or Kamala, so how will "we the people" lose the right and power to vote?

It's boring and annoying having to hear this narrative. "Trump is a threat to democracy. Trump is this, Trump is that..." All that's bullshit, neither Trump or Kamala is greater and stronger than America's democratic and governmental institutions. These institutions stands supreme over all. So no right or power is going anywhere.

Thank you for your extensive analysis and balanced view and mostly for this part here:

” That's how it should be rather than a situation where one gets scared when a particular candidate wins.“

As it should be... 😎


#Xavier

MY THOUGHTS ON THE VICE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES

Honestly, I have to admit, the vice presidential debate was the presidential debate we were looking for but never got. For the first time in a long while, we were exposed to a civil, respectful, passionate, smart, and patriotic debate, scratch that, discuss between two smart, respectful, passionate, sane, composed, presidential, and patriotic Americans. The debate was way... way... way better by miles to the junks we've been having in the name of presidential debates.

Three set of things I noticed from the comments of wall street journal were I watched the debates (I preferred an independent media rather than a right wing or left wing media in other to avoid the right wing or left wing bias comments, the audience of wall street journal were a mix of civil and sane liberals, conservative and independents) were;

* Vance and Walz were more presidential than their principals.
* Audience wished Vance and Walz were the presidential candidates instead.
* It was the debates Americans had been looking for; civil, respectful, smart, passionate and patriotic.

And I'm 100% in agreement with that. For the first time in a long time, I saw liberals and conservatives seeing eye to eye with each other, and disagreeing respectively in the comments. For the first time in a long while, patriotism was the order of the day. The aura of Vance and Walz truly rubbed off on the audience.

One of the most beautiful thing was hearing, "I agree with Vance on this," "I agree with Walz on that." The empathy Vance showed towards Walz when he talked about his mass shooting experience was heartwarming, likewise how they focused their attention on each other when one was speaking, it showed they were willing to listen, and probably learn.

As I said, I'm 100% in agreement that these two should have been the presidential candidates instead of their principals. Vance had the cerebral capacity, and Walz exuded enormous passion to serve his country. With these two as presidential candidates, irrespective of who would have won, America would have been in good hands. That's how it should be rather than a situation where one gets scared when a particular candidate wins. The greatest miracle Americans would be eternally grateful for is waking up and finding out that these two are the presidential candidates 😂😎😁.

Who won the debate? To me, both won. They showed that there's hope for America. They showed that we have people that are willing and passionate to serve this great country. Both made their case to the best of their abilities, and I can tell from the body language of the moderators that they enjoyed the show, who wouldn't? I almost didn't want it to end.

Someone asked me, if Vance and Walz were the presidential candidates, who would I have supported?

Now that's a tough choice, but after reflecting on it for quite some time, I will say, Tim Walz. Why? Well, when I see Tim Walz, I see a patriotic, competent and passionate leader and servant of the people. Don't get me wrong, Vance is a smart, sane, cool, patriotic, and passionate guy also (he's willingness to grant interview and engagements both with left and right wings media and audience is highly commendable), yes he has his flaws, but he's an amazing guy whether you love him or hate him, he's someone I would love to see run for president someday. As I said, Vance is an amazing guy, but I prefer Tim Walz for the reasons mentioned.

Aside that, the performance of Tim Walz right from his time as Congressman to his moments as Governor has been impressive, not perfect, but impressive. Yes, he's made bad decisions and said things that were either wrong or false as a political leader; yes, I don't agree with all his views and policies, but nevertheless, hate him or love him, he's a competent leader, and way more presidential than Kamala and Trump combine.

When I heard him speak during his unveiling as the vice presidential candidate, I was like, "This should be the presidential candidate." And I'm not being sexist here, I will pick an Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosy, or Michelle Obama over Tim Walz, but with Kamala, I'm going with Walz. Kamala doesn't appeal to me for a number of reasons. But if Vivek Ramaswamy is in the scene, forget about it, Vivek Ramaswamy all the way, that's my guy. I guess now, I will be called a Democrat voting Independent for saying I will vote Walz over Vance 🤣🤣🤣.

This is the reason, I'm very mad at the Dems and GOP. GOP had the candidates like Ron DeSantes, Nikki Haley, Vivek Ramaswamy etc, but chose Trump of all people. Dems had people like Tim Walz, Gavin Newsom etc, but preferred Kamala. Why won't they, when they know they have loyal voting base🤦🙄.

Right now, with Trump and Kamala as the presidential candidates, I'm not supporting neither. As a matter of fact, I've washed my hands off the election. Whoever wins, wins, I don't give a fück. My focus is on 2028.

But all in all, the debate was impressive, and Vance and Walz were amazing. There's hope for America 😊.



#Xavier

kingbee90:
But you guys can call Trump a rapist, felon etc and that is ok right?

But is he not a convicted felon? 🤨

As for the "rapist", aside from allegations, I'm yet to see the evidence for that, so that's kept aside.

Calling a convicted felon a convicted felon is stating the truth, but calling someone stupid simply because they are your opposition is simply nothing short of hate. Besides shouldn't someone that claimed that immigrants Haitians are eating pets be called stupid also?


#Xavier

budaatum:
I hope Biden loses this case.

Its like telling Musk to sell X because of alarm at the prospect of X being used by the Musk to spread propaganda to Americans.

Lol!

TikTok will start making its case on Monday against a law that will see it banned in the US unless Chinese owner ByteDance sells the social media app within nine months.

The measure - signed into law by President Biden in April - has been prompted by concerns that US users' data is vulnerable to exploitation by China's government.

In addition to data concerns, DoJ officials and lawmakers have expressed alarm at the prospect of TikTok being used by the Chinese government to spread propaganda to Americans.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5y3y79llndo

Chinese government are using TikTok to spread propaganda as if its the Chinese that spend all their time on the platform spreading the propaganda and not Americans... 😂🙄🤣


#Xavier

kingbee90:
The bitch is really an idiot. Someone whoa has been evading some serious questions because she doesn't have brilliant answers to them.
Lately, she has been exposed as the fake, clueless and unintelligent person that she truly is and Americans are aware.
Sleepy Joe is even more intelligent than that skamala Harris if not that his age is taking the better part of him hence his dementia.

Same can be, without doubt, said of Trump whom Kamala has shown to be more cultured and composed than, especially during the debate.

Fine, political oppositions and criticisms is a social normality, but it shouldn't get to the point of being hateful or derogatory, especially in such manner. Limit suppose dey for everything, yes?

Na all these hates dey cause all these assassination attempts up and down. Na until person die before people body go calm down 🙄

But wetin concern fowl with sky 🚶🚶🚶🚶🚶


#Xavier

kingbee90:
This is a fact..

What the Bleep is this!!! 😒😡😠. There should be a limit to political shenanigans.

_______________

In other news, Americans will not vote for anyone simply because he escaped assassination twice, definitely not the Americans I know. It would be a miracle if that's the case. GOP should better focus on something more credible, and not all these "God save Trump..." "God is with Trump" yada yada yada...

So God no dey with Kamala also who is even more of a Christian than Trump bah? 🙄


#Xavier

IjeBos:
Good idea. While you're at it, look up the meaning of Subjective vs. Objective.

Okay sir... I will be liberalized my liberalism aka radicalized my moderate liberalism. Thanks for the charge 🤗🙃🤝


#Xavier

raumdeuter:
This is the point, there are good candidates on both sides of the divide and a sensible person will differentiate the good and the bad

Exactly. Both have good and bad eggs. Both have given America good and bad presidents.

Respecting and listening to each other's view without hatred is how a civilized society like America should function and this is one thing I love about Vivek. He espouses such belief and is always willing to engage even with people that contradict him. This dude even went to black hoods in Chicago and engaged with liberal blacks and for the first time in a long time, I saw a sane conversation about the progress of the country, one filled with patriotism. That moment was so beautiful. I was moved to tears at how divided America had become.

This is the reason I so much love Obama's speech at the DNC where he criticized the politics of hate and division that is been played in America. He called for people to always listen to the other side with respect whether you agree with them or not.

I get you and respect your views, My own beliefs align more with the Republican party, I dont agree 100% with them but I agree more with them than I do with the Democratic party

🤝✊👊👍🙌

Let me tell you ahead of time, Soon he will say because you dont live in America, you have no right to comment on US issues except you agree with the democratic party 100%

Bro, you don't need to tell me. I've been around this thread as an observer for two years now, so I know how everyone here behaves.

Ijebos is a smart and amazing guy, he knows how to give a good argument, but at times, he tend to act funny, and when he does, even his fellow comrades tend to back off, but nevertheless he's a smart and amazing guy.

Aside that, how will anyone know if I am an American citizen or not if I don't give out that info. But anyways, that's that for that.


#Xavier

IjeBos:
Reading that was painful. So much broken logic.
Isn't it hilarious that I asked for why you think Biden underperformed and to give me specific policy and you did the same thing you accused Harris of doing, dodged, deflected and weaved, but never answered. Lol.

Some questions are funny, hence I don't bother giving replies to them.

You're asking me how Biden has underperformed. Bro, if the reality of Americans regarding the issues like the economy and border security is not enough to convince you that Biden has underperformed, then what is there to say.

Biden isn't underperforming, and yet Kamala is runing on a "fix the economy" campaign.

Biden isn't underperforming, and Kamala was to help the middle class out of economic hardship. What happened to Bidenomics?

Biden isn't underperforming, yet people including
lots of independentss are willing to vote for a convicted felon because they fared better economically during his reign.

If these realities are not enough to convince you that Biden is underperforming, then what will I say, when you will still be hell bent on defending you Biden the over competent fellow.

I misjudged you.
I can probably understand now why you think you are a liberal and are also a fan of Desantic and Vivek. You haven't really thought about it long nor really understand what the liberal philosophy is.

Okay sir. Let me go and educate myself on what the liberal philosophy is 😎👊🙌


#Xavier

raumdeuter:
This is my point too. I don't have to like a person for me to vote him.

Why are you a democrat or republican? Its the policies that differentiates them. So who will push the policies you support

I'm neither of any party, but I'm liberal... moderate liberal. Being a moderate liberal makes me majorly liberal and minorly conservative. Such combinations makes it possible for me to have a balanced view of life. Truth is, both liberalism and conservatism are necessary, both progressiveness and fundamentalism are needed, that's why radicalism has to be put out of the window. Uncontrolled conservatism is oppressive, and uncontrolled liberalism is insanity. Both are needed to ensure balance in the system.

Normally, I'm the kind of person people may pass out as an independent. But in the real sense, no one is an independent. For one to be an independent, one has to be 50% liberal and 50% conservative, or 0% liberal and 0% conservative, but no one really is such. Rather what we have are;

* 100% liberal aka radical liberalism
* Majorly liberal and minorly conservative aka moderate liberal.
* Majorly conservative and minorly liberal aka moderate conservative.
* 100% conservative aka radical conservatism.

I fall into the second category, and everyone falls into any of the four category. Being a moderate liberal makes me have a more balanced view of things, it empowers me to look at things from both side of the spectrum and make a sound judgement, unlike radicalism, be it liberalism or conservatism, that blinds people to the truth. But the downside is that I get called "not liberal or not liberal enough" a lot 😎.

I would have been in favor of Newsom vs DeSantis. I support DeSantis more

Same with me, but Vivek came along 😁. I agreed with some of his view, but I also disagreed on some of his view e.g firing the department of education. What a bluff Vivek 🤣🙄. But what attracted me to him was his smartness, rationality, charisma, vibrancy, and willingness to respectfully engage with people irrespective of whether they are on his side of the fence or not. The way he always humbled CNN, MSNBC, NBC News, ABC News with his wittiness, boldness and confidence always made me laugh

Did you watch the DeSantis vs Newsom debate earlier in the year?

Heard about it, but didn't actually watch it. Now you've brought it up, I will make out time to watch it.


#Xavier

IjeBos:
So, this topic has been a big debate since the era of Trump. How do you debate someone who lies with a Megaphone like Trump. And previous to the debate the consensus argument was that she shouldn't focus on trying to explain the economic policies, too complicated too much detail, so stick with broader themes. I hear you about detail, but we're living in a post fact world and liberals have to understand that. To legislate they have to win. Liberals can't get down to the level of constant lying of Trump and co. But, in this season, it calls for broader generalizations. You remember when Obama ran. Republicans called him professorial as an insult for doing exactly what you suggested. That he thought he was smarter than everyone else, he was looking down on people. What the media repeated was "who would the voter want to have a bear with". That was Harris's goal. As a Black Woman in the US, she had a finer needle to thread. Not too aggressive, not to laughy, not too smart or she would be uppity, but smart enough.

As usual, try and justify Kamala's lack of policy discuss, and heap all the blame on Trump. I believe I've made my points clear, debates are meant to address policies by candidates. So when asked a question, candidates should answer and address that question, and not spend vast majority of the time beating about the bush, throwing lies like grenades, rambling off-point, and blaming the other for their own failures. That isn't what Americans want, otherwise, why bother debating at all?

And fyi, you can't say you are a liberal and talk about you like Ronald Reagan, Ron DeSantes, and Vivek Ramaswamy. You just gave yourself away. Those three are as Bullshit as Bullshit comes esp. Ramaswamay. They hold a fake intellectualism, they know what they say is intellectually dishonest and makes little sense, but will appeal to uneducated Republicans. You know the term voodoo economics came from Reagan. You should instead of listening to how they say things, look at the actual policies they are talking about and ask if they make sense. They understand most people won't

I was expecting you to say this, and I was not disappointed. So I'm not a liberal because unlike you I chose to not ass lick the Democratic party. Just wow 😂, but anyways, who am I to argue 🤣.

Bro, some of us focus on quality of individuals or candidacy, and not party okay. And whether you like it or not, Ronald Reagan was an amazing president, same as Obama.

Were these two perfect? No

Did they perform well? Yes

Did they perform absolutely well? No.

Did they make bad decisions and judgements as president, that faced criticisms? Yes.

Do I agree with all their views and policies? No.

As I said, I do candidates or individuals and not party. An as I also said, no law says that one has to support all the views of his or her preferred candidates, in other words, I don't support all their views and policies.

As for Vivek, reading this makes me laugh 😂. Vivek is not smart? Okay, if you say so 🙌. But the evidence that abounds in the media says otherwise.

My brain cells die listening to Ramaswamy. And I know he's smarter than the BS he spews.

But your brain cells did not die listening to Biden whom you've dedicated all your time and energy on this thread defending. Good to know 🤣.

You keep saying that Biden underperformed. And you and may have a different definition of unobjective. So, explain why. And then explain what you think he could have done better. Give me policy.
If you have a son who is scared of the rain and wants you to stop it. So, you put up blinders in the windows, so he can't see it, dampeners in the house so he can't hear it. But he opens up the door and it's still raining. Did you as a father fail in stopping the rain? No. because it's rain and you don't control the weather. Not all things have an immediate controllable solution and as voters it's our job to research to understand when that's the case.

So in your view, Biden performed well, but yet, Americans are unhappy with the issues of the economy, border security, energy, global wars under the Biden-Harris adminstration.

Biden performed well, and yet Kamala wants to fix the economy, not improve it, but fix it.

Biden performed well, and yet Kamala wants to help the middle class (who where of course faring better under Trump).

Statements like this makes me laugh, but that's what you get when someone has sworn to defend the "competency" of Biden despite the fact that the reality of Americans are the opposite, and when you call that out they claim you're not a liberal, I guess I'm not 🤷.

You're looking for how Biden underperformed? The reality of Americans serves as an evidence to that, likewise the "fix the economy" campaign Kamala is running on.


#Xavier

ObaIgwe1:
I don't know who won the debate, but I know one person achieved her set objectives while the other failed to do so, not because he didn't get the chance or because the moderators were biased, he didn't achieved his goal simply because of his inflated ego and weird obsession to irrelevant issues.

There can never be a fair or policy debate with someone like Trump. Trump hardly obey rules and or care about others. While all politicians lies, Trump lies are at another level, both necessary lies and stupid lies that can make you question your sanity.

As usual, trying to justify her lack of policy discuss. Trump normally is a mad man, but that didn't change the fact that she was asked questions several times, questions which she dodged answering but instead choose to throw lies, and blame Trump. Was Trump responsible for that? Was Trump in charge of the controller of her brain and mouth? All this excuse to me sounds funny.

The moderators, I don't know if they were biased but they gave Trump more time than Harris. For example, Trump kept asking for more time to rebut Harris like 5 times outside the time rule, and the moderators allowed him 4 out of the 5 times. The only time Harris wanted to rebut a false claim by Trump about taking all guns away, the moderators denied her, and she had to use another of her time slot to rebut that... But no one said the moderators were biased at that instance.

What clearly played out was Harris knowing Trump ahead of time, and knowing Trump doesn't play by the rules or stay on policies debates, and that he is all about winning the show and making his opponent look bad. She knew also from the polls that a high number of people still claim not to know her... So she decided to use the debate to achieve the following:

1. Introduce herself to the audience who don't know her. Reason why instead of answering the question on if the economy is better now, she was telling the audience about herself.

2. Get on Trump skin, derail him and make him look bad. She succeeded with this to a good extent.

3. Use the questions to simply sell out her key policies. And she succeeded with this too. I know there is need for more details, she can do that during interviews or rallies or those bus drives.

Some of you think she is not bright... But I saw a smart prosecutor sticking to her brief and goal, avoided questions that will generate bad press and wrong controversies. And IMO, she did make Trump look lesser than himself.

The question is, how many questions did Trump also successfully answered?

Same question should be asked of Kamala (although she fared a little better than Trump in that. I say things as they are.) The debate was all about both candidates spending vast majority of the time dodging questions, throwing lies, rambling off-point, and blaming the other for their failures. Which now begs the question, was that what Americans wanted to see and hear considering the reality on ground?

BTW, the claim that Trump won with closing argument on why Harris has not implement those ideas as VP is bullshit to me. We all know The VP doesn't have such power. Trump knows that and so do all educated people. Like how much of Pence's ideas were implemented under Trump?

Yes, she may not have absolute power, but she has the power to persuade the president and partner with him to do that, but no, such wasn't the case, not even the efforts to do so. Why?

For example, Is she trying to say that Biden wouldn't have gone with her $50K task incentive for small and medium business start-ups? Did she even make the efforts to do so?

Secondly, when she was praising and supporting Biden's economic policies as the next best thing to Jesus Christ, didn't she know of the economic reality on ground? Has she "diplomatically, subtly or wittily" condemn such policies? Did she address them? Or she still praise them.

Whether we like it or not, she was and is the 002 of the Biden-Harris adminstration, which made her heavily associated with how the adminstration was ran, and the effect of such can not be disassociated from her. Secondly as the VP, she had the capacity to persuade the President to buy into those policies of hers, but nada, no efforts were even made for such. So what excuse do you want to give for her?

So yes, the Trump question is more than valid, and the only way for Kamala to disengage herself from that is to address that elephant in the room, and if she can effectively do that, then she has my support, otherwise, unfortunately, I would be stuck with Trump, which I'm not a fan of 😢.


#Xavier

What's with all the Kamala earring's conspiracy theory going round. This is balloney 🙄

Please we have more drama as it is with all the "she's a Marxist", "Trump's project 2025" etc noise flying around. Make we try allow this dust settle na before una start another one 🤣🙏👀


#Xavier

IjeBos:
You're both siding this.
Imagine sitting in front of a fire hydrant/hose and trying to drink from it. That is tantamount to what any debate with Trump is like. It's a torrent of lies, BS and teenage insults. In that environment it is impossible to have a thorough debate on substance. It doesn't work when one party can lie every time he opens up his mouth. Go back and look at the past debates with say Obama and Romney. What has changed recently that's made the debates less policy driven.. Trump. The tell is that half the country supports a man that still doesn't have a health care policy 9 years later and thinks tariffs could take over tax revenue, that hospitals kill babies post birth and that immigrants eat dogs and cats.

And, honestly, you are making this argument with the belief that only if people did things perfectly will things be perfect. Biden could have made all the right economic decisions, that doesn't mean everything would be perfect esp. after Covid. There is inflation in Canada, they are blaming Trudeau. What you should do instead is look at the alternative policies and see if they would have made things better. What policies have Trump or the GOP proposed that would reduce inflation? None. Tax Cuts, inflationary. Tariffs, inflationary. Lower interest rates, inflationary. It's voodoo economics. That is the reason the Economy tends to fair better under Dems. They are comfortable letting the science(Economics) work. That is the reason an evil company like Goldman would endorse a Dem like Kamala.

Biden's failure was not explaining to the country what would happen. The same thing happened with Obama. The Republicans didn't want to bail out the auto companies, were talking about austerity, all the BS Vodoo economics they are known for. What happened. Obama stuck to his guns and the US faired better than other countries.

I'm a liberal, and my liberalism demands I call out bullshit as it is, irrespective of who the subject is, and that's what I did. I don't ass lick anybody. None of them pay my bills.

Note, this is not about Dems vs GOP, this is about Trump and Kamala, and their performance at the debate. Let's not shift ground here.

The debate was an embarrassment, it is what you would expect in a third country's presidential debate. Neither Trump and Harris were answering questions asked them about policies (although Kamala tried very little here compared to Trump. I say it as it is), rather all they did was spend vast majority of the time, beating about the bush, throw lies, rant off-point (Trump), and blame the other for their failures (Kamala).

You attempt to justify the above with the concept of Trump behaviors making policy discuss impossible, but need I remind you that Kamala was asked questions multiple times... questions which she dodged answering. Need I remind you that she had opportunities to address the elephant in the room, which was the incompetence and underperformance of the Biden-Harris adminstration, and tell how and why she can and will be better, but she didn't. Was it Trump that was in charge of her brain and mouth controller?

Look, I don't engage in unobjective task of defending any candidate or party simply because I'm a liberal. I call it as it is. The debate was trash... nothing short of comedy. I'm a fan of Obama, Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosy (who are Democrats), same way I'm a fan of Ronald Reagan, Ron DeSantes, and Vivek Ramaswamy (who are Republicans). I don't do parties, I do individuals.

Defending or trying to justify the underperformance of the Biden-Harris adminstration is unobjective. Defending the unpleasant performance of any of the candidates is unobjective. And that's something I, Xavier, will never be a party to. My liberalism says no. Gone were the day where you would listen to a presidential debate and be thrilled, but today you either get angry or you get wildly amused.

But I gave Trump the win because of his concluding speech despite his lies (which Kamala was equally guilty of), off-point ramblings, and uncoordination. The question he asked is one every American needs to reflect on.

I'm neither a supporter of Trump nor Harris. As a matter of fact, I wanted this election to be between Newsom and Vivek. Vivek was my preferred candidate because he's quality despite the fact that he's conservative and GOP. Do I agree with all of Vivek views? No, same way, I didn't agree with all of Hillary Clinton's view when I supported her in 2016, same goes with Obama. There's no law that says you must agree with your preferred candidates' view to support him or her. I support Vivek because he's very smart, vibrant, bold, engaging, charismatic and appears competent.

As a liberal, my liberalism demands me to be rational and objective, and rationality and objectivity demands I don't support party, but rather, candidates. It demands I focus on candidacy quality. This is what Dr. Phil was tasking his audience to do. If Americans do this, politicians and politcal parties will sit up. They will realize propaganda and shenanigans won't work, but rather quality in terms of candidacy and policies, and will be forced to give Americans those.

If this election were to be between Newsom and Vivek, it would have been a win win for America irrespective of who won due to candidacy quality.

I'm neither a supporter of Trump or Kamala, but IF, and that's a big if, I'm to support anyone, currently it will be Trump despite his unpleasant personality, because of;

* His concluding speech.
* The failure of Kamala to address the above stated elephant in the room.
* Trump's performance as President.
* Trump's talk-and-do personality (this personality isn't absolute though, but it's a highly attestable one)

If an unpleasant personality is the one that appears to be able to get the job done over the so called pleasant personality, then objectivity demands I go for the unpleasant personality. I don't need to like him, I just need to like what he would do as president.


#Xavier

FUNNY HIGHLIGHTS OF THE DEBATE

1.) Moderator: Kamala, you and Trump were elected four years ago...

Me: I didn't know Trump was the president all these while?... 😂😂😂


2.) Moderator: Kamala, is the economy better than it was four years ago?

Kamala: I was raised in a middle class family... yada yada yada... 🙄😂


3.) Literally any questions asked

Trump: millions and millions of illegal immigrants are pouring into our country... 🙄🤣


4.) Trump: Illegal immigrants are eating our dogs, cats and pets...

Me: Oh really!!!!!! 😮😯🙄😂🤣


5.) Kamala: Trump is against IVF

Me: Kamala!!!!!! 😮😯🙄🤣😂


6.) Kamala: project 2025

Me: Good Lord 🤦


7.) Trump: she's had three and half years as the VP to do these things she had said, why didn't she do it?

Me: Gbam... Exactly!!!!! 🙌✊👊👍



#Xavier

MY THOUGHTS ON THE U.S PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES

I know it's coming late, in my defense, I was uninterested in commenting on it, but nevertheless I later felt the urge to do so.

The debate to me was nothing presidential, but everything of a Hollywood comedy sitcom where two adults that called themselves presidential candidates spent at least 90 percent of the time, one, lying, and two, rambling or blaming depending on who was speaking, all these without talking extensively on policies.

Trump was a pathological liar, and off-pointed rambler. Kamala Harris was a pathological liar and blamer of Trump for all the misfortunes that had befallen the country under the Biden-Harris adminstration. I can't count the number of times I had to scream or utter,

"Jesus!!!!! Trump that's a lie."

"Trump for fück sake, stay on track and answer the question."

"Trump enough with the millions and millions of illegal immigrants pouring into our country... and fücking answer the question."

"Mr 'the illegal immigrants are eating our dogs, cats and pets'."

"Mr 'concept of a plan'."

"Woman, Trump is not responsible for that, Biden and you should take responsibility."

"But you've been the vice president for three and half years Kamala, why didn't you ensure such was done. Why now?"

"That's a lie, Kamala!!! Trump never said that... that's not true."

"Really Kamala!?... project 2025, national abortion ban, Trump is anti IVF... really!?"

"Don't tell us your history Kamala, answer the fücking question!"

"Mrs 'Trump caused it'."

"Mrs 'Bidenomics is working, but we need to fix the economy'."

I watched the debate hoping to see two minds talk deeply about policies, but no, all I saw were two aggrieved teenagers in adults bodies settling personal "you did not take me to prom night, and this is the reasons why I didn't do it" scores. It was an eyesore. I have to admit, the Nigerian presidential election was way better than this junk we call presidential debate. So much for being the champions of democracy.

Funny enough, Trump and Harris in their White orange masculinity brain, and black Indian feminine brain respectively would think they won the debate. So ridiculous.

WHO WON THE DEBATE?

Well, I'm tempted to say none, but Trump's finishing statement was the finisher. So because of that, I would say he won the debate by hitting home with that one despite his uncoordination, lies and off-point ramblings.

Kamala talked about very few beautiful polices e.g $50K tax deductions for small and medium size business start-ups (which I personally support), but if she really had the intentions of serving Americans with these policies, why didn't for the past three and half years of being the vice president of the United States of America ensure it was done, or at least made the effort to do it? If she really cared, why didn't she do it? She was and is the VP for three and half years, why not work with Biden to execute at least some, if not all, of those "sweet policies".

* You want to help the middle class, why didn't you do it or make efforts to do it for the three and half years as the VP of the Biden-Harris adminstration?

* You want to fix the economy, why didn't you do it for the three and half years as the VP of the Biden-Harris adminstration? And please remind me whose administration brought such inflation to the economy again? And please remind me who said Bidenomics is working?

* You want to establish a two state solution to end the Israeli-Hamas war, why haven't you and Biden made any effort towards that these past months?

* Regarding securing the border, tackling the Russia-Ukraine war, and restoring abortion to the federal level, why didn't you, in partnership with Biden, do them or made efforts to do them for the three and half years as the VP of the Biden-Harris adminstration?

If she didn't do them or made efforts to them, why and how should and can we trust her to do it?

Truth is, I was expecting Harris to address the elephant in the room... the elephant of the incompetence or underperformance of the Biden-Harris adminstration especially in matters of economy, border security, energy, global wars, cancel culture, radical woke etc, and why and how she was going to be better. If she had done this, she would have gotten my support.

As a liberal... moderate liberal, I'm not a supporter of neither, but after this debate, if I'm to pick a side, I would go with Trump because of;

* His concluding speech.
* Harris failure to address the above stated elephant in the room.
* Trump's performance when he was the president.

And that's my tiny tweeny two cent.



#Xavier

abduleez1:
Damn, Omo I almost download am two days ago but my spirit no gel with am. Instead I downloaded A QUIET PLACE 2. The trailer didn't sing with me cos I wasn't feeling it or felt the need to watch it.

I even say I go ask people for here how e be before I come on board. Means it didn't live up to expectations of it's predecessors.

Cc Xavier5

Hey bro, long time 😎


#Xavier

MaXXXine --- 3/10

Caveat: spoiler alert

A flick blessed with nudity, sex, and gory deaths but cursed with lack of rational storyline as a support structure for the mentioned elements.

Let's go over the plot and see why it is say so;

A preacher wants his daughter, Maxxine, to follow in his foot step as a preacher, or a devoted Christian worker or leader, but unfortunately she has other plans... plans of being a Hollywood star, but since she didn't have a big break she had to start from somewhere and this somewhere happened to be porn. Her preacher father of course was furious with this... furious that his darling daughter had been taken, inducted and corrupted by Hollywood into what he terms, its radical, immoral and satanic films, and Pornography. So he swore to rescue his daughter likewise expose and destroy Hollywood.

And here is where the problem lies, if his aim was to expose and destroy Hollywood, why go on a killing spree after upcoming actresses and porn actresses? Why not go after the big shots in the industry --- the studio executives, investors, directors, producers, scriptwriters, Hollywood stars etc?

Okay, let's give the plot the benefit of doubt and reason that he was trying to get his daughter's attention in other to make his so called Hollywood exposing video with her being featured in it, hence the killing of her friends, then the question of why he killed the other actresses that had no connection to his daughter still hovers in the air.

MaXXXine had what it takes to be an amazing slasher blockbuster, but unfortunately, poor storyline punctured it. It seems the film makers were more interested in the nudity, sex, and gory deaths than the plot. Disappointing and tragic, I must say.


#Xavier

Okay y'all it's been long I posted here... well at times a little vacay is needed... but let's cut to the chase 😏

1.) Divorce In The Black --- 7.5/10

An intriguing and reflective movie about love, family, friendship, commitment, hope, second chance, toxic and abusive marriage, irresponsibility, dysfunctional family and its consequences.

Tyler Perry keeping up with his mandate of not just entertaining but passing across life impacting messages. One reason why his movies, especially his non Madea movies are a must watch for me.


2.) Deadpool And Wolverine --- 5/10

(Spoiler alert on this one)

A spectacular promising movie that morphed into a big let down. The comedy, R-ratedness, musical score, emotional weight, and actions were solid, but unfortunately the movie was cursed with a ridiculously stupid plot.

Okay, let's go over this;

** Why did Paradox choose to destroy the various universes?

** Why did he choose to save the heroes he chose (which he later sent to the void when they refused his proposal of joining the sacred timeline but instead chose to save their universes)?

** The anchor entity concept is just as silly as silly itself, like, how and why should the existence of a universe be based on the existence of a particular person? How does that make sense? Honestly, Marvel's multiverse theory is just balloney.

** Why were the Deadpool Corp seeking to kill Deadpool and Wolverine?

All these plot issues made the plot of the movie hogwash.


#Xavier