Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

He bombed the first debate, but when you look at a transcript and see what he was saying, rather than how he was saying it, it is abundantly clear he is not senile.

His comments were rational, logical, and made sense. There was absolutely no indication of someone having any kind of mental problems in what he said.

I'm not saying he shouldve run again, or that he performed well or anything like that (or that he would've done better in another debate). But when you're arguing that someone is senile, you need more than bad delivery of good content.

:#soycry2talking:

Holy shit /u/Vanden_Boss, that's some hard core copium you're huffing there.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Literally the content was shit bed to him by advisers, the only thing he was responsible for was the delivery. He was calling Zelensky Putin

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Just like he beat Medicare

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

He bombed the first debate, but when you look at a transcript and see what he was saying, rather than how he was saying it, it is abundantly clear he is not senile.

lmao even this is wrong

I remember him being asked a question about crime or some shit and he pivoted to talking about illegal immigrants. Literally the opposite of what he should have done, he literally dragged the conversation to one of the topics where he was at his absolute weakest.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Yeah but if you read the heckin transcript!!!!

:#soyjaktantrumfasttalking:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Ah yes the common debate topic of pivioting to your weakness

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.



Now playing: Gang-Plank Galleon (DKC).mp3

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.