Best Of

Hundreds of articles written giving glowing accounts of bidens speech. The msm loves those rat candidates even the brain dead one's. No one said it was the best ever, they were mostly relieved that he didn't lose all train of thought and mumble his way to oblivion. Once that relief set in, the rat media went about propping his speech up when the reality is, it wasn't positive, it was filled with lies, and his writers clearly have no connection with middle class Americans who are struggling. Honestly, can a President be more out of touch?

Give credit to many Americans. They saw through the bullshit. Notice in the article how the rat writers try like hell to make this all about age as if to say it is superficial and not based in reality.

The press is pathetic.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/yahoo-newsyougov-poll-no-state-of-the-union-bump-for-biden-190451496.html

The speech earned rave reviews from pundits — but so far, Americans don't seem convinced by the president's energetic new pitch.

Pundits may have fawned over President Biden’s State of the Union address last Thursday, praising it as a “homerun” performance from a “fiery, powerful, vigorous guy” that would ease nagging fears about his age and vitality.

But voters barely seem to have noticed.

A new Yahoo News/YouGov survey of 1,482 U.S. adults, conducted in the days immediately following Biden’s big speech, shows zero improvement in perceptions of the president — or in his standing against former President Donald Trump.

Before the State of the Union, Trump (45%) and Biden (44%) were statistically tied in a head-to-head 2024 matchup, according to the previous Yahoo News/YouGov poll from late January.

They remain tied today, with Trump at 46% and Biden at 44% — a gap that’s well within the poll’s margin of error (2.8%).

Before the speech, 40% of Americans approved of the job Biden was doing as president; 56% disapproved. Today, those numbers are 39% and 55%, respectively.

Hahahaha

Sounds good to me!

So how many open Trump voters do you think are tenured professors in the History and English departments at the U of W? There is no way an avowed conservative gets considered for tenure. There may be a few normal(ish) people but they have their heads down. They don't have their heads down at Hillsdale, which is why I mentioned it.

If you want to spend a hundred grand of your own money for a gender studies degree, then go ahead and our wonderful colleges can continue as they are. I have a BA in History. Back in the 70s it was still a useful degree as it was Western Civ centric. While the commies were at the gates they hadn't yet conquered the department. Minored in trade school Accountancy. Today I wouldn't touch a liberal arts degree from anywhere not named Hillsdale. Colleges need the market to carve them down. If the History department wants some students, they need to teach some actual history, not made up sh*t to hit a DEI score or secure some chicom money. Toss in some economics and basic science and make a liberal arts degree worth something - how to read, think, learn and be able to write a comprehensive paper that explains your thinking.

Everything about J 6 is a lie and everyone knows it

but when your incumbent is a veggie brain…

guys inflation is over

Besides the price on everything going up

the left wants mutants walking the planet in the name of diversity.

No one on this board thinks we should be cozy with Russia, China or any of their proxies.

But tell me why I should give a yellow and blue fuck about Ukraine at this point?

We signaled we wouldn’t do shit when they took Crimea 10 years ago so what was going to stop them this time with the same admin fumbling around?

Last I checked Russia does all of their stomping around in E Europe when it’s Obama/Biden running things in the west.

HTH