They would probably be smart to pick Desantis over her. Desantis absorbed more of the Trump base than she did, and if he drops out, they're more likely to go back to Trump than they are to move over to her. I'm betting that she's the next one to drop out.
As it is, both Ramaswamy and Desantis absorbed Trump supporters who probably wanted someone less "caustic and chaotic". Ramaswamy's supporters will likely split between Trump and Desantis with a bias towards Trump, due to Ramaswamy's endorsement, and Haley is going to be left further behind.
The context here is suspect, though. Why use "Pizza shop" as an example here of all places, and of all things?
17 is just a number. Not every appearance of 17 is significant, it's the context in which 17 is used that is significant. It's the same concept here. Pizza is just a food, until the actual context makes it significant.
Whatever happened with the judge-ordered Nuremberg public hearing?
https://therepublicansvoice.com/united-states/public-hearing-for-illegality-of-covid19/
No, we aren't. There are plenty of conservative areas, but Cincinnati, Columbus, and Cleveland are pretty deep blue, and despite most of the state being red, they're the reason Ohio has a history as a swing state, and why, up until recently, we were purple.
This was not a win for Ohio; it's not a loss yet, but the point was to make it harder to allow for constitutional amendments because special interests want to change our constitution for anti-voter id and pro-abortion agendas, and so on. There's a reason the push for this was so skewed and intentionally confused.
When it comes time to vote on those measures, people are going to need to pay more attention and do more research than they did today.
As adamant as you are about telling people to vote no, could your provide your sources for why a no vote is necessary - including the lbgt language that you say is present? Because as far as I can tell, there isn't anything of the sort present, rather, this is what the issue is about, taken directly from the documentation itself:
The proposed amendment would:
• Require that any proposed amendment to the Constitution of the State of Ohio receive the approval of at least 60 percent of eligible voters voting on the proposed amendment.
• Require that any initiative petition filed on or after January 1, 2024 with the Secretary of State proposing to amend the Constitution of the State of Ohio be signed by at least five percent of the electors of each county based on the total vote in the county for governor in the last preceding election.
• Specify that additional signatures may not be added to an initiative petition proposing to amend the Constitution of the State of Ohio that is filed with the Secretary of State on or after January 1, 2024 proposing to amend the Constitution of the State of Ohio.
https://www.ohiosos.gov/globalassets/elections/2023/spec/issuereport.pdf
Is there some pork that's being missed in the full letter of the amendment? If so, then why is General Flynn telling people to vote yes?
While I understand the disgust at the idea of listening to him, closing your eyes and ears and refusing to see what people like him are saying is often times worse than not hearing them at all. That's one cause that allows them to do whatever they want - their enemies refuse to pay attention to them, and so miss the important slips and tells.
Just remember, this is a friendly environment and everyone else is disgusted by him as well. That being said, we need to know what he's saying, because in cases like this clip, he's exposing himself and what he believes in. There are people who believe in him who don't realize that he said this, or who don't realize the importance of what he's saying, who need to be shown the truth of what he stands for.
Who are these people?
No, seriously. I've heard of a small handful of the names listed, but they are a very slim minority. They might as well have asked an AI to create a list of 250 random names for as much worth as this list has. Even if they are real people, not a single one of them is actually important to the world at large; at best, they've just told everyone what content to avoid - if anyone even associates a movie or song with anyone here outside of the likes of Patrick Stewart or Ariana Grande.
"He was threatening me and I was so scared!" - So I keyed his car.
If you are being threatened by someone, and you are actually scared of them, then you don't go out of your way to antagonize them. Plain and simple. Lying sack of shit. He might as well have said "He made me do it! If he didn't showcase an opinion that I didn't like, then I wouldn't have done it at all, so he made me do it!" All he could do was shift the blame to his victim.
Whatever they were, they were better then CNN has seen in years, and they're better than CNN will see again until they are the lone network to host Trump again.
This is really going to burn for them, to see that massive ratings spike, and to know that the only reason for it was because of Donald Trump, and that it showcased him putting them in their place and completely dominating dominating everything they tried to throw at him.
Not only that, but #BoycottCNN and #DoneWithCNN are trending from the left. Not only did Trump dominate tonight, but CNN went into cardiac arrest and is starting to flatline among the few who do watch their regular programming.
To Candace Owens: who released the video, whose testimonies have been received, what is known and what is not known?
This feels very reactionary and incomplete, and there are way too many "Imma react first to get the story and clout!" kneejerk reactions to really take this very seriously without knowing everything. Especially from someone who's reporting under the brand of the Daily Wire, considering the recent drama that they've had with regards to Crowder.
This feels off, and it feels like something that should have been kept private between those two and the others who are directly involved, not something that should be flared off from a source that recent events would suggest is antagonistic toward Crowder.
Well, wait and see on that. It's not a crime for him to have an opinion. It's what he (what anyone) does and how he (they) grows that matters.
If he's awake to the truth behind the media, and if he works to spread the truth, not the propaganda, then why shouldn't he be given the benefit of the doubt? Hold him to account for any crimes that he commits, certainly, but in this case, he didn't (doesn't) like Trump, and he was blind to the truth behind the media? So what?
When someone wakes up and shows that they're willing to help, and then does so, then the response shouldn't be "What took you so long? Care to explain this, this, and that?", it should be "Welcome aboard".
If we wanted everyone to be perfect, and refused to associate with anyone who had flaws, then we'd be alone for a very long time. This isn't a cult, and we're not all required to have the same beliefs. If Tucker is openly awake to the lies and the culture of the media, and is not ignoring it, then he deserves respect for that much, at the very least.
See, the thing is, I could already believe that this is something that Brandon would mumble out, and that Pierre-whatsherface-Le Pieu would try to defend it as if he was actually going to be able to do it.
Best check February of 25, just to be safe!