What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2026 Elections: To the Midterms and Beyond!

Boston_E said:
Not talking about the party. Both meaning El Sayed and Stevens. They obviously have some sort of fued going on… and usually there is some fault from both sides.
Click to expand...
Well yeah, she lost to him.

The leftist, socialist, Muzzie terrorist. Why shouldn't she hate him? All patriotic, country-lovin' 'Mericans should.

Edit: Always 'both sides' with you. I mean, it really is something to endorse the Republican who you would be otherwise running against if a few thousand votes went the other way in the primary. As someone said, then what is it you really stand for? Why did you want to run against him if you like his policies so much?
 
Last edited:
psych said:
Even if true, what has El-Sayed done, in your opinion, that would make Stevens not, you know, just refuse to endorse him or tell her supporters "vote your conscience" or some crap, and instead endorse the other guy? Since you're the only one coming at it from this angle, I can't say I recall too many times where this happened.
Click to expand...
Right - I have no idea what may have been said or done behind closed doors. But unless we think Stevens, as a lifelong democrat, all of a sudden went full on MAGA (unlikely), there must have been something, particularly where she previously had endorsed El Sayed.
 
rufus said:
Well yeah, she lost to him.

The leftist, socialist, Muzzie terrorist. Why shouldn't she hate him? All patriotic, country-lovin' 'Mericans should.

Edit: Always 'both sides' with you. I mean, it really is something to endorse the Republican who you would be otherwise running against if a few thousand votes went the other way in the primary. As someone said, then what is it you really stand for? Why did you want to run against him if you like his policies so much?
Click to expand...

Right - thats why it makes sense to think of the possibility that SOMETHING went on behind the scenes.
 
Boston_E said:
Right - I have no idea what may have been said or done behind closed doors. But unless we think Stevens, as a lifelong democrat, all of a sudden went full on MAGA (unlikely), there must have been something, particularly where she previously had endorsed El Sayed.
Click to expand...

No one thinks she went full on MAGA. She’s an opportunist. Almost her entire team quit, so it seems only she was offended enough to abandon her values to endorse someone who wants to dismantle all of them.
 
She had a disastrous interview with Anderson Cooper. He asked her why she told Debbie Dingell that she wouldn’t endorse Rogers at midnight and then was in church with him the next morning.

First she deflected saying the call wasn’t at midnight. Then he asked regardless of the time of the call, what happened within 24 hours of her backing Abdul and then backing Rogers. She just kept circling around to the same talking point about anger and division, and Hasan Piker, and Cooper told her none of those changed in the last 24 hours, so what changed in her mind? That went back and forth for five minutes before he just straight up asked, did you even talk Debbie Dingell yesterday, and she failed to even answer that question.
 
psych said:
Even if true, what has El-Sayed done, in your opinion, that would make Stevens not, you know, just refuse to endorse him or tell her supporters "vote your conscience" or some crap, and instead endorse the other guy?
Click to expand...

Pretty easy answer - because he won't bow & scrape to AIPAC and suck Israel's dong.
 
There are 160+ ballot initiatives across the nation tomorrow.

If trends hold from the last 2 decades, regardless of the congressional/gubernatorial races in the same state, expect the more liberal position to win out about 80% of the time.
 
psych said:
No one thinks she went full on MAGA. She’s an opportunist. Almost her entire team quit, so it seems only she was offended enough to abandon her values to endorse someone who wants to dismantle all of them.
Click to expand...
But she did go full maga. She is now backing the MAGA guy who is out there fanning the fear of hate and wants to use that time to pick our pockets.

Just because she hasn't said it, right NOW, anyone who is supporting anyone who has not fought back against the current grain is a MAGA. Rogers has done nothing to end the crap that is in the white house, nothing. Just added to it. So anyone who supports him is full maga. Or at least they are part of the racist FAFO crowd.
 
MichVandal said:
But she did go full maga. She is now backing the MAGA guy who is out there fanning the fear of hate and wants to use that time to pick our pockets.

Just because she hasn't said it, right NOW, anyone who is supporting anyone who has not fought back against the current grain is a MAGA. Rogers has done nothing to end the crap that is in the white house, nothing. Just added to it. So anyone who supports him is full maga. Or at least they are part of the racist FAFO crowd.
Click to expand...

I mean, at this point, she’d be better off just switching parties and embracing the dark side entirely. She’s still trying to tightrope this disastrous decision with “I’m still a Democrat.” Bye, Felicia.
 
unofan said:
There are 160+ ballot initiatives across the nation tomorrow.

If trends hold from the last 2 decades, regardless of the congressional/gubernatorial races in the same state, expect the more liberal position to win out about 80% of the time.
Click to expand...
We have several here in Idaho. Big one is prop 1. A "yes" vote restores the right to abortion in most cases. The "no" side has been more vocal here where I am but I think there are a lot more "yes" folks than people realize. A HUGE number of doctors across the state signed an open letter supporting the "yes" side so of course the no side has accused the yes side of lying and has been trying to find any doctor they can to come out against. I was an easy yes on that. I am not confident it will pass but I am really hoping I am wrong.

The other big one would change rules to where only the legislature can decide to legalize marijuana and other drugs. No ballot props or anything could do it. The legalize side has been gaining a lot of momentum and nearly got medicinal passed on a prop a few cycles ago, and of course the legislature doesn't like that, especially after the Medicare expansion was approved by a huge margin a few years ago. I of course voted to leave that in the hands of the people. I am on the legalize side anyway but even if I wasn't, I am 100% certain this would be used to take away the rights for other ballot initiatives as well. Our 3rd was to amend the state constitution to make english the official language. Voted no on that. Waste of time, money, effort. We also had a thing where we could vote on the official state gun. Because apparently nothing else important needs to be addressed. I didn't select one but I was tempted to write in the "oozinator"
 
Proud2baLaker said:
We have several here in Idaho. Big one is prop 1. A "yes" vote restores the right to abortion in most cases. The "no" side has been more vocal here where I am but I think there are a lot more "yes" folks than people realize. A HUGE number of doctors across the state signed an open letter supporting the "yes" side so of course the no side has accused the yes side of lying and has been trying to find any doctor they can to come out against. I was an easy yes on that. I am not confident it will pass but I am really hoping I am wrong.

The other big one would change rules to where only the legislature can decide to legalize marijuana and other drugs. No ballot props or anything could do it. The legalize side has been gaining a lot of momentum and nearly got medicinal passed on a prop a few cycles ago, and of course the legislature doesn't like that, especially after the Medicare expansion was approved by a huge margin a few years ago. I of course voted to leave that in the hands of the people. I am on the legalize side anyway but even if I wasn't, I am 100% certain this would be used to take away the rights for other ballot initiatives as well. Our 3rd was to amend the state constitution to make english the official language. Voted no on that. Waste of time, money, effort. We also had a thing where we could vote on the official state gun. Because apparently nothing else important needs to be addressed. I didn't select one but I was tempted to write in the "oozinator"
Click to expand...
Feels like a real missed opportunity to write in “Fart Gun”.
 
You'll never guess who's seized the chance to make some cable news rounds now that Stevens has stabbed the party in the back. 😁 However, she makes it pretty clear who she supports and how it's going for HS in Dem strongholds over the last 24 hours.

www.youtube.com

Haley Stevens' backlash 'has enraged people'

Michigan state Sen. Mallory McMorrow says backlash against Rep. Haley Stevens has galvanized Democrats in the state and could drive more voters to support De...
www.youtube.com www.youtube.com

After Israeli Haley's stunt yesterday, Mal has got to be seething all the more about getting squeezed out of the race by a DINO.

Sidenote: Coop's 'Tuckface' has practically become a doppelganger. It's the look I'd see on every MTU freshman's face after the first physics or calculus exam.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top