YubNub Social YubNub Social
    #humor #loonylibs #charliekirk #illegalaliens #tpusa #bigfoot #socialists #buy #deportthemall #blackamerica #commieleft #sell #lyinglibs #shemales #trannies
    Advanced Search
  • Login
  • Register

  • Night mode
  • © 2025 YubNub Social
    About • Directory • Contact Us • Developers • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • shareasale • FB Webview Detected • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App

    Select Language

  • English
Install our *FREE* WEB APP! (PWA)
Night mode toggle
Community
New Posts (Home) ChatBox Popular Posts Reels Game Zone Top PodCasts
Explore
Explore
© 2025 YubNub Social
  • English
About • Directory • Contact Us • Developers • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • shareasale • FB Webview Detected • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App
Advertisement
Stop Seeing These Ads

Discover posts

Posts

Users

Pages

Blog

Market

Events

Games

Forum

YubNub News
YubNub News
1 y

The Path of AOC
Favicon 
yubnub.news

The Path of AOC

They were chanting a name in Chicago. Not Kamala’s. Not Barack’s. They certainly weren’t chanting Hillary’s (although she was, surprisingly, cheered). No chant rang out for Buttigieg, or Biden,…
Like
Comment
Share
YubNub News
YubNub News
1 y

Older Liberals Are Destroying Polling
Favicon 
yubnub.news

Older Liberals Are Destroying Polling

By the end of July, it had become clear that Joe Biden was going to lose the 2024 presidential election in a landslide. Democratic internals were not worried about Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania…
Like
Comment
Share
YubNub News
YubNub News
1 y

Trump Is Still the Pro-Life Candidate
Favicon 
yubnub.news

Trump Is Still the Pro-Life Candidate

When Rudy Giuliani ran for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, he had already flip-flopped on abortion once. Having switched from pro-life to pro-choice in his first New York City mayoral campaign,…
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
1 y

The Path of AOC
Favicon 
www.theamericanconservative.com

The Path of AOC

Politics The Path of AOC It’s all air from here. They were chanting a name in Chicago. Not Kamala’s. Not Barack’s. They certainly weren’t chanting Hillary’s (although she was, surprisingly, cheered). No chant rang out for Buttigieg, or Biden, or Michelle either. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez had barely begun speaking before she was forced to stop. They were chanting her name: “AOC!” rang out the call. If there was a seismic moment at the 2024 Democratic National Convention, this was it. “Six years ago I was taking omelet orders as a waitress in New York City,” AOC cried above a sea of multiracial, multicultural Democrats. “I didn’t have health insurance. My family was fighting off foreclosure, and we were struggling with bills after my dad passed away unexpectedly from cancer.” The great thunderclap that rose and rose from the bowels of the United Center on the first night of the DNC was not for the party standard-bearers but for a woman who took an outsider’s path to power. In brilliant, bright red lipstick that softened her navy power blazer, “Alex from the Bronx” never looked more radiant.   She fiercely defended herself from Republican critics who have mocked her previous professional experience as a bartender. “There is nothing wrong with working for a living,” roared AOC, who used her seven-minute speech to highlight the concerns of the working class. “To love this country, is to fight for its people. All people. Working people. Everyday Americans like bartenders and factory workers and fast food cashiers who punch a clock and are on their feet all day in some of the toughest jobs out there.” This was Ocasio-Cortez like never before, on the nation’s biggest political stage, sharing the personal struggles that shaped her ideology and pushed her to seek congressional office. “Like millions of Americans, we were just looking for an honest shake and we were tired of a cynical politics that seemed blind to the realities of working people.” AOC hammered away at Trump: “Trump would sell this country for a dollar if it meant lining his own pockets and those of his Wall Street friends. I, for one, am tired of hearing how a two-bit union-buster thinks of himself as more of a patriot than the woman who fights every single day to lift working people out from under the boots of greed” My phone was lighting up—“Inspired” read one text from a staunchly independent former colleague. “Hit all of my concerns,” summarized a working-class friend. “Ignore her at your own peril,” read another. The next night, Hillary Clinton screamed “something was in the air” above a joyous crowd. But whether she knew it or not, she wasn’t talking about Kamala.  AOC cleverly avoided the Israel dilemma on the big stage, only offering a passing comment about how Harris “is working tirelessly to get a ceasefire in Gaza.” As Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN) joined uncommitted delegates in the streets of Chicago to protest the official positions of the Democratic Party on Israel, AOC discussed the Middle Eastern conflict in private and with the sort of learned cadence you’d expect from the establishment class. It was the sort of centrist turn that dominated her measured and mainstreamed appearance in Chicago last Monday. If she is to run for the highest of American offices, the leveling of the far-left outcroppings that first won her power must begin now.  And when AOC inevitably goes for it, who exactly is stopping her?  Kathy Hochul is the primary target. The New York governor was mocked as a “black hole of charisma” following her miserable DNC speech that provided, in its awkwardness, a dramatic contrast to the organically animated congresswoman from New York City. Worse for Hochul, her tenure as New York’s hand-selected governor has been derided by Republicans and Democrats alike. She struggled in her 2022 “reelection” bid to defeat Representative Lee Zeldin in a solidly-blue state and her prospects for 2026 are mid at best. Her saturnine performance at the DNC has done nothing to ease her critics.  Hochul is a robotic, uncelebrated, unenergetic machine creature who has struggled to steward governorship of one of America’s wealthiest and most powerful states. AOC is a vivacious self-starter strutting the sort of meme energy not often associated with the political class. The plaudits Hochul has won via appointment, AOC has won organically from the people. “She’s in way better shape to run for statewide office than I ever was, because she can appeal in a Democratic primary a lot better than I can,” Representative Tom Suozzi, another hand-selected Democrat machinist, said in response to AOC’s big moment at the convention.  It wouldn’t be a race so much as a sweeping referendum, potentially reorganizing the power structure of the Democratic Party for years to come. In a nod to that shifting landscape, it was DNC organizers who reached out to AOC regarding Monday’s primetime speaking slot, not the other way around. Hochul meanwhile was buried and forgotten on Wednesday, the weakest day of the four. Any statewide aspirations that New York City Mayor Eric Adams might have cast for himself appear to have long come and gone. The embattled mayor, who has spent wildly on efforts to reinvent the trash can, made a quiet and unceremonious visit to the DNC and did not receive a speaking slot as he continues to fight a federal investigation into his 2021 campaign finances. The governor’s mansion has long served a launching pad for American presidents. George Bush, Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, and Jimmy Carter all made their way to Pennsylvania Avenue via their state’s top office during the modern era. If AOC wants the Oval Office, New York’s highest office is a logical place to start and the runway looks clear for takeoff.  Defeating Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer would be another battle altogether.  Though Schumer is old, age shouldn’t be an issue—California’s Senator Dianne Feinstein died in office earlier this year at the age of 90. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is 84. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who has repeatedly glitched in public, is 82. And Schumer, who won reelection to the Senate in 2022, will be “only” 78 years old when he’s up for reelection in 2028.  More worrying for Schumer, however, are the tighter and tighter margins he has won with over the last two decades. Schumer defeated the Republican Joseph Pinion III by 800,000 votes in 2022, but the victory represented Schumer’s smallest margin in a Senate race since he dethroned three-time incumbent Al D’Amato in 1998. Schumer’s position and power does not come from the people. Though he has taken the votes in a comfortably Democratic state, his power truly comes from those other (faceless) people, the bureaucrats and middle managers who couped President Joe Biden. The ones who really run Washington. Schumer’s lengthy tenure is not a testament to his magnanimous character but an ode to the weakness of the New York Republican party and the dogged, brutal machinery of the Democratic power structure (and Schumer’s willingness to climb).  But would she dare? AOC turns 39 in the fall of 2028. That would rank her along with Sens. Josh Hawley and Jon Ossof among the youngest members of America’s highest legislative body. Judging by her attitude on the DNC stage—a stage that has green lit the careers of many other Democratic starlets such as Obama and Tulsi Gabbard—AOC is seeking upward mobility.  The liberal pundit Mehdi Hasan couldn’t resist musing on AOC’s future in a post sharing her speech from the DNC: “If AOC ever runs for president—or a New York Senate seat!—you’ll see this clip a lot.” Although Schumer’s position is stronger than junior Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, it is unlikely AOC would attempt to oust the popular 57-year-old in an election only two years from now. This gives AOC ample time to soften her message and make further appeals to center Left voters who dominate the American electorate.  Freddie DeBoer sounded depressed—“AOC is just a regular old Democrat now,” read the headline of his dismissive 2023 article on the Queens upstart in New York Magazine. After years of performative stunts and stringently voicing for the concerns of America’s blighted underbelly, AOC had finally become the thing she once (allegedly) fought against—the establishment.  It never fit her better. Radicals may still light the spark, but the center is where the path to power lies. Whatever she chooses, governor or senator, the presidency would not then be far beyond her grasp. As it stands now in the summer of 2024, only two men seemed poised to repel what would be, by then, a sufficiently grassroots 2032 campaign with all the dressings of celebrity: California’s Governor Gavin Newsom and Florida’s Governor Ron DeSantis. These appear to be the likeliest of men that would stand in AOC’s path.  DeSantis has reigned supreme over a new Florida that ranks among the happiest and most prosperous states in the Union. Memories of his pudding fingers and his socially awkward demeanor could potentially be mended by that point, especially if he’s willing to allow his rockstar, cancer-beating wife to take a larger role in the campaign.   Newsom has already begun efforts to wipe the slate clea n on his tenure as top man in the Golden State, issuing and then personally seeing through his controversial decision to clean out homeless encampments throughout the state. In a recent show of force, Newsom, often derided by conservative critics for “destroying California,” has threatened to withhold state funds from counties who do not adhere to his executive order. Sporting aviator glasses, blue jeans, and work gloves, Newsom’s brawny show of force was a distinct detour from what has been characterized by his critics as a wasteful term that has seen Republicans in the state mount a recall effort in 2021.  Newsom also bucked party establishment during the DNC, openly mocking the process through which Kamala Harris was deemed fit to take over the 2024 ticket. Newsom, and other top Democratic talent, opted to allow the coronation of Harris 2024 knowing full well that there will be ample opportunity to run a full-on presidential candidacy in 2028 and beyond. As for other potential Republican challengers, Youngkin could be there. Perhaps Hawley too, although the picture may haunt his national ambitions for years to come. Gaetz seems like the type to make a run at the Oval Office, and the country probably deserves a Gaetz vs. AOC showdown for the memes if nothing else. Who knows, even Vance could be in contention, depending on how this whole 2024 thing plays out.  One thing AOC has is time. 2032 is realistic but 2036 probably suits her best. Meanwhile, she will have plenty of opportunities to walk back her more extreme rhetoric while positioning herself as the guiding female force in the new Democratic party. It’s a long, winding road to Pennsylvania Avenue, but for AOC, it’s all air from here.  The post The Path of AOC appeared first on The American Conservative.
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
1 y

Older Liberals Are Destroying Polling
Favicon 
www.theamericanconservative.com

Older Liberals Are Destroying Polling

Politics Older Liberals Are Destroying Polling For eight years, one group’s response bias has been playing havoc with poll accuracy. (DigitalVision/Getty Images) By the end of July, it had become clear that Joe Biden was going to lose the 2024 presidential election in a landslide. Democratic internals were not worried about Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania but New Mexico, Virginia, and New Jersey. Yet polls remained relatively tight nationally because Biden’s considerable support came from one demographic group: older white voters. Quinnipiac’s last poll before Biden dropped out had him leading Trump among senior citizens by eight points; the New York Times/Siena and NPR/Marist polls gave Biden a four-point lead with Baby Boomers and the Silent Generation, Fox News had the 46th president tied with his predecessor. In contrast, the Washington Post/ABC poll gave Trump just a point lead among this crucial demographic.  So, did Joe Biden have a unique ability to win over these voters, perhaps because of his advanced age? No; it was that older white liberals were answering the polls at a greater frequency than the general public.  It’s called polling response bias, and it’s the reason that voters were shocked at Trump’s 2016 victory and how close 2020 was despite Clinton and Biden’s monumental leads. Older white liberals’ tendency to become “Karens,” telling anyone within an eyeshot their opinion, is destroying the reliability of the polling industry.  According to Pew Research’s analysis of the last two presidential elections, Trump defeated Clinton by nine and Biden by four percent among voters over 65. Still, in the run-up to the election, pollsters predicted a blue wave led by an army of gray-haired voters. In the last few weeks before the election, Biden was crushing Trump among seniors in most national polls: Quinnipiac said Biden would win voters 65 and up by 15 points, Emerson by 12, CNN by 11, The New York Times/Siena and Fox News by 10, NPR/Marist by nine, YouGov/Economist by four points USA Today by two, ABC/Washington Post had him up a point.  This wasn’t the first time this happened. In 2016, key swing states had Clinton outperforming Trump among senior citizens.  According to exit polls, Trump beat Clinton by 23 points among senior citizens in North Carolina, but polls leading up to the election had his victory far narrower. Monmouth and the New York Times had his lead at 11 points, CNN had him up five, and Elon University tied them. Likewise, in Pennsylvania, Trump beat Clinton by 10 points among seniors in exit polls. Still, serious pollsters undervalued his support among this key demographic group in the last few weeks of the election. CNN had Clinton leading Trump by four, as did Monmouth. While pollsters have worked at updating models after the embarrassment that was 2016 and 2020, the same issue is occurring in 2024.  With less than 70 days to go, Kamala Harris’s marginal lead in polls is built off the back of a group she will lose, and probably somewhere in the margin Biden and Hillary lost: four to nine points. The only national public polls with crosstabs available to have Trump in this range are Pew Research, which has the largest national sample size of 10,000 people, and the New York Times/Siena poll. Pew shows him besting the vice president by six points among voters over 65, while she leads in the national poll by a single point, while the New York Times has Trump with a single-point advantage overall while winning seniors by five.  National polls like Fairleigh Dickson University have Harris beating Trump among seniors by 16 points, NPR/Marist has the Vice President leading by 11 points among Baby Boomers and two among the Silent Generation, Marquette has her up by four, Fox News has her up by two, Emerson has them tied, ABC/Washington Post has Trump up by just two. In the swing states, the polls are even more lopsided regarding seniors. The New York Times/Siena poll, considered one of the most accurate in the country, has Kamala leading or outperforming Biden’s 2020 numbers among seniors in virtually every swing state. According to their polls, she leads among voters over 65 years old by 20 points in Michigan, 10 points in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, and two points in Arizona. The pollster has Trump leading by five in Georgia and North Carolina and seven in Nevada. In 2020, Trump performed significantly better against Biden among seniors in most of those states. According to the exit polls, he won voters 65 years and older by 19 points in North Carolina, 12 points in Georgia, seven in Nevada and Pennsylvania, six in Wisconsin, and a point in Arizona. Biden won seniors in Michigan by two points. And the New York Times/Siena poll remains one of the more accurate among this crucial demographic. Quinnipiac has Kamala winning the gray vote by three in Pennsylvania, Marquette has her leading by five in Wisconsin, SurveyUSA has Kamala up 10 in North Carolina, and Landmark Communications has Trump up by just two in Georgia. Older white liberals’ response bias created the illusion that there was a silent Trump voter in the last two presidential elections, and they’re doing it again. The post Older Liberals Are Destroying Polling appeared first on The American Conservative.
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
1 y

Trump Is Still the Pro-Life Candidate
Favicon 
www.theamericanconservative.com

Trump Is Still the Pro-Life Candidate

Politics Trump Is Still the Pro-Life Candidate Harris threatens to upend every piece of progress the cause of life has made in the past 20 years. Credit: image via Shutterstock When Rudy Giuliani ran for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, he had already flip-flopped on abortion once. Having switched from pro-life to pro-choice in his first New York City mayoral campaign, he didn’t think he could plausibly change back for the Republican presidential primaries. Still basking in the glow of being “America’s Mayor” on 9/11, Giuliani sought the presidential nomination of a pro-life party as a pro-choice candidate. But he did make a few modifications to his position: He defended the partial-birth abortion ban, which he had opposed during his short-lived 2000 Senate campaign in New York, backed parental-notification laws, and vowed to appoint “strict constructionists” to the Supreme Court who might someday vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. Giuliani sat atop the national polls for most of 2007, making him the Republican frontrunner. But his pro-choice position ultimately proved fatal, as it informed his disastrous political strategy of skipping the early states. Iowa and South Carolina were too socially conservative for a New York abortion rights advocate. New Hampshire might have more fertile ground, but he feared losing to Mitt Romney, then of neighboring Massachusetts. Romney switched from pro-choice to pro-life and was rewarded with the Republican presidential nomination four years later. (He would later have to switch states from Massachusetts to Utah to continue his political career, but that’s another story.) So did Donald Trump four years after that. Unlike Romney, Trump was elected president. And unlike Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush, the judges Trump appointed did overturn Roe v. Wade. If both Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas had been confirmed, it might have happened 30 years earlier—but it didn’t. All this history comes in the context of the first post-Roe presidential race. Trump is panicking about abortion. And pro-lifers are panicking about Trump. Trump has gone too far in using phrases like “reproductive rights” to describe abortion (though he might have meant IVF, which is different, though it raises its own set of pro-life ethical issues). He excessively diluted the pro-life plank of the Republican platform, making it the weakest it has been since 1976. He still takes credit for Roe’s reversal, but is clearly rattled by recent Republican electoral setbacks on abortion, especially now that he is running a more competitive race against a female opponent. Much as was the case when Trump’s pal Rudy was the GOP frontrunner all those years ago, Republicans who don’t care much about abortion are telling pro-lifers to shut up and fall in line if they want to win.  While I have defended Trump for not wanting to rush headlong into where the pro-choice position is strongest, his backsliding on abortion has become excessive. And like his ditching of Project 2025, it risks shifting from a strategic retreat from movement conservatism’s excesses to reinforcing one of Trump’s worst tendencies: treating loyalty as a one-way street. It would still be disastrous to the pro-life cause for Vice President Kamala Harris to be elected president. Her Justice Department would continue the persecution of pro-life activists and pregnancy centers, which are now more important than ever. If Harris ever got to govern with a Democratic Congress, the Senate filibuster would probably be gone and she would sign into law a bill that would usher in a worse national abortion policy than prevailed for most of the final 30 years of Roe. The health exception would make most existing abortion restrictions toothless, and she would move to promote taxpayer funding of abortion. Regardless of whether Trump was the most sincere pro-life president, he was the most successful one during his first term. The power of pro-lifers to enact their preferred policies at any level of government hinges at the moment on this election. The fact that they cannot do so in many states has more to do with the weakness of their current position than with Trump’s lack of pro-life fervor. The question is how to improve that position. Defeating Giuliani to ensure the GOP remained a pro-life party advanced the cause. But that was during the Republican primaries, while abortions were declining and after years of intermittent pro-life gains both legislatively and in public opinion, and ahead of a general election that was probably unwinnable for any Republican after Iraq and the Great Recession. This by contrast is a winnable election against a candidate who supports federally funded abortion on demand as well as measures that codify the most permissive reading of Roe and packing the Supreme Court to topple its current anti-Roe majority. Even if Trump lost because he did not motivate pro-life voters to turn out for him, there is a strong chance Republicans would reach the opposite conclusion—that he was defeated because of his role in undoing Roe—and run further away from abortion. That is what they will hear from donors, and the media. It’s also what Republicans have done after losing elections the past, even when there has been fairly strong exit-polling evidence to the contrary. Trump is a unique figure who isn’t influenced in the same ways as a normal politician, and he is limited to a single term. He has chosen a running mate who is more pro-life than he is, even if J.D. Vance currently has to follow the boss’s line (as Dick Cheney once did on gay marriage). It’s possible that pro-lifers could luck out, and Harris won’t have the congressional support necessary to enact the most radical pro-abortion policies. Even the worst-case scenario in November suggests Republicans could hold 51 Senate seats next year. An election forecast by the Hill and Decision Desk gives House Republicans a better chance of retaining their majority than Trump winning the White House. Then maybe Harris is unpopular again and Democrats have a bad midterm election. The 2026 Senate map looks favorable to the GOP. But have politics for the past decade really been that predictable? These are the dilemmas that face a pro-life movement that no longer has meaningful bipartisan support. The future is hard to predict. The past track records and current positioning of the two major-party candidates shouldn’t make this a close call for prudent pro-lifers, especially those living in battleground states. Trump delivered the biggest pro-life victory in 50 years. Harris wants to take it away. The post Trump Is Still the Pro-Life Candidate appeared first on The American Conservative.
Like
Comment
Share
Bikers Den
Bikers Den
1 y ·Youtube General Interest

YouTube
Biker Confronts Man Hitting Girl | @Undisclosed_Moto
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
1 y

Fascist U.K. Nurses Set To Deny Healthcare To Anyone Opposing Unlimited Illegal Immigration
Favicon 
conservativefiringline.com

Fascist U.K. Nurses Set To Deny Healthcare To Anyone Opposing Unlimited Illegal Immigration

The following article, Fascist U.K. Nurses Set To Deny Healthcare To Anyone Opposing Unlimited Illegal Immigration, was first published on Conservative Firing Line. (Natural News) A registered trade union for those in the profession of nursing in the U.K. has just issued new guidelines on situations where they can refuse to treat and withdraw care from patients and this includes clients who would oppose illegal migration because they deem them “racists.” The Royal College of Nursing (RCN) indicated in the … Continue reading Fascist U.K. Nurses Set To Deny Healthcare To Anyone Opposing Unlimited Illegal Immigration ...
Like
Comment
Share
Intel Uncensored
Intel Uncensored
1 y

Let's look at DORITOS CORN CHIPS under the MICROSCOPE!
Favicon 
api.bitchute.com

Let's look at DORITOS CORN CHIPS under the MICROSCOPE!

Yuck - parasites and who knows what other chemical poisons are in those so called corn chips...
Like
Comment
Share
Intel Uncensored
Intel Uncensored
1 y

? Massachusetts Towns Set Voluntary Curfew to Combat "Mosquito-Borne Virus"
Favicon 
api.bitchute.com

? Massachusetts Towns Set Voluntary Curfew to Combat "Mosquito-Borne Virus"

"A voluntary evening lockdown has been enacted in four Massachusetts towns amid a potentially fatal mosquito-born disease." UTL COMMENT:- Bill Gates, anyone?? ? ⏯ @RealWorldNewsChannel ✳️ @RealWorldNewsChat
Like
Comment
Share
Showing 57784 out of 97638
  • 57780
  • 57781
  • 57782
  • 57783
  • 57784
  • 57785
  • 57786
  • 57787
  • 57788
  • 57789
  • 57790
  • 57791
  • 57792
  • 57793
  • 57794
  • 57795
  • 57796
  • 57797
  • 57798
  • 57799
Advertisement
Stop Seeing These Ads

Edit Offer

Add tier








Select an image
Delete your tier
Are you sure you want to delete this tier?

Reviews

In order to sell your content and posts, start by creating a few packages. Monetization

Pay By Wallet

Payment Alert

You are about to purchase the items, do you want to proceed?

Request a Refund