non sequitur
He could bring his husband with him.
That's a really nasty and bigoted statement. You should be ashamed. Maybe you are revealing your real self.
As of when are facts “nasty and bigoted”?
Because if Buttegeig were straight and had a female partner, no one would even think of saying "he can bring his wife along."
Because if Buttegeig were straight and had a female partner...
He could bring his husband with him.
He might have a chance to be the Dem nominee, Slobodan, but not a prayer of being elected President.
I know it's hard to make contact with the facts from over there in the Netherlands, Bart, just as it's impossible for Bernard to make contact from Japan, or for Peter Alt to make contact from North Carolina, but people in the United States just aren't ready for a guy with a husband. Then there's his crappy record as mayor of a small city. Then there's the fact that he smeared Trump voters as people who ignore racism -- a lot like Hillary and the "deplorables." I could go on, but there's no way any of these turkeys is going to become President of the U.S.
people in the United States just aren't ready for a guy with a husband.
Another satire, I know, but from a different site this time.
DNC Mulls Asking Donald Trump To Run As Democrat In Effort To Stop Sanders (https://politics.theonion.com/dnc-mulls-asking-donald-trump-to-run-as-democrat-in-eff-1841432132?utm_source=Facebook&utm_content=Main&utm_campaign=SF&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&fbclid=IwAR1cGxmeunhXdKFGJzPEAQ7urD_uDEoMKEUAwMSVC1v0K53VZrPvATedDvY)
That website reports also that Elizabeth Warren Was Disappointed After DNA Test Shows Zero Trace Of Presidential Material.
1) says who? (besides you)
2) why not?
That website reports also that Elizabeth Warren Was Disappointed After DNA Test Shows Zero Trace Of Presidential Material.:)
A majority, Peter. And are you telling me that in western Canada they don't understand why?The left calling everyone a bigot and racist all the time if you have a belief that they don't approve, have many people afraid to speak their minds. That's why everyone was surprised when Trump won. The secrecy of the ballot box allows people to speak up.
CNN judge Jeffrey Toobin joked: “Breaking news, Democrats announce that Volodymyr Selenskyj won the Iowa election.”
Iowa election fiasco...
https://www.en24.news/A/2020/02/us-iowa-primaries-democrats-disgrace-themselves-with-election-chaos.html
Must be the Russian hackers playing with that Demo voting app.
If not that, the Dems running the Iowa show must be unbelievably incompetent.
If not that, the Dems running the Iowa show must be unbelievably incompetent.
I helped out in several Canadian elections, and we did all the counting manually. It took about about 2-3 hours for each voting station after the closing, and the main election office was adding the station votes continuously as they came in and releasing immediately the intermediate results to the news channels. Even if the Iowa country bumpkins were not the brightest bulbs in those voting rooms, they could have done the complete recount easily by midnight and released the numbers shortly after.
Iowa election fiasco.Wasn't Biden the one who said that every time he heard Obama speak, he would get a tingle up his leg? Maybe it was Buttigieg.
The idea was actually quite simple: All results should be sent digitally to the party headquarters. Then chaos broke out.
A district chief who was struggling with the new technology was on hold for an hour before the hotline kicked him out. An election officer passed on the results in desperation via Twitter. Others were asked to photograph the handwritten ballot papers and email the photos to the party.
Pete Buttigieg did well, but he needs the Republican IT techs and organization. Biden said, “We have a good feeling”.
https://www.en24.news/A/2020/02/us-iowa-primaries-democrats-disgrace-themselves-with-election-chaos.html
They had to get home to go to sleep because they get up early to milk the cows. The presidency can wait. I'm sure Trump will speak of the democrat incompetence to run the country and screw up a good economy at his State-of-the-Union speech to Congress tonight. HIs point will be, do you want to bet on a horse that trips out-of-the-gate?
That can't be it. Unlike the Iowa caucuses, their cow milking is fully automated, using the latest technology. It works every time, to the satisfaction of both, the farmers and the cows.
Emerging evidence suggests that milk products may play a beneficial role in improving cognitive function and thus aid in thought processing and mental ability.
The strange thing is that the increased dairy consumption is said to improve the brain's cognitive function, so the Iowans should be sharp as tacks.
However, this report has been released by the dairy association, so it may be biased. I always suspected that the dairy industry spreads out fake news.
https://www.dairynutrition.ca/scientific-evidence/roles-on-certain-health-conditions/cognitive-function-and-milk-products
Well, the smart ones are Republicans. :)
They must have used a different app. Or did the counting manually.
https://apple.news/AREzdWIEXRQuS5xltq5ikRQWho needs Russians? Maybe the Democrats hacked their own APP? No one is going to believe the results.
“Iowa caucus app: no security vetting, no testing, no training, says NYT report”
https://apple.news/AREzdWIEXRQuS5xltq5ikRQ
“Iowa caucus app: no security vetting, no testing, no training, says NYT report”
Take a look (on LinkedIn) at who is behind the app. Shadow Inc is made up of all ex-Hillary Clinton operatives.
Shadow is looking for passionate people, committed to advancing progressive values and helping elect progressive, Democratic candidates.
They are hiring now.
That website reports also that Elizabeth Warren Was Disappointed After DNA Test Shows Zero Trace Of Presidential Material.
Well, the smart ones are Republicans. :)
https://apple.news/AREzdWIEXRQuS5xltq5ikRQ
“Iowa caucus app: no security vetting, no testing, no training, says NYT report”
There were three strategic needs surrounding the Iowa caucuses: Hide the collapse of Joe Biden; Diminish the win by Bernie Sanders; and cover-up a less than enthusiastic voter turnout. It seems they've done a splendid job on all three.
Memes continue:Looks like a great plan. We can all get to sleep earlier instead of staying up with all fake news cable stations. Of course the losing sides will complain with this also. "Mary stepped passed the foul line when she took her swing. It's fixed!!"
As funny as this is, and as much as we know this was not really intentional, I very much doubt the Bernie Bros will be of the same opinion.
I really hope Milwaukee is putting together a rock solid emergency riot plan for the convention.
The same app that was used in Iowa is set to be used in the Feb. 22 caucuses in Nevada. Nevada? Las Vegas? Anyone want to take a bet they'll be counting on their fingers instead? I'll give 2 to 1.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/iowa-caucuses-2020-live-updates/2020/02/04/23561bd6-4707-11ea-bc78-8a18f7afcee7_story.html
They should use just a roulette table.It'll probably come up 0 or 00 green.
... if he turns out to be a clear winner...
Well, congrats to Mary Buttplug. He made it further than anyone could have predicted.
I made this prediction several times since early November. And Joe always laughed it off.
Already reported by Adam on page 3, with more details about the owners and employees of the company
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=133787.msg1150542#msg1150542
They should use just a roulette table.
They took you up on your suggestion.So CNN isn't fake news?
"Nevada Democratic Party abandons problematic app used in Iowa caucuses"
https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/04/politics/iowa-caucus-app-issues/index.html
So CNN isn't fake news?Even for CNN, this is pretty hard to spin.
Even for CNN, this is pretty hard to spin.So even though the story is on CNN, you believe it? How do you decide which stories on CNN are true and which are fake?
So even though the story is on CNN, you believe it? How do you decide which stories on CNN are true and which are fake?Discernment.
So CNN isn't fake news?
...If Bloomberg will ask Pete Buttigieg to join him as VP...
Speaking about CNN, they just reported the official Iowa results. Buttigieg first with 26.9%, followed by Sanders with 25.1%. Warren 18.3%, Biden 15.6%, Klobuchar's 12.6%.
So, Buttigieg's team was more efficient and one day earlier in supplying the results than the official Dem's team. Sounds like he can get things done.
Going ahead, Biden is effectively out of the race, Mike Bloomberg will step in, and Warren will also fall aside. Warren's supporters will give their votes to Bernie, Biden's and Klobuchar's fans to Pete and Bloomberg, and the few Yang's and Steyer's supporters and undecided will switch also to Pete and Bloomberg.
If Bloomberg will ask Pete Buttigieg to join him as VP, that would be a good ticket to beat the Trump and Make America Great Again.
Speaking about CNN, they just reported the official Iowa results. Buttigieg first with 26.9%, followed by Sanders with 25.1%. Warren 18.3%, Biden 15.6%, Klobuchar's 12.6%.
So, Buttigieg's team was more efficient and one day earlier in supplying the results than the official Dem's team. Sounds like he can get things done.
Going ahead, Biden is effectively out of the race, Mike Bloomberg will step in, and Warren will also fall aside. Warren's supporters will give their votes to Bernie, Biden's and Klobuchar's fans to Pete and Bloomberg, and the few Yang's and Steyer's supporters and undecided will switch also to Pete and Bloomberg.
If Bloomberg will ask Pete Buttigieg to join him as VP, that would be a good ticket to beat the Trump and Make America Great Again.
Re: Impeaching Donald Trump
« Reply #3818 on: February 03, 2020, 10:30:14 pm »
ReplyQuoteModifyModifyRemoveRemove
So the first voting appears to be in from Iowa Democrats nomination. I don;t know if this is the final. But Biden didn't do too well. Buttgieg won. The Democrats must be getting nervous. Time to impeach Trump again.
Buttigieg 27.6%
Sanders 26.3
Warren 20.5
Biden 13.8
Klobuchar 11.5
Les, I already reported the results last night at 1030pm in another thread even before Buttigieg. Maybe I should run as I seem to be able to get things done as well. OK. My results percentages were slightly different. But pretty close and I got the order of winners correct. OK. I stole them from the NY Times early report before they ran scared and drop their early results. Where did the Times get their results and why didn't they report it longer? What was in their devious minds?
I agree Biden's done. Two reasons. His incompetence. Two, Pelosi shot him while aiming at Trump. Well maybe three. Americans won't vote for a guy who will be taking naps in the Oval Office.
AS far as the scenario Les predicted, I'm not sure. As Joe said, Bloomberg carries a lot of baggage regarding guns. He'll win the blue states, but that's a given. That will work against him in all the rural states some of which are key battleground states.
Curious, Joe, what sets off your brother about Nanny Bloomberg and Mayor Pete?
In any case, I see why the Dems are worried. You can't run against someone with no one.
Look at it this way, the Iowa caucus total turnout in 2008 was about 240K. The Dems, for the last month, have been telling us that the turn out this year would be about the same, and they needed it to be. Without a turnout as large as Obama's, there is just not enough enthusiasm to beat Trump.I think the biggest problem that Dems have is that Trump started changing his presentation in the last few months. He's going from the bad cop to the good cop. So by the time the election happens, he'll actually seem like a regular president who's done a good job. A lot of the "bull in the China shop" attitude people believe of him will be gone. I think that Trump is playing this game perfectly and timing it perfectly too.
Actual turn out was around 170K, pretty much HRC's turn out numbers.
Combine that with rising Trump approval numbers, along with a recent poll that should 90+% of Republicans and around 80% of independents believe Trump will be re-elected. Only around 60% of Dems believe Trump will loose.
The enthusiasm is just not there. Unless someone really develops a serious amount of charisma, like Obama level of charisma, the Dems are in a for a disappointment come November.
I don't think Americans are ready for a First Lady who's the president's husband. Imagine reporters asking questions. Mr. President, will the First Lady Chasten be travelling with you to NATO? Well, that won;t work. How about, Mr. President, will the First Husband be traveling with you? That seems strange too. Or how about this. Madam President, will you be traveling with the First Gentleman? That might work. What do others think?
Regarding Mayor Bloomberg, he ran a liberal city. I don;t think the rest of the country is ready for his anti-gun, anti plastic, anti-super drink cups nanny state. He thinks and acts like he's the smartest guy in the world. But he wants to force his stuff down everyone's throat. Don't get me wrong. He is a smart guy with plenty of money to spend. He's the only person who can say that during his 12 years as mayor, his wealth grew from $5 billion to around $35 billion. Well, he did give up his mayoral salary.
All of this is a shock to the Dems. But it's because they don't see any of their candidates as the person to beat Trump. All of them are the same anti-Trump caricatures of each other. "We got to get rid of Trump. Blah. Blah. Blah." Sanders wants to turn America into 1984. Kobluchar wants to be president of Middle America. Warren doesn;lt know what to do with her moccasins. Buttigieg can;t wait to try out the Lincoln Bedroom. And Biden just wants to take a nap.
I don't think having a husband in the White House would be such a problem as you think. Especially after Trump. Many younger voters couldn't care less if Pete's partner wears pants or a skirt. There could be much worse things than that. Tim Cook is a good shepherd of a rather large organization, so he could advise Pete how to run a big outfit.I think everyone is tip toeing around the big elephant in the room. They're afraid to say anything because they don;t want to be called a bigot. But most Americans are not ready for a male president who is married to another male who is his "husband". I've joked about it because frankly I don;t know how to express my opinions without getting nasty static from others. But maybe it's important to discuss just how I and others might feel about him being president.
Anyway, if Pete doesn't land that job this fall, it would be a good preparation for the next try.
Let's see what happens in the next few months.
I think everyone is tip toeing around the big elephant in the room. They're afraid to say anything because they don;t want to be called a bigot. But most Americans are not ready for a male president who is married to another male who is his "husband". I've joked about it because frankly I don;t know how to express my opinions without getting nasty static from others. But maybe it's important to discuss just how I and others might feel about him being president.
I can imagine what many are picturing going on in Lincoln;s bedroom and they're concerned of the image we project as a country. They wonder about the man's ability to be strong and steadfast during times of crisis. They may not be saying it, but there is that concern. I know I feel it. Will he be able to be singularly strong in times of crisis, or does he depend on another man to make him strong. Who are we actually voting for?
Arguing that Tim Cook runs Apple is not the same thing. Cook was not elected. He doesn;t represent the citizens of the country. Whether he succeeds or not has little effect on most people unless you happen to own Apple stock. A wrong move by Cook isn't getting us into WWIII.
I think not talking about this is foolish. Because if everyone just goes along to get along, when the election occurs, all those misgivings that people have will come out in a secret ballot. And then everyone is going to be surprised with how easy Trump won. Better to talk about it now so people can make honest decisions during the nomination process. Of course, that's probably going to happen anyway. Iowa is a caucus state where people might feel embarrassed because discussions about the candidates are open. So he seems to be running ahead there. But future voting in other states will be secret. So we might know exactly how the electorate feels by what his own Democrats say about him when they vote.
... A wrong move by Cook isn't getting us into WWIII...
Biden's always been "done." What y'all saw in Iowa is just the tip of the iceberg. And the Democrats are sailing toward it full speed ahead.
Haven't had as good a laugh in a long time as I've had at the Iowa "caucuses."
This is funny too: 'Hey Iowa, We Fixed Your Voting Problems'That's funny Bart. My camera use to to work like paper too. Now I need a 350 page manual. I use to send my film out to the local photo processing store and get back two 4x6" prints of all my shots in less than an hour. No levels, contrast, etc. Today I've had to become an computer engineer and software specialist.
https://youtu.be/U5NygevLsiU
Personally, that wouldn't disturb me a bit. There will be some homophobic people, some gays, and most won't care at all. Don't project your personal attitude onto the other voters. I don't think many people will be worried or imagining what's going on in the Lincoln's bedroom. As seen from the Iowa results, very few "established and standard observers" anticipated the final outcome. And when it comes to the international image of USA, it can't get any worse than it is now under Trump.He has to get elected before traveling to Canada.
As to the official state procedures, Pierre Trudeau in his last term or two was a swinging bachelor, and that was fine both with his constituents and other statesmen. He coined the phrase "There's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation". Fidel Castro married a second time, but kept his marriage and wife secret, going solo to various official functions and visits. I'm sure if Pete makes his first official international visit to Canada, he will be greeted here with all the pomp and respect as Canadians extend to other statesmen.
This is funny too: 'Hey Iowa, We Fixed Your Voting Problems'
https://youtu.be/U5NygevLsiU
He has to get elected before traveling to Canada.
I'm reminded of our election in 1960 when Kennedy ran as the first Catholic to seek the presidency. There was much concern in his party that he owed his allegiance to the Pope and Rome, that he wouldn't put America's and American's interests first. It would work against him. So he took the bull by the horns and arranged a specific speech to address the situation directly. He told America that he was independent of the Catholic Church. That his faith would not interfere with his work for America and Americans. He would be independent. His speech was accepted, voters we satisfied, and he went on to become America's first Catholic president. That opened the door for people seeking office of other faiths as well. Today, no one ever mentions it.
Buttigieg has to do something similar or he won't win the nomination. He has to answer any questions that Americans might have about his sexual preferences that they won't interfere with his work if he becomes president. This is particularly a problem for him because he's only 37 years old. He doesn;t have a long history and career in politics where he's shown his stuff. People don't really know who he is.
He has to get elected before traveling to Canada.
I'm reminded of our election in 1960 when Kennedy ran as the first Catholic to seek the presidency. There was much concern in his party that he owed his allegiance to the Pope and Rome, that he wouldn't put America's and American's interests first. It would work against him. So he took the bull by the horns and arranged a specific speech to address the situation directly. He told America that he was independent of the Catholic Church. That his faith would not interfere with his work for America and Americans. He would be independent. His speech was accepted, voters we satisfied, and he went on to become America's first Catholic president. That opened the door for people seeking office of other faiths as well. Today, no one ever mentions it.
Buttigieg has to do something similar or he won't win the nomination. He has to answer any questions that Americans might have about his sexual preferences that they won't interfere with his work if he becomes president. This is particularly a problem for him because he's only 37 years old. He doesn;t have a long history and career in politics where he's shown his stuff. People don't really know who he is.
He has to answer any questions that Americans might have about his sexual preferences that they won't interfere with his work if he becomes president.
What questions might those be, Alan? (Or <insert usual suspects here>)?He says he has a husband. What does that mean? Is his husband his alter ego? Who am I voting for? Him or his husband? Is he really his own man? Is he a leader? Americans expect their presidents to lead, to be in charge. Kennedy faced similar issues with the Catholic church. To become president, he had to put those issues to rest.
He says he has a husband. What does that mean? Is his husband his alter ego? Who am I voting for? Him or his husband? Is he really his own man? Is he a leader? Americans expect their presidents to lead, to be in charge. Kennedy faced similar issues with the Catholic church. To become president, he had to put those issues to rest.Don't be silly, please!
This is all new to most Americans. I commend him for acting natural and open about himself in public. But people are still concerned about a dynamic they may not understand. He'll have to go the extra mile to put it to rest. Thinking everyone is ok with it will cost him the nomination.NEW? as old as mankind, but not accepted or even acknowledged in too many countries.
... as old as mankind, but not accepted or even acknowledged in too many countries.
He says he has a husband. What does that mean? Is his husband his alter ego? Who am I voting for? Him or his husband? Is he really his own man? Is he a leader? Americans expect their presidents to lead, to be in charge. Kennedy faced similar issues with the Catholic church. To become president, he had to put those issues to rest.
This is all new to most Americans. I commend him for acting natural and open about himself in public. But people are still concerned about a dynamic they may not understand. He'll have to go the extra mile to put it to rest. Thinking everyone is ok with it will cost him the nomination.
You don't vote for Pete's husband or their dog.
Is your wife your alter ego? If a wife bosses her husband around, is he his own man? Is he a leader in the house or only when dancing tango on weekends?...
Hehehe... the Obamas come to mind ;D
Hmmm... I wonder why?
You don't vote for Pete's husband or their dog.Well I'd be more comfortable if he was the husband. Of course, being the wife he'd be breaking the glass ceiling.
Is your wife your alter ego? If a wife bosses her husband around, is he his own man? Is he a leader in the house or only when dancing tango on weekends?
As to the religion, that should be kept out of the politics, unless you like the Iranian model of government.
Dynamics are overrated. Most Americans understand dynamics of their income taxes and dynamics of dropping a bomb on a hostile country. Maybe also dynamics of a bad meal.
Well I'd be more comfortable if he was the husband. Of course, being the wife he'd be breaking the glass ceiling.
Do you know many gay couples? I don't know any that subscribe to such a rigid social dynamic.What do you mean?
What do you mean?
Hmmm... I wonder why?
That type of comment was perhaps remotely funny the first time. Now it is just yawn-inducing.
None of the gay couples I know really present themselves in distinct, traditional "husband/wife" roles or mannerisms. I'm just curious as to whether your experience is different.I don;t know any couples who are gay other than I know some people who are gay who have partners. But nothing more than that. So OK. If there are no distinct husband/wife roles, how do they decide who's who. And why even apply those nouns rather than just "partner"?
If there are no distinct husband/wife roles, how do they decide who's who.
I don;t know any couples who are gay other than I know some people who are gay who have partners. But nothing more than that. So OK. If there are no distinct husband/wife roles, how do they decide who's who. And why even apply those nouns rather than just "partner"?
I hate to get involved in such a pointless conversation, but Alan, you are thinking about this way too much. I don't think anyone really cares. Or should I say the amount of people in this country that would vote against mayor Pete just because he is gay is probably just as large as the amount of people who voted against Obama because he was black. Frankly, there are probably some, but not enough to make a difference.
Second, every gay couple I know refers to each other as husband and every lesbian couple I know refers to each other as wife. There are no specific roles they happen to play, or at least I have never met a couple that has.
The only time where gender roles may be important would be if the couple was raising a child. Men and women raise and interact with children differently, and there is a lot of evidence children need both types of parenting to develop properly. In this instance, there may be a need to decide who plays what role, but beyond this, it does not matter. I don't believe Mayor Pete has any children, so this does not apply to him anyway.
Last, for the love of God, can we stop using the word partner for anything else then business partner! We are in the 21st century, just say husband or wife (or boyfriend or girlfriend). Saying partner just confuses the hell out of people, especially for people like me who happen to work a lot with business owners.
One of my clients is a firm owned by two women and whenever I refer to them as partners to someone new, I get blank stares and need to both explain that they are not lesbians (and are actually married to their own husbands) and that, just like men, women can form partnerships too. It is quite annoying.
I don't know what you mean by funny. It's not funny, it's right on point.
Alan, I second Joe's motion that you are overthinking this.80% of the people vote based on what party they belong too. The press makes a bigger deal out of policy and that stuff. The rest of the voters tend to vote on personality and other intangibles beside policy. Charisma has a bigger effect than what the guy thinks about taxes or the JCPOA. I hope you don;t get offended if your wife calls you honey or sweetie. At least in private. :)
The politicians are elected not based on their sexual preferences, and whether they prefer to be on top or bottom (and even in the heterosexual relationships some women like to play the dominant role), but to do things like rising and lowering taxes, cutting ribbons and pretending putting shovels into the ground, and dropping bombs on the bad guys.
Whether they are called husbands, wives, or partners is completely irrelevant. Actually, I'd find it much more offending if a woman called me honey or sweetie.
80% of the people vote based on what party they belong too. The press makes a bigger deal out of policy and that stuff. The rest of the voters tend to vote on personality and other intangibles beside policy. Charisma has a bigger effect than what the guy thinks about taxes or the JCPOA. I hope you don;t get offended if your wife calls you honey or sweetie. At least in private. :)
Well, I'm sure your wife thinks you're a sweetie anyway. :)That's was indisputable. But now all my exes live in Texas.
That's was indisputable. But now all my exes live in Texas.Ah. I didn't know that about you. Is that why you live in Canada?
Ah. I didn't know that about you. Is that why you live in Canada?
How are Democrats going to run the country when they can;t even run one's state's election? It looks like they'll never be able to confirm the final results.
Iowa Caucus Results Riddled With Errors and Inconsistencies
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/06/upshot/iowa-caucuses-errors-results.html
Actually, I said it only because I liked how it sounds.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmOOAd25WRw
As to the Texas girls, waitresses and sale ladies, they all call you there honey
I'm surprised no one's blaming the Russians yet.They wouldn't make such a mess; In the US it happened before in Florida remember?
I'm surprised no one's blaming the Russians yet.
I'm surprised no one's blaming the Russians yet.
Welp, here you go!Putin must be chuckling.
Democrat Congresswoman Blames Iowa Caucus Disaster On Russia (https://thefederalist.com/2020/02/06/democrat-congresswoman-blames-iowa-caucus-disaster-on-russia/)
Although I would not normally post something from The Federalist, there is a video clip verifying the reporting.
Putin must be chuckling.
It shows incompetence. Today the chairman of the DNC is calling for a recount on Iowa. That'll certainly make Sanders supporters cry foul. They're trying to help another candidate, Biden this time. If Sanders wins the most votes during the nomination process, and the Democrats nominate someone else, the Sanders supporters won't show up for the election. Teump could take California.
To be honest, I sincerely hope Sanders does not win.
Although I think the chance is low that he could bet Trump, there is still a chance and I would not want a devote communist as president. The economy would completely tank.
The way things went in Iowa, I'd say there's a 2 to 1 chance the Democrat nomination will be won by Trump. :)
Current law also states that those who have committed drug crimes abroad, or any “crimes involving moral turpitude,” are ineligible to immigrate here. The New Way Forward Act abolishes that statute.
A Mexican drug cartel leader could be released from prison, then freely come to America immediately. And if he wants, he could come here illegally, and it wouldn’t be a crime – because, and you were waiting for this, the bill also decriminalizes illegal entry into America, even by those previously deported.
According to a document promoting the bill, criminalizing illegal entry into America is “white supremacist.”
But believe it or not, we saved the nuttiest part for last. What could be more destructive than changing U.S. law, specifically to allow rapists, child molesters, and drug dealers to stay in America? How about this: Using taxpayer money to bring deported criminals back into America.
From 2002 to 2018, 480,000 people were deported for illegal entry or reentry into America. And under this bill, you’d have to buy them all a plane ticket to come back. The tickets alone would cost about a billion dollars, and that’s before Democrats make you start paying for these criminals’ free health care, too.
This thread's title should be renamed to "Echo chamber." :)Not really. The other one on Trump was making fun of him. Now we have a chance to make fun of Democrats.
Not really. The other one on Trump was making fun of him. Now we have a chance to make fun of Democrats.Impeachment fun? you mean?
Dems lose another one against Trump. This just isn't their week.
"Appeals court tosses Democrats' emoluments lawsuit against Trump"
https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/07/politics/emoluments-lawsuit-trump/index.html
Rise To Power
Discharged from the hospital amid the social chaos that followed Germany’s defeat, Hitler took up political work in Munich in May–June 1919. As an army political agent, he joined the small German Workers’ Party in Munich (September 1919). In 1920 he was put in charge of the party’s propaganda and left the army to devote himself to improving his position within the party, which in that year was renamed the National-sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (Nazi). Conditions were ripe for the development of such a party. Resentment at the loss of the war and the severity of the peace terms added to the economic woes and brought widespread discontent.
Dems lose another one against Trump. This just isn't their week.This one was always a stretch: two other emoluments cases still pending. Secret Service is paying $650/night for rooms at Trump properties.
"Appeals court tosses Democrats' emoluments lawsuit against Trump"
https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/07/politics/emoluments-lawsuit-trump/index.html
That's how it started 100 years ago...
That's how it started 100 years ago. One concession at a time, one appeasement at a time, and the fearless leader owns the partyWhat does Hitler have to do with finding Democrats acting unconstitutionally?
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Adolf-Hitler/Rise-to-power
What does Hitler have to do with finding Democrats acting unconstitutionally?
Slobodan and Alan,
if you don't like the Hitler and Nazi comparison, I can point out also to Klement Gottwald and communists taking over Czechoslovakia in 1948.
The analogy between Nazis, Communists and Republicans (at this time) is that the cowards and spineless followers in the respective parties were fearful of their leader, didn't want to rock the boat, and allowed ostracizing (and worse) of their honest and brave colleagues. The 2020 State Of The Union reminds very strongly of Nazis and Communists clapping and cheering their leaders, and Trumps attacks of Romney, Comey and others are as hateful as of the aforementioned despots.
Hi Les,
I can agree that all politics has this at it's core...On EVERY side. That's what politics are all about.
But Romney saying his religious beliefs were at the core of his decision to vote to expel Trump is a bit too far beyond belief. And he stating that he is a deeply religious man. When he was conducting business and made billions for him and his partners and crushed corporations and destroyed peoples lives in the doing, just where were his religious convictions then???
The reason for his vote sickens me. If he just said the truth that he despises Trump, I would applaud him for his honesty.
Politicians truly disgust me...no matter the brand. I wish the people of this country would forgo party, and be only Americans.
Peter
Hi Les,
I can agree that all politics has this at it's core...On EVERY side. That's what politics are all about.
But Romney saying his religious beliefs were at the core of his decision to vote to expel Trump is a bit too far beyond belief. And he stating that he is a deeply religious man. When he was conducting business and made billions for him and his partners and crushed corporations and destroyed peoples lives in the doing, just where were his religious convictions then???
The reason for his vote sickens me. If he just said the truth that he despises Trump, I would applaud him for his honesty.
Politicians truly disgust me...no matter the brand. I wish the people of this country would forgo party, and be only Americans.
Peter
Looks like the TDS is spreading faster that the Corona virus, infecting even some otherwise sane minds :(
Maybe Bloomberg will join the race later on; that might be interesting.
Peter,
Whether it was his religion or just common decency, at this time he did the right thing. Maybe he is now a better man than before. Which can't be said about Trump.
Looks like the TDS is spreading faster that the Corona virus, infecting even some otherwise sane minds :(
Slobodan and Alan,Les, The president of the US serves in three capacities: Chief executive of the US, commander-in-chief of the armed forces, and leader of his party. To equate Trump to Hitler because he runs his party is just as silly as assuming that a PM is Hitler becomes he runs his party. All presidents get fealty from their party. Actually, in Trump's case, it took him a lot longer to get it as mainline republicans were against him in the beginning. Is Nancy Pelosi a Hitler too because her party all voted for impeachment, likewise in the Senate? Was Obama a Hitler because he got all the Democrats to vote for Obamacare? This is just more of the anti-Trump press trying to make Trump into some evil person, which is silly. I'm surprised you're falling for it.
if you don't like the Hitler and Nazi comparison, I can point out also to Klement Gottwald and communists taking over Czechoslovakia in 1948.
The analogy between Nazis, Communists and Republicans (at this time) is that the cowards and spineless followers in the respective parties were fearful of their leader, didn't want to rock the boat, and allowed ostracizing (and worse) of their honest and brave colleagues. The 2020 State Of The Union reminds very strongly of Nazis and Communists clapping and cheering their leaders, and Trumps attacks of Romney, Comey and others are as hateful as of the aforementioned despots.
I wasn't around the watch the Nazis, but I've seen Communists in Czechoslovakia and there are quite a few parallels between them and Trump.
https://www.radio.cz/en/section/czechs/klement-gottwald
It's a contemporary plague.
A part of Germany just made a pact with the neo-nazis and got a member of Angela's club elected. It lasted less than a day, and resulted in the resignation of the cat that won the seat: Angela said no friggin' way do we sup with the devil.
That dangerous lunatic fringe on the far right never went away, never goes away; it raised its Gorgon head recently in England, Italy and is trying really hard again in Spain.
We live in times of great danger. In the end, communism or its opposite on the fringes of politics across the world come to the same thing: repression for Mr Everyone and the rule by party, not by any representative of the common man. You lived and worked under that; can't you recognize the same thing growing under a different name? You create personalities above the law, keep them there by vilifying everyone else who has the nerve to speak up and say hey, wait a minute...
Les, The president of the US serves in three capacities: Chief executive of the US, commander-in-chief of the armed forces, and leader of his party. To equate Trump to Hitler because he runs his party is just as silly as assuming that a PM is Hitler becomes he runs his party. All presidents get fealty from their party. Actually, in Trump's case, it took him a lot longer to get it as mainline republicans were against him in the beginning. Is Nancy Pelosi a Hitler too because her party all voted for impeachment, likewise in the Senate? Was Obama a Hitler because he got all the Democrats to vote for Obamacare? This is just more of the anti-Trump press trying to make Trump into some evil person, which is silly. I'm surprised you're falling for it.
Not to worry Rob - the purges are already beginning (https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/1225883722102296576) and the political apparatus, which has notably stonewalled investigations into the executive, is already mobilized (https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/481876-treasury-responds-to-gop-requests-for-hunter-biden-burisma-info) on behalf of the king. Soon there will be no dissent, so we can all pretend that everything is perfect again and go back to our bread and circuses.
Ironic, isn't it, that that was kinda what the war of Independence was supposed to be about. Circles...
I really feel sad about it: I used to think that Americans had a wonderful country where but to dream was to fulfil; now, I think that's all being thrown away by a new totalitarianism that's going to create uncrossable divides, just as I think has happened over Brexit where those who you believe screwed you can never, ever be your friends again for the deep pain they have wished upon you. You just see them through different eyes. It's done.
Alan,You're doing exactly what Hillary did in 2016. She called those who disagreed with her viewpoints "deplorables", and lost the election. 94% of Republican voters today support Trump through all the charges, maybe because of them. The Republican Senators and Congressmen reflect their voters. Insulting them by calling their leaders "dumb and fearful, callous and corrupt" , won't get any of them to vote for a Democrat.
the reference to Hitler was unfortunate. I didn't compare personality of Trump to his, but the actions of Nazis (and communists) to the current conduct of Republicans. They were gutless cowards, betraying their country and fellow citizens. Some did it because they are simply dumb and fearful, others are callous and corrupt. Trump won't last forever, but the damage he has done to the party will be longer lasting and more detrimental. How did you feel watching those gutless wimps cheering and clapping?
Not to worry Rob - the purges are already beginning (https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/1225883722102296576) and the political apparatus, which has notably stonewalled investigations into the executive, is already mobilized (https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/481876-treasury-responds-to-gop-requests-for-hunter-biden-burisma-info) on behalf of the king. Soon there will be no dissent, so we can all pretend that everything is perfect again and go back to our bread and circuses.No one party can silence dissent. That's just anti-Trump arguments to smear Trump. Dissent comes from the opposing party. Which Democrats dissented with Nancy Pelosi? WHich democrats opposed Obamacare? How many Democrats supported the Supreme COurt justices when they were nominated by republicans? How many Democrats cheered President Trump's accomplishments that helped the country? We can make up similar lists for both sides. 90% of the media is Anti-Trump and present the news that way.
You're doing exactly what Hillary did in 2016. She called those who disagreed with her viewpoints "deplorables", and lost the election. 94% of Republican voters today support Trump through all the charges, maybe because of them. The Republican Senators and Congressmen reflect their voters. Insulting them by calling their leaders "dumb and fearful, callous and corrupt" , won't get any of them to vote for a Democrat.
You also apparently aren't familiar with the annual state-of-the-union affair. The members of the President's party, whether Democrat or Republican, hoot and holler, while the members of the opposing party sit there in silence with grimaces on their faces. It's all very silly and both parties indulge in the exuberance equally. Maybe you ought to spend time looking at videos of previous state-of-the-union speeches to verify my point. It's just plain normal for party member to cheer their presidents' accomplishments because they want the glory to wear on them as well. Equating their action to Nazis is over the top.
I respect your arguments and agree that there is a sizeable group of politicians and constituents liking and admiring Trump. Some of us see it differently from the outside, but we are just observers, not participants. When it comes to apostles following blindly their leader, personally, I'd find it dangerous and disgusting regardless of a party, religion or a country - maybe because I saw results and consequences of such situations.I understand your concern. But Trump is just a loudmouth, a bull in the China shop. He's never been a politician and says it like it is which riles people. They're not use to it. I don;t like it either. But, his policies are fairly mundane and have been pretty successful so far. Pro business, low taxes, and liberal socially. He's a bit of an isolationist "America First". He's opposed to America getting into wars where our interests are not paramount. That makes him a peacenik compared to past presidents who never saw a foreign adventure they didn't approve of. Hillary is a warmonger compared to him. He uses American strength to get our way. Obviously, if you're on the receiving end, you're pissed. But for americans, it makes us safer and wealthier. Sorry. But that;s the way it is. What's happened is the political insiders just can't handle that an outsider became president. Didn't he know he wasn't suppose to do that? It's driven them crazy so they've made up all these crazy things about him.
the purges are already beginning and the political apparatus, which has notably stonewalled investigations into the executive, is already mobilized on behalf of the king. Soon there will be no dissent, so we can all pretend that everything is perfect again and go back to our bread and circuses.
If it makes you feel any better, Slobodan and I get along famously via PM (honestly) and I definitely plan to pal around with him next time I find myself in E. Europe.
... You lived and worked under that; can't you recognize the same thing growing under a different name?...
...How did you feel watching those gutless wimps cheering and clapping?
If it makes you feel any better, Slobodan and I get along famously via PM (honestly) and I definitely plan to pal around with him next time I find myself in E. Europe.
... they are not afraid to voice their concerns...
I am sorry, Les, but that is a ridiculous argument. One side of the parliament always cheers and claps, from the French Revolution times. You think Obama’s side didn’t cheer and clap for him? Or any other president before him? Have you ever watched British parliament debates and how raucous they can get when one side cheers and the other boos?
Besides, what’s not to cheer? Economy is up, stocks ar up, employment is up, wages are up, minority employment is up, etc., etc., etc. The only thing down are Democrats, green with envy that that jerk is actually delivering what they have only been promising all this time, while they’ve been busy staging one coup attempt after another.
I respect your arguments and agree that there is a sizeable group of politicians and constituents liking and admiring Trump. Some of us see it differently from the outside, but we are just observers, not participants. When it comes to apostles following blindly their leader, personally, I'd find it dangerous and disgusting regardless of a party, religion or a country - maybe because I saw results and consequences of such situations.
I understand your concern. But Trump is just a loudmouth, a bull in the China shop.
Precisely because I lived under that, and none of you did, I can assure you that nothing of the sort is happening.
Really?Maddow and Hannity are two sides of a hyper biased political coin...that's the way much of America see this.
Esper Guarantee Against Retaliation Proves Faithless For Vindman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jkSx_J1e90
Those who trust this administration will get screwed, apparently.
So, the result is that you'll wind up with a wrecked chinashop, with some hard to replace pieces gone for ever.
That will prove to be a very high price to pay.
Really?
Esper Guarantee Against Retaliation Proves Faithless For Vindman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jkSx_J1e90
Those who trust this administration will get screwed, apparently.
Not necessarily!
Bull in a China Shop (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzw2iBmRsjs)
So how do we elect a Bull???
Peter
Vindman is not out of a job, just out of the White House. If you had someone working in your home who tried to get you convicted and failed, [...]
Say what? Purple heart decorated, United States Army lieutenant colonel Alexander Vindman was the Director for European Affairs for the United States National Security Council (NSC) was called by Congress to testify and tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. If Trump got pissed off by that, it must have been because he didn't want the truth be told. Is Trump pleading guilty by self implication?
How about Vindman's, and his family's personal safety? We've already seen what Esper's words are worth, less than the paper it was written on ...
So, the result is that you'll wind up with a wrecked chinashop, with some hard to replace pieces gone for ever.
That will prove to be a very high price to pay.
No, Bart. Trump came into a china shop that had been wrecked by a couple of his predecessors. He's been cleaning it up by greatly improving things like employment and income.
Executing effectively the vision and strategy of a wise leader is a good and noble thing.Actually, Bill Maher is the one who hates Democracy. He talks the talk but doesn;t walk the walk. If you don't believe what he believes, there's something wrong with you. People who appreciate democracy don;pt spend three years trying to find a reason to get rid of a duly elected president. They get ready for the next election and try to convince the public to vote for their ways of governing. Also, democrats are the ones who want big government to run everything. How's that democracy when you lose individual freedoms?
Following blindly an emperor and trying to appease him rather the whole country is something entirely different.
I just watched Bill Maher and one of the things he said was:
"The Republicans don't hate just the Democrats, they hate democracy. They hate the player and the game."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kllPUCjKHI4
Not necessarily!Joe, that's amazing. I'll have to drop that saying. Maybe there a point to all that. That Trump despite his loud mouth and unpolitical ways, is getting the job done.
Bull in a China Shop (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzw2iBmRsjs)
To tell the truth, normally I don't watch this kind of performances, maybe that's why it disturbed me so much. As mentioned previously in another post, the speeches by Obama, Clinton and Reagan were always uplifting and more entertaining, and the clapping intermezzos were used to a lesser extent.They're always more entertaining and uplifting when he's your guy.
Russ, having to work multiple jobs to make ends meet, is not improving employment. It only messes up people's quality of life, and the statistics as well.
Russ, having to work multiple jobs to make ends meet, is not improving employment. It only messes up people's quality of life, and the statistics as well.That's true to a certain extent. But at least the second jobs are there for people to work. Better than being unemployed. In any case, most EUropeans would say America is doing better than Europe. Our markets are up, employment is up, unemployment is down, ISIS is gone, NK is quiet, we're making trade deals, etc. It's interesting we're still talking about Trump here in a thread about the Democrats. What have they done in three years except throw sticks and stone at Trump? All it's been is Nyah Nyah Nyah from them.
Say what? Purple heart decorated, United States Army lieutenant colonel Alexander Vindman was the Director for European Affairs for the United States National Security Council (NSC) was called by Congress to testify and tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. If Trump got pissed off by that, it must have been because he didn't want the truth be told. Is Trump pleading guilty by self implication?
How about Vindman's, and his family's personal safety? We've already seen what Esper's words are worth, less than the paper it was written on ...
You may want to actually look at the stats instead of Dem talking points. Average work hours per week is below 40, I think 36 actually. That’s not working two jobs.
Add onto that, wages are actually increasing amongst lower income jobs, something that did happen under Obama.
In April 2014, the U.S. Senate debated the minimum wage on the federal level by way of the Minimum Wage Fairness Act. The bill would have amended the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA) to increase the federal minimum wage for employees to $10.10 per hour over the course of a two-year period. The bill was strongly supported by President Barack Obama and many of the Democratic Senators, but strongly opposed by Republicans in the Senate and House.
Later in 2014, voters in the Republican-controlled states of Alaska, Arkansas, Nebraska and South Dakota considered ballot initiatives to raise the minimum wage above the national rate of $7.25 per hour, which were successful in all four states. The results provided evidence that raising minimum wage has support across party lines.
“While the percentage of households with discretionary income has risen over the past several years, purchasing power remains concentrated in the wallets of the affluent,” said Lynn Franco, director of The Conference Board Consumer Research Center.
Nearly 78% of all discretionary income is held by households earning more than $100,000. Average discretionary income for this segment, $66,451, is 2.7 times the national average.
How do you know? Do only 36 hour jobs exist in the USA?The important thing is that there are more jobs for more people than ever before thanks to Trump. That's good for America and his re-election. What have democrats done in the last three years to help Americans?
That again is not correct, assuming the information I have is correct:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage_in_the_United_States
So claiming that wages were not increasing under Obama, seems to be wrong, or a lie.
Also, there is a difference between what people earn and wich part of that is disposable income (or perhaps even more importantly, discretionary income).
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/033015/what-difference-between-disposable-income-and-discretionary-income.asp
In case you're really interested:
https://www.marketingcharts.com/industries/financial-services-2340
They're always more entertaining and uplifting when he's your guy.
It's interesting we're still talking about Trump here in a thread about the Democrats.
How do you know? Do only 36 hour jobs exist in the USA?
Assuming the information I have is correct:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage_in_the_United_States
So claiming that wages were not increasing under Obama, seems to be wrong, or a lie
Alan,
I don't have any dogs in this fight, I can't vote for any of these guys, and I can see faults in both the republican and democratic party. So when it comes to commenting on international politics, I consider myself pretty neutral. For entertainment, I like to watch Bill Maher, Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Kimmel or John Oliver. For some reason, they seem to find a lot of material on Trump.
The important thing is that there are more jobs for more people than ever before thanks to Trump. That's good for America and his re-election. What have democrats done in the last three years to help Americans?
Alan,Trump is making all of them rich along with all the cable news hosts as well. They all ought to chip in and give Trump a thank you party for making their careers so successful. :) I stopped watching the late night shows. SNL is like them too. They all hate Trump and their jokes are stale already. The old late night comics were somewhat balanced and you could laugh at all the politicians on all sides. Today, their shows are like reading the anti-Trump Washington Post or NY Times. If Trump loses the election, they'll all go broke. He's what's keeping them in green. No one would watch without Trump.
I don't have any dogs in this fight, I can't vote for any of these guys, and I can see faults in both the republican and democratic party. So when it comes to commenting on international politics, I consider myself pretty neutral. For entertainment, I like to watch Bill Maher, Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Kimmel or John Oliver. For some reason, they seem to find a lot of material on Trump.
Thanks to, or despite? Look at the National Debt. Printing money is easy, but not always a wise thing to do. Who is going to pay the bill? Trump or the people (and amongst them, who)?Well, when NATO countries finally pay their 2%, we'll be able to cut some of our defense spending and reduce our deficits. Please urge your government to start spending more for our sake. Thank you.
Russ, having to work multiple jobs to make ends meet, is not improving employment. It only messes up people's quality of life, and the statistics as well.
How do you know? Do only 36 hour jobs exist in the USA?
"Did happen under Obama", is that a typo, or did you mean that?
Assuming the information I have is correct:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage_in_the_United_States
So claiming that wages were not increasing under Obama, seems to be wrong, or a lie.
Also, there is a difference between what people earn and wich part of that is disposable income (or perhaps even more importantly, discretionary income).
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/033015/what-difference-between-disposable-income-and-discretionary-income.asp
In case you're really interested:
https://www.marketingcharts.com/industries/financial-services-2340
Well, when NATO countries finally pay their 2%, we'll be able to cut some of our defense spending and reduce our deficits. Please urge your government to start spending more for our sake. Thank you.
It's interesting we're still talking about Trump here in a thread about the Democrats. What have they done in three years except throw sticks and stone at Trump? All it's been is Nyah Nyah Nyah from them.
I watch these guys too...But they are from a common mind which is not neutral.
Peter
I know you love charts, so here's one:
France is spending 2.3% of their GDP on their military budget. Hopefully, on the latest military hardware, not on new uniforms and gourmet meals.Yeah, but Macron wants to start his own NATO. :)
Pretty much identical to Republican behaviour throughout the eight preceding Obama years.
Well, when NATO countries finally pay their 2%, we'll be able to cut some of our defense spending and reduce our deficits.
Agreed. Government at its finest. I love this kind of conflict. They do less damage because they pass less legislation. Exactly what the founders intended. Grid lock. It allows regular people to go about their business with less government interference in their lives. Like stupid laws prohibiting people from shooting photos in public.
Make my day !!Obama did alright. Of course going up was the only place to go considering where we were in 2009. But he could have done a lot better if he spent less time adding regulations in all industries and restricting investments and expansion in the oil industry.
Even you should know better. 2008 was the start of the financial crisis - started under a Republican administration and inherited by Obama.
Move forward to mid 2011 and start from there ...
Make my day !!
Even you should know better. 2008 was the start of the financial crisis - started under a Republican administration and inherited by Obama.
Move forward to mid 2011 and start from there ...
Keep fooling yourself. The weapons industry has you in a firm grip.Americans like their tanks.
Or shooting eachother ...Americans like their guns too.
Keep fooling yourself. The weapons industry has you in a firm grip.
So what you're saying, Manoli, like many others, is that after the recession was over the economy started going back up. Golly. What a revelation. If it hadn't started back up we'd have continued to call it a recession. The question always was, how much was Obama's administration holding back the rise. All you have to do is look at the chart and you can see the answer.
October 2008, Congress passed the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, putting $700 billion into the hands of the Treasury Department to bail out the nation’s banks at a moment of vanishing credit and peak financial panic. Over the next three months, Treasury poured nearly $239 billion into 296 of the nation’s 8,000 banks. The money went to big banks. It went to small banks. It went to banks that desperately wanted the money. It went to banks that didn’t want the money at all but had been ordered by Treasury to take it anyway. It went to banks that were quite happy to accept the windfall, and used the money simply to buy other banks. Some banks received as much as $45 billion, others as little as $1.5 million. Sixty-seven percent went to eight institutions; 33 percent went to the rest. And that was just the money that went to banks. Tens of billions more went to other companies, all before Barack Obama took office. It was the largest single financial intervention by Treasury into the banking system in U.S. history.
Bart,You're putting up the smoke screen. It doesn't hide the fact that many NATO nations are not meeting their commitment to spend 2% of their GDP on defense. You're leaving it up tp the American taxpayer to defend you spending our money better spent on on our medical care. Then you criticize us for not spending more public funds for medicine while you can afford to do so because you're cheap when it comes to defending yourself. That's hypocracy. No wonder you support Democrats. They're stupid enough to go along with the game.
I have neither the strength nor inclination but I’m sure Alan and his pals probably haven’t even heard of the EPAA - could you point them to
https://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/missile-defense-systems-2/missile-defense-systems/policy-coming-soon/european-phased-adaptive-approach-epaa/
and explain that the now infamous 2.5% is but a smokescreen.
Thanks,
M
You're leaving it up tp the American taxpayer to defend you spending our money ...
So what you're saying, Manoli, like many others, is that after the recession was over the economy started going back up. Golly. What a revelation. If it hadn't started back up we'd have continued to call it a recession. The question always was, how much was Obama's administration holding back the rise. All you have to do is look at the chart and you can see the answer.Obama's rise was steeper... and he had to deal with enormous economical problems getting the economy working again.
Russ,
At times you crack me up !
But you'll need to do better than that.
Glibly calling it a 'recession' is, to phrase it politely, somewhat understated.
Time to brush up on our economic fundamentals ?
All best,
M
Defending yourselves just as much if not more so than Europe.The Cold War ended 30 years ago. Russia isn't a threat to America, maybe Eastern Europe. Also to Hillary. Mainly, they;re your problem. Why are you buying their natural gas instead of ours and building a pipeline that you,ll have to rely on Russia? Seems rather foolish. What if they shut the spigot when you have an argument with them?
Russian Hypersonic nukes travel at Mach8 , that’s 45 minutes Moscow > NY or Washington.
Submarine launch obviously less, and of course we all remember how much the Americans loved the idea of having nukes sitting on their doorstep.
You wanna talk nuclear defense ? perhaps start another thread.
In the meantime, purges continue... in Germany 🤣
Germany AfD: Merkel fires minister over far right row https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51427957
The Cold War ended 30 years ago. Russia isn't a threat to America, maybe Eastern Europe.
Also to Hillary. Mainly, they;re your problem. Why are you buying their natural gas instead of ours and building a pipeline that you,ll have to rely on Russia? Seems rather foolish. What if they shut the spigot when you have an argument with them?
Say what???You're trying to divert attention to the main question. Why is Europe getting into bed with and relying on Russian gas and pipeline for your survival? That's worse the the Turks buying Russian missiles. Why is America spending all our money defending you against Russia when you apparently don;t seem so concerned? We should pack up our troops and send them home. You seem to have the Russians under control. If Trump wins re-election, I think you'll see him pull out of Europe for these reasons just like he pulled out of JCPOA, Paris, and various trade agreements. It's not in our interest at what it costs us. We need our money for health care.
Are you that fooled, into believing that's the only thing done? Europe has made deals with the USA and others as well.
However,
Daily Satellite Observations of Methane from Oil and Gas Production Regions in the United States
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-57678-4.pdf?origin=ppub, but that's yet another threat to the planet, courtesy of the dysfunctional USA government.
But then, some are not interested in the truth, are you?
Anyway, the Russian economy would tank (as long as Trump's plans to forget about the Crimea invasion do not materialize), and Putin might risk re-election into power or create social unrest. Putin first needs, as he is trying, to change the law's re-election terms and Trump is being helpful (WHY?).
You're trying to divert attention to the main question. Why is Europe getting into bed with and relying on Russian gas and pipeline for your survival?
That's worse the Turks buying Russian missiles
... We need our money for health care.divert some money from Defense for real needs since you already have a 10x stronger army than anyone else...and enough nuclear warheads to kill the earth a few times.
In the meantime, purges continue... in Germany 🤣
Germany AfD: Merkel fires minister over far right row https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51427957
Let me know when she fires his brother as well.
Meanwhile, back at home, Trump is defending his fake tan and dyed hair on Twitter:
"More Fake News. This was photoshopped, obviously, but the wind was strong and the hair looks good? Anything to demean!"
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-trump-tan-orange-bronze-photo-20200208-aupdbo53mbgfvhicedqivlgaua-story.html
Since the USA has proven to be an unreliable partner, Europe has started to reduce it's reliance on the USA, as a (former) partner.If that's how you feel, all the more reason the US should send our troops home. We'll save defense money to spend on healthcare.
...
In the meantime, purges continue... in Germany 🤣Your mean Merkle acted like a Queen purging duly elected people? Don't they have democracy over there?
Germany AfD: Merkel fires minister over far right row https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51427957
If that's how you feel, all the more reason the US should send our troops home. We'll save defense money to spend on healthcare.
While ypu (should) know that ain't gonna happen. That's truely deplorable and sheeplish posturing.What's deplorable is that so many European members of NATO don't pay their fair share as promised and expect American taxpayers to make up the difference. Why should we spend our money defending you when you care little to defend yourself? You realize this arrangement won;t last if Trump gets re-elected. He's no one's fool. He's complained a lot and you have started to increase spending. But not by much. He's just keeping quiet until after the election. He'll drop the boom then. He'll pull out a battalion or two to send a message. Then everyone will wet their pants in panic and cough up some real money for European defense.
Meanwhile, back at home, Trump is defending his fake tan and dyed hair on Twitter:
"More Fake News. This was photoshopped, obviously, but the wind was strong and the hair looks good? Anything to demean!"
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-trump-tan-orange-bronze-photo-20200208-aupdbo53mbgfvhicedqivlgaua-story.html
What's deplorable is that so many European members of NATO don't pay their fair share as promised and expect American taxpayers to make up the difference. Why should we spend our money defending you when you care little to defend yourself? You realize this arrangement won;t last if Trump gets re-elected. He's no one's fool. He's complained a lot and you have started to increase spending. But not by much. He's just keeping quiet until after the election. He'll drop the boom then. He'll pull out a battalion or two to send a message. Then everyone will wet their pants in panic and cough up some real money for European defense.
Trump on Letterman in 1987,sound familiar? He was the darling of the left back then.Good video. He talks about foreign countries unfairness starting after 10:10. Really interesting. He hasn't change much in his beliefs. He's doing as president exactly how he felt back then 33 years ago. Actually the whole interview shows how he feels about incompetent government and how it should be corrected which he's doing a pretty good job of it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYCPO2QDjxg
What's deplorable is that so many European members of NATO don't pay their fair share as promised and expect American taxpayers to make up the difference.
Why should we spend our money defending you when you care little to defend yourself?
Where are you getting that idea?The Netherlands is NOT on track to meet its commitments. It will only meet a 1.3% expenditure by 2024 while they promised 5 years ago to meet 2%. No one is denying there is joint purpose in our common defense. But you're not pulling your own weight. It's unfair to American taxpayers that we are doing part of your share. Previous presidents are saps. Trump's no one's fool. No wonder you want him defeated in 2020.
You are defending yourself. We have no illusions that you care about Europe as an advanced warning post (even if you should).
Europe's part of the NATO 'coalition' has agreed to increase it's level of military spending, up to 2% of GDP, and is on track. The USA has been sending mixed signals instead. Europe does challenge the rigid (old-style USA) framework since drones and cyber warfare have been developing.
Europe (i.e. The Netherlands) has penetrated Iranian nuclear sites (allowing the USA to plant a Stuxnet virus) and has penetrated Russian troll factories (hijacking their on-location webcams). Keep pissing off European partners, instead of joining forces, and we'll start focusing on merely our own interests.
Let me know when she fires his brother as well.
I didn’t get the brother reference?
I didn’t get the brother reference?
Vindman’s brother was also fired for no apparent reason. (https://theweek.com/speedreads/894639/alexander-vindmans-twin-brother-wasnt-impeachment-witness-still-fired)
What with partisan gerrymandering, voters being systematically dis-enfranchised, and the recent Democratic party voting debacle in the primary, should the UN be considering sending election observers into the US? :)Republicans have always run things better based on the buck. Democrats run things based on the heart. The Republican Iowa caucus went off without a hitch. It was only the Democrat caucus that screwed up. The Federal government seems to run better under Trump. So it's more than embarrassing. It will affect the vote in November. Voters will have to decide if things are better today than they were four years ago.
How is it possible to create such a clusterf**k? Maybe sub-contract it all to Amazon or Google or somebody, hell even Microsoft, at the very least get the whole system out of the hands of the political parties, which is insane on the face of it. Honestly, it's embarrassing.
Republicans have always run things better based on the buck. Democrats run things based on the heart.Do you say republicans have no moral other than $$$ ?
Honestly, it's embarrassing.
In the Netherlands we took that road and have lowered our deficit over the last years.
Do you say republicans have no moral other than $$$ ?Going into debt and bankrupting your family or country is not being moral. God wants us to be good stewards of our finances. There's no conflict with that and being charitable. Just don;t be stupid about it. Sanders would destroy the golden goose that America is to complete some socialist/communist belief he has. I'd rather vote for Biden. After all, how much damage could he do while napping?
Anyway the deficit is rising with giant steps under Trump and when the economy is going well it is the time to do something about it... because now it is possible. In the Netherlands we took that road and have lowered our deficit over the last years.
You lowered your debt by passing on defense expenditures to US nitwits who are clueless about European intent. That's what we should do by pulling out of NATO. We could save a bunch.
Maybe spending only 1.2% of GDP on defense helps to explain that, Pieter.
I said this a couple of years ago in one of these threads: #1 geopolitical adversary of the US is not Russia, not China, but the EU. Why are we still in NATO then? Keep your friends close, and your enemies even closer ;)
I said this a couple of years ago in one of these threads: #1 geopolitical adversary of the US is not Russia, not China, but the EU. Why are we still in NATO then? Keep your friends close, and your enemies even closer ;)
So you think the USA aligns with totalitarian states and that it's a good thing?
The EU was not an adversary. All it did was have a combination of companies that makes 'planes many prefer to Boeing. It also doesn't like to poison itself with what it eats.
... I hear now from many people who used to have digestion, allergy and other problems when living in USA, and all their problems disappeared after moving to Europe or Mexico...
.... Trump is trying to cut the EU out of the game because it has potential to pass the US one of these days if it hangs together... Russia doesn't have the economy to let it count; it does have the nukes, though, as does China, but as we know, China also has the economy unless Corona does for it...
The level of discourse is now dropping to old wives’ tales?
Quite the contrary. These are the real stories!
Correct, Rob, that is what I had in mind. In addition to economy, Europe is committing a collective harakiri leaving a Muslim playground behind in 50 years, a major problem for all other civilized parties, notably the US, China, and Russia.
Well, here is another one: after fifteen years in the States without digestion, allergy or other problems (bar financial) I left and still have no digestion, allergy and other problems.
... How do you compare the Serbian cuisine to American?
Carbohydrates (pastry), meat and fats. Not that different. Though I prefer the taste of Serbian food (childhood memories). However, I find the choice for healthy eating in American supermarkets and restaurants wider and better. Visually, on the streets, the lack of whales is refreshing, I must admit.
You haven't really lived until you've eaten in an "Italian" restaurant in Iceland.
Peter
Bolognese with rotten shark? Yum. ;)
Almost...Bolognese with ketchup base to give it that Italian flavor.
Peter
Ketchup seems to be the base substitute for all manner of red sauce outside the states :D
I ate spaghetti with ketchup when I was a kid in The Bronx. I'm not Italian.
You haven't really lived until you've eaten in an "Italian" restaurant in Iceland.That's the first and last time that I paid $60 for a plate of spaghetti. :)
Peter
That's the first and last time that I paid $60 for a plate of spaghetti. :)
That's almost $100 Canadian. I presume that was the cheapest item on the menu.
I Know....; )Jewish spaghetti sauce. :)
“The only thing, the only thing between the United States and the abyss is the Democratic Party. That’s it. If we go the way of the British Labour Party, if we nominate Jeremy Corbyn, it’s going to be the end of days. ... So I am scared to death, I really am," said Carville...
.. Carville added that he considered himself a "liberal" rather than a centrist -- but Democrats went too far even for him.
"They’ve tacked off the damn radar screen," he said when asked if the party moved too far left.
Sanders surging in New Hampshire to 28%. Interesting how last time in 2016, the anti-Trump media consistently said how bad Trump was doing. After all, they argued, his 30% votes in the nomination elections meant that 70% of the people voted for and wanted someone else. So he was going to lose. Interesting how they forgot this analysis standard in today's analysis for the Democrats. Based on their Trump analysis, Sanders has 72% of the people against him. Of course, the anti-Trump "fake-news" press was just spinning the news back then. Or did they have a point?Anything else you would like to whine about this morning?
https://nypost.com/2020/02/10/new-hampshire-poll-shows-bernie-sanders-surging-joe-biden-faltering/
https://www.foxnews.com/media/james-carville-cult-socialism-democrats-bernie-sanders
"James Carville warns of 'end of days' if Dems choose Bernie: 'I'm not interested in being in a cult!'"
... Allegedly, this year, the GOP asked their voters to prop Bernie Sanders.
Anything else you would like to whine about this morning?
This is only partially possible. There are states where you'd have to be a registered Democrat to vote in their primaries (closed primary). There are approximately 25 states with open primaries, five of which allow only independent voters to vote (i.e., if you are a registered Republican, you can't). I am not an election scholar, so someone (Chris?) can correct me if wrong.Correct. Some states allow voting without registration, but most, including the most populous, require registration to a party.
UMass Lowell poll: 62% of New Hampshire Democrats would rather see a giant meteor strike the earth and extinguish all human life than see President Trump get re-elected.
(https://i1.wp.com/www.citizenfreepress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/mig698.jpg?ssl=1)
;D ???
Please explain what you imagine that question contributed to the thread.That's OK. I'm use to it. He sounds like my wife.
Jeremy
In the meantime, this is our "love trumps hate," tolerant and inclusive left:That's one way of shutting down debate. :)
Viral video shows individual threatening pro-Trump student group: 'Slash Republican throats!'
https://www.foxnews.com/media/arizona-state-trump-slash-republican-throats
In the meantime, this is our "love trumps hate," tolerant and inclusive left:I am sure there are fine people on both sides.
Viral video shows individual threatening pro-Trump student group: 'Slash Republican throats!'
https://www.foxnews.com/media/arizona-state-trump-slash-republican-throats
I am sure there are fine people on both sides.Thanks for appealing for sanity on both sides. Can't we just get along. Just like Trump. :)
Welp, it's starting to look like the Dems would rather destroy their credibility instead of taking the sane position. During the debate Friday night, when asked if any of them would have a problem with a socialist on the ticket, not a single one said no.
Good luck.
In the meantime, this is our "love trumps hate," tolerant and inclusive left:
Viral video shows individual threatening pro-Trump student group: 'Slash Republican throats!'
https://www.foxnews.com/media/arizona-state-trump-slash-republican-throats
Amy did. She raised her handYes Kobluchar wants to be president of Middle America. East from western Pennsylvania to west around the Plains states.
In the meantime, this is our "love trumps hate," tolerant and inclusive left:
Viral video shows individual threatening pro-Trump student group: 'Slash Republican throats!'
https://www.foxnews.com/media/arizona-state-trump-slash-republican-throats
So Amy's in third position in New Hampshire. Thank Pelosi.
OPINION
Why Klobuchar is gaining while Biden is collapsing
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/why-amy-klobuchar-is-gaining-while-joe-biden-is-collapsing
Honestly, I think Amy (Along with Bloomberg) is probably the one you don't want to face. And a Bloomberg Amy ticket would be damn strong.I agree. Don't you think it would be delicious irony that a billionaire, one of the richest people in America and the world, might represent the democrat party?
Honestly, I think Amy (Along with Bloomberg) is probably the one you don't want to face. And a Bloomberg Amy ticket would be damn strong.
I agree. Don't you think it would be delicious irony that a billionaire, one of the richest people in America and the world, might represent the democrat party?
You think the Bernie bro’s will be down with that? Nothing like 50 billion bucks buying the White House to fire up those “democratic” socialists. North Carolina will tell us a lot about how the black vote feels about Bloomie as well. Amy has zero chance, at least in my humble opinion.
I agree. Don't you think it would be delicious irony that a billionaire, one of the richest people in America and the world, might represent the democrat party?
I don't think the Bernie Bros will be down at all, but on the other hand I think Bloomberg has a very real shot at capturing some moderates that would be terrified of Bernie. As for Klobuchar, I just don't know. If she can break out of the pack I think she's an intriguing candidate, and I think having a woman on the ticket would strengthen the trend of female suburban swing voters that turned away from republicans in the recent midterms.
No quibble from me on Bloomie’s potential appeal to moderates who I think vote Trump over Bernie. But if you lose the votes of the Bernie Bro’s there is a very good chance IMO the Dem turnout falls woefully short.
Amy, interesting, yes, both my wife and I agree on that after watching her in the last debate. Electable, and breaking of the pack? A real long shot.
And I’m not convince 2018 numbers a going to apply.
No disagreement here. It's one of the major differences in the parties IMHO. The Dems need to pull together a wider range of priorities than the Rs do. Some of that is structural, some cultural. Ezra Klein wrote a fantastic piece (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/24/opinion/sunday/democrats-republicans-polarization.html) on this issue a week or two back.That will be interesting if Bloomberg wins the nomination. He had a stringent frisk and search policy that he supported strongly for years as NYC mayor. that targeted minorities mainly. Of course, he's already apologized for it because he's running for president. It will be interesting to see what minorities do about it, stay home for the vote, or what? He's become a strong wild card, just reached third nationally in the polls without even getting a single vote. He's going to become a strong replacement vote for Sanders on the left and Kobluchar and Buttigieg in the middle. Biden's done thanks to Pelosi. Maybe that was Pelosi and the Democrat's plans. TO get Biden out of the race and open it up to someone like Bloomberg. The Dems don't want to lose another election.
I think those are separate issues. Electable when the choice is her vs. a singular opponent that allows here to present a contrasting alternative? I think that's workable, and as I said, I think she'd also be a killer VP candidate. Differentiating from other same-party candidates where the contrast is not in policy as much as excitement? Probably more difficult.
I'm not either (or at least it would be a mistake for Democrats to take it as a given), but I'd be very surprised if we saw educated suburban women swing back to Trump as a group. More likely than that (IMHO of course) is Trump making inroads into the male minority vote. I don't think will be much, but I suspect it won't take much either way for some of the battleground states to be impacted one way or another.
Amy did. She raised her hand
Wasn't it half heartedly and after a few seconds though?
That does not really say I will fight communism.
They are all commies. Democrats. Some of them just don't know it yet.
Bloomberg leads in New Hampshire. :)
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/11/dixville-notch-votes-michael-bloomberg-113844
Bloomberg received three write-in votes, one from a Republican and two from Democrats. The remaining votes went to Pete Buttigieg and Bernie Sanders.
I wouldn't expect any meaningful votes for Bloomberg in NH, but he can now participate in the Nevada debate, so he should do better there.Well, he'll buy Nevada. Then they'll all vote for him. :)
Wow!
I know it is a little early, but the fact that Klobuchar is currently in the lead is surprising. She current has double the amount of support as Sanders.
That was the midnight report, by now she will be trailing Bernie and Pete.
"Ninety-five percent of murders- murderers and murder victims fit one M.O. You can just take a description, Xerox it, and pass it out to all the cops," he said. "They are male, minorities, 16-25. That's true in New York, that's true in virtually every city (inaudible). And that's where the real crime is. You've got to get the guns out of the hands of people that are getting killed."
"So one of the unintended consequences is people say, 'Oh my God, you are arresting kids for marijuana that are all minorities.' Yes, that's true. Why? Because we put all the cops in minority neighborhoods," Bloomberg is heard saying on the recording. "Yes, that's true. Why do we do it? Because that's where all the crime is. And the way you get the guns out of the kids' hands is to throw them up against the wall and frisk them... And then they start... 'Oh I don't want to get caught.' So they don't bring the gun. They still have a gun, but they leave it at home."
OMG! OMG! I love Mike Bloomberg!
Anyone having the courage to speak the truth against the prevailing political correctness gets my vote. Sorry, Trump.
(emphasis mine)
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bloomberg-stop-and-frisk
Wait, what!?
He said that in 2015 but later apologized?
I will never vote for someone who apologizes for the things they did deliberately and as a matter of practice. Apologies should be reserved for stepping on someone's toes, inadvertently, in public transport, for instance. You did, own it, stand by it. Be a man.
Even Biden would get my vote (if running against Romney) for things he said, repeatedly, about thugs and illegals throughout his earlier career, had he not apologized for it later.
That was the midnight report, by now she will be trailing Bernie and Pete.
Well you better hope not Sanders. New Gallop poll last month found that 53 percent said that they would not vote for their party nominee if they were a, "generally well-qualified person for president who happened to be socialist."
Sanders winning NH doesn't concern me, except that if he wins NH then tanks the hardcore Bernie fans will be out in force spouting their conspiracy theories.
Perhaps the terror will really come to fruition and you will be forced to defend a socialist who once said Castro was a better person than JFK, and has never recanted it.
No idea why you think I'd defend Bernie. I live in Texas, so I have the luxury of being able to vote my conscience because Texas is still reliably red. Not that I would ever vote for Donald Trump, but if my real-life choices are Trump or Bernie, I could easily vote Libertarian again (as I did in 2012).
Bloomberg is an opportunist. He'll switch because he's a politician. All phonies. Trump said stuff 40 years ago that he stands by today. That's why people hate him. And like him.
Maybe he is standing by some of the stuff 40 years ago. But now, there is much more stuff, on which he changes his stand overnight.List some important stuff he's changed his mind over. The stuff I'm talking about for example is trade agreements that took advantage of America. He's changed NAFTA and working on others. China stealing our stuff and creating an unfair business environment for foreign businesses in their country. Illegals taking jobs away from Americans. These are things he complained about years ago. Iran comes to mind as well. NATO 2%.
Nothing wrong with some of the billionaires. Bloomberg, Musk, Bezos, Branson, Gates, they all seem nice and accomplished fellows.Democrats are the ones mainly who complain about money running politics. So here's Bloomberg, a guy who's trying to buy the presidency. Trump did it on the cheap. He hardly spent any of his money on it. But the main point is how can Democrats argue against money in politics and support a guy worth $55 billion who's offering Democrat candidates money for their campaigns (for supporting his presidential run)? Bloomberg was the NY mayor who bought a third term against the law by promising and helping politicians on NYC's Counsel to change the law so he could run for a third term, which he did and won. I have to admit also that he screwed me out of an 8% raise in 2008. It cost me thousands in salary and pension, the jerk. >:(
List some important stuff he's changed his mind over. The stuff I'm talking about for example is trade agreements that took advantage of America. He's changed NAFTA and working on others. China stealing our stuff and creating an unfair business environment for foreign businesses in their country. Illegals taking jobs away from Americans. These are things he complained about years ago. Iran comes to mind as well. NATO 2%.
Democrats are the ones mainly who complain about money running politics. So here's Bloomberg, a guy who's trying to buy the presidency. Trump did it on the cheap. He hardly spent any of his money on it. But the main point is how can Democrats argue against money in politics and support a guy worth $55 billion who's offering Democrat candidates money for their campaigns (for supporting his presidential run)? Bloomberg was the NY mayor who bought a third term against the law by promising and helping politicians on NYC's Counsel to change the law so he could run for a third term, which he did and won. I have to admit also that he screwed me out of an 8% raise in 2008. It cost me thousands in salary and pension, the jerk. >:(
I don't listen to all his speeches, but there are people who keep a detailed record of all his "inaccuracies".Petty stuff. The fact is Trump kept his word on the important stuff. All the lists of inaccuracies are "gotchas" because they cannot argue against his big items that he kept his word on from his campaign. So what about all the Democrats who are running away from all their old statements and positions? "I never said it. It wasn;t me. You misunderstood what I said. I must have been ill when I said it. I'm a different person today at 77. The times were different. Someone twisted my arm. It was taken out of context. I was told the microphone was off." Did I miss any? :)
The last twist was that yesterday he asked the Justice Department to reduce Stone's sentence for his crimes, and today he said he stayed out of it.
Call it whatever you like, but from outside it doesn't look very credible.
I seem to recall, that you said that Trump screwed you also out of some money or contracts.Re-read my post.
Re-read my post.
You are right, I didn't remember it correctly, it was an old post. You didn't say that he screwed you, just that he was a lousy payer.I said Trump like many real estate developers was cheap and I was screwed by one of them who didn't pay my bill, but not Trump. I never worked for him and would be cautious if I had the opportunity. Bloomberg screwed me as Mayor when he canceled my 8% raise when I worked for NYC. He also as mayor failed to negotiate a raise with the teacher's union when my wife was a teacher in NYC. I would rate him as more concerned with national debt than Trump although I doubt if he would want to use his money to balance the budget. :)
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=131029.msg1120137#msg1120137
also:
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=132094.msg1130316#msg1130316
where you said you wouldn't work for a guy like Trump. I can sympathize with you.
NH Results:
Bernie Sanders 9 25.7% 71,759
Pete Buttigieg 9 24.4% 68,141
Amy Klobuchar 6 19.8% 55,164
Elizabeth Warren 0 9.3% 25,899
Joe Biden 0 8.4% 23,475
It was widely expected that Bernie Sanders will win, but even more surprising was that Buttiegieg did so well on Sanders' turf and placed within 1% after him.
Amy Klobuchar's surge was also very impressive, getting twice as many votes as Warren and Biden. Not something any of the political analysts were predicting.
"Obviously, right off the bat, God is followed by an R, while the serpent is followed by a D," the project's chief editor, Dr. Gary Leyland, told reporters. "Those ones are easy. Some of the other characters are a little tougher, as we have little written evidence of their modern American political ideology. But we can usually figure it out with context. For instance, if a character works a lot and is rich, they're a Republican. If a character is poor and wears sandals, definitely Democrat. Except for Jesus."
"The weird characters no one likes are probably libertarians."
Here are some of the characters whose political identity is revealed for the first time:
...
- Crying baby Jesus: Democrat
- Adolescent Jesus: Libertarian
- Mature, grown-up Jesus: Republican
- Judas Iscariot: Never Trumper but labeled as Democrat for accuracy's sake
...
Isn’t the Democratic platform that billionaires should not exist?
Good one Slobo, but I much rather enjoyed the article in response to AOC bootstrapping interview.
AOC: 'You Cannot Literally Wrap Your Head Around Something, You Would Get Hurt' (https://babylonbee.com/news/aoc-you-cannot-literally-wrap-your-head-around-something-you-would-get-hurt)
But anyway, getting back to the primary, I'm rooting for Amy. She is the only sane one right now and it was nice to see her do well. (Mayor Pete is pretty radical and a horrible Mayor; he will get eaten alive.)
But anyway, aside from this, the other big story is turnout was low at 2016 level. It just does not look like the enthusiasm is there this year. Meanwhile, on the Trump side of things, 50,000+ showed up to a NH rally of which 25% were registered Dems.
This has sorta been uttered....By BS
Maybe he is standing by some of the stuff 40 years ago. But now, there is much more stuff, on which he changes his stand overnight.
Hmm... why would anyone need more than, say, fifty million for the living of a very good life? I've had a very good one for way, way under any of that!
To suggest, perhaps, that we would otherwise not have people like the founders of Apple etc. unless they were able to amass huge sums of loot is a nonsense: these inventive people do what they do because it's what they do: they can't help themselves from inventing things.
I would be inclined to set a flat, top limit of personal/family worth beyond which the earnings would be obliged to be ploughed straight back into the company or group of companies creating the wealth. And if there are none, then make it a pure tax penalty. That way, you might actually see a redistribution of wealth, a trickle-down effect at last. As much as I admire some of the people with the ability to create fortunes, I do not feel sympathy with them when it comes to having more money than anybody but a madman needs.
It would also level the playing field and stop places like Ireland offering tax haven taxation levels to globals. It hasn't even worked in Ireland: that's why the political arm of the IRA has, a couple of days ago, won as much electoral support as the other two parties in the race. Why? Because they have taken a stance to speak for the rest of the Irish people who do not work in finance or tech, people for whom it has become impossible to find homes to buy or even to rent. What's not to like?
If that hurts some sensibilities, mostly misplaced theoretical ones held by folks who will never see that kind of dough any more than will I, then too friggin' bad.
Time for less theory and more reality in politics, and some muscle in the interests of the commonweal.
Rob
Amy has problems going forward. She reportedly has a very small ground game in Nevada where a large one is needed as it’s a caucus. It also seems she is low on funds which makes it harder to compete in SC. Perhaps her showing last night will boost her fundraising.
Don’t give up on CIA Pete. He’s “programmed” to win by the best spooks our taxes can buy😂. At this point it’s any port that shelters the Dems from tropical storm Bernie.
The biggest questions the Dems will need to answer if Amy, Pete or Mike make it to the end is how many die hard Bern voters stay home and refuse to vote, and how much the Hispanic and Black votes move towards Trump.
... these inventive people do what they do because it's what they do: they can't help themselves from inventing things....
Rob, this statement shows a complete lack of understanding about wealth and business!First, taking someone else's money to give to someone else is stealing. Sure, since government does it, we can make believe it's righteous, but it isn;t. The entire Soviet Union was based on this and look what they had for 70 years. Gulags to enforce it and a lot worse. That's what it leads too. Oh, did I mention Venezuela, Cuba, etc.?
The fact is that although Bezos is very wealthy, he has very little cash on hand and does not receive a salary, aka earnings, any where near the amount that he is worth. I would be very surprise if he even had a $1M in the bank. Nearly all of his wealth is tied up within Amazon, not in cash, but in the business itself.
The only way that he could retrieve that wealth would be to sell part of the business, or his stock.
And this is the problem with Sander's tax proposal. He wants to tax people based on wealth, not salary. If Bezos is taxed 6% (Sander's top tier) on his total wealth today, that would be a tax bill of almost $8B. In order to pay that, he would need to sell $8B worth of stock, but in doing so, this would crash the price of Amazon stock.
This, combined with all of the other stocks suddenly being flooded on the market from other wealthy people selling to make the tax bill, would crash the stock market.
Then, we start getting into trying to figure out how much to tax people who's wealth is not tied up in public companies that dont have a stock price. How do even determine the value of a private company? (I dont know my company's value. I know how much I made this year, and the past, but value is more then just that. To put an exact dollar figure on it would be impossible.) Sure, public is easy, you multiply the stock price by the total shares, but what about private where neither of those things exist?
Bernie's whole plan is doomed to failure due to him not understanding the scale to which this would effect the economy and the sheer complexity of trying to figure out how wealthy a wealthy person actually is.
Insofar as you saying people do what they do, how well is that working out for Venezuela? I know a couple of photographers who left because the economic system did not let them do what they do. How about Cuba? I seem to remember all those people who do what they do leaving and building up Miami, Dominican Republic, etc. while Cuba fell into the abyss.
Then, we start getting into trying to figure out how much to tax people who's wealth is not tied up in public companies that dont have a stock price. How do even determine the value of a private company? (I dont know my company's value. I know how much I made this year, and the past, but value is more then just that. To put an exact dollar figure on it would be impossible.) Sure, public is easy, you multiply the stock price by the total shares, but what about private where neither of those things exist?
First, taking someone else's money to give to someone else is stealing. Sure, since government does it, we can make believe it's righteous, but it isn;t. The entire Soviet Union was based on this and look what they had for 70 years. Gulags to enforce it and a lot worse. That's what it leads too. Oh, did I mention Venezuela, Cuba, etc.?
Thats the problem for businesess like ours, they have very little real value. Unless you have some business real estate, they true value of oyur business is YOU. When you retire, you can sell equipment and that has some value. You can try to sell a client list but thats not worth much because the clients are really buying YOU. Not much is left to add a real value to the business.
There is nothing wrong with being a lone wolf, and I actually prefer it to all the other forms my lifetime career has taken. You just need to understand going that there is really nothing of real value in your business other than yourself. I'm rather enjoying my end of career trajectory. I work with my wife, we are making good bank and we work maybe 100 days a year. We have pretty much zero overhead and our billing rate has never been higher. I can't put a dollar value on that :) I don't think Bernie could either :) I'm having a ball. Working on my toy car, in the process of getting my part 107 remote pilot cert and playing with drones. Oh yea, shooting for some select clients. too.
Life is good.
I agree on this, and although I tend to lean towards the logical in these arguments, we really need to start talking about this morally.The prohibition against covetousness leads to the other commandment: Thous shall not steal. One follows the other. One justifies the other. It also leads to murder, which is justified governmentally when citizens fail to follow the socialist rules. Government becomes God with power over people including life and death. It decides on personal property. It decides on which medical procedures they;ll pay for and what coverage you have or don;t have. It decides just how much freedom you have or don;t have. Why anyone would want an old Socialist like Sanders to decide how they should run their life boggles my mind. Yet, half the Democratic party see socialism as something good. Well, that comes from covetnousness where we started this conversation.
What Bernie is suggesting is immoral. It goes directly against thou shall not covet thy neighbor's goods. Many people incorrectly define covet as just jealousy or being envious, but it is much more then that.
To covet thy neighbor's goods means you are so envious that you feel you should have a right to the exact goods of your neighbor for no other reason then for your sense of envy. This is what Bernie is promoting, and it is evil.
(FYI, I am not a religious person, but an atheist. However, I still see the commandments as a base for morality.)
True, but here is the thing, this is the case with all business, even real estate.Of course the main problem is how do you pay taxes on wealth that's tied up in the property? Let's use your real estate exdample. So you own a hotel or a golf course that's worth $10 million. Leave aside how that's determined right now. But it's not in cash. So you have to pay a wealth tax of let's say 2% a year. That's $200,000. Where do you get it from. It's not under your pillow. It's tied up in the property. So now you actually have to sell off part of it to raise the cash for taxes. So you have a fire sale and the value of the property is lost. Same if you own a farm. Everything is tied up in the land, and tractors, and barns, and milking machines. So you have to sell your farm to get cash to pay the taxes? That's nuts. That's why the tax law is currently written, for good reason, to pay taxes when the property is sold. That's the only real time cash is available to pay the taxes. It's also the time that the capital is no longer needed as an investment. It's also the time that the owner get the real wealth in a form he can spend it on himself and use it personally.
Lets say you own a bunch of buildings that you rent out. Well, how much are those building worth? Some would say just add up the sale price of those building, but what is the sale's price? If you bought them 20 years ago, they are certainly worth more now then when you bought them, especially if you did renovations. So, you cant go by the numbers you bought them at.
What about adding on inflation and the cost of the renovations? Well, that does not work, since many renovations increase the value of a building by more then what is invested? Not to mention, you need to take into account how the neighborhood has changed too.
What about looking at comps and recent sales of buildings in the area? Well, that does not really take into account any unique aspects of your buildings, so ...
See the point, even with real estate, it become impossible to put an exact value on the value of the business. Take for instance my house, which I bought for $158K and then put $50K in work into it. Is it now only worth $208K? But that 50K was really mainly supplies since I did all the carpentry, flooring and masonry myself, so how much do I add on for my time? Well houses in my neighborhood sell for around $260K right now, so maybe $260K? But my kitchen is all new and I know for a fact my house is one of the few that had all the knob and tube replaced with modern wiring, so is it more then $260K?
And this is the problem. The only way I could figure out how much my house is worth is by selling it, but I am not interested in doing so right now. Same thing with all private businesses.
Put an exact dollar figure on a person's wealth in order to tax it become a conundrum, and, as a person's wealth increases, it becomes an impossibility.
True, but here is the thing, this is the case with all business, even real estate.
Lets say you own a bunch of buildings that you rent out. Well, how much are those building worth? Some would say just add up the sale price of those building, but what is the sale's price? If you bought them 20 years ago, they are certainly worth more now then when you bought them, especially if you did renovations. So, you cant go by the numbers you bought them at.
What about adding on inflation and the cost of the renovations? Well, that does not work, since many renovations increase the value of a building by more then what is invested? Not to mention, you need to take into account how the neighborhood has changed too.
What about looking at comps and recent sales of buildings in the area? Well, that does not really take into account any unique aspects of your buildings, so ...
See the point, even with real estate, it become impossible to put an exact value on the value of the business. Take for instance my house, which I bought for $158K and then put $50K in work into it. Is it now only worth $208K? But that 50K was really mainly supplies since I did all the carpentry, flooring and masonry myself, so how much do I add on for my time? Well houses in my neighborhood sell for around $260K right now, so maybe $260K? But my kitchen is all new and I know for a fact my house is one of the few that had all the knob and tube replaced with modern wiring, so is it more then $260K?
And this is the problem. The only way I could figure out how much my house is worth is by selling it, but I am not interested in doing so right now. Same thing with all private businesses.
Putting an exact dollar figure on a person's wealth in order to tax it becomes a conundrum, and, as a person's wealth increases, it becomes an impossibility.
The problem is even smart people don;t understand the rules of how an economy works. We don't teach our kids these things in school. In fact, we have socialists who teach redistribution. So then people, nice people, vote in guys like Maduro and Chavez in Venezuela. Than 15 years later, when the economy collapses, people are wandering around looking for a slice of bread to feed their families and wondering what went wrong. Guys like Sanders and Warren know better. Their selfishness and hunger for power makes them support economic policies that would destroy the country. It's disgraceful.
I know that things are heading down-hill in the USA, but to compare the political system in the USA with that of Venezuela looks like a bit of a stretch to me ...We're getting there. We had a trillion dollars in deficit spending last year. Trump just recommended a budget for next year continuing with another trillion dollar deficit. That's 20% more than the entire GDP of your country The Netherlands. Think about it. That trillion dollars could buy the entire productivity of your country, pay all salaries and buy all your products including windmills and solar panels. :) And all we did is to print some more dollars. And that's from Trump. Can you imagine if Sanders won?
Just what do you include in "down hill,," Bart? Employment is booming, wages are rising, the stock market is rising. Please explain what you mean by "down hill." It sounds as if your news sources may be out of touch.
First, taking someone else's money to give to someone else is stealing. Sure, since government does it, we can make believe it's righteous, but it isn;t. The entire Soviet Union was based on this and look what they had for 70 years. Gulags to enforce it and a lot worse. That's what it leads too. Oh, did I mention Venezuela, Cuba, etc.?
...There is a reason Europe and the rest of the world do not have Apples, Googles, Microsofts, Teslas, etc. of the world. Those inventions require enormous amounts of money to take off. If you limit how much money one can make, you limit how much money would be in the ecosystem as well.The amount of money to take off is not dependent on the Billionaires...
...
My take is that billonaires have too much money, ergo too much undemocratic controlled power in one hand.
Also when the election system is partly based on the amount of money a candidate can bring they directly can influence the democratic part of the political system.
In todays economic system it is easy for them to get even richer without taking great risk while pretending to be philantropists. (for instance Bill Gates)
Some of them acknowledge this situation and ask for a tax system in which they pay more.
The amount of money to take off is not dependent on the Billionaires...
It is for this the stock exchange was developed.
You do beautiful work Craig.
Of course the main problem is how do you pay taxes on wealth that's tied up in the property? Let's use your real estate exdample. So you own a hotel or a golf course that's worth $10 million. Leave aside how that's determined right now. But it's not in cash. So you have to pay a wealth tax of let's say 2% a year. That's $200,000. Where do you get it from. It's not under your pillow. It's tied up in the property. So now you actually have to sell off part of it to raise the cash for taxes. So you have a fire sale and the value of the property is lost. Same if you own a farm. Everything is tied up in the land, and tractors, and barns, and milking machines. So you have to sell your farm to get cash to pay the taxes? That's nuts. That's why the tax law is currently written, for good reason, to pay taxes when the property is sold. That's the only real time cash is available to pay the taxes. It's also the time that the capital is no longer needed as an investment. It's also the time that the owner get the real wealth in a form he can spend it on himself and use it personally.You would pay taxes on the hotel with income from room fees, and on the golf course with income from greens fees and cart rentals. You would pay taxes on the dairy farm with income from the sale of milk. They are an expense you budget for.
You pay taxes on the golf course with income from greens fees and cart rentals. You pay taxes on the farm with income from the sale of milk.
I pay annual property taxes to my local government without having to sell my house.
Wow, I never truly realized how evil Obama was then. He outspent McCain 3 to 1 and Romney 2 to 1.This is apart from any candidate- it has to do with the way the electionsystem is based at the moment in the US.
I guess what you are saying is that the people's choice those years should not have been Obama.
But anyway, getting back to billionares having too much power, how about Tom Steyer and Bloomberg? If they win, will you still endorse them, or go third party? How about Elon Musk? How does he effect politics? How about Warren Buffet?
This is apart from any candidate- it has to do with the way the electionsystem is based at the moment in the US.
It means that without enough money you don't have a chance...
This has always been the case, with the possible exception of George Washington.I did not say money rules all... fortunately not.
Today though, modern technology has made it possible for the average person to donate, directly, without difficulty. I would argue that the victory of Trump, who was out spent in the primary and general, and Bernie in the lead without any major donators, disproves your premise.
You pay taxes on the golf course with income from greens fees and cart rentals. You pay taxes on the dairy farm with income from the sale of milk.
Like most people I pay annual property taxes to my local government without having to sell my house. I'm guessing you do too.
I did not say money rules all... fortunately not.
I do not have enough knowledge of the funding of those two you mentioned. You may be right. I suppose it is possible for every person to see how they are funded?
Then please show me some link...
This is apart from any candidate- it has to do with the way the electionsystem is based at the moment in the US.
It means that without enough money you don't have a chance...
I did not say money rules all... fortunately not.
I do not have enough knowledge of the funding of those two you mentioned. You may be right. I suppose it is possible for every person to see how they are funded?
Then please show me some link...
Thats the problem for businesess like ours, they have very little real value. Unless you have some business real estate, they true value of oyur business is YOU. When you retire, you can sell equipment and that has some value. You can try to sell a client list but thats not worth much because the clients are really buying YOU. Not much is left to add a real value to the business.
There is nothing wrong with being a lone wolf, and I actually prefer it to all the other forms my lifetime career has taken. You just need to understand going that there is really nothing of real value in your business other than yourself. I'm rather enjoying my end of career trajectory. I work with my wife, we are making good bank and we work maybe 100 days a year. We have pretty much zero overhead and our billing rate has never been higher. I can't put a dollar value on that :) I don't think Bernie could either :) I'm having a ball. Working on my toy car, in the process of getting my part 107 remote pilot cert and playing with drones. Oh yea, shooting for some select clients. too.
Life is good.
Rob, this statement shows a complete lack of understanding about wealth and business!
The fact is that although Bezos is very wealthy, he has very little cash on hand and does not receive a salary, aka earnings, any where near the amount that he is worth. I would be very surprise if he even had a $1M in the bank. Nearly all of his wealth is tied up within Amazon, not in cash, but in the business itself.
The only way that he could retrieve that wealth would be to sell part of the business, or his stock.
And this is the problem with Sander's tax proposal. He wants to tax people based on wealth, not salary. If Bezos is taxed 6% (Sander's top tier) on his total wealth today, that would be a tax bill of almost $8B. In order to pay that, he would need to sell $8B worth of stock, but in doing so, this would crash the price of Amazon stock.
This, combined with all of the other stocks suddenly being flooded on the market from other wealthy people selling to make the tax bill, would crash the stock market.
Then, we start getting into trying to figure out how much to tax people who's wealth is not tied up in public companies that dont have a stock price. How do even determine the value of a private company? (I dont know my company's value. I know how much I made this year, and the past, but value is more then just that. To put an exact dollar figure on it would be impossible.) Sure, public is easy, you multiply the stock price by the total shares, but what about private where neither of those things exist?
Bernie's whole plan is doomed to failure due to him not understanding the scale to which this would effect the economy and the sheer complexity of trying to figure out how wealthy a wealthy person actually is.
Insofar as you saying people do what they do, how well is that working out for Venezuela? I know a couple of photographers who left because the economic system did not let them do what they do. How about Cuba? I seem to remember all those people who do what they do leaving and building up Miami, Dominican Republic, etc. while Cuba fell into the abyss.
The amount of money to take off is not dependent on the Billionaires...
It is for this the stock exchange was developed.
And yet they come to the good, old, greedy US of A to help themselves. Elon Musk could have stayed in South Africa to pursue his inventions... how far would that get him? There is a reason Europe and the rest of the world do not have Apples, Googles, Microsofts, Teslas, etc. of the world. Those inventions require enormous amounts of money to take off. If you limit how much money one can make, you limit how much money would be in the ecosystem as well.
It is like mice determining just how much grass is enough for elephants.
Thanks. So you were the hit from New Jersey :)I forgot about that. I guess I'm still impressed.
(I really need to update that Web Site...)
How arrogant of you, and how reflexively driven. Read my post properly: folks like Bezos are doing exactly what I suggested: reinvesting. Is your foot painful?
And exactly right: selling off his stock breaks my suggested way forward, and so he'd be inclined to keep it going. That said, he could still get himself that fifty million in cash (and be within my limit) any time he wanted to as long as he didn't do it in a way to panic the market.
If you use an accountant to do your books every year (I did, right from the first year) he will give you a value for your little business each time, not just tell you how much tax you have to pay or how much you have lost, or otherwise advise you on the benefit of doing something else.
People from Cuba and Venezuela have nothing to do with it; they either flee countries ruled by despots or political gangsters. You should not try to confuse the plight of these people with a fair tax regime in developed countries. Taxing the crazy rich is not gangsterism; handing contracts out as kickbacks and for kickbacks is. You see the difference?
Rob
In the case of real estate, someone is going to appraise it. and they are goingt o consider condition, upgrades and current market value of similar properties. Thats the number. Most banks are going to consider that number as a basis for what the value of a loan might be for that property. It matters not a whit if you have put in far more in renovations than the value of the property at the time its appraised. If you want to sell it the true value is what someone is willing to pay at that instant. If the value it greater than the bank value ( if a loan is required) the purchaser could pony up more money. The question is...would they?
I can imagine thats what would happen in a Bernie world. Someone would appraise the business and decide what the tax would be. Just like your home is appriaised for taxes.
Trust me, if this were come to pass they would create a mechanism to value your wealth. I cant image there will be a robust way to challenge the assessment :)
How then would you expect candidates to get their words out to the people without money?
For one you could give all parties the same advertising exposure, funded by the state (tax).
Well maybe I mis-read you, but you stated, "I would be inclined to set a flat, top limit of personal/family worth ..."
When you write worth, do you mean total wealth, or amount earned through salary per year? I define worth as the former, which if you set a limit on becomes a detriment to the economy. Taxing only earnings, and not wealth, is not part of the Democrat platform right now, which I why I jumped right to wealth.
Insofar as taxing the rich at higher and higher rates opens the door for more and more kickbacks. You really think that making the tax system more complicated wont bring more cronyism and will make things fairer? That's not how things work out.
For one you could give all parties the same advertising exposure, funded by the state (tax).
Earn whatever you can, but make sure you reinvest. As they say, money lying in the bank is a stinking fish. Having fifty million squids in you bank is stink quite enough, I'd have thought.
You would pay taxes on the hotel with income from room fees, and on the golf course with income from greens fees and cart rentals. You would pay taxes on the dairy farm with income from the sale of milk. They are an expense you budget for.What you're suggesting is using income to pay income taxes. That's what we do now. If the company makes more money, they pay more taxes. If they have a bad year, they pay less. To tie it to the value of the company will make it impossible to pay the taxes in a bad year and maybe bankrupt it. It will also create an unfair playing field among competitors since company expenses will be different to the different company in an industry because of different tax requirements based on the wealth of the company. For both of the problems mentioned, and lots others, a tax on wealth is a terrible way of government funding. That's why it isn't done. Just raise rates on income if the government needs more money.
Like most people I pay annual property taxes to my local government without having to sell my house. I'm guessing you do too. Would you prefer to eliminate property taxes and replace them with income taxes?
What you're suggesting is using income to pay income taxes. That's what we do now. If the company makes more money, they pay more taxes. If they have a bad year, they pay less. To tie it to the value of the company will make it impossible to pay the taxes in a bad year and maybe bankrupt it. It will also create an unfair playing field among competitors since company expenses will be different to the different company in an industry because of different tax requirements based on the wealth of the company. For both of the problems mentioned, and lots others, a tax on wealth is a terrible way of government funding. That's why it isn't done. Just raise rates on income if the government needs more money.It is done in virtually every taxing jurisdiction in the United States. The tax man doesn't ask me if I had a good year or a bad year when he comes to collect my property taxes.
This is apart from any candidate- it has to do with the way the electionsystem is based at the moment in the US.Should we stop unions from using their money to influence elections to pass favorable union legislation and help union workers? Should we prevent environmental organizations like The Sierra Club spending their money to influence government to protect the environment with more regulations? SHould we stop Muslim groups from using their money to hire lobbyists to stop regulation of Muslim immigration? Just where would you stop people and organizations from using their money to influence government action,, rules and legislation? Who's going to determine which groups have value and should be allowed to do these things? You?
It means that without enough money you don't have a chance...
It also means that influence in the political system can be bought.
Who's going to determine which groups have value and should be allowed to do these things? You?
It is done in virtually every taxing jurisdiction in the United States. The tax man doesn't ask me if I had a good year or a bad year when he comes to collect my property taxes.
It is done in virtually every taxing jurisdiction in the United States. The tax man doesn't ask me if I had a good year or a bad year when he comes to collect my property taxes.First, you're not competing with other homeowners. In business, tying taxes to wealth as I explained in the last post, is a terrible and unproductive way of doing it. Just raise business income taxes if you have too.
I'll do it!Sure. :)
However only the people with the stinking fish get to say when the stink is too much to bear...After all, it is their stinking fish.
Peter
Yes, that's the status quo; it used to be the status quo in Britain, too, and the keepers of fish grew fat, dyspeptic and ever richer whilst the rest of humanity tugged its forelock and envied those on the next rung - maybe the footman or butler, or even the guy who drove the coach-and-four.
Today, though a lot better, some folks still grow fat but only because they don't have enough to pay for proper food and heating or clothes for their kids.
That's where my idea comes in and gives a progressive government the incentive to do something for the folks outwith that top percentile of fishkeepers. Let's face it - left to their own devices and the politicians they are always trying to get elected, their volume of fish would steadily increase until only global warming would put that fish back where it belongs. By themselves, they mostly wouldn't give you a sardine.
That said, some of them are different: they give enormous sums to charities and good works, tacitly accepting and understanding the reality and morality of too much being, well, too much for any one man or family. Let's "encourage" the recalcitrant rest to do the same by removing the alternative option!
;-)
While giving their money to charity sounds wonderful and is good for the soul, it's not the best way to dispose of all that wealth. Speaking of fish comes to mind the expression, give a man a fish and eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he eats for a lifetime.
Wealthy people should use their wealth to start or invest in other businesses or expand existing ones. That capital used for investments create more wealth and jobs that help more people than a one-time gift of charity. The fact is there's really no way billionaires can spend all their money. It has to be invested which helps the economy and other people. Even if they take some of it out of the investments, they;re going to spend it. That means jobs for pilots, car assembly workers, boat manufacturers, as well as contribution to government in the form of taxes. In the end they can;t take it with them so they leave it like any corpse that gets reabsorbed into nature:- dust, money and all.
I've no stats to back it up but my gut trells me most of the filthy rich dont leave the bulk of thier fish in hte cooler getting stinky. I think they are using that fish to catch more fish.
I do some work for a guy who has lot of stinking fish. I asked him once about why he continues to try and catch more fish. Aside from wanting more fish to use as bait, he finds that counting the fish he has is how he keeps score of his fishing prowess.
He continues to catch a lot of fish. but he is really quite generous wiht the fish he catches. He often hold fish frys for the people of his community. I for one like it when I earn some of his fish. I want him catch as many fish as he can...
However only the people with the stinking fish get to say when the stink is too much to bear...After all, it is their stinking fish...
... Wealthy people should use their wealth...
I personally get all that. But it can not be mandated that all must divest. That too, is a wrong. Charity is a gift to the giver as well. Not everyone gets to know that.Agreed. Charity comes from the heart of the individual. You can't put a gun up to someone's head and tell them to contribute to your favorite charity. Actually, much wealth does go to charity because they can;t take it with them. The hospital that I;ve been to have all sorts of wings built mainly from charitable giving. People want to do good whether they're rich or poor. We all have hearts. We all have souls. If all giving was government mandated, how would we save our souls? :)
Peter
Agreed. Charity comes from the heart of the individual. You can't put a gun up to someone's head and tell them to contribute to your favorite charity. Actually, much wealth does go to charity because they can;t take it with them. The hospital that I;ve been to have all sorts of wings built mainly from charitable giving. People want to do good whether they're rich or poor. We all have hearts. We all have souls. If all giving was government mandated, how would we save our souls? :)
... rather do I think it makes me someone who realises that greed is ultimately self-defeating and destructive.
Unless a moderate favorite soon emerges, party leaders may increasingly look to Michael R. Bloomberg as a potential savior.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/12/us/politics/democrats-new-hampshire-sanders.html
which would be a good thing.So the party of the little people, will turn their lives over to a billionaire to save themselves. Don;t you see the sweet irony?
So the party of the little people, will turn their lives over to a billionaire to save themselves. Don;t you see the sweet irony?
In any case, he won't get my vote until I get the 8% raise he owes me. :)
They finally realized what I've been saying for weeks. Pelosi and Schiff aimed at Trump and shot Biden. The only question is, was it deliberate?
"Trump Got Impeached -- But Is Biden Campaign the Casualty?"
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/02/13/trump_got_impeached_--_but_is_biden_campaign_the_casualty.html
1. Hunter Biden's Ukrainian business dealing would have been found out and publicized anyway.
2. Bloomberg would have pushed Biden to the side sooner or later with or without Trump's impeachment.
Rob, have you missed my allegory about mice dictating how much grass should be enough for elephants? Because it seems to me it is quite fitting for what you are suggesting.
But I think the biggest take away from this will be that Bloomberg waited too long to get in the game; that he should have been on the NV ballot. And maybe he should have spent some of his ad money to attack socialism instead of just attacking Trump.
Bernie is looking more and more like he will be the nominee, and then every Dem, from Federal to local, will be put into the position to support and defend communism. Maybe some will choose wisely and disavow Bernie; Joe Manchin is signaling that he may endorse Trump ultimately. However I think most will go done with the ship.
I also think that Bloomberg waited too long, but there is still a lot of time for voters to make up their mind.
Impossible to make predictions at this time. We'll have a much better picture in 2 weeks, after the Super Tuesday.
It's all academic. The entire Democrat field is a joke. The only person who can bring Trump down is Trump. He keeps working on it, but if he's going to bring it off against this incredible field of incompetent clowns he's gonna have to work a lot harder. And the impeachment charade guarantees that the Democrats will lose the House and the Republicans hang on to the Senate.
ROTFL
I also think that Bloomberg waited too long, but there is still a lot of time for voters to make up their mind.I agree. It's too early. Bloomberg is being protected by the powers that be in politics and the press. He'll be given a pass on his frisk policies of minorities. I could see Bloomberg and Kobluchar or Warren as VP.
Impossible to make predictions at this time. We'll have a much better picture in 2 weeks, after the Super Tuesday.
I agree. It's too early. Bloomberg is being protected by the powers that be in politics and the press. He'll be given a pass on his frisk policies of minorities. I could see Bloomberg and Kobluchar or Warren as VP.
I'd speculate that the media and all his competitors will use Bloomberg's frisk-and-search policy as an easy and convenient way to attack him, but when it comes to the actual voters, most of them are not disturbed by it.The media won;t attack him because they're anti-Trump.
When it comes to the choice of VP, I can't see Warren on Bloomberg's ticket. Klobuchar is a definite possibility.
... although no longer a minority woman. :)
Perhaps for Bloomberg's sake, we better hope he does not win. Otherwise the presidency just may get a little more suicidal.The source for the story is the Drudge Report so you may want to factor that in when evaluating the credibility of the report.
Mike Bloomberg 'is considering picking Hillary Clinton as his running mate in the 2020 Democratic race to help take on Trump' (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8007521/Mike-Bloomberg-wants-Hillary-Clinton-running-mate-say-sources.html)
The source for the story is the Drudge Report so you may want to factor that in.
A Drudge Report story picked up by the Daily Mail? It sure doesn't get any more authoritative than that.
The source for the story is the Drudge Report so you may want to factor that in when evaluating the credibility of the report.
And you may want to work on your sense of humor.So you think this story is the Drudge Report's attempt at humor?
So you think this story is the Drudge Report's attempt at humor?
Since you’re not a USA citizen I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt here. There is a running joke on HRC that she can make people kill themselves since more then a handfull of nefarious associates of the Clintons have done so, like Epstein to name one.You know you are in trouble when you have to explain your own jokes.
You know you are in trouble when you have to explain your own jokes.
It was a pretty direct joke at least as Joe expressed it, with the key word being suicidal.I get it now. Thanks for the explanation.
You know you are in trouble when you have to explain your own jokes.
A New York City man who’s now been arrested 139 times thanked Democrats for guaranteeing his immediate release despite repeatedly swiping hundreds of dollars from unsuspecting subway commuters since the state’s new bail reform law went into effect Jan. 1.
Charles Barry, 56, has been arrested six times since the start of this year. He’s been released each time without having to post bail under New York’s new bail reform law since his alleged offenses were nonviolent, the New York Daily News reported. In the past, Barry’s served several stints in state prison and has a lengthy record, including six felonies, 87 misdemeanors and 21 missed court hearings, the newspaper reported, citing court records.
You can't make this stuff up.
"NYC subway thief thanks Democrats after his 139th arrest, release: 'Bail reform, it’s lit!'"
https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-york-bail-reform-law-nyc-subway-thief-thanks-democrats-139th-arrest
This is something Bloomberg can't buy.Your tax dollars at work.
President Donald Trump flies over Daytona Race Track in Air Force 1 than leads field on a pace lap after giving command ahead of Daytona 500
https://sports.yahoo.com/president-donald-trump-gives-command-for-drivers-to-start-their-engines-at-daytona-500-200743873.html
Another crushing blow to Biden's candidacy:
Found out today that Bloomberg shut down his investigative media team in China after the Chinese government told him in no uncertain terms that it would cost him if he did not. When given the opportunity to maintain moral and journalistic ethics, he decided instead to kowtow to China to increase his wealth, just like the NBA.Sure, Trump ads will show how the president went after the Chinese for stealing our stuff, hurting them with tariffs, while Bloomberg blinked. What kind of president do you want defending the country?
This is not going to play very well now that the entire country pretty much is on the same side of the isle as Trump is on China.
Found out today that Bloomberg shut down his investigative media team in China after the Chinese government told him in no uncertain terms that it would cost him if he did not. When given the opportunity to maintain moral and journalistic ethics, he decided instead to kowtow to China to increase his wealth, just like the NBA.
This is not going to play very well now that the entire country pretty much is on the same side of the isle as Trump is on China.
Your tax dollars at work.
Isn't life a funny thing!Just as Trump is criticized for what he did in business once he got into politics, so Bloomberg is open to criticism about his business practices now that he's running for office.
There I was, suggesting a way forward to redistribute wealth by leaving the very rich holding onto a maximum of fifty million fish in personal cash or goodies, their invested interests something quite apart - a place most folks I know would find themselves very comfortable being able to inhabit - and was roundly condemmed for my supposedly red-under-the-bed thinking mechanism!
Now, my interference and presumptuousness is turned on its head because it has become legitimate to criticise China for wanting others to mind their own business. And worst of all, somebody else, an American, may be about to make more squillions for minding his own business! Oh sweet irony, will your audience see you or are you dancing in vain?
;-)
Bloomberg is spending millions of his own money on the election, thus redistributing his personal wealth to fellow Americans. Better than buying a yacht.The media loves Bloomberg and Trump for how rich these guys are making them. Not only from their ads, but from the constant buzz that brings in readers and watchers and raises ad revenues. Trump isn't a yacht kind of guy. He doesn;t like to build anything that has to float.
I think Bloomberg is running against himself more then Trump is, who could have thought.Nanny Bloomberg. When he was NYC mayor, he imposed a regulation that stopped soda cups larger than 16 ounces. He was concerned that people were eating too much sugar. He was sued and lost in court. It's his was or the highway. In his soul he's a dictator, but a nice one who only wants good for you according to what he thinks is the right thing.
"I could teach anybody, even people in this room, no offense intended, to be a farmer," Bloomberg said. "It's a process. You dig a hole, you put a seed in, you put dirt on top, add water, up comes the corn. You could learn that."
I was listening to a podcast recently talking about Bloomberg's stop and frisk video, and the guy made an interesting point. Bloomberg was not being racist in that video, he was just being himself, talking done to people. It does not matter your race, gender, income level, he just talks down to you.
Bloomberg is spending millions of his own money on the election, thus redistributing his personal wealth to fellow Americans. Better than buying a yacht.
Trump isn't a yacht kind of guy.He had to sell his yacht during one of his bankruptcies.
I agree, but could have found a better way of off-loading some of that. I had better polish my begging bowl and rework my spiel before pitching to him!
;-)
He had to sell his yacht during one of his bankruptcies.Knowing Trump, he probably made twice what he paid for it.
No sweat, Rob. He'll teach you to farm (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bloomberg-implied-farming-is-easy-in-2016-comments). I'm sure that with his knowledgable instruction, even I could learn to farm.I'm sure Bloomberg believes that most people shouldn't vote because they don't understand things. The difference between Bloomberg and Trump is that while Trump was only kidding at being president for a third term, Bloomberg actually bought his third term as mayor. He promised the head of the NYC Council that he would support her later in her run for mayor if she would get the counsel to change the law. The law while he was mayor in his second term was that only two terms are allowed. So the Counsel changed the law to allow three terms, he ran, and won. When she ran after Bloomberg left, she lost. People were really perturbed she changed the law. In any case, the law was changed back subsequently to two terms.
...The law while he was mayor in his second term was that only two terms are allowed. So the Counsel changed the law to allow three terms...
That's where Putin got the idea! ;)
“Nevertheless, there's this enormous cohort of black and Latino males, age, let’s say, 16 to 25,” Bloomberg said, “that don't have jobs, don't have any prospects, don't know how to find jobs, don't know what their skill sets are, don't know how to behave in the workplace where they have to work collaboratively and collectively.”
Wow.
I can see the Trump campaign slogan now, "at least I'm not a racist!"
As I said before, you guys are looking at a false messiah. Klobuchar is the only one who has a chance, but it looks like a safe bet you will ignore her.
Why do you choose to consider that racist...
Enough with Trump already. Let's leave some oxygen for everyone else. So what's going on with the Democrats? Will Biden pull it out? Will America go for a Soviet? Will Bloomberg get the nod in a brokered convention? Does anyone care?I agree. However, I did vote for Trump and I will do so again in 2020. For results, he will go down in history as the most productive President in our lifetimes. As for his personality, not a fan of his attacks, but my investments and tax returns don't care about personalities.
So let's see. Bernie isn't a democrat. He's an Independent running as a Democrat. Bloomberg was the Republican mayor of New York City for 12 years during which his wealth increased from $5 to $35 billion. Republican! Isn't it embarrassing the Democrats have two leaders running wo aren't Democrats?
Bloomberg should have joined GOP and then the two could have duked it out. Who needs Trump?You not liking Trump doesn't mean anything. 90% of Republicans support Trump. There's no room for Bloomberg or anyone else right now. Bloomberg had to run as a Democrat.
You not liking Trump doesn't mean anything. 90% of Republicans support Trump.
Do Republicans have an alternative option but to vote for Trump? Support for Trump doesn't seem to show from his approval rating (especially when lacking an alternative).Yes. There are Republican nominations for president just like the Democrats. Of course, the anti-Trump press would rather not mention it since Trump is swamping the vote. Well, maybe I shouldn;t use the word swamp. In any case, here's the tally link to date. Note that I'm running for Republican president as well. If you were an American, you could write in my name. And thank you everyone who actually is voting for me. :)
From a pure entertainment perspective, this just keeps on getting better and better.Don't underestimate Bloomberg. He won three terms as NYC mayor as a Republican in a liberal Democrat city. He bought his third term paying to change the law against it. Trump may rue the day he went after Biden in Ukraine. Maybe Pelosi made a deal with Bloomberg. He told her he would pay for all the campaigns of democrats running in the upcoming election if she would impeach Trump. That would put the target of corruption on Biden and push him out, which is what's happening. The swamp runs deep and wide in Washington DC.
"If your conversation during a presidential election is about some guy wearing a dress and whether he, she, or it can go to the locker room with their daughter, that's not a winning formula with most people," Bloomberg said in 2019.
He actually used the pronoun "it" when talking about a person. :o My God, I think I can hear the heads of Bernie Bros exploding as I write this.
Maybe Bloomberg really is the guy the Dems need. If he wins the nomination, perhaps he will be able to slap the entire woke BS out of their heads.
If Bloomberg goes full tilt tomorrow night, it will be amazing. Although, if he does, you may want to think about selling any real estate you have in downtown Milwaukee. Bernie Campaign Organizer Says 'Milwaukee will Burn' if Sanders Loses (https://newstalk1130.iheart.com/featured/common-sense-central/content/2020-01-14-bernie-campaign-organizer-says-milwaukee-will-burn-if-sanders-loses/)
Don't underestimate Bloomberg. He won three terms as NYC mayor as a Republican in a liberal Democrat city. He bought his third term paying to change the law against it. Trump may rue the day he went after Biden in Ukraine. Maybe Pelosi made a deal with Bloomberg. He told her he would pay for all the campaigns of democrats running in the upcoming election if she would impeach Trump. That would put the target of corruption on Biden and push him out, which is what's happening. The swamp runs deep and wide in Washington DC.
If Bloomberg owns his comments and does not bend over for the left in the party, I think he may very well be a force to reckon with.Bloomberg is already making overtures for liberal giveaways to people in line with the left of the Democratic party. If he wins the nomination, he could pick Warren as his VP running mate and secure the vote on the left. Sanders will come around and support the Democrat ticket securing Bloomberg's offer to become ambassador to the Soviet Union, er, Russia. Well, maybe Cuba or Venezuela.
But if he comes out and apologizes, he'll be dead in the water. People are not looking for some fake as hell pussyfoot, which is why Bernie is doing well. Bernie, or course, has other problems, mainly with being a communist in a country where the vast majority have a deep negative view of communism.
Bloomberg is already making overtures for liberal giveaways to people in line with the left of the Democratic party. If he wins the nomination, he could pick Warren as his VP running mate and secure the vote on the left. Sanders will come around and support the Democrat ticket securing Bloomberg's offer to become ambassador to the Soviet Union, er, Russia. Well, maybe Cuba or Venezuela.
Either way you look at it though, the Democratic party is royally screwed beyond belief. I never thought I would ever see either of our two major parties in this shape. Just look at the candidates.
You have a cranky old commie, a banjo playing zombie, a chieftess who's way off the reservation, the jack of all platitudes but master of no policies, the Big Apple version of Frog Horn Leg Horn, and the invisible woman.
I am sure there must be some Dems behind closed doors shaking their heads, asking themselves how it got to this, and debating if they should pour another Bourbon Special or just go straight for the 38 special.
Okay, so I was looking for a James Carville meme to go with that last sentence and could not find anything relatable, but my God, does that man have a way with words. If anyone really thinks Trump is the first crass person in politics, just look up some Ragin Cajun classics.
Either way you look at it though, the Democratic party is royally screwed beyond belief. I never thought I would ever see either of our two major parties in this shape. Just look at the candidates.
You have a cranky old commie, a banjo playing zombie, a chieftess who's way off the reservation, the jack of all platitudes but master of no policies, the Big Apple version of Frog Horn Leg Horn, and the invisible woman.
I am sure there must be some Dems behind closed doors shaking their heads, asking themselves how it got to this, and debating if they should pour another Bourbon Special or just go straight for the 38 special.
Okay, so I was looking for a James Carville meme to go with that last sentence and could not find anything relatable, but my God, does that man have a way with words. If anyone really thinks Trump is the first crass person in politics, just look up some Ragin Cajun classics.
You seem to have completely forgotten that 3.5 years ago Trump was up on stage claiming that Cruz's dad killed Kennedy, and that Lindsay Graham was claiming Trump was the antichrist, among other things.
Peter Thiel recently said that the way you know that you won an argument in politics is if both sides agree with you. Well the entirety of the country, on both sides, now feels China is a threat that needs to be dealt with.I watch the news pretty carefully and haven't seen any coverage on the issue. Do you have a poll or something that shows the entirety of the country on both sides now feels China is a treat.
I watch the news pretty carefully and haven't seen any coverage on the issue. Do you have a poll or something that shows the entirety of the country on both sides now feels China is a treat.
I watch the news pretty carefully and haven't seen any coverage on the issue. Do you have a poll or something that shows the entirety of the country on both sides now feels China is a treat.
Getting back to Bloomberg overall, this article pretty much sums up my thoughts on him.
Why Mike Bloomberg is already pandering to the left: Goodwin (https://nypost.com/2020/02/18/why-mike-bloomberg-is-already-pandering-to-the-left-goodwin/)
If Bloomberg went fill tilt, did not care what the left thought of him and just ran on his record unapologetically, I feel he would be a force to reckon with. But it appears like he is becoming "Bernie Lite," and why go for that when you can have "Bernie Full Strength." This is the same issue with all of the candidates; they are trying to be kind of woke but kind of normal at the same time.
It's not going to work, not even for Bloomberg. Not to mention it destroys his authenticity, the largest positive for both Trump and Bernie.
Some of those authenticities might be best forgotten.We're voting for a president not an in-law.
Snag is, when the guy you vote for is not a guy you'd like to introduce to your wife and sister, your vote is also saying something about you, the voter.
Can't have it both ways unless you're the candidate.
Bloomberg fizzled in the debates tonight.
Michael Bloomberg’s rising presidential campaign got stopped and frisked on Wednesday night by the rest of the Democratic debate field, which piled on the former New York City mayor as he offered contrition for the contentious policing policy. In his first appearance on a presidential debate stage, Bloomberg came under fire from a united front of his five rivals for the policy that led the New York Police Department during his mayoralty to stop and search thousands of residents of color in the city without traditional standards of probable cause.
Bloomberg defended himself from gang-up, though, noting that attitudes have recently changed on criminal justice and that almost every candidate on stage has mixed record on issues of race and policing.
"If we took off everybody that was wrong on this panel, everybody that was wrong on criminal justice at sometime in their careers, there’d be nobody else up here," Bloomberg said.
From outside, it looked like the little lion was attacked by a pack of angry hyenas. Unsurprisingly, they didn't offer anything new, just the same old stuff media enjoys reveling in.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/debate-rivals-hammer-bloomberg-over-stop-frisk-policing-nyc-n1139356
From outside, it looked like the little lion was attacked by a pack of angry hyenas. Unsurprisingly, they didn't offer anything new, just the same old stuff media enjoys reveling in.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/debate-rivals-hammer-bloomberg-over-stop-frisk-policing-nyc-n1139356
I did like this zinger, "The best known socialist happens to be a millionaire with three houses."
Finally glad to see someone actually take it to Bernie. In response to Bernie's answer that many Vermonters have a summer home, I would like to know exactly how many Vermonters do have a main home and a summer home?
Hey, Tony Blair, who managed to win several elections in a row representing the face of New Labour, the only electable type left and therefore instantly spurned by the new Commie version under Corbyn (that lost thrice in a row to the Tories, now the extreme right under Boris and those propping him up) - is reputed to have five houses, but I haven't personally counted them, having never even been invited to have tea in one!
There is nothing morally wrong with having more than one home just as long as they don't, together, reach a value of over fifty million squids. If they do, according to my new, enlightened doctrine, one would have to be sold so that you could have some spending cash to tide you through until the end of the fiscal year. You see how well that would recirculate money? What's not to like?
I don't care that he has 3 houses. I care that he is promoting a system that vilifies people for having three houses, while exempting himself and his cronies, which is how socialism always ends.
I did like this zinger, "The best known socialist happens to be a millionaire with three houses."
Finally glad to see someone actually take it to Bernie. In response to Bernie's answer that many Vermonters have a summer home, I would like to know exactly how many Vermonters do have a main home and a summer home?
I don't care that he has 3 houses. I care that he is promoting a system that vilifies people for having three houses, while exempting himself and his cronies, which is how socialism always ends.+1
Meanwhile, Trump filled yet another arena with an overflowing crowd.And was apparently incoherent.
And was apparently incoherent.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-rally-twitter-roger-stone-sentence-pardon-2020-election-rally-phoenix-arizona-a9345956.html
This is why Trump has the support he does.Less than half of the country.
"BLOOMBERG TO PAY HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE $2,500 A MONTH TO PRAISE HIM ON THEIR PERSONAL SOCIAL MEDIA FEEDS"
https://www.newsweek.com/michael-bloomberg-2020-election-pays-social-media-users-advertising-text-social-media-1488213?fbclid=IwAR1EEvcpUtFcccOiRsdI6zANX7ohhysr8zOsZQz5wn6wGwJZS1g7WtH3sFY
Less than half of the country.Actually, it is more than half the country.
Actually, it is more than half the country.
Is this gig available only to US citizens or also to international commentators?
Democrats removed only American flag on stage before debates for the president of the United States. . Did you read about it anywhere in mainstream news? This is why Trump has the support he does.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1230612612934709250
Democrats removed only American flag on stage before debates for the president of the United States. . Did you read about it anywhere in mainstream news? This is why Trump has the support he does.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1230612612934709250
Corin Kealoha and Shaun Karagory both work full time - but cannot afford food without the help of a food bank.
OMG. Don't tell me you get your information from Twitter ...No I don;t have twitter. I got the link from a web page. Is there something wrong about twitter?
emplyed but still not enough money to earn a living...I'm sure there will be a lot of these kind of stories from the anti-Trump press between now and the election. You guys are obviously really worried about the economy doing so well. With more people employed, there will be less acceptance of a socialist president and agenda that the Democrats are pushing.
The complicated truth behind Trump’s ‘American comeback'
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51578045
Less than half of the country.Frank, Even Americans who may like socialist policies are patriotic. They don't like when the country is besmirched or the flag disrespected. It's this kind of attitude like calling Americans "deplorables" they helped Clinton lose the election. But the real left can't help themselves. They talk patriotism, but then fall back into their disrespect of the country. Spitting on the flag loses votes.
Is there something wrong about twitter?
That really does have to be one of the funniest (and, I trust, rhetorical) questions I've read in a long while.
Jeremy
That really does have to be one of the funniest (and, I trust, rhetorical) questions I've read in a long while.Well, I don;t know how to use twitter. Does Trump? It seems more difficult than forums.
Jeremy
Okay, I got to give it to Mike for this, this is great.
I'm The Only One Who Started a Business (https://twitter.com/MikeBloomberg/status/1230515129877434368?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxnews.com%2Fmedia%2Fcnn-msnbc-bloomberg-disinformation)
Love the sound of crickets in the background.
Okay, I got to give it to Mike for this, this is great.
I'm The Only One Who Started a Business (https://twitter.com/MikeBloomberg/status/1230515129877434368?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxnews.com%2Fmedia%2Fcnn-msnbc-bloomberg-disinformation)
Love the sound of crickets in the background.
What a great if not totally deceptive edit :)
Maybe so but Mike B's statement is true.
Peter
Oh, I'm worried, and I am not underestimating.Good background article on Sanders support of Communist governments. I thought it was interesting during the debate when Warren objected as much as Sanders when Bloomberg called Sanders a Communist.
And I think we as capitalist need to start lobbying the school boards to teach more on communism and how it is just as bad, if not worse, then nazism.
Oh yea he did start a business and none of the others did. The truth ends there.
Nevada Caucus 2020: Live Results Updates
It’s still early, but Sanders leads Biden by 16.2 percentage points with 1 percent of precincts reporting. For the latest updates, follow our live blog.
Longtime Republican Clint Eastwood is pulling support from Donald Trump in the 2020 election. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, the actor-director signaled that he thinks a different candidate would be the better choice. "The best thing we could do is just get Mike Bloomberg in there," he said.
Oh yea he did start a business and none of the others did. The truth ends there.
What's interesting is Bloomberg created a blind trust during the 12 years he was mayor of NYC. During that time, his wealth increased from $5 billion to $35 billion.
Even the article I posted above is part fake news because the headline calls the USSR, CUBA and Nicaragua socialist and not communist as they were. They refuse to label Sanders a Communist sympathizer which is what he was and is.
How's that?Sanders is a Communist. A Bolshevik. A Marxist. Just to be clear.
Currently Bernie has 50% of the vote in NV with Biden in 2nd place at 17%Be careful what you wish for. You may get it. Sanders has charisma. He's very smart. He has the right words down that gets him supporters. Sanders has a core belief unlike the other candidates who just want to be president and would sell their mothers and change their positions to get elected. Voters see that. He could win a presidency just as Trump the outsider did.
Yep, if the night ends even close to this, the Dems are screwed. Bernie will win this thing and then the Dems are going to have to defend an devote communist. Good luck with that!
Maybe, maybe if Amy or Mayor Pete came in 2nd, a "moderate" would have a chance, but with Biden coming in 2nd, this shows the non-radicals in the party have no idea what they want and more then likely no one will be able to consolidate that lane. Even after Bloomberg gets in, with Biden getting this decent of a result, he has no reason to drop out and will just continue to clog up the lane with everyone else. That combined with the total stupidity of all of the moderate candidates deciding to attack Bloomberg instead of the front runner, Bernie, pretty much cements this thing.
Hello to a majority of states' legislatures being republican in a redistricting year. Bring on the gerrymandering. And I'm being serious! If the Dems decide to put a communist on the ticket, I feel they should have no say what so ever in any kind of decision making.
In June 2016, Haney testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee, where he alleged that the Obama-era DHS had ordered him to delete hundreds of files about reputed associates of Islamic terrorist groups. Haney made the case that several attacks in the U.S. could have been prevented if some of the files had not been deleted,
"Most Americans were unaware of the enormous damage to morale at the Department of Homeland Security, where I worked, his condemnation caused," Haney wrote, referring to Obama. "His words infuriated many of us because we knew his administration had been engaged in a bureaucratic effort to destroy the raw material — the actual intelligence we had collected for years, and erase those dots. The dots constitute the intelligence needed to keep Americans safe, and the Obama administration was ordering they be wiped away."
Haney, who worked for DHS for about 15 years, was also the author of "See Something, Say Nothing: A Homeland Security Officer Exposes the Government's Submission to Jihad."
In November, Haney contacted the Examiner about plans to publish a sequel to the book, the newspaper reported.
Be careful what you wish for. You may get it. Sanders has charisma. He's very smart. He has the right words down that gets him supporters. Sanders has a core belief unlike the other candidates who just want to be president and would sell their mothers and change their positions to get elected. Voters see that. He could win a presidency just as Trump the outsider did.
I don't think he'll get a nomination majority. And I agree with you the Democratic insiders will try to screw him at a brokered convention. What's interesting is how Americans have turned to outsiders and anti-establishment types like Sanders and Trump on different sides of the political and economic spectrums. People who want to throw out the insiders who they feel screwed them much like the Brits with Brexit. I don't think they care much about politics, just that they're opposed to the system. It's dangerous because anything can happen.
The Dems are panicking. They know they've gotta find a way to stop Bernie. Maybe Bernie will "suicide" as Philip Haney just did.
London is covered with dire warning signs about US politics:
London is covered with dire warning signs about US politics:
Your front runner ladies and gentlemen.Cuba taught everyone to read at the same time burned books and made it illegal to read books they didn't approve of. You lost your right of free speech. If you read books the regime did not approve of, Castro would break your legs. But that's OK. After all they would take care of your broken legs with free medical care.
"We're very opposed to the authoritarian nature of Cuba but you know, it's unfair to simply say everything is bad. You know? When Fidel Castro came into office, you know what he did? He had a massive literacy program. Is that a bad thing? Even though Fidel Castro did it?" Sanders told Anderson Cooper.
Yep, I guess you want those whom you are about to execute without a trial to be able to read those made-up charges.
For anyone who actually thinks Sanders could implement a socialist government without it becoming authoritarian, I would recommend reading The Road to Serfdom.
In Canada, when you look at the landscape scenes from the US border, even trees lean to the right. But some environmentalists blame on the prevailing winds.
In Canada, when you look at the landscape scenes from the US border, even trees lean to the right. But some environmentalists blame on the prevailing winds.On the border the trees look straight.
I am just beyond perplexed with how they did not see this coming. They all, like every single Democrat, tried to siphon Bernie supporters by being Bernie lite, and then they are surprised when Bernie starts winning? ???
And on top of that, nearly all of the mainstream media goes light on Dems, protecting all of them, and not asking Bernie a single hard question, so how could you see his support being questioned. ???
Even Mit Romney predicted this would happen a couple of weeks after Trump won in 2016. It was so obvious to see coming. They bought this ticket, and they get to ride the train straight off a cliff.
Dow down over 700 points due to Coronavirus. This could set off a recession that would not be good for anyone including Trump.
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/markets/dow-plunges-950-points-fears-coronavirus-will-tank-global-economic-n1141546
Dow down over 700 points due to Coronavirus. This could set off a recession that would not be good for anyone including Trump.
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/markets/dow-plunges-950-points-fears-coronavirus-will-tank-global-economic-n1141546
On the border the trees look straight.
... you don't know if you're coming or going. Just like a bad girlfriend might be... I'm sure that I remember a southern song about that, but just for Slobodan's sensitive nature, I shall sit on it for now.
I have a friend who is not exactly a card-carrying Democrat, and maybe not even a Democrat, but who would support Biden vs. Trump.If you own stock, or a retirement plan, how could you vote for a guy who will make it drop 20-30% when he takes office and lose thousands? Well, he hasn't won yet. The insider Dems will screw him out of it at the convention. Although I don;t know who would take his place?
He sent me this yesterday:
"I can't believe i might have to vote for trump in the fall. I am vomiting in my mouth."
:)
Well don't expect Bloomberg. His campaign is going around apologizing today for that great video they put out last week on the "I'm the only one who started a business." What a weakling he is showing himself to be.Biden's also weak compared to Sanders. Bernie may be a socialist, but he'd cut your heart out in a Soviet minute.
For a new report on financial literacy, Americans were asked three “very fundamental questions” to test financial literacy.
Among millennials, only 16% correctly answered all three.
1) Suppose you had $100 in a savings account, and the interest rate was 2% per year. After 5 years, how much do you think you would have in the account if you left the money to grow? Answers: a) More than $102; b) Exactly $102; c) Less than $102; d) Do not know; e) Refuse to answer.
2) Imagine that the interest rate on your savings account was 1% per year and inflation was 2% per year. After 1 year, how much would you be able to buy with the money in this account? Answers: a) More than today; b) Exactly the same; c) Less than today; d) Do not know; e) Refuse to answer.
3) Please tell me whether this statement is true or false. “Buying a single company’s stock usually provides a safer return than a stock mutual fund.” Answers: a) True; b) False; c) Do not know; d) Refuse to answer.
Here are the Bernie Bros that are supporting the delusionary budget proposal:They're not as stupid as the study suggests. They all know when a politician is offering them something for free.
"New report finds only 16% of millennials qualify as ‘financially literate’"
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/a-new-report-finds-only-16-of-millennials-qualify-at-financially-literate-195635534.html
Now, who can blame them? The questions were really hard, rocket-science type:
They're not as stupid as the study suggests. They all know when a politician is offering them something for free.When you are living paycheck to paycheck, there is no reason to have learned about anything in the survey.
When you are living paycheck to paycheck, there is no reason to have learned about anything in the survey.
When you are living paycheck to paycheck, there is no reason to have learned about anything in the survey.
Dems planning on screwing Bernie.
https://news.google.com/s/CBIw0rzm8UQ?r=12&oc=em
... If they didn't have their money in the stock market, they would pray the coronavirus would sink it.
View in browser | nytimes.com
The New York Times
BREAKING NEWS
Global markets fearful of the spread of the coronavirus tumbled for a sixth day, dragging the S&P 500 down more than 10 percent in just a week.
Thursday, February 27, 2020 4:07 PM EST
The S&P 500 fell 4.4 percent on Thursday, the worst single day slide for the market since August 2011. The index is on pace for its worst weekly performance since the 2008 financial crisis. Stocks in Europe and Asia were also hard hit on Thursday
They got their wish
Somebody, somewhere, will say it's fake news.
S&P 500 stages quickest correction since the Great Depression
Junk bond funds suffer worst outflows in more than a year
Investors dump high-yield ETFs
Saudi Arabia seeks bigger oil cut as coronavirus slashes demand
Kingdom pushes for deeper Opec reductions in face of crude price slump
Volatility index hits highest level since 2011 ‘flash crash’
Wall Street’s ‘fear gauge’ is eyeing its biggest weekly rise since the 2008 crisis
The Democrat party insiders have finally read the riot act to the middle of the roaders to open up the middle lane to Biden tp run without competition. They want to screw Bernie again.Or candidates, looking at the numbers, came to their own conclusion that they weren't going to win. Not everything is a conspiracy.
"You know Amy if you get out now rather than waiting for Wednesday, I'll talk to Biden and make sure he considers you to be his vice presidential pick or at least you'll know you'll get Democrats support in the future to keep your seat as senator. I'm sure you going to do the right thing, honey."Honey?
Honey?Yes. To let her know who's really in charge. Not her. The guy on the other end of the call.
... They want to screw Bernie again.
Not if Biden gets more delegate votes in primary, before the convention. Asking others to drop is a legitimate primary strategy. Screwing Bernie would happen if he gets the majority, but still doesn’t win the nomination, due to some behind-the-scenes machinations via superdelegates.My point is that the powers that be in the Democrat party are out to destroy him and not let their own people decide by democratic voting in the primaries. They're stacking the deck against him. Ganging up on him. Insiders in the swamp care less what the average Democrat thinks.
Or candidates, looking at the numbers, came to their own conclusion that they weren't going to win. Not everything is a conspiracy.So in quick succession, Buttigieg, now Klobuchar, and Beto O'Rourke, all coincidentally came out the night before the Tuesday primary to give their support to Biden. Of course, no one is behind the curtain pulling the strings telling them to do it if they want a future in the Democratic party. Of course, they told Warren to stay in as she will peel votes from Sanders. Bloomberg has too much money to tell him anything. In any case, they don't want to upset him as he promised them to give them all campaign support money to help the rest of the party keep the house and take back the Senate. Let's all applaud independent but concerted thought. Amazing how they all did this together. :)
Former Vice President Joe Biden said Michael Bloomberg is not a Democrat after the former New York mayor suggested Biden did not have the kind of experience necessary to be president of the United States.
Biden stated that Bloomberg is not a Democrat. Well, not your average Democrat. And that could be a good thing.The voting results tomorrow are going to be very interesting. Biden, Bloomberg, and Bernie. They sound like a vaudeville act, law firm or haberdashery.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/02/politics/mike-bloomberg-joe-biden-not-a-democrat/index.html
... Biden, Bloomberg, and Bernie. They sound like a vaudeville act, law firm or haberdashery.
:D
Biden, Bloomberg, and Bernie walk into a bar. AOC is already there... the rest is a very bad joke ;D
... AOC is already there... the rest is a very bad joke
Mary Buttplug quits.
New York congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has delivered an online lesson to Republican Ted Cruz after he questioned her authority to comment on matters of science.
In the aftermath of Donald Trump's decision to appoint vice president Mike Pence to spearhead the administration's response to the coronavirus, many have questioned the move.
Ms Ocasio-Cortez wrote on Twitter: "Mike Pence literally does not believe in science. It is utterly irresponsible to put him in charge of US coronavirus response as the world sits on the cusp of a pandemic.”
Among those to jump to the vice president's defence was Mr Cruz, the right wing Texas senator who is a staunch Christian, and who in 2016 was Mr Pence's first pick for president, before he switched support to Mr Trump. "As you are speaking as the oracle of science, tell us, what exactly is a Y chromosome," Mr Cruz said to Ms Ocasio-Cortez in the first of a trio of questions.
Ms Ocasio-Cortez, who once worked as a waitress, responded: "Sen Cruz, while I understand you judge people's intelligence by the lowest income they've had, I hold awards from MIT Lincoln Lab &others for accomplishments in microbiology." ... "Sincerely – an Intel global finalist, a fmr multi-year intern for Sen. Kennedy, a cum laude dual major in Economics & International Relations, a fmr Educational Director for national organisation, Who to you is "just a bartender".
... Mud on whose face ?
It is more about cum (laude) on her face to explain her "accomplishments." When you are a good-looking leftie, it is not that difficult to endear yourself to leftie professors.
To whit, yet more wit ...
... Some threads just die, hoist of their own petard; some linger because of inertia. This one lives of desperation.
Absolutely right, Rob. Desperation to find someone, anyone who could beat Trump in November.
Pete's withdrawal is making Biden very gay.I watched Pete's husband introduce Pete yesterday when he pulled out of the race. Well, I didn't stay to watch Pete. In any case, it was the first time I watched and heard Pete's husband. If Pete had 1/10th the charm and especially the sincerity of his husband, he may still be in the race. I never believed Pete. He seemed like a very intelligent debater with no core beliefs other than he wants to be president.
The left eating its own. Chris Matthews of MSNBC groveled as he resigned under fire by the left.
His "guilt"? Paying compliments to what he thought were ladies. Which turned out to be bitches.
Some threads just die, hoist of their own petard; some linger because of inertia. This one lives of desperation.