ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
There's always hope. But nothing of what I know of our American electorate indicates that to be the case.
GTWcuNbXYAA82MU
 
I know this. The facebook hens, who had been absolutely silent for months, are out in full force now. Kamala has single, middle-aged, unhappy white women, and chip on their shoulder black women absolutely on fire. My facebook feed is choked with stuff like this.

trash.jpg



and quotes like:

We can DO this sisters, get out there and VOTE to save our country!

or

Attention! If you will turn 18 before election day, GO REGISTER and VOTE! This is where we take back(?) our country!!!! (THAT gem, is compliments of my older sister, who, at 65 is so dysfunctional, that I have to manage her finances, and everything that is wrong in her life is someone's else's fault. She literally thinks like a 7 year old child.)

(I guess they don't realize that Trump has made huge strides in the 18 to 29 demographic)
Save the country from what exactly?

Worst voting bloc in America and it's not even close. They are the most privileged and sheltered people but are convinced life is so hard for them and the only things that makes them rally is 1) killing a baby 2) anything with the gay community
 
I condemn all violent protests. I condemn any protest that results in violence towards people or vandalism of property.
I condemn Palestinian protests of that nature.
I condemn BLM protests of that nature.
I condemn the Jan 6th protest of that nature.
Can you say the same or is beating up cops, busting out windows and vandalizing property ok as long as the ones doing it vote like you??
Wait, so are you admitting that the J6 protest was not in fact an actual "insurrection?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: trueblujr2
I didn't follow his career much but also don't understand the dislike of him. From what I see he is doing well. VP is the attack dog. Play the role.
just check the sources that are reporting that he is polling poorly, trump will replace him etc. it’s just the expected barrage of negativeism coming from the expected sources.
 
I left out the Dims plans becasue they are appallingly worse. But this shows (again) that Trump is no conservative. And MAGA doesn't GAS.

"The economic platforms of both presidential candidates are littered with antigrowth proposals. .... Donald Trump is proposing to hold the line on spending and current tax policy but would raise tariffs and pursue an economically destructive immigration policy. ......

Tariffs are fees charged on goods imported by U.S. companies. These increased costs typically result in higher prices for consumers. The hope is that the increase in the relative costs of imports compared with goods produced domestically will lead to a shift toward domestically produced goods. But the benefits of any shift are more than offset by inefficiencies, the higher costs to domestic consumers, and the foreign retaliation that usually occurs. ..... I

in 2018 Mr. Trump imposed tariffs of 25% on steel imports and 10% on aluminum imports, declaring, “Trade wars are good and easy to win.” China retaliated in various ways and Mr. Trump’s promise that manufacturing jobs would suddenly flood back to the U.S. proved worthless.
Global trade and production declined and U.S. manufacturing jobs flattened.

Tariffs violate the simple but sound law of comparative advantage. It may be wise to ban trade in sensitive goods related to national security, but Mr. Trump’s fear of bilateral trade deficits with foreign partners is simply economic nonsense.....

Meanwhile, both candidates have pledged not to touch the benefits and structures of Social Security and Medicare. These are the primary sources of large deficits and mounting government debt. Promising to leave these programs alone may be good short-run politics, but it’s irresponsibly bad economics.

I’ve prepared side-by-side comparisons of presidential candidates’ economic platforms since 1992. A review of these comparisons makes two things obvious. First, the Democratic Party has moved decidedly leftward. ......
Second, while Mr. Trump’s tax and spending platform is standard GOP stuff (i.e., Rino stuff. LOL.), his proposals on tariffs and immigration move the party away from its traditional embrace of free enterprise. His mass-deportation plan is impractical and antithetical to economic growth in a nation whose population is aging.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Stan the caddy
I left out the Dims plans becasue they are appallingly worse. But this shows (again) that Trump is no conservative. And MAGA doesn't GAS.

"The economic platforms of both presidential candidates are littered with antigrowth proposals. .... Donald Trump is proposing to hold the line on spending and current tax policy but would raise tariffs and pursue an economically destructive immigration policy. ......

Tariffs are fees charged on goods imported by U.S. companies. These increased costs typically result in higher prices for consumers. The hope is that the increase in the relative costs of imports compared with goods produced domestically will lead to a shift toward domestically produced goods. But the benefits of any shift are more than offset by inefficiencies, the higher costs to domestic consumers, and the foreign retaliation that usually occurs. ..... I

in 2018 Mr. Trump imposed tariffs of 25% on steel imports and 10% on aluminum imports, declaring, “Trade wars are good and easy to win.” China retaliated in various ways and Mr. Trump’s promise that manufacturing jobs would suddenly flood back to the U.S. proved worthless.
Global trade and production declined and U.S. manufacturing jobs flattened.

Tariffs violate the simple but sound law of comparative advantage. It may be wise to ban trade in sensitive goods related to national security, but Mr. Trump’s fear of bilateral trade deficits with foreign partners is simply economic nonsense.....

Meanwhile, both candidates have pledged not to touch the benefits and structures of Social Security and Medicare. These are the primary sources of large deficits and mounting government debt. Promising to leave these programs alone may be good short-run politics, but it’s irresponsibly bad economics.

I’ve prepared side-by-side comparisons of presidential candidates’ economic platforms since 1992. A review of these comparisons makes two things obvious. First, the Democratic Party has moved decidedly leftward. ......
Second, while Mr. Trump’s tax and spending platform is standard GOP stuff, his proposals on tariffs and immigration move the party away from its traditional embrace of free enterprise. His mass-deportation plan is impractical and antithetical to economic growth in a nation whose population is aging.


Even granting all of this, you left out the most important reason to vote for Trump; the sheer entertainment value. It is quite literally "off the charts."

Deficit spending is going to increase, no matter who wins. At least let us have some fun, watching the pearl clutchers' heads explode.

We may never get this chance again in our lifetimes.
 
So why bother debating a defenseless opponent? Sensible voters don't need to be more convinced. It's the nonsensical and irrational voters that vote D, and the media has them by their public parts.
I would say mainly because I think there will be a fair number of voters who tune into the debate(s) who otherwise don’t pay much attention until election time. That may be the only venue whete Trump will have a direct opportunity to challenge her on all her stated positions. We KNOW the liberal media is going to run cover and ignore all of these issues for the next 4 months. They will want to make this like Obama’s campaign where there was no serious vetting of positions.
 
The RNC wanted Rubio or Doug Burgum.

I'll take this over that or Haley, thank God.

Would've preferred DeSantis or Vivek but whatever.
That’s fine but listen that VP is the attack dog in elections and this dud has been neutered by the media. You may not want some of the others but it’s about winning not running two people based on principle and lose.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT