President Biden

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawg80

1. Yep. And, there is no reason for the NATO members not to chip in the amounts they agreed to. Or, is there no consequence in blood and treasure for Germany and other European countries?

2. "a strong WHO"? Hmmm...how about an honest and transparent one?

3. Something like 50 large companies relocated out of the country under obummer, taking with them their $billions in taxes. That trend reversed under Trump, many of those 50 returning and next to none, maybe NONE, leaving during Trump's tenure.

As for your last question, there has to be a balance between what is good for individual firms and is what is good for the country. OF COURSE!!! I support any private company doing what it thinks is best for itself. But I also favor a nation doing what is best for itself, and if those don't match up, then oh well, so sorry for the private companies who made their choices. For instance, let's say there is a widget company that wants to relocate all of its manufacturing to China to save on labor costs. That is their choice and their right. But if the US places HUGE tariffs on widgets to build up and protect domestic production and said China-based widget company cannot compete in the US market and it ends up hurting them...so sorry, so sad for them. Just as firms are free to make decisions that benefit them, so too are nations.

In some key industries...like steel and as we have seen recently, pharma, it behooves a country to have strong domestic industries. That is for national security reasons.

Just imagine how different history would be...how different the world would be today...if back in the 1930's - '40's the US did not have a strong steel industry. Wow! Just think if all of our steel industry had relocated to China, for the sake of their profits. OMG! The Japs would have over-run all of those sites and seized the steel for themselves. The US would NOT have been able to gear up, build, and support Britain...and the Soviet Union...in their fight against Hitler. He would have easily steamrolled both. And the US would not have been able to build our Pacific fleet like we did...going from 4 carriers in 1941 to 30 by 1945 and all those cruisers and destroyers, and battleships, and troop carriers, and support vessels we were able to build. Japan would have easily achieved all of their goals and no doubt would have expanded on them once they realized we were unable to respond.

Now... a nation can use a carrot or a stick to "encourage" domestic manufacturing. I prefer the carrot, incentives vs. the stick, tariffs. But, when, like Trump found himself in, there is a need for quick changes, a combination of both was needed. He did apply tax incentives and deregulation along with tariffs and other measures to help corporations see the benefit of building in the US.

As for "capitalism" you pretend to be so concerned about, I didn't see, don't see ANY infringement on that by Trump and his policies. ALL firms were, and still are, free to weigh the pros and cons and decide what is best for them and their shareholders. For instance, our widget company would weigh cost savings on labor against the added cost of paying the tariff. If they could still net more profit by remaining in China, that is what they would do. So? How is that any different than every other decision businesses have to make every day?

---

The tariff shrinks the size of the pie by introducing costs and economic inefficiency. It reduces return on capital.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

The tariff shrinks the size of the pie by introducing costs and economic inefficiency. It reduces return on capital.

---

Not for the XYZ Widget Company who invested domestically and is now reaping the benefits of the tariff "protection." Those shareholders are quite pleased with the matter. And not for savvy investors...like me...who often invest in both sides! I win no matter what, and either don't lose or cut my losses (reaping a much needed tax deduction) and just move on to other investments.

No, there is no reduction in capital. Only reallocations of it, and if someone makes bad choices and squanders some, then that is on them. Every door that closes, opens another one elsewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawg80

Not for the XYZ Widget Company who invested domestically and is now reaping the benefits of the tariff "protection." Those shareholders are quite pleased with the matter. And not for savvy investors...like me...who often invest in both sides! I win no matter what, and either don't lose or cut my losses (reaping a much needed tax deduction) and just move on to other investments.

No, there is no reduction in capital. Only reallocations of it, and if someone makes bad choices and squanders some, then that is on them. Every door that closes, opens another one elsewhere.

---

Capital flows to where it returns are greatest. That is how capitalism works. If you create greater costs where it would more efficiently flow, you reduce the returns. This is basic stuff.

It’s okay if you have some Marxist views. You just should recognize it when it rears its head.

I hope the Repubs pick up the last two Senate seats. Divided government is a great thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

Capital flows to where it returns are greatest. That is how capitalism works. If you create greater costs where it would more efficiently flow, you reduce the returns. This is basic stuff.

It’s okay if you have some Marxist views. You just should recognize it when it rears its head.

---

Oh brother....

the sky is blue. Yeah, I know, you'll say it's some specific, little known shade of blue, just to argue for the sake of arguing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

Capital flows to where it returns are greatest. That is how capitalism works. If you create greater costs where it would more efficiently flow, you reduce the returns. This is basic stuff.

It’s okay if you have some Marxist views. You just should recognize it when it rears its head.

---

You have as much knowledge of Marxism as you did fascism. None.

Marxism is about owning the means of production.

Now your anti-religion views fit well within the tenets of Marxism...that and being a member of the lumpenproletariat.

And yes, capital flows to where returns are greatest, which is where the costs of production are lowest and the access to markets are unimpeded. Dem policies of increasing the minimum wage and allowing offshoring of labor to skirt those same laws is what has led to the destruction of the American middle class. Additionally, for the menial jobs in America, citizens compete directly with illegal laborers who are not covered by those same laws. THIS is what has created the enormous wage gap here in America....our horrible government policies.

Ross Perot, a man I laughed at many years ago, was absolutely correct. It is government causing the the capital, and jobs, to "efficiently flow" to those that have declared themselves enemies of America.

The minimum wage was never supposed to be a "living wage". That's just demagoguery that folks like you fall for every time. Those jobs are just an on-ramp into the American economy....but our dumb policies have removed the interstate so that when you get to the top of the ramp you have no place to go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow

You have as much knowledge of Marxism as you did fascism. None.

Marxism is about owning the means of production.

Now your anti-religion views fit well within the tenets of Marxism.

And yes, capital flows to where returns are greatest, which is where the costs of production are lowest and the access to markets are unimpeded. Dem policies of increasing the minimum wage and allowing offshoring of labor to skirt those same laws is what has led to the destruction of the American middle class. Additionally, for the menial jobs in America, citizens compete directly with illegal laborers who are not covered by those same laws. THIS is what has created the enormous wage gap here in America....our horrible government policies.

Ross Perot, a man I laughed at many years ago, was absolutely correct. It is government causing the the capital, and jobs, to "efficiently flow" to those that have declared themselves enemies of America.

The minimum wage was never supposed to be a "living wage". That's just demagoguery that folks like you fall for every time. Those jobs are just an on-ramp into the American economy....but our dumb policies have removed the interstate so that when you get to the top of the ramp you have no place to go.

---

I laugh at your general ignorance, but also your specific ignorance of Marxism. Marxism is much more of philosophical framework than just an economic system (his ideal being a “pure” form of communism).

I am no Marxist, but I can recognize a Marxist argument when I see it. Trumpism, like Marxism, focuses on the plight of the proletariat wage earner and how they are taken advantage of by business owners (capitalists).

Loss of minimum wage jobs to is not destroying the middle class. You are confused. Minimum wage is not middle class.

Trying to stop the offshoring of jobs purely to protect the power of the American worker is the Marxist argument I am referring to. Dawg80’s argument about protecting industries critical to our security is a much better argument than the Marxist one you are making. Capitalists are more than happy to offshore jobs when it is more efficient to do so. That is what capitalism is about. Making profits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

I laugh at your general ignorance, but also your specific ignorance of Marxism. Marxism is much more of philosophical framework than just an economic system (his ideal being a “pure” form of communism).

I am no Marxist, but I can recognize a Marxist argument when I see it. Trumpism, like Marxism, focuses on the plight of the proletariat wage earner and how they are taken advantage of by business owners (capitalists).

Loss of minimum wage jobs to is not destroying the middle class. You are confused. Minimum wage is not middle class.

Trying to stop the offshoring of jobs purely to protect the power of the American worker is the Marxist argument I am referring to. Dawg80’s argument about protecting industries critical to our security is a much better argument than the Marxist one you are making. Capitalists are more than happy to offshore jobs when it is more efficient to do so. That is what capitalism is about. Making profits.

---

Trust me, the ignorance is all yours. I know exactly what Marxism means, and it has nothing to do with preserving jobs.

Perhaps you should re-read my post. In no statement did I state that minimum wage was middle class. To help with your obvious comprehension issues, go read my statement about going from the middle wage to find the interstate (that means jobs that provide you with a middle class income) is no longer there. The interstate is in some other country where they can pay less for labor because our government has made us unable to compete. Many of these nations benefit from our capitalist system without being capitalist themselves.

Trying to stop the offshoring of jobs by making America competitive is not Marxist. Neither is stopping the offshoring to protect the power of the American worker. Letting other nations produce products and dump them here and passing laws that kill our competitiveness with labor elsewhere is just STUPID. Letting others produce things that are in our national interest is just STUPID, because as we've seen we are at their mercy when demand and shortages arise. Making laws to ensure those profits happen HERE and our citizens benefit from those profits is what these folks in Washington are supposed to be doing...the represent US, not some idiotic concept of capitalism you seem to harbor.

Why do you think McDonalds workers want $15 bucks an hour? That should make you think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow

Trust me, the ignorance is all yours. I know exactly what Marxism means, and it has nothing to do with preserving jobs.

Perhaps you should re-read my post. In no statement did I state that minimum wage was middle class. To help with your obvious comprehension issues, go read my statement about going from the middle wage to find the interstate (that means jobs that provide you with a middle class income) is no longer there. The interstate is in some other country where they can pay less for labor because our government has made us unable to compete. Many of these nations benefit from our capitalist system without being capitalist themselves.

Trying to stop the offshoring of jobs by making America competitive is not Marxist. Neither is stopping the offshoring to protect the power of the American worker. Letting other nations produce products and dump them here and passing laws that kill our competitiveness with labor elsewhere is just STUPID. Letting others produce things that are in our national interest is just STUPID, because as we've seen we are at their mercy when demand and shortages arise. Making laws to ensure those profits happen HERE and our citizens benefit from those profits is what these folks in Washington are supposed to be doing...the represent US, not some idiotic concept of capitalism you seem to harbor.

Why do you think McDonalds workers want $15 bucks an hour? That should make you think.

---

When Apple makes iPhones in China those profits happen here. Lots of profits. Making lots of Americans wealthy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

When Apple makes iPhones in China those profits happen here. Lots of profits. Making lots of Americans wealthy.

---

Yes the folks in China making those iPhones on electricity generated from coal with no OSHA regulations to protect them are becoming the middle class we are losing (you do know that most union contracts are based on the minimum wage, right?).

And by lots of Americans you mean company executives and those that own stock, which you need a job to accumulate the capital to buy that stock before you can become wealthy (actually, few are becoming wealthy, but there are stockholders that have done well). Well, unless mommy and daddy have given you the capital.

So those iPhones COULD be made here if we had the same EPA and labor regulations China has, but we have chosen to allow them to have a competitive advantage by labeling them a developing nation. You do know they are having power outages in California because they CHOSE to destroy power created by fossil fuels and rely heavily on expensive green energy instead, right? Can't run a factory 24/7 and keep up with demand with ongoing power outages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow

Yes the folks in China making those iPhones on electricity generated from coal with no OSHA regulations to protect them are becoming the middle class we are losing (you do know that most union contracts are based on the minimum wage, right?).

And by lots of Americans you mean company executives and those that own stock, which you need a job to accumulate the capital to buy that stock before you can become wealthy (actually, few are becoming wealthy, but there are stockholders that have done well). Well, unless mommy and daddy have given you the capital.

So those iPhones COULD be made here if we had the same EPA and labor regulations China has, but we have chosen to allow them to have a competitive advantage by labeling them a developing nation. You do know they are having power outages in California because they CHOSE to destroy power created by fossil fuels and rely heavily on expensive green energy instead, right? Can't run a factory 24/7 and keep up with demand with ongoing power outages.

---

Lol. I am sure you could find an army of people willing to assemble iPhones in the US for $5.50 an hour!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

Lol. I am sure you could find an army of people willing to assemble iPhones in the US for $5.50 an hour!

---

Include the cost of shipping the phones here after they are created (done via big diesel-burning ships). Also, something tells me they are paid a bit more than that because they are actually buying the iPhones as well, and the last I looked that might be a stretch for someone making $5.50 an hour.

For someone that screams about how racist America is all the time (not systemic, unless you can point to the law that says minorities cannot participate in something because of their race), I figured you'd at least see the implicit racism in the system you are describing.

You said in another post that you are more rewarded for capital than work, but failed to acknowledge that capital is accumulated from selling yourself into the American economy (that's work). Certainly you see that minorities are less capital rich than non minorities, yet you are quickly willing to allow jobs that would allow them to accumulate that capital to go to nations that are hell bent on destroying us and not playing by the rules we expect Americans to follow.

It is their interstate you are destroying and it is no wonder they are stuck on the on-ramp. This is the same on-ramp you destroy by not letting them attend the school of their choice (right now you gotta already have capital to go to the better schools). One day they may figure out who the real racists are that are keeping them poor and segregated in "minority communities", at least I hope so. Until then, the rich will get richer and the poor....well, you know the rest.

Capital doesn't just one day magically appear, unless you get it willed to you.

As for me, I am fine and not impacted by any of this. I have my capital and live a comfortable life, so I guess by your definition I should not even care. Heck, I might even become even more comfortable the more cheap stuff that is made overseas and the more I can make on my capital by having it made there. Of course, I need to make sure I get a gun and have it handy because those that find themselves without capital and unable to get any might become violent.

I didn’t say you shouldn’t care. Capitalists don’t care. That is your inner Marxist caring. Capitalism is the best economic system for generating material improvements to life, but it is brutal as well.

Very few people can raise capital just doing the things they choose to do in life (too bad you couldn’t get paid for playing video games when I was a kid). The rest of us have to work for it (and spend less than you make) or have it given to you.

Apple’s margin on an iPhone is around 60%, so the vast majority of “value” is actually captured in the US.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

I didn’t say you shouldn’t care. Capitalists don’t care. That is your inner Marxist caring. Capitalism is the best economic system for generating material improvements to life, but it is brutal as well.

Very few people can raise capital just doing the things they choose to do in life (too bad you couldn’t get paid for playing video games when I was a kid). The rest of us have to work for it (and spend less than you make) or have it given to you.

Apple’s margin on an iPhone is around 60%, so the vast majority of “value” is actually captured in the US.

---

Once again nothing to do with Marxism. A Marxist would be stupidly concerned about the poor Chinese worker being taken advantage of. It's a class thing, not a jobs thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow

Once again nothing to do with Marxism. A Marxist would be stupidly concerned about the poor Chinese worker being taken advantage of. It's a class thing, not a jobs thing.

---

Silly. Marxism is about the struggle between the bourgeoisie (those with financial capital) and the proletariat (those that have to work for a living). “Jobs” are inherently a class thing. When you are talking about jobs, you are talking about the proletariat class.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics...-eHrS9-nCiGV0E

How much did Hunter get?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawg80

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics...-eHrS9-nCiGV0E

How much did Hunter get?

---

http://www.jons-online.com/issues/20...cer-initiative

Mr Simon: The point of the Biden Cancer Initiative is not to fund projects, interfere with regulatory decisions, or to lobby. We do not give grants, we do not touch patient data, we are not a silo of genomic information. Instead, we’re looking for efficiencies that can be implemented and addressing cultural issues that might be slowing us dow*n— the brakes we are leaving on while we drive the car, so to speak. Our goal is to work with the different organizations to figure out how they can double what they’re doing. When problems arise, we’ll address it by assessing solutions that already exist. We want to enrich the possibilities to scale a ubiquitous solution to a local solution.

Translation: we take people's money just to pay ourselves huge salaries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawg80

Translation: we take people's money just to pay ourselves huge salaries.

---

Don’t donate to them if you don’t like their mission or how they operate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

Don’t donate to them if you don’t like their mission or how they operate.

---

I don't and I won't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

Lol. I am sure you could find an army of people willing to assemble iPhones in the US for $5.50 an hour!

---

We would if the socialist Dems wouldn’t keep destroying the economy when in the Oval Office, along with liberal governors, mayors and their idiotic restrictions and overall policies. And they they demand increase in the minimum wage to cover their destruction. 😣

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

We would if the socialist Dems wouldn’t keep destroying the economy when in the Oval Office, along with liberal governors, mayors and their idiotic restrictions and overall policies. And they they demand increase in the minimum wage to cover their destruction. 😣

---

#DIV/0!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

We would if the socialist Dems wouldn’t keep destroying the economy when in the Oval Office, along with liberal governors, mayors and their idiotic restrictions and overall policies. And they they demand increase in the minimum wage to cover their destruction. 😣

---

Do you understand the relationship between Marginal Propensity to Consume (MPC) and economic growth? There have been some studies.

What you and your socialist and now commie leaning party don’t understand is pure American common sense. Studies can’t help you there my friend. Period!

Banning church will be next for commie loving Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schumar and of course Soros and “Obama leading them from behind”. Yep, just more anti- God stances. Remember the reason for Thanksgiving celebrations?

Joe Biden on Thanksgiving Gatherings: 5 People, 10 Maximum ‘Socially Distanced, Wearing Masks’


Former Vice President Joe Biden suggested that Americans limit their gatherings on Thanksgiving and adhere to coronavirus protocols in their private residences, citing experts who, according to the former vice president, recommend gatherings of “five people, maximum ten people” who are “socially distanced, wearing masks.”

Biden, whom the media have declared president-elect, detailed his view on holiday gatherings during a Monday press conference in Wilmington, Delaware, urging Americans to adhere to the advice of “health experts.”

More

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...wearing-masks/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

Banning church will be next for commie loving Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schumar and of course Soros and “Obama leading them from behind”. Yep, just more anti- God stances. Remember the reason for Thanksgiving celebrations?

Joe Biden on Thanksgiving Gatherings: 5 People, 10 Maximum ‘Socially Distanced, Wearing Masks’


Former Vice President Joe Biden suggested that Americans limit their gatherings on Thanksgiving and adhere to coronavirus protocols in their private residences, citing experts who, according to the former vice president, recommend gatherings of “five people, maximum ten people” who are “socially distanced, wearing masks.”

Biden, whom the media have declared president-elect, detailed his view on holiday gatherings during a Monday press conference in Wilmington, Delaware, urging Americans to adhere to the advice of “health experts.”

More

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...wearing-masks/

---

Already happening in some west coast states... no surprises there... Yet casino's are essential businesses...:icon_roll:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

What you and your socialist and now commie leaning party don’t understand is pure American common sense. Studies can’t help you there my friend. Period!

---

The studies kind of prove out what is common sense. Maybe you should look into them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

The studies kind of prove out what is common sense. Maybe you should look into them.

---

These days it totally depends on the political leanings of the scientist, his or her’s company, polling company, which media is presenting, or the politician. Nowhere at all what your saying, reading or believing on so many topics and issues.

You guys that voted for this old clown are out of your ever-loving minds for so many reasons. But this is one of his puppet masters craziest ideas to bring the United States of America back down to 3rd world status like Obama, his wife, the Deep State and Soros hoped for with a Hillary win. Gone will be the American Dream.


Published 1 hour ago

Biden indicates he supports raising tax rates to Bush-era highs.

Under George W. Bush, highest marginal income rate was 39.6% for Americans earning at least $374K.


https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/...-bush-era-high

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

You guys that voted for this old clown are out of your ever-loving minds for so many reasons. But this is one of his puppet masters craziest ideas to bring the United States of America back down to 3rd world status like Obama, his wife, the Deep State and Soros hoped for with a Hillary win. Gone will be the American Dream.


Published 1 hour ago

Biden indicates he supports raising tax rates to Bush-era highs.

Under George W. Bush, highest marginal income rate was 39.6% for Americans earning at least $374K.


https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/...-bush-era-high

---

Big government, is their religion. They don't mind paying more because it like Christians tithing to church.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FriscoDog

Big government, is their religion. They don't mind paying more because it like Christians tithing to church.

---

Government grew under Trump.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

Government grew under Trump.

---

Government grows under every president...as does the national debt. Just that some are worse than others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawg80

Government grows under every president...as does the national debt. Just that some are worse than others.

---

Sure...but not all presidents present themselves as "conservative" while they grow the debt and the size of government. Of course, we all know Trump is not now and has never been conservative.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

Government grew under Trump.

---

This has nothing to do with government growing.. Progressives and democrats like big government. They feel that they are there to "serve" government instead of having government "serve" the people. So they have no issues giving more to government since republicans and conservatives are more likely to be religious than progressives.

Another Biden/Harris/DNV scandal?

Published 1 hour ago

Republicans demand probe into Padilla's $35M grant to Biden-linked firm, claim 'misuse' of taxpayer funds.

The lawmakers say the California Secretary of State's office used CARES Act grant money to fund a contract for a consulting firm.

EXCLUSIVE: Republicans on the House Oversight and House Administration Committees are demanding answers from California Secretary of State Alex Padilla about a “highly questionable” $35 million contract his office awarded to a firm linked to the Biden campaign, claiming it was a “misuse of taxpayer money and a violation of the law.”

Padilla’s office, according to House Oversight Committee Ranking Member James Comer, R-Ky., Administration Committee Ranking Member Rodney Davis, R-Ill., and Rep. Jody Hice, R-Ga., allegedly used Help America Vote Act (HAVA) grant money from the coronavirus stimulus package, known as the CARES Act, to fund a voter contract with SKD Knickerbocker— a public affairs and political consulting firm the Republican lawmakers described as “Joe Biden’s main election campaign advisory firm.”

THE RACE IS ON TO SUCCEED KAMALA HARRIS IN THE SENATE: WHO THE FAVORITES ARE

“In light of recent media reports that California Secretary of State Alex Padilla is now the front-runner to be appointed to California’s open United States Senate seat, we are writing to request a member-level briefing on the status of your review of the highly questionable $35 million contract for voter contact the California Secretary of State’s Office awarded to SKD Knickerbocker, Joe Biden’s main election campaign advisory firm,” Comer, Davis, and Nice wrote in a letter, exclusively obtained by Fox News, to the inspector general for the U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

Padilla has emerged the frontrunner to be appointed to Vice President-elect Kamala Harris’ Senate seat. Comer, Davis and Hice noted that an appointment to Harris’ seat is expected to be made before Jan. 20, 2021.

“Because Secretary Padilla may become a member of the United States Senate in a matter of days or weeks, it is critical that he provide answers about his decision to award a contract to a partisan firm that appears to be both a misuse of taxpayer money and a violation of the law,” they wrote.

The Republican lawmakers wrote that they provided documents to the office of the inspector general which “appear to show that the California Secretary of State’s Office planned to use HAVA money for voter contact.”

“As you know, the use of HAVA funds for voter contact is a violation of the law,” they wrote. “According to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, HAVA grants cannot be used to get out the vote or encourage voting.”

They added that the CARES Act “is very specific about the use of these funds, which must be used to ‘prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus, domestically or internationally, for the 2020 Federal election cycle.”

The lawmakers claimed that the $35 million contract was “apparently intended to provide a partisan firm the opportunity to use taxpayer money to influence the federal election.”

More

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/rep...taxpayer-funds

Not for long anyway. Of course the regressive’s will claim they now have a sense of humor and this is nothing. As if!

Published 9 hours ago

Lawrence Jones on Biden-Harris CNN sit-down: 'This is why he doesn't do interviews'.

Joe Biden is asked about his disagreements with Kamala Harris on certain issues:

"Like I told Barack, if I reach something where there's a fundamental disagreement we have based on a moral principle, I'll develop some disease and say I have to resign."

Biden quips about resigning after 'developing a disease.

President-elect Joe Biden will be "taking the backseat" to his vice president, Kamala Harris, during his term, Fox Nation host Lawrence Jones said Friday.

More

https://www.foxnews.com/media/joe-bi...resign-disease

Ray, don’t be a fruitcake.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

Ray, don’t be a fruitcake.

---

That would be ex-Sen. and VP Biden. Like I stated above, you will now, all of the sudden, have a sense of humor where politician statements are concerned. 😒 You fail to understand that this guy has dementia of the mouth.


Joe Biden is asked about his disagreements with Kamala Harris on certain issues:

"Like I told Barack, if I reach something where there's a fundamental disagreement we have based on a moral principle, I'll develop some disease and say I have to resign."

Biden quips about resigning after 'developing a disease.

President-elect Joe Biden will be "taking the backseat" to his vice president, Kamala Harris, during his term, Fox Nation host Lawrence Jones said Friday.

More

https://www.foxnews.com/media/joe-bi...resign-disease

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

Ray, don’t be a fruitcake.

---

Brilliant comeback to defend another asinine comment from Biden. Really? Pointing out the obvious makes one a "fruitcake"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

Brilliant comeback to defend another asinine comment from Biden. Really? Pointing out the obvious makes one a "fruitcake"?

---

It was an obvious quip about how simpatico their moral philosophy (rather than political philosophy) is, and it was self-deprecating humor, something our current POTUS is completely incapable of. Self-deprecating humor shows high EQ and leadership qualities. The inability to do so, shows the opposite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

Pointing out the obvious makes one a "fruitcake"?

---

I can tell you from experience that pointing out the obvious may lead to being called: a hater, a libtard, a commie, a sufferer of TDS, a globalist, a cuck, a soy boy, a lightweight, one who is anatomically female.

That’s not an exhaustive list, but it includes most of the hits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

It was an obvious quip about how simpatico their moral philosophy (rather than political philosophy) is, and it was self-deprecating humor...

---

I see. Interesting comeback. So I'll file this one away for the next time he says something stupid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

I can tell you from experience that pointing out the obvious may lead to being called: a hater, a libtard, a commie, a sufferer of TDS, a globalist, a cuck, a soy boy, a lightweight, one who is anatomically female.

That’s not an exhaustive list, but it includes most of the hits.

---

I've included you in the hater list. I never considered that personal. It's pretty much the same list as the RINO list when it involves Bad Orange Man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

I've included you in the hater list. I never considered that personal. It's pretty much the same list as the RINO list when it involves Bad Orange Man.

---

How could I forget RINO?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

I can tell you from experience that pointing out the obvious may lead to being called: a hater, a libtard, a commie, a sufferer of TDS, a globalist, a cuck, a soy boy, a lightweight, one who is anatomically female.

That’s not an exhaustive list, but it includes most of the hits.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

How could I forget RINO?!

---

Maybe we'll start saying "All of the above" to refer to you and Goosey. Although, actually stating it feels better. (yes, I said "feels" better...I'm channeling my inner liberal side!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

I see. Interesting comeback. So I'll file this one away for the next time he says something stupid.

---

Biden has said stupid things and will surely say stupid things in the future. This one wasn’t stupid, but not smart either considering the narrative the right wingers have concocted about him being a puppet for others (which he surely must be aware of).

You guys are just getting your cranks yanked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

Biden has said stupid things and will surely say stupid things in the future. This one wasn’t stupid, but not smart either considering the narrative the right wingers have concocted about him being a puppet for others (which he surely must be aware of).

You guys are just getting your cranks yanked.

---

Nah! we are just getting cranked up! Impeach President Kamala Harris!!! There are whistleblowers...all patriots...who will say Harris has had illegal phone calls with Russia, and Ukraine, and China, and Canada! Yes, even Canada!

There is, or will be, evidence that will be revealed at some future date that shows Harris-Biden colluded with Russia...and Iran too!...to steal the election. You just have to accept the evidence is there, just like Shifty Schiff said he had.

Buckle up...bud...gonna be a bumpy ride.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

How could I forget RINO?!

---

Trump is actually the RINO. Reagan was one, too. I remember reading how the republican establishment absolutely cringed at the thought of Reagan. Nixon said he couldn't even be in the same room as him. Trump was foolish enough to believe that real RINOs actually wanted to pass legislation that represented the issues they ran on....silly Trump.

A typical republican was the guy caught playing footsie in a roadside rest area with an undercover police officer. They closely resemble most democrats, just a little less evil and slightly less power hungry (and capable of doing nothing for long periods of time, unlike the dems who are capable of always doing the wrong thing all the time).

Yeah, I know the evil orange guy has been quite the womanizer in his past, which under dem standards should get him an eternal flame in Arlington cemetery when he goes to meet his maker.

A Cardinal has stated this as well about Pelosi and Biden.

Published 1 hour ago

Retired Catholic archbishop says Biden should be denied Holy Communion over abortion stance.
Charles J. Chaput says the "moral laws of the Church" are not optional.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/arc...h-urges-denial

President Elect Biden already has a higher approval rating than Trump ever had.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/326885/...rump-dips.aspx

Yes these polls are believable. You getting your "crank yanked"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

I think this was from November 9th of 2016.



I certainly remember lots of "so this is why we should eliminate the electoral college" talk (which probably wouldn't have come up if they had won). And plenty of "Trump has been an illegitimate POTUS" for a variety of other reasons (whether you buy those arguments or not). But I don't remember the votes being contested so much. I'm sure there was some of that. But I think the Obama administration handed over access fairly quickly, right? I know there was a 9/11 recommendation about how important that part is. I feel like there were even some quotes from within about how Trump wasn't prepared to take over, didn't want to put a team together, etc.

I really hope that as the state certifications come in, the concession comes and a transition starts happening. Maybe we need to consider holding the election date earlier (despite the problems with that) to ensure the process can play out in time for a good transition. I do worry about that some (and frankly would be less concerned if I thought the chance of a change was more credible - as it is, again - it just looks to be motivated by something(s) other than an expectation of changing the overall result).

---

I'm surprised you are so gullible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

President Elect Biden already has a higher approval rating than Trump ever had.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/326885/...rump-dips.aspx

---

That's what the communist want you to believe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DONW

I'm surprised you are so gullible.

---

That is some irony right there coming from Mr. Epoch Times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DONW

I'm surprised you are so gullible.

---

It's a grift.

Happens to be one that could turn out to be dangerous, but I'm hoping not.

In the meantime, I just hope you're not sending him money for this stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

It's a grift.

Happens to be one that could turn out to be dangerous, but I'm hoping not.

In the meantime, I just hope you're not sending him money for this stuff.

---

Yes, I am sending money and I will fight for mine and your freedom up until the day I die. I will not live in a country run by a bunch of communist. Was Tech still teaching the Americanism versus communism course when you were there?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DONW

Yes, I am sending money and I will fight for mine and your freedom up until the day I die. I will not live in a country run by a bunch of communist. Was Tech still teaching the Americanism versus communism course when you were there?

---

I really don’t think the younger pups on here were taught the different political systems and governments of the world in high school much-less at college. Heck, I bet many didn’t even have Civics or American government classes either. That’s why the younger millennials and GenXers are clueless at what’s happening right in front of their eyes. The others just don’t care and/or want government to “be their daddy” and give handouts, believe the lame stream media’s BS or think we should try something else as of total naivety.

What’s happening before our eyes is that Trump’s PAC (Save America) is fleecing scared old folks...most of whom can’t afford it. It’s shameful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

What’s happening before our eyes is that Trump’s PAC (Save America) is fleecing scared old folks...most of whom can’t afford it. It’s shameful.

---

It is the poor whites and minorities that have been getting fleeced and abused for 70+ years by the liberal and now socialist Dems. Heck, the Dems now would rather give the country’s taxpayer money and good jobs into the hands of illegals. Btw, the Senate is looking into Facebook for doing just that as minorities are getting past over for illegals and paying them outrageous wages. The jobs aren’t even getting posted as Facebook is saying true Americans won’t apply. Give me a freaking break!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

What’s happening before our eyes is that Trump’s PAC (Save America) is fleecing scared old folks...most of whom can’t afford it. It’s shameful.

---

Yes, it's honorable to keep promising black folks more for their votes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

It is the poor whites and minorities that have been getting fleeced and abused for 70+ years by the liberal and now socialist Dems. Heck, the Dems now would rather give the country’s taxpayer money and good jobs into the hands of illegals. Btw, the Senate is looking into Facebook for doing just that as minorities are getting past over for illegals and paying them outrageous wages. The jobs aren’t even getting posted as Facebook is saying true Americans won’t apply. Give me a freaking break!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

Yes, it's honorable to keep promising black folks more for their votes.

---

The evergreen Trump apologetic: They did it first!

You probably didn't accept that from your kids and you certainly shouldn't accept it from your President.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

The evergreen Trump apologetic: They did it first!

You probably didn't accept that from your kids and you certainly shouldn't accept it from your President.

---

Nice sermon from the Biden supporter who supports his racism, corruption and murder of babies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

The evergreen Trump apologetic: They did it first!

You probably didn't accept that from your kids and you certainly shouldn't accept it from your President.

---

First of all what you are accusing him of is not true. Trump haters assume that Trump supporters are weak minded fools who only give to his cause/campaign because they are not mentally superior like those who don't vote and/or hate Trump.

On the other hand and at the risk of being accused of being racist, democrats have abused the black race since 1865 in one way or another.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

First of all what you are accusing him of is not true. Trump haters assume that Trump supporters are weak minded fools who only give to his cause/campaign because they are not mentally superior like those who don't vote and/or hate Trump.

On the other hand and at the risk of being accused of being racist, democrats have abused the black race since 1865 in one way or another.

---

You're projecting. He's spent four years trying to scare people...it's his whole campaign. And it is true that these legal battles were always a sham. Save America PAC is taking money from DonW's account and sending it almost directly to Rudy's (Rudy has requested $20K/day). If there's anything left over, it's going to retire campaign debt. Just like Bannon, these grifters are getting rich off of fear mongering. I don't blame the people who are being fleeced, but I certainly hold those who defend the fleece as enablers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by glm47

Nice sermon from the Biden supporter who supports his racism, corruption and murder of babies.

---

Proverbs 26:4.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

You're projecting. He's spent four years trying to scare people...it's his whole campaign. And it is true that these legal battles were always a sham. Save America PAC is taking money from DonW's account and sending it almost directly to Rudy's (Rudy has requested $20K/day). If there's anything left over, it's going to retire campaign debt. Just like Bannon, these grifters are getting rich off of fear mongering. I don't blame the people who are being fleeced, but I certainly hold those who defend the fleece as enablers.

---

A slightly more tactful way of claiming mental superiority, but your are still voting for the guys doing the real fleecing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DONW

Yes, I am sending money and I will fight for mine and your freedom up until the day I die. I will not live in a country run by a bunch of communist. Was Tech still teaching the Americanism versus communism course when you were there?

---

Ah, Don. I sincerely appreciate your patriotism. And it goes without saying that you should spend your money however you want (I mean, look, if y'all knew what I spent at Sonic each month - it's just that it's right by my house and it's always happy hour if you use the app. . .)

But, I really do hate it that you're throwing your money away like this. I mean, look at what it would take for them to "win" the election here. It's just not plausible. If the goal is to save America by giving Trump's team money so they can go win these court cases and eventually change the election results, I really think there is no chance of that happening.

If the goal is just that you want to give to the overall cause of election security and closing every loophole and triple-checking every vote or something, well - I think you might be better off donating to your local election board (which you might already be doing, but I'm just saying the money would likely have more impact on preventing error/fraud at that level if it's not being used in frivolous lawsuits or to pay off campaign debt).

And I know the tax return stuff was controversial, and I'm not sure what the Trump supporter party line take ended up being on that stuff (and frankly never really cared either way), but think of it this way - if he's really the genius businessman millionaire he says he is, then he can afford his own lawsuits. And if he's bankrupt or the money is all tied up in assets or property or whatever, then wouldn't that make you a little suspicious about giving him your money?

I really hope that Rudy recovers quickly with no lingering problems. But I also really don't think he should be taking your money. Have you seen what he's supposedly charging? Does that amount line up with the results he's been getting?

And, no - I did not take a class about communism at Tech.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

First of all what you are accusing him of is not true. Trump haters assume that Trump supporters are weak minded fools who only give to his cause/campaign because they are not mentally superior like those who don't vote and/or hate Trump.

---

I don't think that, but look at the results. What is Don's money getting him? What has it got him so far? Even if you think lawsuit after lawsuit has been dismissed because lizard people are mind-controlling all the local and state election officials and all the judges who have been ruling - regardless of the reason (and I've been pretty clear on what I think the reason is) they aren't winning. They're losing the cases.

So even without looking at the merits (which I think should be important), from a strictly results standpoint this has not been a good investment (at best) or (more likely) is a grift. Who is gaining from this stuff? Who is going home at the end of the day with the donated money? Who comes out ahead no matter what is decided? Are they going to refund the money? Or will they pocket the money, continue to make outrageous claims and ease right into media deals?

I could maybe see that Trump himself really buys this stuff. But his legal team (and so many Republicans that are scared to say so out loud because they don't want to be seen as crossing his purposes) are doing this cynically. They're ripping people off (and setting them up to continue to get ripped off).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

I don't think that, but look at the results. What is Don's money getting him? What has it got him so far? Even if you think lawsuit after lawsuit has been dismissed because lizard people are mind-controlling all the local and state election officials and all the judges who have been ruling - regardless of the reason (and I've been pretty clear on what I think the reason is) they aren't winning. They're losing the cases.

So even without looking at the merits (which I think should be important), from a strictly results standpoint this has not been a good investment (at best) or (more likely) is a grift. Who is gaining from this stuff? Who is going home at the end of the day with the donated money? Who comes out ahead no matter what is decided? Are they going to refund the money? Or will they pocket the money, continue to make outrageous claims and ease right into media deals?

I could maybe see that Trump himself really buys this stuff. But his legal team (and so many Republicans that are scared to say so out loud because they don't want to be seen as crossing his purposes) are doing this cynically. They're ripping people off (and setting them up to continue to get ripped off).

---

Poor conservative small minded thinkers...if they could only grasp the Trump hate like all the mentally superior RINOs and Socialist Democrats.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

Ah, Don. I sincerely appreciate your patriotism. And it goes without saying that you should spend your money however you want (I mean, look, if y'all knew what I spent at Sonic each month - it's just that's right by my house and it's always happy hour if you use the app. . .)

But, I really do hate it that you're throwing your money away like this. I mean, look at what it would take for them to "win" the election here. It's just not plausible. If the goal is to save America by giving Trump's team money so they can go win these court cases and eventually change the election results, I really think there is no chance of that happening.

If the goal is just that you want to give to the overall cause of election security and closing every loophole and triple-checking every vote or something, well - I think you might be better off donating to your local election board (which you might already be doing, but I'm just saying the money would likely have more impact on preventing error/fraud at that level if it's not being used in frivolous lawsuits or to pay off campaign debt).

And I know the tax return stuff was controversial, and I'm not sure what the Trump supporter party line take ended up being on that stuff (and frankly never really cared either way), but think of it this way - if he's really the genius businessman millionaire he says he is, then he can afford his own lawsuits. And if he's bankrupt or the money is all tied up in assets or property or whatever, then wouldn't that make you a little suspicious about giving him your money?

I really hope that Rudy recovers quickly with no lingering problems. But I also really don't think he should be taking your money. Have you seen what he's supposedly charging? Does that amount line up with the results he's been getting?

And, no - I did not take a class about communism at Tech.

---

I don't mind giving money to a good cause. Too bad you didn't get to take the Americanism vs communism course. Your post reveal that you have no idea what is going on. Go to youtube and search Tucker Carlson Tonight , 12/7/20. The first part of it is a video of a Chinese communist making a speech about how the Chinese communist are going to manipulate Biden. He also talks about how easy they were able to steal intellectual property from the US before Trump became president. They are really happy that Biden won the election.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

Proverbs 26:4.

---

Matthew 5:22

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

Poor conservative small minded thinkers...if they could only grasp the Trump hate like all the mentally superior RINOs and Socialist Democrats.

---

Do you think the return on this investment is going to be positive?

If a few more people would just donate to the cause they might win?

Do you think Rudy is working pro bono?

Do you think they'll refund the money when they lose?

Do you think Trump "needs" this money?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

Proverbs 26:4.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow

Matthew 5:22

---

Deuteronomy 25:11-12

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

Do you think the return on this investment is going to be positive?

If a few more people would just donate to the cause they might win?

Do you think Rudy is working pro bono?

Do you think they'll refund the money when they lose?

Do you think Trump "needs" this money?

---

Why are you bothered by others giving their own money to what they believe in? Did you take up arms when you read about self proclaimed do gooders giving to idiotic causes like BLM and Antifa?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

Deuteronomy 25:11-12

---

:laugh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

Why are you bothered by others giving their own money to what they believe in? Did you take up arms when you read about self proclaimed do gooders giving to idiotic causes like BLM and Antifa?

---

Excellent post.

In their egocentric universe, no viewpoint can be accepted unless it agrees with theirs. Your cause is never worth fighting for. They know all, see all, understand all, and have to save you from yourself.

Me....I'm too cynical to give money to either side, but can understand why someone would want to do so. I appreciate there are folks out there that are willing to do this kind of stuff. The fact that it is so horrible to some makes me reconsider my decision to not make a donation.

The word "grifter" must be trending on the mainstream media and liberal sites. It seems to have become the word of the day for the sheep that follow such things (much like "beginning of the end" and "collusion" were in the recent past.) This parroting must be a sign of mental superiority.

They heard the ladies on “the view” Saying grifter and went with it…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

Why are you bothered by others giving their own money to what they believe in? Did you take up arms when you read about self proclaimed do gooders giving to idiotic causes like BLM and Antifa?

---

I don't know anybody who gave any money to BLM and I'm pretty sure it's impossible to send it to Antifa. Regardless, I'm not bothered when folks who have plenty of money spend it on things they care about. Are you not troubled when people scare folks on fixed incomes into giving them money that has not possibility of achieving the result that's pitched to the victim?

The whole thing feels a lot like a viatical settlement pitch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow

The word "grifter" must be trending on the mainstream media and liberal sites. It seems to have become the word of the day for the sheep that follow such things (much like "beginning of the end" and "collusion" were in the recent past.) This parroting must be a sign of mental superiority.

---

It's been around a while, just never quite so obvious as it is right now. When Trump spends 77 cents to earn a dollar, where do you think that 77 cents goes? Usually, it goes to grifters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

Why are you bothered by others giving their own money to what they believe in? Did you take up arms when you read about self proclaimed do gooders giving to idiotic causes like BLM and Antifa?

---

I said in my post that it goes without saying that he can spend his money however he wants (and that certainly he wouldn't agree with how I spend every dollar of mine).

It's fine if he wants to donate to this cause. Really. As you say, it's not my money. Same for liberal causes (or even conservative causes I do agree with). Sure. Obviously. Fine.

But it's (part) of the subject of the greater conversation here. I am convinced that many if not all of the people getting this money are making the claims that they're making, not because they believe them but because they'll profit off of this idea. And the most direct way that this is happening is the donations. I've made my case for my view, I don't really expect Don or anyone else to be convinced by my reasoning (although I stand by it).

Do you see any flaws in the substance of what I've claimed other than "it's his money, none of your business?" Because I'll concede that point happily. It's only my business to the extent that it relates to the topic at hand. Naturally.

But as to my point(s)? Crickets so far. . .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow

Excellent post.

In their egocentric universe, no viewpoint can be accepted unless it agrees with theirs. Your cause is never worth fighting for. They know all, see all, understand all, and have to save you from yourself.

Me....I'm too cynical to give money to either side, but can understand why someone would want to do so. I appreciate there are folks out there that are willing to do this kind of stuff. The fact that it is so horrible to some makes me reconsider my decision to not make a donation.

The word "grifter" must be trending on the mainstream media and liberal sites. It seems to have become the word of the day for the sheep that follow such things (much like "beginning of the end" and "collusion" were in the recent past.) This parroting must be a sign of mental superiority.

---

Do you think that "my view must be right" viewpoint is unique to those skeptical of Trump winning the election? I mean, that's a fairly ironic point to make in the context of this larger discussion (including the multiple other threads about the "stolen election"). The NYT can't be right because they're liberal. Same for NPR. And Reuters? And the AP? And National Review? And Fox News (if they say something Trump disagrees with)? And The Dispatch?

But hey, this one outlier source that isn't "mainstream" because it only speaks the truth, that's the place to get your election coverage? You can trust them. . .because. . . they say what I was hoping for?

I can totally understand why someone would donate to a political cause or campaign (although like you, I am extremely unlikely to ever do so). That I get. If you wanted Trump to win and gave to his election campaign over the summer, I totally understand that (same for Biden or the Libertarian Party or Green Party). I even understand why you'd do so against all odds of a win (like the Libertarian or Green Party). I get that.

But giving to an effort like this that (seems to me) is clearly in bad faith, that I'm confused about. I honestly have a hard time getting why you'd throw your money away like this (again, while freely acknowledging that I do plenty that could be considered "throwing my money away"). I guess the key is "clearly in bad faith" and whether you think they can win. But that's the question I am asking. Are people donating because they truly believe that things will change and the result of their donation will be that Trump will remain as president? And if so, why do they think that? I suspect it would probably be based on the media you trust (vs the media/data I trust) but I guess we'll see eventually, right? If someone is giving money without much expectation of a change, then I'm just curious as to why. I mean, again - I could see that it's meant to bring about some incremental good like those that give money to third party candidates or something. But this is pretty specific for that. And the places the money is going maybe aren't the best ways to improve election security long-term. And if you just want to donate after the fact to offset Trump campaign costs for some reason, couldn't you still do that directly?

I guess I'm legitimately curious about the motivations here (I suspect most actually believe their donations will make an impact, do you think that's likely?).

As for "grift," it's the most accurate word for what I think is happening. I chose it (and have been using it a lot) because I think that's the name for the action taking place. It's small-scale swindling (small-scale on a case-by-case basis, obviously much larger when considered altogether).

If you're seeing that word elsewhere it's certainly possible probably even likely that it is trending because it's being used to describe what seems to be happening. I don't recall hearing it or reading it anywhere, but I very well could have. I don't think I really consume all that much "mainstream" or "liberal" media, but you know - it's possible that I heard it somewhere, considered it, and felt that it applies (as opposed to finding just the right word in a thesaurus). To be honest, I think it'd almost serve as a synonym for much of government (left or right). If there was some sort of Freudian slip where you said "grifter" instead of "senator" I probably wouldn't correct you (because I'm not sure you'd need correcting in 90/100 cases).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

They heard the ladies on “the view” Saying grifter and went with it…

---

Now you're hitting below the belt.

For the record, money spent at Sonic (particularly at happy hour) is always spent in good faith.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

Are you not troubled when people scare folks on fixed incomes into giving them money that has not possibility of achieving the result that's pitched to the victim?

---

Not happening, but keep up the good work mentioned in my favorite Bible verse...James 1:27.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

For the record, money spent at Sonic (particularly at happy hour) is always spent in good faith.

---

It's too close to my house.

It's just too easy to pop in and use the app (so that it's always happy hour)! So tempting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

Not happening, but keep up the good work mentioned in my favorite Bible verse...James 1:27.

---

You don’t believe they are raising money by promising something that is all but impossible?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

Not happening, but keep up the good work mentioned in my favorite Bible verse...James 1:27.

---

Which part isn't happening?

I agree that there are some assumptions being made about who is sending in the money (probably semi-reasonable assumptions, but I know I haven't seen any data on this, nor have I actually looked).

Or are you saying that people aren't being sold a result that is unlikely (at best)?

Do you think most donors are wealthy people who understand that the almost certain outcome of their donation is simply attorney bills and campaign cost offsets? That's possible. And of course it's totally fine that they spend their money however they want.

But really, what isn't happening?

You guys are judging the givers and the takers based on what you believe.

I believe they can/should give to whatever they want to give to.

I think what really bothers you guys is that bad orange man will not go away quietly. He will continue to get support from 50% of the population which includes 90% of the American work force. I think it drives you nuts that you can't control their thought process like the democrats can control their mindless robots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

You guys are judging the givers and the takers based on what you believe.

I believe they can/should give to whatever they want to give to.

I think what really bothers you guys is that bad orange man will not go away quietly. He will continue to get support from 50% of the population which includes 90% of the American work force. I think it drives you nuts that you can't control their thought process like the democrats can control their mindless robots.

---

Who's judging the givers?

And, after your last three sentences, you sure we're the ones making unjustified judgements?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

You guys are judging the givers and the takers based on what you believe.

Well, yeah. At least the takers. If I were to ask you for money to support my lawsuit based on proof that I totally had that I should be named President instead of Biden or Trump, you'd tell me to take a hike. And if you were discussing me and my efforts to become President against all odds with some online friends and debating my merits (I didn't receive a single vote to my knowledge) and some in that group were arguing on my behalf (either because they believe me or just as devil's advocate or out of disdain for Biden/Trump) you'd likely point out your conclusions about my chances (none). And if someone in that conversation said, "Inudesu is totally going to win, I've been contributing to his efforts" you'd have some (justified) questions. Justified because it's the topic of discussion, justified because of your conclusions about the merits of my chances, justified because message boards are made for this stuff, maybe justified as a citizen over my wasting of governmental resources or undermining of American trust.

Donald Trump has certainly a better claim than me, but only because my claim is nothing. He did get a TON of votes. Many, many, many people really did (and do) want him to be President. For sure. Indisputably.

But it's still pretty much a done deal. That I believe is fairly a done deal. That I also believe is known to be a done deal by many (if not all) who are making the claims. No, I certainly can't prove intent. I am also not currently sitting as a Supreme Court justice (not yet - although it's probably not a job I'd be interested in anyway).

But yes, I am judging the takers in this case based on what I believe is true in terms of the almost certain outcomes and based on what I am assuming about what they believe to be the almost certain outcomes. But how else would I judge them?

I believe they can/should give to whatever they want to give to.

I'm pretty sure I've already agreed to this. What I was asking is whether you think they'll get the outcome they expect for the money? Which is their money which they are totally free to use however they want. I am free to buy your neighbor's used car. Based on your information, you could maybe give me a clue about whether it will run or not, right? And naturally, even if you told me that it's not a good car to buy, I'm still free to do so. Do you think Trump "wins" the election if enough people donate to his legal team/campaign costs?

I think what really bothers you guys is that bad orange man will not go away quietly.

Hey, wait a minute! Are you judging me based on what you believe?

But yeah, I do think he should concede and wrap things up and head off to private life (where he is free to write a book, sign a tv deal, run for other offices including 2024 presidential election, etc). There was never an expectation that he would go quietly. Anyone who thought that was ever an option has been living under a rock. I would like for him to acknowledge defeat and stop trying to convince people (in some cases successfully) that the election was unfair due to a conspiracy.

And I don't know if "bad orange man" is trending on conservative social media or you saw that on The View or something but I've noticed you use that phrase sarcastically a lot. It's clear that you're being sarcastic, but as a side note - his skin color is a little odd, right? I don't think you'll find many (if any) comments from me about his appearance around here, I don't have any more time for that from the left than I do from the right, but. . . It's not very convincing as a tan to me.

He will continue to get support from 50% of the population which includes 90% of the American work force. I think it drives you nuts that you can't control their thought process like the democrats can control their mindless robots.

No. I mean, yes, he'll continue to get support from a large percentage of the population (I question your exact figures). But no, I don't want to control anyone's thoughts. At least not past the normal amount that you'd have in any message board discussion. Plus, there go judging based on what you believe again. ;)

---

.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

Why are you bothered by others giving their own money to what they believe in? Did you take up arms when you read about self proclaimed do gooders giving to idiotic causes like BLM and Antifa?

---

Exactly! Or those that give to Planned Parenthood, Dem. Party or Biden. That doesn't obviously bother these guys.

The Socialist and Communist mindset can’t handle someone being able to give money to anyone or organization they don’t think is right nor should it be allowed. In fact that’s the government’s money. I’m afraid some above don’t understand the path they are taking right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

I don't think that, but look at the results. What is Don's money getting him? What has it got him so far? Even if you think lawsuit after lawsuit has been dismissed because lizard people are mind-controlling all the local and state election officials and all the judges who have been ruling - regardless of the reason (and I've been pretty clear on what I think the reason is) they aren't winning. They're losing the cases.

So even without looking at the merits (which I think should be important), from a strictly results standpoint this has not been a good investment (at best) or (more likely) is a grift. Who is gaining from this stuff? Who is going home at the end of the day with the donated money? Who comes out ahead no matter what is decided? Are they going to refund the money? Or will they pocket the money, continue to make outrageous claims and ease right into media deals?

I could maybe see that Trump himself really buys this stuff. But his legal team (and so many Republicans that are scared to say so out loud because they don't want to be seen as crossing his purposes) are doing this cynically. They're ripping people off (and setting them up to continue to get ripped off).

---

It only takes one state to start going in the right direction- and maybe it will not happen in time, but the chance is worth it for me and many others. Even an idiot can see this was ripe for fraud. Whether you believe there is fraud is something different. I do believe it was, and I have donated MY money. I am guessing Don doesn't give a crap what you think, and the millions of others of us don't either. Hello, I have a job, and I get to spend it however I want. The arrogance of your post disgusts me!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cal&Ken

It only takes one state to start going in the right direction- and maybe it will not happen in time, but the chance is worth it for me and many others. Even an idiot can see this was ripe for fraud. Whether you believe there is fraud is something different. I do believe it was, and I have donated MY money. I am guessing Don doesn't give a crap what you think, and the millions of others of us don't either. Hello, I have a job, and I get to spend it however I want. The arrogance of your post disgusts me!

---

I suppose the good news here about the arrogance of my post (or not) is that we're going to see, right? Not working too well so far, but there is always a chance.

If you're donating in the hopes that first one state and then another changes their results to the point that Trump wins the election, and you've weighed the odds of that happening and think it's worth it, sure. I've said over and over that I do not think any of these claims has been valid to the point of overturning anything, much less the hundreds of thousands of votes it would take to change the overall result. So far, every court has said the same. And we're kind of up against it at this point.

But OAN and Newsmax and Rudy and Donald and the Kracken and some kind of pillow guy (right? I'm not following this close enough to know who this guy is, but for some reason I occasionally see someone quoted on twitter who invented a pillow or something? IDK) are saying there is something there, they just never really seem to say the same level of things in court for some (obvious) reason.

When we talk about football on this site, we argue our points. "no, this guy should be the starter that other can't run well enough" or whatever. We're talking about the merits of the case(s) and the media narratives that drive either skepticism (me) or trust (you, apparently). So in that context, donating to the cause came up. To the extent that most taking part are pretty convinced of their case, every comment in the discussion is "arrogant."

To circle back to my analogy from before, if I want to buy your neighbor's used car and you and I are chatting, I'd hope you would mention that you don't think it runs. I can still buy it (it's my money) and how reasonable your reasons are vs. your neighbor's selling points is up to me to determine (your neighbor may not be happy with you, on the other hand if I buy a lemon and you knew, I might be mad in that case).

Again - I understand donating and I understand (as I may have mentioned) that you can use your money however you want. I even understand donating based on principle in support of a lost cause. I'm just throwing out there that if you think it's a lost cause (you obviously don't, that's the point) you could probably give more directly to the cause (either directly to Trump or to election reform causes or your local election board). But those are just suggestions. If you think your donation will get Donald Trump back in power as president for another term (and that's what you want) then OF COURSE you are free to try. But I just don't think it's going to happen. We've been going round and round on these threads about why or why not, people will obviously make up their own minds. I'm just making my point.

Sorry for the disgust.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

it goes without saying that you should spend your money however you want (I mean, look, if y'all knew what I spent at Sonic each month - it's just that's right by my house and it's always happy hour if you use the app. . .)

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

I said in my post that it goes without saying that he can spend his money however he wants (and that certainly he wouldn't agree with how I spend every dollar of mine).

It's fine if he wants to donate to this cause. Really. As you say, it's not my money. Same for liberal causes (or even conservative causes I do agree with). Sure. Obviously. Fine.





I can totally understand why someone would donate to a political cause or campaign (although like you, I am extremely unlikely to ever do so). That I get. If you wanted Trump to win and gave to his election campaign over the summer, I totally understand that (same for Biden or the Libertarian Party or Green Party). I even understand why you'd do so against all odds of a win (like the Libertarian or Green Party). I get that.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inudesu

Again - I understand donating and I understand (as I may have mentioned) that you can use your money however you want.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cal&Ken

I have donated MY money. I am guessing Don doesn't give a crap what you think, and the millions of others of us don't either. Hello, I have a job, and I get to spend it however I want. The arrogance of your post disgusts me!

---

In case it isn't clear, that point has been conceded. Spend your money how you like, my advice (which you can take or not as you like) is that this particular way of spending your money is unlikely to get the result you are seeking, but if you disagree or don't care about the end result (are not giving your money predicated on an expectation of Trump necessarily winning) or if you are 50/50 but think there is just the slightest chance that it might pay off -by all means. I cannot tell you how to spend your money. But in the (very mild) vein of "hey guys, you should buy this book, it's great" or "don't buy a ticket for this movie, it stinks" sense of suggesting what will probably happen should you spend your money in a certain way - and in that sense only - I think this is a poor investment, because I think there is no case here, the election was legal, the legal challenges will (continue to) fail, and Biden will be president.

And then, yeah. Some governmental policies will go a different way from what you (and often I) would prefer. That's for sure.

What is more disgusting is the idea that one thinks giving money might actually work. That is a disgusting proposition, because it means that you would be hoping to overturn people’s votes (the will of the people) in favor of the state government picking their own slate of electors.

Just because you aren’t happy with an election result is a poor excuse to try to destroy our democratic traditions. It is unAmerican.

Trump is stress testing our election system right now (and the idea of democracy, in general). It isn’t working, but harm is being done.

The Supreme Court (and lower courts for that matter) have made it clear in they are going to try to protect what makes America.

Shows how absolutely it was to ever trust this maniac with the power of the executive branch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

Trump is stress testing our election system right now (and the idea of democracy, in general). It isn’t working, but harm is being done.

The Supreme Court (and lower courts for that matter) have made it clear in they are going to try to protect what makes America.

Shows how absolutely it was to ever trust this maniac with the power of the executive branch.

---

I do think the judicial system is holding up like champs right now. Look at how many blistering opinions have come from conservative or at least conservative appointed judges.

I think a lot of the legislative branch would say one thing privately but are cowards (they're not saying anything to me personally, so again - it's about what media you trust). No shock there. Hard to expect them to be anything more than politicians.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

What is more disgusting is the idea that one thinks giving money might actually work. That is a disgusting proposition, because it means that you would be hoping to overturn people’s votes (the will of the people) in favor of the state government picking their own slate of electors.

Just because you aren’t happy with an election result is a poor excuse to try to destroy our democratic traditions. It is unAmerican.

---

Well, I've tried to stick to the results argument here because (as discussed above) we don't really know anyone's intent. I'm willing to assume that most of the Trump team realizes that this stuff isn't going to work (and I think there is some evidence to back that assertion up). And I'm quite sure that most Republican congressional members know, but are keeping quiet to avoid turning Trump and the base against themselves. I think many of the media on the far right probably know, but they're financially motivated to keep the facade up (actually, the article I read about OAN/Newsmax did say that most of the hosts at least kind of hedge, but are happy to let their guests say any wild thing they want without correction - which is probably smart cover, but pretty cynical).

There are kind of four possibilities here:

1. Biden won fairly (obviously a vote here or a vote there on both sides probably fraudulent, but nothing close to large enough, nothing systematic, maybe worth sussing out for posterity's sake or to reform for the future, but by the rules - Biden won).
2. Biden won but it was unfair enough that if enough is uncovered, then enough states flip and Trump could (legally) be president. I guess in this case, Trump really should have won. And therefore it's important to give money to make sure this happens.
3. Biden won "fair enough" to really be the winner per the rules, but with the right legal approach that can be changed (unfairly - if possibly legally if you squint enough). Trump didn't really win per the rules, but if the rules get bent, we can make it happen.
4. Biden probably won, but Trump might have won if we examine everything closely, willing to trust the courts, just want as many possible re-examinations as possible.

I think if you really buy scenario #2 or #4 as I assume most donors are, it's admirable to donate (if you really think he won, sure, fight for your boy).

I just think most of those profiting off of the donations fall into either #1 or #3. I really don't know about the man himself. I think he might fit in any of the 4 or some new grouping.

And yeah, #3 is pretty disgusting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

Trump is stress testing our election system right now (and the idea of democracy, in general). It isn’t working, but harm is being done.

The Supreme Court (and lower courts for that matter) have made it clear in they are going to try to protect what makes America.

Shows how absolutely it was to ever trust this maniac with the power of the executive branch.

---

Mail in ballots 90% Biden, but ONLY in the swing states. Nothing to see here. Bad Orange man in tearing down the great system that allows this to happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PawDawg

Mail in ballots 90% Biden, but ONLY in the swing states. Nothing to see here. Bad Orange man in tearing down the great system that allows this to happen.

---

You keep promoting that false statement but it is not true.

In Pennsylvania, Biden won 75% of the mail in vote. So why do you lie?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.inq...outputType=amp

Remember, Trump told his supporters to not vote by mail in rallies in these states, so is it really any surprise that they didn’t?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

You keep promoting that false statement but it is not true.

In Pennsylvania, Biden won 75% of the mail in vote. So why do you lie?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.inq...outputType=amp

Remember, Trump told his supporters to not vote by mail in rallies in these states, so is it really any surprise that they didn’t?

---

Trump got more votes in Penn that he got it 2016. That's really all he needed to do to win Penn. The lies you are part of claim 10s of thousands more voted for Biden than voted for Clinton in 2016...all by mail of course.

Don’t know the exact number in GA, but here it says that Biden got nearly twice as much absentee vote as Trump. That is not even close to 90 percent.

https://apnews.com/article/election-...8609781fe78a18