POTUS 45:52: Not Founded On Anything

[trixR4kids]

Re: POTUS 45:52: Not Founded On Anything

But she did have a gleaming pile of policy proposals on what she was going to do to help those people displaced by loss of industry

Like what, unpaid internships?

 

[Rogie21]

Re: POTUS 45:52: Not Founded On Anything

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Apparently,, President Trump has just realized that his National Security Advisor, John Bolton, wants the U.S. to go to war with Iran. In fairness, this would indeed be a shock to anyone who has been trapped deep in an underground cave for the last few decades.</p>— Jeff Greenfield (@greenfield64) <a href="https://twitter.com/greenfield64/status/1129012316228296704?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 16, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> Always looking for ways to create a tough-guy image, Trump hired Bolton; now realizing the tough-guy posturing could easily take a devastating wrong turn. #TheGunsofAugust

 

[joecct]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Apparently,, President Trump has just realized that his National Security Advisor, John Bolton, wants the U.S. to go to war with Iran. In fairness, this would indeed be a shock to anyone who has been trapped deep in an underground cave for the last few decades.</p>— Jeff Greenfield (@greenfield64) <a href="https://twitter.com/greenfield64/status/1129012316228296704?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 16, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> Always looking for ways to create a tough-guy image, Trump hired Bolton; now realizing the tough-guy posturing could easily take a devastating wrong turn. #TheGunsofAugust

I could (and did) have told him that from Day 1.

 

[rufus]

Like what, unpaid internships?

If you'd bothered to look at her policy positions, you'd know.

Just like how Elizabeth Warren has in depth, well thought out solutions for much of the problems we face today, but none of those heart of gold denizens of the heartland will even look at them, cause.......Elizabeth Warren

 

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45:52: Not Founded On Anything

But she did have a gleaming pile of policy proposals on what she was going to do to help those people displaced by loss of industry, or ravaged by opioids. They didn't want to hear it, cause "that biitch".

Correct.

Hillary had many problems but lack of substance sure wasn't one of them. She had solutions that would have helped the herpa-derps. They didn't want to hear them; they only wanted to goose step to the polls for Dump. They are responsible for their choices.

 

[trixR4kids]

Re: POTUS 45:52: Not Founded On Anything

If you'd bothered to look at her policy positions, you'd know.

She was going to raise taxes on the rich barely, spend a blip of the budget on infrastructure, let students refinance their debt so they got slightly less ****ed, and increase the min wage.

She also supported NAFTA (which is a big reason she lost those rust belt states) and got all her money from Wall St. so there was reason to be skeptical of any large scale changes taking place especially in middle America.

And Liz Warren's policies are infinitely better.

 

[jerphisch]

Re: POTUS 45:52: Not Founded On Anything

She was going to raise taxes on the rich barely, spend a blip of the budget on infrastructure, let students refinance their debt so they got slightly less ****ed, and increase the min wage.

She also supported NAFTA (which is a big reason she lost those rust belt states) and got all her money from Wall St. so there was reason to be skeptical of any large scale changes taking place especially in middle America.

And Liz Warren's policies are infinitely better.

And if Liz Warren was who she was running against that would be a good comparison to make...

 

[trixR4kids]

Re: POTUS 45:52: Not Founded On Anything

Kepler mentioned her policies and made the comparison, I probably should've quoted that.

 

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45:52: Not Founded On Anything

Kepler mentioned her policies and made the comparison, I probably should've quoted that.

Her policies were weak sauce but they were detailed and they would have been light years better for the white working class than those of Dumpy and the Vulgarians.

Bernie's were far, far better of course. And Bernie might have gotten us such a groundswell that we took Congress.

Well, we have the chance again with Warren (or for that matter Bernie though I think that is a mistake).

 

[ScoobyDoo]

And if Liz Warren was who she was running against that would be a good comparison to make...

Yep.

 

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45:52: Not Founded On Anything

Another murder, this time of a 2-year old.

Be proud, Republicans. Be oh so oh so proud of yourselves. Nobody else. You did this. Who's a good boy?

 

[MissThundercat]

Re: POTUS 45:52: Not Founded On Anything

Another murder, this time of a 2-year old.

Be proud, Republicans. Be oh so oh so proud of yourselves. Nobody else. You did this. Who's a good boy?

But he's not a 6 week old embryo. Republicans don't give a sh-t.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Another murder, this time of a 2-year old.

Be proud, Republicans. Be oh so oh so proud of yourselves. Nobody else. You did this. Who's a good boy?

Don’t say who’s a good boy. That’s for dogs. Dogs are infinitely better than republicans

 

[rufus]

She was going to raise taxes on the rich barely, spend a blip of the budget on infrastructure, let students refinance their debt so they got slightly less ****ed, and increase the min wage.

She also supported NAFTA (which is a big reason she lost those rust belt states) and got all her money from Wall St. so there was reason to be skeptical of any large scale changes taking place especially in middle America.

And Liz Warren's policies are infinitely better.

Saw an article the other day, can't remember where, but it was on the state of manufacturing in the US. You can do a search for it, or if I find it again, I'll link to it.

In short, US manufacturing is better now than it was before NAFTA, US trade numbers are better than they were before NAFTA, etc.

But you just go on believing what you heartlanders believe.

Ahh, here it is. From George Will, of all people. Raging liberal socialist.

https://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2019/05/12/george-f-will-danger/

 

[Handyman]

Re: POTUS 45:52: Not Founded On Anything

Saw an article the other day, can't remember where, but it was on the state of manufacturing in the US. You can do a search for it, or if I find it again, I'll link to it.

In short, US manufacturing is better now than it was before NAFTA, US trade numbers are better than they were before NAFTA, etc.

But you just go on believing what you heartlanders believe.

Hey now...dont lump us all in with trix

 

[French Rage]

Re: POTUS 45:52: Not Founded On Anything

There are tapes: https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1129137199620984840

 

[trixR4kids]

Saw an article the other day, can't remember where, but it was on the state of manufacturing in the US. You can do a search for it, or if I find it again, I'll link to it.

In short, US manufacturing is better now than it was before NAFTA, US trade numbers are better than they were before NAFTA, etc.

But you just go on believing what you heartlanders believe.

Ahh, here it is. From George Will, of all people. Raging liberal socialist.

https://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2019/05/12/george-f-will-danger/

There appears to be some serious stat cherry picking in that article, most of which can’t even directly be tied to NAFTA. (And while I don’t know anything about George Will, if he’s writing for a Jeff Bezos owned paper I kinda doubt that he fits that label). Sure output went up, what happened to wages and union protections? What happened in terms of net job loss over the past 20 years? Oh

Clinton and his collaborators promised that the deal would bring "good-paying American jobs," a rising trade surplus with Mexico, and a dramatic reduction in illegal immigration. Instead, NAFTA directly cost the U.S. a net loss of 700,000 jobs. The surplus with Mexico turned into a chronic deficit. And the economic dislocation in Mexico increased the the flow of undocumented workers into the U.S.

Nevertheless, Clinton and his Republican successor, George Bush II, then used the NAFTA template to design the World Trade Organization, more than a dozen bilateral trade treaties, and the deal that opened the American market to China -- which alone has cost the U.S. another net 2.7 million jobs. The result has been 20 years of relentless outsourcing of jobs and technology.

NAFTA's fundamental purpose was not to free trade, it was to free multinational corporations from public regulation in the U.S., Mexico, Canada, and eventually all over the world.

Among other things, NAFTA granted corporations extraordinary legal protections against national labor and environmental laws that that they could claim threatened future profits. At the same time, workers and unions were denied the legal status needed to defend themselves in these new cross-border jurisdictions.

It is not just workers in export and import industries who have suffered. Labor markets are connected. When autoworkers and steelworkers are hired for $14 instead of $20 an hour, lower wages ripple into the paychecks of those who work for suppliers, construction contractors, restaurants, and retail stores.

Nor is it just American workers who have taken the hit. Historically high Canadian wages also have been undercut. In Mexico, although some new jobs are created when production is shifted south of the border, the lack of worker protections in NAFTA insured that corporate investors would reap most of the benefits. The gap between U.S. and Mexican wages remains as wide as it was twenty years ago. In the even poorer countries, unregulated global trade has led to the ruthless exploitation of labor -- from teenagers in the sweat shops of Bangladesh to eight year olds working in the gold mines of Tanzania.

But you know, production is up I guess

https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4528140/amp

 

[joecct]

Re: POTUS 45:52: Not Founded On Anything

He had a good year.

https://wtop.com/white-house/2019/05/trump-reports-making-at-least-479-million-in-2018/

 

[aparch]

Re: POTUS 45:52: Not Founded On Anything

And yet they forced Carter to sell his fu**ing peanut farm.

 

[Slap Shot]

Re: POTUS 45:52: Not Founded On Anything

If they thought a (fake) billionaire from NY had their best interests at heart they are getting exactly what they deserved. I am glad they maybe learned their lessons, but they get zero sympathy for their plight. They made their bed they can stew in it. (see also: Northern Minnesota)

If they prove they learned their lesson we can talk then. If I had a nickle for every GOPer I have met who disavowed their leader but still voted for them in November I wouldnt need to save for retirement.

Has anything I've ever posted here suggested I feel any differently? Not everyone that voted for Trump last time is going to vote for him this time. True or false? All other commentary beyond that answer is just noise.

I'll just have to bear the burden of your scorn Slappy! Not sure how I can go on knowing a total idiot doesn't like me, but somehow I'll manage...

1. Calling me an idiot is code for you conceding.
2. Like you? Why would you matter enough to me to have ever given it a thought?
3. You still need to get over yourself
4. Hope that helps

Voting for (depending on one's political bent) Clinton in 1992, or Dukakis in 1988 or George W. Bush in 2000 or for practically any other major party candidate for president in my lifetime (I've been voting since Reagan) could be considered a "mistake," sure. But you are giving far too much credit to people who voted for trump to call that a mistake. Only someone truly very stupid could have voted for trump in 2016 and not known what we were actually going to get.

Another smartest guy in the room.