Jump to content


The 2020 Presidential Election - Convention & General Election


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

By "involved" I mean privately saying "no son. Do not take this job. These are corrupt men, paying you in order to use my name and presumed influence. It could easily be used against both of us. If you need money, I can help."

 

Maybe he did say that, and Hunter simply acted as a grown man with a drug problem, no career, and a fondness for $50k a month. 

 

But using these talking points to claim that the Biden's did nothing wrong doesn't wash.  Put Eric Trump or Jared Kushner on that board and we'd be all over it. 

 

Hallelujah

 

2 hours ago, Redux said:

 

This makes it stupid.  Congress consent in this situation doesn't really change anything.  A bunch of suits sign off on something so NOW it's kosher.

 

We could cut the government in half and if anything, life would get better for everyone.

 

Agreed on both. 

Link to comment

18 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

Take the heat of what? That's the thing. You are insinuating we give credibility to the idea Biden acted corruptly in getting Shokin fired even though he has been cleared of that and it doesn't add up anyway. 

 

Why do you insist that I'm insinuating anything, when I'm stating what I mean clearly and repeatedly?

 

If we are all in agreement with you that Hunter Biden being on the board of Burisma while his father was Vice-President isn't something we should be doing in American politics then......

 

...what exactly are you disagreeing with? 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

 

Hallelujah

 

 

Agreed on both. 

 

Now if I can get one more agreement from you:

 

If Donald Trump's best case scenario was proving that Joe Biden was as corrupt as he was, then it's hardly a shield from Trump's litany of corruption, fraud, lawsuits, Emoluments Clause violations and nepotism that the Impeachment Hearings didn't even touch.

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
10 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

Why do you insist that I'm insinuating anything, when I'm stating what I mean clearly and repeatedly?

 

If we are all in agreement with you that Hunter Biden being on the board of Burisma while his father was Vice-President isn't something we should be doing in American politics then......

 

...what exactly are you disagreeing with? 

I'm disagreeing that we should let Joe Biden take the heat for firing Viktor Shokin. I'm disagreeing that Hunter Biden being on the board of Burisma affected how Joe Biden did his job in regards to Viktor Shokin. I agree Hunter shouldn't have been on the board, but at the moment there isn't a law preventing it and there is no evidence Joe Biden was involved with getting Hunter on the board other than providing him with a powerful last name and there is no evidence Hunters position affected Joe's job performance. So I'm curious as to what you think Joe Biden did in this situation that was so corrupt?

Link to comment
6 hours ago, Redux said:

I do love how I'm being accused of being deaf and blind and having Trump's guilt repeatedly explained to me  ....  I need to cry about Trump and give Biden a pass or I'm not literate or something.

 

That's right, you've assessed this correctly. It's very clear you don't know how to form your opinions proportionately based on evidence, you form them based off whatever you want even if there isn't any evidence. 

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Redux said:

Is it because what Trump did was wrong or is it because it's Trump?

 

It's because both. Trump is a criminal acting illegally, and also Trump is an incompetent narcissist who is really dangerously steering this country in troubling directions.

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Redux said:

Is what Biden did really okay, or is it okay because admitting that it's not could be seen as giving Trump a pass.

 

It's really okay because when you're investigated by qualified bodies and found to have done nothing wrong with no evidence of having done anything wrong, then you're clear. 

 

If Biden acted improperly, find the evidence, and punish him. Nepotism and personal quid pro quos aren't appropriate for government officials. And Trump would still be equally as guilty even if Biden was too. 

 

 

 

3 hours ago, Redux said:

 

No I'm defending my opinion which is being mislabeled as ignorance.

 

It's very correctly being labeled.

 

 

 

3 hours ago, Redux said:

I made a comment about how him taking $1 as income as POTUS was kinda nice, and then a bunch of talk about how he is a criminal for helping his family.

 

He is a criminal and elements of that criminal behavior involve his family. That is true. Here, take a look:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-tax-schemes-fred-trump.html

 

 

President Trump

participated in dubious tax schemes during the 1990s, including instances of outright fraud, that greatly increased the fortune he received from his parents, an investigation by The New York Times has found.

 

Much of this money came to Mr. Trump because he helped his parents dodge taxes. He and his siblings set up a sham corporation to disguise millions of dollars in gifts from their parents, records and interviews show. Records indicate that Mr. Trump helped his father take improper tax deductions worth millions more. He also helped formulate a strategy to undervalue his parents’ real estate holdings by hundreds of millions of dollars on tax returns, sharply reducing the tax bill when those properties were transferred to him and his siblings.

These maneuvers met with little resistance from the Internal Revenue Service, The Times found. The president’s parents, Fred and Mary Trump, transferred well over $1 billion in wealth to their children, which could have produced a tax bill of at least $550 million under the 55 percent tax rate then imposed on gifts and inheritances.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

2 hours ago, Redux said:

We could cut the government in half and if anything, life would get better for everyone.

 

2 hours ago, Redux said:

Half of the current payouts to government employees staying in taxpayer pockets wouldn't make life better for everyone?  Interesting.

This is a silly talking point that's easily debunked if you just think about the consequences of what cutting half the government would actually do.

 

First, the tax code and the federal budget aren't directly connected, so cutting all those payouts wouldn't necessarily even show up in anyone's pocket. For example, budget is in deficit, so that money could just reduce the rate of debt.

 

Second, the simplistic idea of cutting "half" ignores all the complexity of the real world where which parts get cut make a HUGE difference. Imagine eliminating all the military employees. Or eliminating the IRS. That's going to work very, very poorly. Or eliminating the VA, post office, unemployment, etc. etc.

 

Third, you've just eliminated about 1 million jobs. Federal jobs average about $90k/year, so that's about $90 billion/year lost from the economy.

 

There's reasonable discussions to be had about reducing federal jobs, but it isn't some blanket statement or sweeping generalization. The details of what we're cutting and what cutting those jobs will do is enormously important.

Link to comment
17 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

 

This is a silly talking point that's easily debunked if you just think about the consequences of what cutting half the government would actually do.

 

First, the tax code and the federal budget aren't directly connected, so cutting all those payouts wouldn't necessarily even show up in anyone's pocket. For example, budget is in deficit, so that money could just reduce the rate of debt.

 

Second, the simplistic idea of cutting "half" ignores all the complexity of the real world where which parts get cut make a HUGE difference. Imagine eliminating all the military employees. Or eliminating the IRS. That's going to work very, very poorly. Or eliminating the VA, post office, unemployment, etc. etc.

 

Third, you've just eliminated about 1 million jobs. Federal jobs average about $90k/year, so that's about $90 billion/year lost from the economy.

 

There's reasonable discussions to be had about reducing federal jobs, but it isn't some blanket statement or sweeping generalization. The details of what we're cutting and what cutting those jobs will do is enormously important.

 

Right, we would never be able to function as society if all those suits had to earn an honest days work.

 

#Hyperbole

 

(Edit)

 

So cutting the government's pay by half wouldn't have an impact on taxes etc.  But Bernie's Socialist ideas would totes work.  I can't even with this :lol:

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
25 minutes ago, Landlord said:

That's right, you've assessed this correctly. It's very clear you don't know how to form your opinions proportionately based on evidence, you form them based off whatever you want even if there isn't any evidence. 

 

It's because both. Trump is a criminal acting illegally, and also Trump is an incompetent narcissist who is really dangerously steering this country in troubling directions.

 

It's really okay because when you're investigated by qualified bodies and found to have done nothing wrong with no evidence of having done anything wrong, then you're clear. 

 

If Biden acted improperly, find the evidence, and punish him. Nepotism and personal quid pro quos aren't appropriate for government officials. And Trump would still be equally as guilty even if Biden was too. 

 

It's very correctly being labeled.

 

He is a criminal and elements of that criminal behavior involve his family. That is true. Here, take a look:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-tax-schemes-fred-trump.html

 

Sorry I don't subscribe to the NYT....sooooo....

Funny-Sheep-Facts-1200x800.jpg

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
13 minutes ago, Landlord said:

Just google 'Trump fined defrauding charities'

 

or 'Trump Tax Fraud Father's Wealth'

 

or 'Trump family criminal behavior'

 

So using the same logic that is being applied to Biden... How is it that he has gotten away with all these things and is not in prison? Because all of those things sound just as bad if not worse than Bernie Madoff

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment

24 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

Right, we would never be able to function as society if all those suits had to earn an honest days work.

 

#Hyperbole

 

(Edit)

 

So cutting the government's pay by half wouldn't have an impact on taxes etc.  But Bernie's Socialist ideas would totes work.  I can't even with this :lol:

Who do you think works for the government? The military and postal workers are "suits"? Plus there are WAY more "suits" in the private sector than the government, so your argument is completely backwards.

 

You should really learn about the difference between the tax code and the federal budget. And even if they were directly linked, cutting half the federal jobs would cut about $90 billion from the $4.4 trillion budget, or about 2%. The average American pays about $8367/year in federal, state, and local income taxes, which means each American would pocket about $167/year. That's it, just $167/year in exchange for cutting 1 million jobs and the  services associated with those jobs.

 

What Bernie's policies are ideologically and whether they would work or not is a dumb strawman that has nothing to do with anything I said.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
15 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

So using the same logic that is being applied to Biden... How is it that he has gotten away with all these things and is not in prison? 

 

 

Because the Republican party has voluntarily made itself a hostage and is suffering from some impenetrable Stockholm Syndrome.

 

Trump has rendered useless our checks and balances by successfully coopting the Republican party and convincing those in power on that team that there is no depth of impropriety or immorality or incompetency or corrupt behavior that is too low to follow him to or to be ok with and overlook for the sake of maintaining power.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
8 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

Who do you think works for the government? The military and postal workers are "suits"? Plus there are WAY more "suits" in the private sector than the government, so your argument is completely backwards.

 

You should really learn about the difference between the tax code and the federal budget. And even if they were directly linked, cutting half the federal jobs would cut about $90 billion from the $4.4 trillion budget, or about 2%. The average American pays about $8367/year in federal, state, and local income taxes, which means each American would pocket about $167/year. That's it, just $167/year in exchange for cutting 1 million jobs and the  services associated with those jobs.

 

What Bernie's policies are ideologically and whether they would work or not is a dumb strawman that has nothing to do with anything I said.

 

You know full well what I meant.  Suits are pretty blatantly the overwhelming amount of career politicians we employ.  I've had this argument before, and it's always met with "facts" and "logic" that we NEED those people to do their do nothing jobs and collect massive retirement funds and even get paid during shut downs.

 

That's $167 I would gladly pocket instead of let some suit buy a nice bottle of scotch with.

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

You know full well what I meant.  Suits are pretty blatantly the overwhelming amount of career politicians we employ.  I've had this argument before, and it's always met with "facts" and "logic" that we NEED those people to do their do nothing jobs and collect massive retirement funds and even get paid during shut downs.

 

That's $167 I would gladly pocket instead of let some suit buy a nice bottle of scotch with.


Why are you such a bitter person? You think everyone is out to get you. You complain about people on welfare and you complain about people who work for a living because they get better benefits than you. You complain about “socialist” policies that would actually help you. What do you not complain about?

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Redux said:

You know full well what I meant.  Suits are pretty blatantly the overwhelming amount of career politicians we employ.

There are about 2 million federal workers. How many career politicians do you think there are? Do you think there are more career politicians than military or postal workers?

 

6 minutes ago, Redux said:

  I've had this argument before, and it's always met with "facts" and "logic" that we NEED those people to do their do nothing jobs and collect massive retirement funds and even get paid during shut downs.

That's just another dumb strawman as I never made any such claims.

 

4 hours ago, Redux said:

We could cut the government in half and if anything, life would get better for everyone.

 

6 minutes ago, Redux said:

That's $167 I would gladly pocket instead of let some suit buy a nice bottle of scotch with.

Wait, is this your "better life"?!?

 

:rollin

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...