the party that cares about blacks, threw eggs at Larry Elder

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

again, you are denying truth. I am well aware that the president needs advisers.

He said "I was instructed to..." And again you fail on sarcasm

He needs advisors for big, specific issues, for the military, for the economy, for crime, etc. Why does he need to be instructed (his words) which reporters he's allowed to call on? See Above

You flushed your credibility here by suggesting the vaccination rates are "almost certainly" lower for whites, with absolutely zero data to back it up. go read the article I didn't write it

And as always, when you humiliated yourself, backed yourself into a corner from which there's no escape, you play the "but Trump" card.
your blind to trump's actions but observant with Joes

If you can find a video where Trump said to Jim Acosta "I was instructed not to call on you". I will concede that Trump did it too.

just inject Bleach I bet his staff wish they had a button after that

What honest people suspect here, is that Biden needs to be coddled so that he doesn't go out there and soil himself, or start singing Ethel Merman tunes in response to a question.

No Jim dishonest people who cant find anything else push Conspiracy theories AKA you

"And they have a schedule to maintain?"

Nope. He mentioned who he was instructed to call on "first", which meant it was the beginning of the question-and-answer period.

“Our hearts and minds are with the people being persecuted so unfairly relating to the January 6th protest concerning the Rigged Presidential Election,” Trump said in a statement. “In addition to everything else, it has proven conclusively that we are a two-tiered system of justice. In the end, however, JUSTICE WILL PREVAIL!”


But your worried about Biden Right now the danger to America are Republicans who would have ever such a thing would be True

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

“Our hearts and minds are with the people being persecuted so unfairly relating to the January 6th protest concerning the Rigged Presidential Election,” Trump said in a statement. “In addition to everything else, it has proven conclusively that we are a two-tiered system of justice. In the end, however, JUSTICE WILL PREVAIL!”


But your worried about Biden Right now the danger to America are Republicans who would have ever such a thing would be True

"And again you fail on sarcasm"

OK. Did Biden say "I was instructed to call first on..."

The video shows he said that. So my question is, why. Why can't the most powerful man in the world, decide for himself who he's going to call on?

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"And again you fail on sarcasm"

OK. Did Biden say "I was instructed to call first on..."

The video shows he said that. So my question is, why. Why can't the most powerful man in the world, decide for himself who he's going to call on?

Jim why are you going on and on over .this why are you
taking what he sad literally? To convince your self the button thing is real?

But 4 years of Trumps attacks and lies and just dump comments you and others always explained as hyperbole, While His handlers going on Fox and his press secretary telling Americans what he ment to say even though we heard him very clearly . On topics much bigger than who to call on in a press conference….
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

“Our hearts and minds are with the people being persecuted so unfairly relating to the January 6th protest concerning the Rigged Presidential Election,” Trump said in a statement. “In addition to everything else, it has proven conclusively that we are a two-tiered system of justice. In the end, however, JUSTICE WILL PREVAIL!”


But your worried about Biden Right now the danger to America are Republicans who would have ever such a thing would be True

oh good...WDMAOC

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by scottw

oh good...WDMAOC

Saying you didn’t vote for him doesn’t suggest you are not with him and agree with him .. and his madness
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Saying you didn’t vote for him doesn’t suggest you are not with him and agree with him .. and his madness
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

here’s what liberals sometimes get, and sometimes don’t get, depending on who’s in the white house.

You can vote for a president and support him, without that meaning that you approve of every single thing he does.

When Bill Clinton was president, for 8 years, liberals said we should
ignore his many personal flaws and focus on policies. The reason they said that, is because looking at him that way, makes him look pretty good. I actually agree with that concept, i judge a president by the effects of his public policies. And that’s why I say Clinton was a good president.

But when republicans elect someone severely flawed, NOW we’re supposed to ignore the effects of his policies, and only talk about his personal behavior.

Can we just decide on one set of rules and apply them equally, do we all have to do a 180 every time the party of the sitting president changes?

Both sides do it. Republicans went on and on about growing deficits under Obama, but said nothing when trump spent like crazy.

Democrats said ( it was literally Joe Biden who said it) if a sitting Republican president near election tries to nominate a supreme
court justice, that the senate should block him. They actually called it the “Biden Rule.”. But when a democrat was president, it was horrible when republicans did EXACTLY what Biden said should be done. When a democrat is president, democrats suddenly said it was ok to appoint supreme court justices late in the term. Then when trump was president, the democrats did another full 180 and said a sitting president near election should not be able to nominate a supreme court justice. There’s only one conclusion…democrats believe it’s only ok when democrats do it.

Both sides do this constantly.

On this issue here, you are willfully failing to distinguish between supporting Trumps policies ( which i hate to break it to you, but the Gallup poll clearly shows that people liked), and his personal behavior, which nobody condones, except brain dead zealots like Sean Hannity.

Pick a set of rules, and apply them evenly. is that too much to ask?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

here’s what liberals sometimes get, and sometimes don’t get, depending on who’s in the white house.

You can vote for a president and support him, without that meaning that you approve of every single thing he does.

When Bill Clinton was president, for 8 years, liberals said we should
ignore his many personal flaws and focus on policies. The reason they said that, is because looking at him that way, makes him look pretty good. I actually agree with that concept, i judge a president by the effects of his public policies. And that’s why I say Clinton was a good president.

But when republicans elect someone severely flawed, NOW we’re supposed to ignore the effects of his policies, and only talk about his personal behavior.

Can we just decide on one set of rules and apply them equally, do we all have to do a 180 every time the party of the sitting president changes?

Both sides do it. Republicans went on and on about growing deficits under Obama, but said nothing when trump spent like crazy.

Democrats said ( it was literally Joe Biden who said it) if a sitting Republican president near election tries to nominate a supreme
court justice, that the senate should block him. They actually called it the “Biden Rule.”. But when a democrat was president, it was horrible when republicans did EXACTLY what Biden said should be done. When a democrat is president, democrats suddenly said it was ok to appoint supreme court justices late in the term. Then when trump was president, the democrats did another full 180 and said a sitting president near election should not be able to nominate a supreme court justice. There’s only one conclusion…democrats believe it’s only ok when democrats do it.

Both sides do this constantly.

On this issue here, you are willfully failing to distinguish between supporting Trumps policies ( which i hate to break it to you, but the Gallup poll clearly shows that people liked), and his personal behavior, which nobody condones, except brain dead zealots like Sean Hannity.

Pick a set of rules, and apply them evenly. is that too much to ask?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

https://www.businessinsider.com/trum...o-2020-2019-12

Trumps wins and failures as president really depend on your view of the policies. I’m not a pro life guy, I’m all for pro choice, so stacking the justices in my mind is a failure. His environment policies absolutely s*cked. Space force while sounding goofy at first is probably necessary to balance the potential threat from China primarily when it comes to protecting our property in orbit. Tax policy was wonderful if your a big corporation or one of the 1% ers, I’m really hoping Biden can avoid the filibuster and get his tax plan threw, it’s long overdue that these companies and rich pay their fair share. Not a lot of wins in my opinion, but I’m sure Trumps base feels otherwise.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

https://www.businessinsider.com/trum...o-2020-2019-12

Trumps wins and failures as president really depend on your view of the policies. I’m not a pro life guy, I’m all for pro choice, so stacking the justices in my mind is a failure. His environment policies absolutely s*cked. Space force while sounding goofy at first is probably necessary to balance the potential threat from China primarily when it comes to protecting our property in orbit. Tax policy was wonderful if your a big corporation or one of the 1% ers, I’m really hoping Biden can avoid the filibuster and get his tax plan threw, it’s long overdue that these companies and rich pay their fair share. Not a lot of wins in my opinion, but I’m sure Trumps base feels otherwise.

"Trumps wins and failures as president really depend on your view of the policies."

You can say that about every president, right?

"I’m all for pro choice, so stacking the justices in my mind is a failure. " You mean stacking the court with the conservatives he nominated? In my opinion, there's a lot of misinformation about what it means to be a liberal judge vs a conservative judge. Conservative judges (if they are fair minded, which not all are) won't always advocate for the conservative cause, they will advocate to adhere to what the law actually says, not what they wish the law said. During her confirmation hearings, Justice Barrett listed a few decisions she made which were contrary to her personal beliefs, but which were consistent with the constitution. I don't want the Supreme Court to outlaw abortion, I want them to do what the constitution says, and refer the question to the states (since it's not in the specified list of things that the federal government is responsible for). Send it to the states where it belongs, and then some states will allow it, some won't, depending on who the citizens elect. These things are not supposed to be decided by 9 people who aren't elected, and they're appointed for life meaning they aren't answerable to us.

"His environment policies absolutely s*cked."

I respect why you'd say that. I don't agree, which doesn't mean I don't care about the environment, because I do. But I notice two glaring things. First, none of the dire predictions made by this community have come true, which tells me their models are flawed, I don't know what other conclusion you could reach. Second, many of the most influential leaders of this movement have carbon footprints you'd expect from a small country - mansions, yachts, private jets). I don't think they believe what they claim to believe, and again I don't know what other conclusion you could reach. I say spend the money, do lots of honest research, and let's take reasonable steps to make things cleaner, but I don't care to hear about AOC's green new deal.

"Tax policy was wonderful if your a big corporation or one of the 1% ers"

A common Trump attack, but it's just not true, not to the extent they claim. I'm not a corporation, I'm not a 1%-er, I work in a cubicle (not a corner office) of a huge company, my wife stays home, we have 3 kids, we have literally lived paycheck-to-paycheck since my wife stopped working. Trumps tax cuts reduced my tax liability by about $250 a month. That loosened the noose around our necks. We used it to buy a camper, which my kids and I sleep in almost every night in the driveway all summer, and which we take on every vacation now. We wouldn't have bought it if not for those tax cuts. We can reasonably debate if less should have gone to the rich an d more to the poor, but you can't say it only helped the rich.

"long overdue that these companies and rich pay their fair share." Another common democrat rallying cry, but the truth is a bit murkier. If you actually do the math, and assume that all the rich make no changes and make the same income, and just pay the higher marginal tax rate, how much more revenue are we talking, compared to our current annual budgets?

I actually did a mathematical exercise once, I looked the total compensation of the Walmart CEO, and determined that if he worked for free and we gave his salary+bonus to all US workers, it worked out to something like $40 per year for each worker. The math doesn't work. There aren't that many rich people, and they aren't that rich, not enough to make a big difference. That said, I won't lose any sleep if we tweak those tax rates a bit as there's some unfairness in there, but it's absurd to think we can tweak the tax rates on people who won't know the difference, and solve any meaningful problem. It's more like a rounding error.

"Not a lot of wins in my opinion, but I’m sure Trumps base feels otherwise"

Not just his base. Gallup does a poll every 4 years during presidential elections, asks Americans if they're better off than they were 4 years ago. When they did the poll in 2020, during the pandemic, a record-number of Americans (58% I think) said they were better off. Gallup has done this poll for decades, and never before had more Americans said they were better off.

There's a reason for that. People liked the tax cuts, the insanely low unemployment (especially for blacks, which would have been celebrated as an historic win if any democrat president had pulled that off), his dealing with terrorists, his not getting us involved in questionable wars, his criminal justice reform (which liberals have wanted for decades, and which Obama could easily have done when the democrats controlled congress, but he chose not to), his talk of securing the southern border (his actions fell way short), the stock market records, his work in the middle east (we'll see how that plays out now), his giving companies incentive to repatriate trillions of dollars that had been banked elsewhere..

It's not just right-wing radicals that approve of those things. CNN and MSNBC won't ever say it, but those are populist ideas. That's why I believe that a likeable republican who advocated for those things but who didn't have Trumps endless list of character flaws, would be tough to beat - in normal times. The pandemic may be enough to make people put those things aside.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Not just his base. Gallup does a poll every 4 years during presidential elections, asks Americans if they're better off than they were 4 years ago. When they did the poll in 2020, during the pandemic, a record-number of Americans (58% I think) said they were better off.

Ya think maybe just maybe the unprecedented amount of Covid relief flowing from the treasury might have skewed that poll a bit? It was 56% by the way...

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Trumps wins and failures as president really depend on your view of the policies.

I love when people state the obvious thinking it makes them sound smart

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Democrats said ( it was literally Joe Biden who said it) if a sitting Republican president near election tries to nominate a supreme court justice, that the senate should block him. They actually called it the “Biden Rule.”.

This isn't really true, McConnel took Biden's remarks out of context and labeled it as a sneaky trick to give cover for his own actions. What Biden said was near an election you shouldn't nominate an extreme justice and create a partisan fight. Rather, he said the Whitehouse should work with the Senate Judicial Committee to ensure a smooth process.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Saying you didn’t vote for him doesn’t suggest you are not with him and agree with him .. and his madness

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

ummmmm...ok