Trump is so short-sighted on the coal mining issue.
What does he care, he'll be dead soon enough and his kids don't live in West Virginia. As long as he gets votes now, that's all that matters.
People in West Virginia need options.
I don't think most miners even want their kids to go into the family business.
But Trump didn't save their jobs.
He gave tax breaks and eased regulations to allow the owners to make more money, not keep more miners working.
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
All those tent cities, poop & needles in the streets are in democrat run cities.
You could say anything about "Democrat run cities" and it would be true of almost every city because the large majority of major cities are run by Democrats.
13 of the largest 50 cities are run by Republicans. 2 independents, and 35 Democrats. Of the top 10, it's even more lopsided. 8 Democrats, 1 Republican, 1 Independent. Democrats run large cities.
There's no shining beacon of a city that is run by a Republican.
L L wrote:
Trump is so short-sighted on the coal mining issue.
What does he care, he'll be dead soon enough and his kids don't live in West Virginia. As long as he gets votes now, that's all that matters.
People in West Virginia need options.
I don't think most miners even want their kids to go into the family business.
But Trump didn't save their jobs.
He gave tax breaks and eased regulations to allow the owners to make more money, not keep more miners working.
Also true.
Coal in the US continues to decline. Renewables are quickly rising. According to the US Energy Information Administration, new power generating capacity in 2020 will look like this:
Wind: 44%
Solar: 32%
Natural Gas: 22%
Other: 2%
We need to shut down the coal mines for good. Same for oil and natural gas. Keep it in the ground where it belongs.
L L wrote:
Texas is doing great at 4%
That is because Texas keeps importing CA companies. TX will vote blue in 2020. I thought that would not happen until 2024, but no-State-taxes Texas desperately needs the money that imported businesses bring in.
Just say no to RINOs wrote:
www.deseret.com/utah/2020/1/29/21114269/utah-lawmaker-bill-to-allow-recall-of-us-senator-mitt-romney
YAWN . . . Senators cannot be recalled. Especially by a butt-hurt, and powerless Utah Republican.
"Quinn [R} said he started drafting the bill “weeks and weeks ago” after some constituents came to him raising ideas of how Utah could return to a “pre-17th Amendment” time, or when U.S. senators were appointed rather than elected."
Just say no to RINOs wrote:
https://www.deseret.com/utah/2020/1/29/21114269/utah-lawmaker-bill-to-allow-recall-of-us-senator-mitt-romney
Oh the great irony! Trump is in trouble for trying to extort Zelensky.
Now Trump and his sycophants are trying to extort a senator to vote against having witnesses.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
I disagree with that assessment. Trump has a laundry list of business failures. For someone who had a HUGE head start in life, he has not done well in business. He hit a home run with his biggest con...getting elected President, but he has already been impeached and widely considered the most corrupt President ever, so his legacy is forever tarnished. As President, we also found out how bad at business he has been. Just not a good salesman at all.
No, he is a great salesman. He marketed himself so well that condominium developers would pay him just to have his name on their buildings. He would receive millions and not have to invest a single penny in the development. Absolutely incredible.
He has not turned any salesmanship into great profit. Bankruptcies, failed business ventures, even in his wheelhouse of real estate, it has been shown he would have made more money had he simply invested the money Daddy gave him. That a small part of his efforts might have actually proven profitable, that doesn't cover all the failures.
Truth b told2 wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
I disagree with that assessment. Trump has a laundry list of business failures. For someone who had a HUGE head start in life, he has not done well in business. He hit a home run with his biggest con...getting elected President, but he has already been impeached and widely considered the most corrupt President ever, so his legacy is forever tarnished. As President, we also found out how bad at business he has been. Just not a good salesman at all.
True, but you can be a good salesperson but horrible at running a business. That is Trump.
We'll just have to agree to disagree.
P wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
I disagree with that assessment. Trump has a laundry list of business failures. For someone who had a HUGE head start in life, he has not done well in business. He hit a home run with his biggest con...getting elected President, but he has already been impeached and widely considered the most corrupt President ever, so his legacy is forever tarnished. As President, we also found out how bad at business he has been. Just not a good salesman at all.
Being "widely considered the most corrupt President ever" while surviving as POTUS actually supports the argument that he is a great sales person (con man) for the 20% of the people who matter. So at least part of your argument corroborates the assessment of 'Truth b told2'.
Disagree. He is a many-time failed entrepreneur where he was the main (or only) salesperson. Hit hit a home run with the 2016 election. Doesn't make him overall a great salesman. Pretty good cheater. One big win (I'll give him two with The Apprentice, though it never was as successful as he always said it was) doesn't make up for all those other failures. No successful salesperson would want to trade his or her abilities as a salesperson for that of Trump.
Flagpole wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
No, he is a great salesman. He marketed himself so well that condominium developers would pay him just to have his name on their buildings. He would receive millions and not have to invest a single penny in the development. Absolutely incredible.
He has not turned any salesmanship into great profit. Bankruptcies, failed business ventures, even in his wheelhouse of real estate, it has been shown he would have made more money had he simply invested the money Daddy gave him. That a small part of his efforts might have actually proven profitable, that doesn't cover all the failures.
His failures were in areas that required business acumen of which has none.
His product for his presidential campaign was a man of limited intelligence, no coherence, no knowledge, no respect for anyone and who had been caught on tape bragging about grabbing women by the pu**y and yet he won. Even though he's most effective with idiots, he is a tremendous salesman.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
He has not turned any salesmanship into great profit. Bankruptcies, failed business ventures, even in his wheelhouse of real estate, it has been shown he would have made more money had he simply invested the money Daddy gave him. That a small part of his efforts might have actually proven profitable, that doesn't cover all the failures.
His failures were in areas that required business acumen of which has none.
His product for his presidential campaign was a man of limited intelligence, no coherence, no knowledge, no respect for anyone and who had been caught on tape bragging about grabbing women by the pu**y and yet he won. Even though he's most effective with idiots, he is a tremendous salesman.
I see no evidence of that. We will have to agree to disagree.
Trump has posted this cut and paste tweet over 100 times:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1222975645447348225?s=20
Why can't he have one of his aids do some research and personalize it a little bit? The man is an idiot.
Flagpole wrote:
P wrote:
Being "widely considered the most corrupt President ever" while surviving as POTUS actually supports the argument that he is a great sales person (con man) for the 20% of the people who matter. So at least part of your argument corroborates the assessment of 'Truth b told2'.
Disagree. He is a many-time failed entrepreneur where he was the main (or only) salesperson. Hit hit a home run with the 2016 election. Doesn't make him overall a great salesman. Pretty good cheater. One big win (I'll give him two with The Apprentice, though it never was as successful as he always said it was) doesn't make up for all those other failures. No successful salesperson would want to trade his or her abilities as a salesperson for that of Trump.
While you start your post with the word, "disagree", there is nothing in your post that disagrees with anything in my post.
There have been some interesting articles about what happens in case of a tie vote during this trial. And we could be headed for a tie vote on witnesses. If Romney, Collins, and Murkowski vote for witnesses with all 47 Democrats then it would be a 50-50 tie.
The Vice President can not break a tie in an impeachment trial.
A Chief Justice has broken a tie before, but that was over 150 years ago.
If Roberts declines to break a tie, the motion will not carry and we will not have witnesses.
Friday's vote on witnesses could be epic in more ways than one.
Fat hurts wrote:
There have been some interesting articles about what happens in case of a tie vote during this trial. And we could be headed for a tie vote on witnesses. If Romney, Collins, and Murkowski vote for witnesses with all 47 Democrats then it would be a 50-50 tie.
The Vice President can not break a tie in an impeachment trial.
A Chief Justice has broken a tie before, but that was over 150 years ago.
If Roberts declines to break a tie, the motion will not carry and we will not have witnesses.
Friday's vote on witnesses could be epic in more ways than one.
We have already had witnesses. The Dems in the House had 17 witnesses and allowed none for the Repubs. How peculiar they would dominate the proceeding like that and then bellyache that the Pubs in the Senate are now allowing witnesses. The House already had 17 witnesses and the Senators have been able to read those testimonies. Every thing the House did the Senate has all the documents and EVERYTHING. The witnesses the House want now - Bolton et al. - were available to testify in the House. If the Senate allows witnesses and Bolton turns out to be a dud - how long and how many witnesses will the House managers demand? This has already gone on for 3 years. You want endless investigations of Trump? That is what this has become.
Flagpole wrote:
The Irishman wrote:
+1.
A meltdown of epic proportions. Difficult to feel sympathy for such a nasty poster.
"A nasty poster" is a good description of Sally. I defended him once upon a time in this thread when people were going at him hard, but he didn't take that opportunity to realize that how he presents himself in this thread is not pleasant. It has nothing to do with a political difference of opinion. It has to do with him stating the same things over and over again...sometimes after people have agreed to let a certain topic go. I defended him, but he's just continued on his negative path too much. It has to do with him stating the same proven false things over and over again, making fun of the appearance of a 72-year-old woman who never says boo about anyone like that, making homophobic comments, insulting other posters. Lying. All the while pretending that he is a pleasant message board citizen when he is anything but that.
I stopped responding to Sally Vix months ago. He is a one trick pony. The same routine over and over again.
Let’s be honest does anyone genuinely think that Sally is a woman? A former model? Or someone who doesn’t like Trump?
It’s a dude sitting online all day every day defending Trump no matter what, often playing stupid when he’s backed into a corner.
A clown, best ignored.
Ciro wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
"A nasty poster" is a good description of Sally. I defended him once upon a time in this thread when people were going at him hard, but he didn't take that opportunity to realize that how he presents himself in this thread is not pleasant. It has nothing to do with a political difference of opinion. It has to do with him stating the same things over and over again...sometimes after people have agreed to let a certain topic go. I defended him, but he's just continued on his negative path too much. It has to do with him stating the same proven false things over and over again, making fun of the appearance of a 72-year-old woman who never says boo about anyone like that, making homophobic comments, insulting other posters. Lying. All the while pretending that he is a pleasant message board citizen when he is anything but that.
I stopped responding to Sally Vix months ago. He is a one trick pony. The same routine over and over again.
Let’s be honest does anyone genuinely think that Sally is a woman? A former model? Or someone who doesn’t like Trump?
It’s a dude sitting online all day every day defending Trump no matter what, often playing stupid when he’s backed into a corner.
A clown, best ignored.
Posted legit points - you just can't address them. Point taken.
Whatever troll dude, people have caught onto you.
Bye bye tedious troll.
Treadhead wrote:
Whatever troll dude, people have caught onto you.
Bye bye tedious troll.
Lately, I almost always skip anything written by Sally. Also, I usually skip anything written in response to Sally.