Plus he refused to enter his affairs into a blind trust.
Plus he refused to enter his affairs into a blind trust.
Fat hurts wrote:
The Real Answer wrote:
People are for doing something to stop climate change. However, when they find out what it entails and the cost of it, they become against it.
It's a loser on the campaign because Repubs can provide voters with the actual cost.
That depends on how you sell it. If the super-rich are funding it, most people will be in favor.
Ditching fossil fuel is an enormous job-creator.
Plus, it will cost us trillions if we do nothing. That comes from Individual-1's own administration projections.
People see how many jobs there are installing solar panels. They see how much you save when you install solar or drive an EV. When they look at the new green economy, they like it a lot.
But most of all, they see the billions of dollars lost every year to climate change. And it will only get worse if we elect Republicans.
You are becoming like flag pole posting nonsense after nonsense. Please, where do get these crazy numbers or ideas. I'm interested to know.
Billions are lost every year to climate change?
Ditching fossil fuels is an enormous job-creator?
Are you getting this stuff from some newsletter? Pardon me if your name has been hijacked.
There are almost 4 millions professional truck drivers in the US. The entire solar industry employs less than 400,000 people.
I remember... wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
You thought wrong. I have been very clear on this, but I will help you out with the truth again...
If you currently support Donald Trump, and you are not an elected official, you are either:
1) Stupid.
2) Racist. All racist people are stupid, but not all stupid people are racist.
Regarding elected officials who support Trump, they are one of these:
1) Stupid.
2) Racist.
3) In it for self-preservation as they believe they need to support Trump in order to get votes from the stupid and racist people who support him.
A preemptive answer to a question you might have. "If an elected official can be in it for self-preservation, why can't a citizen also just support Trump for self-preservation?" Good question. The answer is that a citizen who votes for Trump who believes that Trump will save their job in some way hasn't paid attention to reality (see US auto jobs, Carrier, coal miner jobs, etc.) and is deciding to believe things that Trump says are true. Trump lies ALL THE TIME on issues big and small, so only a stupid person would believe ANYTHING he says. The racist ones don't necessarily believe everything he says; they just side with him because they share the racist bond.
You never said that all Trumper supporters were racists without all these qualifications?? Am I mis-remembering?
The first time I mentioned that all supporters of Trump were stupid or racist, someone brought up elected officials. I hadn't considered them in that (proving that I accept fault when it is so), so I added the info about them, because they fall into a different category that just a typical voter. There really are no qualifications other than that.
If you are not an elected official and you CURRENTLY support Trump, you are either:
1) Racist
OR
2) Stupid
So, does that clear it up for you? It should.
To be clear, and this is also something I have said, all VOTERS of Trump were not necessarily stupid or racist. Some of them felt disenfranchised and thought Trump would be a breath of fresh air. While I maintain there was enough information pre-election to believe otherwise, I do not fault those who voted for him to give him a chance.
BUT, since the election:
1) We have learned that Trump LIES ALL THE TIME. That should be enough right there to stop supporting him.
2) He has shown how racist he is ("good people on both sides" etc.).
3) He has shown how horrible of a hiring manager he is. His staff is/was chock full of criminals and demonstrably unethical people. Even if he is found innocent of all things, he still has surrounded himself with horrible and unqualified people. Where are all these "best people"?
4) He has become an unindicted co-conspirator to two FELONIES.
5) He has openly defied his own intelligence agencies and taken the word of Putin and MBS.
6) He has shown that Mexico will not pay for a wall. This was a CENTRAL theme of his campaign!
7) He has not appointed a Special Counsel to look into Hillary's "situation", and she is not in prison as he said she would be if he were elected President. This was a CENTRAL theme of his campaign! "Lock her up! Lock her up!"
8) Obamacare is still there. He said it would be SO EASY to repeal and replace. Later, after he was elected, he said "who knew healthcare was so complicated?" Umm...everyone!
9) He and his organization and groups that support him (inaugural committee, etc.) have 17 separate investigations looking into his criminal behavior not including the one the House said would begin now to look into his finances.
What more do people need to know about him to stop supporting him?
He's a racist.
He's a sexist.
He's a misogynist.
He's a serial liar.
He's amoral.
He is an unindicted co-conspirator to two FELONIES.
He cozies up to dictators around the world and tells heads of our intelligence agencies that they need to "go back to school"
He reportedly does not read anything or study issues or listen to experts.
He is a criminal of epic proportions who is putting our national security at risk...this will all be proven.
What is there about him that keeps a smart person supporting him? He lies ALL THE TIME, so how does someone even know what they are supporting if they support him?
Fat hurts wrote:
_its_baddude wrote:
In other words, Trump did not hire these people. Managers that worked at these places did. Also, how do you know that the illegals did not forge documents or mislead the hiring managers.
The president is responsible for what happens at his company.
There is evidence that the Trump Organization knew the documents were forged and even helped them in that regard. It's just one more way they can go after Individual-1 and send him to prison.
The president of a company may be liable for what happens at his company but is he always responsible? If a rogue employee acting as an agent for the company (say a VP al la Fastow at Enron) commits crimes (though Skilling and Lay did as well) is the president responsible for his crimes or just liable for his crimes?
jesseriley wrote:
Plus he refused to enter his affairs into a blind trust.
Exactly. He is 100% responsible for what happens at his companies. There is no passing the buck when you are the sole-owner of Trump Organization.
Sally Vix wrote:
The president of a company may be liable for what happens at his company but is he always responsible?
Trump is the OWNER of the companies. All profits flow to him.
Flagpole,
I am neither stupid nor racist. But I support Trump only as an adversary to those on the Democratic side likely to run against him. I think Trump as a person is reprehensible, but his policies overall have benefited the country. Trump versus AOC? Trump all the way. Against Bernie too. Socialism would ruin this country. If the Democrats did offer up a more moderate like Biden, I would be open to listening to what he may offer. Again, Trump is a vile man but his policies have been good for the country.
owned by trump wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
The president of a company may be liable for what happens at his company but is he always responsible?
Trump is the OWNER of the companies. All profits flow to him.
Exactly right. Companies get sued for "their" actions --regardless of who committed any crime-- all the time. The is how the laws are set up.
Fat hurts wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
Pfffft.
Gillibrand has some sketchy comments in the past that she has reversed course on, but I'm not for those past comments and have no other reason to support her at this point, and she is my least favorite at this point of the three you mentioned.
I think Elizabeth Warren is great. She's super smart and correct about almost everything. She would be a GREAT President. Her problem though is electability at this point. She will be portrayed as a liar and someone who benefited by lying with regard to the Native American issue. Perhaps unfair, but that's the reality. If I got to pick one person right now to be President, it would be her. I would NOT pick her though to be a candidate because I think she's sunk already.
Kamala Harris's idea of getting rid of private health insurers is a bad idea. Even in countries that have nationalized healthcare, there are still private insurers where you can buy MORE insurance if you want. I am not for this idea of hers. Doesn't mean I wouldn't support her as a candidate.
I know you are just trolling me, but those are my answers...just felt like answering.
I agree with you on Warren. I think she will be great in the debates, but so far her campaign looks like it is failing. She would make a good VP candidate if Biden gets the nomination.
I think Kamala Harris's position has been misrepresented. She's saying that with Medicare-for-all, nobody would want to have private insurance any more. But she hasn't said it would be outlawed. I'm sure she would be fine with supplemental plans like you are talking about.
I have considered (also considered that I'm being hopeful) that what you say about Harris is correct. She hasn't been out there stumping really yet. I will give all comers a good listen before deciding.
All things being equal, I would love to see a woman President. Too many people out there (mostly conservatives and Fundamentalist religious people) don't think a woman should be the President. That attitude needs to stop.
owned by trump wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
The president of a company may be liable for what happens at his company but is he always responsible?
Trump is the OWNER of the companies. All profits flow to him.
Not exactly. I am not sure how many of Trump's companies are privately held versus public companies but the public companies are ones in which the profits would go to the shareholders.
Sally Vix wrote:
I am neither stupid nor racist. . . . .
You haven't respond to the question of why you post using female names, and claim you have a wife?
Your posting style is eerily like that of Rigged for Hillary. So very strange. Is he your Chinese wife?
Sally's wife wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
I am neither stupid nor racist. . . . .
You haven't respond to the question of why you post using female names, and claim you have a wife?
Your posting style is eerily like that of Rigged for Hillary. So very strange. Is he your Chinese wife?
Why do you care my choice of monikers? I use Fatty R. Belt Buckle but I am probably the fittest person here. I use Sally because I chose to. I am a male and have a female wife. Why do you care?
Enquirer being investigated over alleged extortion of Bezos, a violation of their plea deal in the trump hush-money scandal. They’re screwed.
Sally Vix wrote:
Flagpole,
I am neither stupid nor racist. But I support Trump only as an adversary to those on the Democratic side likely to run against him. I think Trump as a person is reprehensible, but his policies overall have benefited the country. Trump versus AOC? Trump all the way. Against Bernie too. Socialism would ruin this country. If the Democrats did offer up a more moderate like Biden, I would be open to listening to what he may offer. Again, Trump is a vile man but his policies have been good for the country.
I agree about Trump, on one hand a complete jackass, on the other an infinitely better choice than HRC or Bernie 'the sellout' Sanders.
No on Biden. Yes on Gabbard.
Other than that this entire thread is nothing but NPC's obediently parroting mainstream orthodoxy.
He also said socialism would ruin this country, but since he’s writing from Russia it’s not relevant.
Sally Vix wrote:
Sally's wife wrote:
You haven't respond to the question of why you post using female names, and claim you have a wife?
Your posting style is eerily like that of Rigged for Hillary. So very strange. Is he your Chinese wife?
Why do you care my choice of monikers? I use Fatty R. Belt Buckle but I am probably the fittest person here. I use Sally because I chose to. I am a male and have a female wife. Why do you care?
And one more thing ... Flagpole posts as "Flagpole" but is he a flagpole? Of course not.
Sally Vix wrote:
Sally's wife wrote:
You haven't respond to the question of why you post using female names, and claim you have a wife?
Your posting style is eerily like that of Rigged for Hillary. So very strange. Is he your Chinese wife?
Why do you care my choice of monikers? I use Fatty R. Belt Buckle but I am probably the fittest person here. I use Sally because I chose to. I am a male and have a female wife. Why do you care?
Because you are also Rigged for Hillary.
jesseriley wrote:
Enquirer being investigated over alleged extortion of Bezos, a violation of their plea deal in the trump hush-money scandal. They’re screwed.
And more extortions are coming out. And guess who some were at the "request" of? Trump.
They were supposed to refrain from illegal activity for 3 years! Time flies when you’re having fun extorting your enemies...
Sally's wife wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
Why do you care my choice of monikers? I use Fatty R. Belt Buckle but I am probably the fittest person here. I use Sally because I chose to. I am a male and have a female wife. Why do you care?
Because you are also Rigged for Hillary.
I have barely posted on this thread until the last few days. I have no idea who Rigged for Hillary is. It is not me.
Am I living in the twilight zone? The Boston Marathon weather was terrible!
Is there a rule against attaching a helium balloon to yourself while running a road race?
How rare is it to run a sub 5 minute mile AND bench press 225?
Move over Mark Coogan, Rojo and John Kellogg share their 3 favorite mile workouts
Matt Choi was drinking beer halfway through the Boston Marathon
Mark Coogan says that if you could only do 3 workouts as a 1500m runner you should do these
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion