Trump's Second and Third year in office
He insults her appearance publicly, so she makes a public crack that he has a small penis.
I think both sides should just call it what it is: White Gutter Trash v. White Gutter Trash Round 10.
We should all stop paying any attention to political news and just have a book club equivalent that watches Springer reruns and discusses them.
The part about Ben Roethlisberger trying to tap the Orange Man’s sloppy seconds was kind of funny, though, I got a good laugh out of that part true or not.
First thing out of their mouth is "he has a small penis and he doesn't know what to do with it." It's "basic b!+$h" 101. Make up claims only a select few people can refute, and smile because for some reason in your basic mind you are a bigger person because you shoved it down your throat with a smile back in the day.
OTOH:
C-word has a horseface. Even her mom would admit that. It's probably why she gobbles nob and licks poo-holes for a living. Ugliness is not a trait most look for in a wife, but when her face never gets above your waist, it can be manageable in hour long increments if she stays busy down there.
Quote: Maverick17Have you ever had an argument with or just dumped a woman?
First thing out of their mouth is "he has a small penis and he doesn't know what to do with it." It's "basic b!+$h" 101. Make up claims only a select few people can refute, and smile because for some reason in your basic mind you are a bigger person because you shoved it down your throat with a smile back in the day.
OTOH:
C-word has a horseface. Even her mom would admit that. It's probably why she gobbles nob and licks poo-holes for a living. Ugliness is not a trait most look for in a wife, but when her face never gets above your waist, it can be manageable in hour long increments if she stays busy down there.
7 days for obscenity.
Quote: Maverick17Have you ever had an argument with or just dumped a woman?
First thing out of their mouth is "he has a small penis and he doesn't know what to do with it."
Can't say that's ever happened to me.... and I've definitely been the jerk in a relationship.
Quote:C-word has a horseface. Even her mom would admit that. It's probably why she gobbles nob and licks poo-holes for a living. Ugliness is not a trait most look for in a wife, but when her face never gets above your waist, it can be manageable in hour long increments if she stays busy down there.
So.... she's an ugly horseface, yet her entire adult life has been spent successfully working jobs that are 100% dependent on looks?
Still, she's a household name now thanks to Trump, so I'm sure she's laughing all the way to the bank, even after paying some legal bills.
Quote: SanchoPanzaYou said, "After Obamacare was implemented, the deficit was shrinking." Got any numbers that verify that?
I looked them up and what I said is incorrect. Obamacare was fully implemented in 2014 and while the deficit did in fact go down the following year, it began to slowly rise after.
My broader point remains valid. Obama inherited a train wreck of an economy with a 1.2+ trillion deficit. Presidents have their most impact on the economy during times of crisis. I think it's fair to say that we took the necessary steps to stabilize the economy and begin the long road to recovery. Let's remember that Obama did a few things during this process that were very unpopular with his liberal base. It's kind of hard to be the "most liberal president in history" when you aren't anywhere near liberal ENOUGH for liberals.
Here are the numbers, by the way:
https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_1960_2021USb_XXs2li111mcn_G0f
Anyone surprised by this?
(Hint: No. You're not.)
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17951596/kavanaugh-trump-senate-impeachment-avenatti-democrats-2020-supreme-court
Quote: TigerWuCan't say that's ever happened to me.... and I've definitely been the jerk in a relationship.
#HumbleBrag
Quote:So.... she's an ugly horseface, yet her entire adult life has been spent successfully working jobs that are 100% dependent on looks?
More successfully than most, in fairness, but I've seen some pretty horrendous hookers. I think Stormy Daniels is definitely better looking than the average street whore in a low-income area, at least of the few street whores in low income areas I have seen, though I don't know how much further than that I would take it.
I don't even consider this chauvinist because when your resume' reads, "Porn star," I think you've pretty well opened your appearance up to public critique.
I like to go to restaurants and I very rarely go to a restaurant where there is not at least one hostess and/or waitress I would find more attractive than Stormy Daniels. Hell, forget proper restaurants, I probably see at least one more attractive female employee 25% of the time when I walk into a Kentucky Fried Chicken.
Quote:Still, she's a household name now thanks to Trump, so I'm sure she's laughing all the way to the bank, even after paying some legal bills.
Make money to have sex one way or make money to have sex the other way. Might as well diversify. Sites like Pornhub are killing the pay to play market and Stormy isn't exactly getting younger. She's actually quite an old 39 when she's not covered in makeup. Not to mention the fact that it's hard to imagine she's popular amongst White Evangelical Christians, who were probably 87% of her DVD sales/rental market, any longer.
As far as legal fees, Michael Avenatti is recently divorced, so who knows? Maybe Stormy Daniels is paying her legal bills the same way the pizza delivery guy gets paid in films such as the ones she does if not her films specifically. Of course, maybe she has an exclusive thing for married guys.
if I really see a guy f*****g a pig, I don't know what anyone else sees, but I see a pig, and a pig f*****. The hypocrisy of guys who put down the 'whores' they choose to put their penis in is sometimes astounding.
BEST to keep your mouth shut if you think you've been banging some ugly ass animal, instead of complaining about it like the fool you are.
OR, maybe just have some respect for other people if they're not out to hurt anyone regardless of their station in life.
Quote: rxwinei'm completely fair in this. if you want to call any woman you had sex with "horseface'. Fine. But you're the one who chose her. Where do you get off insulting her?
By the same token, did she not take the mushroom into her body?
Quote:if I really see a guy f*****g a pig, I don't know what anyone else sees, but I see a pig, and a pig f*****. The hypocrisy of guys who put down the 'whores' they choose to put their penis in is sometimes astounding.
By the same token, did she not take the mushroom into her body?
Quote:BEST to keep your mouth shut if you think you've been banging some ugly ass animal, instead of complaining about it like the fool you are.
By the same token, did she not take the mushroom into her body?
Quote:OR, maybe just have some respect for other people if they're not out to hurt anyone regardless of their station in life.
There you go.
Both Donald Trump and Stormy Daniels are complete white gutter trash in this. That's all there is to it. Donald Trump is who he is, we all know about Trump, you don't need me to talk about Trump.
Stormy Daniels is a whore, by definition, insofar as she gets paid to have sex with people. More than that, she had sexual intercourse with a married man and I strongly doubt that she did so with the consent of that man's wife. After that, she cut a deal by which she would accept payment not to talk about the affair which information she likely would have otherwise sold to anybody buying. Despite acknowledging accepting said payment, she went ahead and violated the agreement on legal grounds that were perhaps spurious, (that will be determined) but that definitely violated the agreement.
You could argue that the White Evangelical Christians deserved to know about it so they could base their votes accordingly, but at the same time, they only care about moral improprieties when it's not one of their own doing it, and as their candidate and President, they have (mostly) adopted Trump as one of their own.
Either way, Donald Trump is essentially any pejorative that you want to use, in my opinion, though there are a few things he does well. On the flipside, Stormy Daniels is a gutter trash whore, but she seems friendly enough and has a pretty good sense of humor from what I've read. I don't know how either side gets off pretending that either of the two of them are morally superior in this whole thing. It is pretty funny to watch, though.
Quote: Mission146I don't know how either side gets off pretending that either of the two of them are morally superior in this whole thing. It is pretty funny to watch, though.
And in fact, did I not imply if Trump or anyone wants to put down women they slept with as horseface ugly, after they already chose to sleep with them, they don't even have a short penis to stand on AFAIC,
Quote: Mission146On the flipside, Stormy Daniels is a gutter trash whore,
There's so many worse things in life one can do in life besides having sex for money. Most of it is violence, or abuse or even common thievery and other crimes. it may not be something one can be proud doing, but it is not worth slamming so hard either imo.
Quote: rxwineAnd in fact, did I not imply if Trump or anyone wants to put down women they slept with as horseface ugly, after they already chose to sleep with them, they don't even have a short penis to stand on AFAIC,
No, nothing to do with you or anything you said, personally. Just both sides. You have the, "Moral Right," composed primarily of White Evangelical Christians who are anti-gay marriage, sometimes anti-gay, pro-life, pro sanctity of marriage...etc. etc. etc. except for when they either choose not to be or when someone they happen to otherwise like is doing something he's not supposed to.
On the other side, you have a certain subset of liberals who praise Stormy Daniels and herald her as a #NationalHero for doing all of the things that I just said she did in the previous post. That in itself might not be so hypocritical coming from social liberals, until you consider the fact that the underlying act was having sex with the one person they consider to be the absolute scum of the Earth.
The fact is, it happened when nobody thought he'd be making a serious run for President as the Republican candidate, by Stormy's own admission. She basically says that she was jacked in the first place because she didn't end up getting the promised spot on the apprentice:
https://www.esquire.com/uk/latest-news/a23297916/stormy-daniels-goes-into-day-ruining-detail-about-donald-trumps-sex-life-in-new-memoir/
So, again, if the Liberals (which includes most feminists) want to hold up someone who has sex for money and/or promises of favors as an icon...that's fine...I just think it's funny as hell.
Quote: rxwineThere's so many worse things in life one can do in life besides having sex for money. Most of it is violence, or abuse or even common thievery and other crimes. it may not be something one can be proud doing, but it is not worth slamming so hard either imo.
I agree with this, as well. I have no issue with the fact that she is a whore and being a whore is not what makes her gutter trash. This entire public fight with him calling her horseface and her writing a book that disparages his penis is what makes the two of them both gutter trash.
In fairness, were she not gutter trash, I probably wouldn't go out of my way to use the word, "Whore," and would just stick to porn star. Actually, I would have no idea who she was to begin with which, again, is probably her primary goal...to get famous. The only porn star I've even heard of to know by name before this was Katie Morgan because she was in a funny non porn (but about porn).
Anyway, I'm mainly sick of having to hear about porn stars having sex with rich married guys as a direct result of the fact that I have a passing interest in politics. It's just not what I thought I was signing up for when I got interested in politics.
Anyway, she had sex with a man to get to where she is today. So, yay feminism, I guess.
Quote: SteverinosAnother great read from Ezra Klein:
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17951596/kavanaugh-trump-senate-impeachment-avenatti-democrats-2020-supreme-court
That loser from MSNBC is still alive? Learn something new everyday.
Vox? Again, thanks for making my day.
Quote: SteverinosAnother great read from Ezra Klein:
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17951596/kavanaugh-trump-senate-impeachment-avenatti-democrats-2020-supreme-court
That was, in fact, a great read. We'll probably look back at it in about 2025, while taking a break from the riots, and say, boy, he nailed it.
Quote: beachbumbabsThat was, in fact, a great read. We'll probably look back at it in about 2025, while taking a break from the riots, and say, boy, he nailed it.
First paragraph in and already spot 3 mistakes. May have to crack open the labtop (tm) for this one...
Quote:Brett Kavanaugh was nominated to the Supreme Court by an unpopular president who won 3 million fewer votes than the runner-up.
False. Trump won by 77 votes.
Quote:He was confirmed by a Senate majority that represents a minority of the country.
Not really sure what this is supposed to mean. At minimum shows a complete misunderstanding of how the Senate works and how they're elected.
Quote:He was confirmed despite most Americans telling pollster after pollster they did not want him seated on the Supreme Court.
Okay, maybe not completely a mistake, but, I have a very hard time believing 165+ million Americans were polled. Regardless, it's the Senate's job to accept/deny the potential justice.
Quote:Nothing about Kavanaugh’s ascension breaks the rules of American government. Donald Trump is the duly elected president of the United States. Republicans hold a majority in the US Senate. Elected officials bear no responsibility to follow public opinion. Yet the left sees Kavanaugh’s confirmation as illegitimate, and they’re turning their ire on the composition of the US Senate and their focus to the possibilities for future court-packing and judicial impeachment.
Can't believe I'm saying this -- but I agree with Vox.
The rest of it, that I read, was pretty much what someone would expect of Vox. Meh.
Quote: TigerWuA) He will not go after her. He's already threatened to sue multiple people and never gone through with it.
B) "She knows nothing about me, a total con!" Well, it's nice to see he's at least admitting he's a con artist.
before suing someone it is good to assess your chances of collecting.
Quote: ams288ATTN: straight men -
It *might* not be a good idea to get into a name calling back-and-forth with a woman who knows your penis is smaller than average:
Her reference to beastiality must be a self admittance to being 1/1024th horse.
Quote: MaxPenQuote: ams288ATTN: straight men -
It *might* not be a good idea to get into a name calling back-and-forth with a woman who knows your penis is smaller than average:
Her reference to beastiality must be a self admittance to being 1/1024th horse.
Whorse*
Quote: TigerWuTrump's lawyer in this case:
"No amount of spin or commentary by Stormy Daniels or her lawyer, Mr. Avenatti, can truthfully characterize today's ruling in any way other than total victory for President Trump and total defeat for Stormy Daniels."
Getting into a pissing contest on social media with a porn star and calling her Horseface isn't exactly the definition of "total victory," especially when you're the President of the United States. But whatever... I guess when you're Donald Trump, you take any "win" you can get.
Trump is the only person I have heard of that is eligible for a rebate from a hooker.
Quote: Mission146So, again, if the Liberals (which includes most feminists) want to hold up someone who has sex for money and/or promises of favors as an icon...that's fine...I just think it's funny as hell.
I don't know if there is equal badness all around, although one of them is claiming to do porn and strip, and the other is pretending that he is too good to have had sex with the horse face lady who does porn and strips while his wife was pregnant. if she broke a contract to partially reveal our President is not what he pretends to be, i'm fine with that.
Quote: SteverinosI think it's fair to say that we took the necessary steps to stabilize the economy and begin the long road to recovery.
Recovery for the banks, but not you.
A massive temporary tax cut, like the one Trump gave us, would have put cash directly into the pockets of the people and stimulated the economy.
The money would have flowed to the banks, where it would have been loaned and re-loaned, and multiplied.
Just as it is now.
Instead, Obama let the 24 Goldman Sachs pros in his administration roll him like a rube at a county fair, and sell him on creating $4 trillion in QE funny money which went directly to the banks. Zero to the people.
QE is unproven, and has the potential of causing massive inflation.
When the Fed announced it would purchase $85 billion each month in Treasuries, the banks purchased the Treasuries ahead of the Fed. They then sold those Treasuries to the Fed at a profit every month.
Massive profits with zero risk. The ultimate AP move.
By 2014, the big banks made $650 billion selling those Treasuries to the Fed. No surprise, GS got most of it.
The theory was, the banks would loan and re-loan the funds, causing a desired multiplier effect. Uncertain of the future, the banks hoarded most of the money, because they still had their bad loans and toxic debt to deal with.
Interest rates went down, but unless you owned real estate, or stocks, you saw little benefit.
"For every winner in QE, there are 99 losers."
Obama's Gift to The Rich
Quote: rxwineI don't know if there is equal badness all around, although one of them is claiming to do porn and strip, and the other is pretending that he is too good to have had sex with the horse face lady who does porn and strips while his wife was pregnant. if she broke a contract to partially reveal our President is not what he pretends to be, i'm fine with that.
I guess, but she didn’t really need to break a contract to tell me what I already knew. Flipping it again, she equally had sex with a guy she had every reason to know was married, though I don’t know if she’d have known his wife was pregnant or not. She was completely unimpressed by his sexuality and had sex with him exclusively for the purpose of personal advancement, either immediate or sometime down the line.
I don’t particularly care about any of these things other than they are now a topic of national political rhetoric and it makes our entire country look like a joke. I also don’t understand the reaction of Liberals because I’m not seeing where the female empowerment is having sex with a guy to get on a TV show.
She probably would have went ahead and let Ben Roethlisberger smash it had she wanted a position as a Steelers cheerleader. I’m guessing the only reason she shut him down is that she wasn’t going to ask for cash on direct and didn’t really see any potential for other benefit in doing him.
Quote: Mission146I guess, but she didn’t really need to break a contract to tell me what I already knew. Flipping it again, she equally had sex with a guy she had every reason to know was married, though I don’t know if she’d have known his wife was pregnant or not. She was completely unimpressed by his sexuality and had sex with him exclusively for the purpose of personal advancement, either immediate or sometime down the line.
Thing is, like in a case with a mob guy and corrupt politician, regardless of how terrible a person we find the mob guy to be, unless he's running for office, the only thing that matters is if you believe the evidence you have fits with the mob guys story. Unless you don't believe what mob guy is accusing the politician of, why do you care so much about putting down the mob guy? Likewise, unless you don't believe what Daniels says about Trump because of who she is, what does it matter who she is? So, stormy slept with a married guy. She;s not the one who wanted votes for the highest office in the land. I care whether Stormy is telling the truth in this case, and only about who she is if it somehow disproves her accusation.
Quote: SteverinosAnother great read from Ezra Klein:
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17951596/kavanaugh-trump-senate-impeachment-avenatti-democrats-2020-supreme-court
I read this twice.
Just a bunch of gobbeldygook about how to gain permanent power for the Democrats and total failure to understand that the two Democrats that lost the Electoral vote but won the popular vote were just not good candidates. Gore is a stiff and Clinton needs several planes for all of her baggage. The other two candidates in those elections were as bad/worse depending on your perspective. The candidates that won used strategies to gain the most electoral votes because that is what counts. If they had all four run for the popular vote total, we really don't know how it would have ended because their strategies would have been different--we can only parrot the vote count and say "see" but that is based on the strategies employed by all of the candidates.
The actions supported in this article are dangerous for our country. I would never threaten or take away his right to say them, but you have to be off your rocker to think that total control of the government by either of our parties is a great idea. That is what he espouses with court packing and making up new states to gain more seats for Dems. Before you start on your "but the Republicans stuff"....the dangers of the Republicans or Democrats getting an extra seat here and there based on gerrymandering or that kind of thing are much less of a threat to our society than the dangers of complete control of the government without recourse. If that is what you want, you absolutely are an idiot.
Quote: MaxPenTrump is the only person I have heard of that is eligible for a rebate from a hooker.
I hope he makes that a talking point during the next Presidential debate!
Quote: RonCI read this twice.
Just a bunch of gobbeldygook about how to gain permanent power for the Democrats and total failure to understand that the two Democrats that lost the Electoral vote but won the popular vote were just not good candidates. Gore is a stiff and Clinton needs several planes for all of her baggage. The other two candidates in those elections were as bad/worse depending on your perspective. The candidates that won used strategies to gain the most electoral votes because that is what counts. If they had all four run for the popular vote total, we really don't know how it would have ended because their strategies would have been different--we can only parrot the vote count and say "see" but that is based on the strategies employed by all of the candidates.
The actions supported in this article are dangerous for our country. I would never threaten or take away his right to say them, but you have to be off your rocker to think that total control of the government by either of our parties is a great idea. That is what he espouses with court packing and making up new states to gain more seats for Dems. Before you start on your "but the Republicans stuff"....the dangers of the Republicans or Democrats getting an extra seat here and there based on gerrymandering or that kind of thing are much less of a threat to our society than the dangers of complete control of the government without recourse. If that is what you want, you absolutely are an idiot.
Read it a third time, because total control of the government by one party is most definitely NOT was what advocated.
Quote: BozThat loser from MSNBC is still alive? Learn something new everyday.
You're back! Wasn't sure if you were "still alive". Learn something new everyday.
I'll take Vox's reporting of the facts over any right-wing rag publication on any day of any week. AINEC.
It's funny to hear conservatives call a person a who has started a successful business a "loser". So much for celebrating hard work.
Quote: MaxPenQuote: ams288ATTN: straight men -
It *might* not be a good idea to get into a name calling back-and-forth with a woman who knows your penis is smaller than average:
Her reference to beastiality must be a self admittance to being 1/1024th horse.
Okay now THAT was funny.
Is that a "winner" in his book?
EDIT: Yet another one of Trump's quotes that didn't age well:
"No member of Congress should be eligible for re-election if our country's budget is not balanced---deficits not allowed!" -Trump, in 2012
Quote: SteverinosRead it a third time, because total control of the government by one party is most definitely NOT was what advocated.
I did. I get your point, but the main ideas presented are about unfairness in the system and how to beat it.
There are no ideas presented about how to actually win votes from all over by having better ideas and better candidates.
Better candidates MIGHT have won both in 2000 and 2016. Those losses are not surprising to anyone in light of the people put forward by the party.
Quote:an eight-month investigation by ProPublica and WNYC reveals that the post-millennium Trump business model is different from what has been previously reported. The Trumps were typically way more than mere licensors or bystanders in their often-troubled deals. They were deeply involved in these projects. They helped mislead investors and buyers — and they profited handsomely from it.
Patterns of deceptive practices occurred in a dozen deals across the globe, as the business expanded into international projects, and the Trumps often participated.
One common pattern, visible in more than half of those transactions, was a tendency to misstate key sales numbers.
In interviews and press conferences, Ivanka Trump gave false sales figures for projects in Mexico’s Baja California; Panama City, Panama; Toronto and New York’s SoHo neighborhood. These statements weren’t just the legendary Trump hype; they misled potential buyers about the viability of the developments.
Another pattern: Donald Trump repeatedly misled buyers about the amount (or existence) of his ownership in projects in Tampa, Florida; Panama; Baja and elsewhere. For a tower planned in Tampa, for example, Trump told a local paper in 2005 that his ownership would be less than 50 percent: “But it’s a substantial stake. I recently said I’d like to increase my stake but when they’re selling that well they don’t let you do that.” In reality, Trump had no ownership stake in the project.
The Trumps often made money even when projects failed. And when they tanked, the Trumps simply ignored their prior claims of close involvement, denied any responsibility and walked away.
The cycle is exemplified in Panama City, where the Trumps were involved in a project to build a massive tower and complex known as the Trump Ocean Club. The project’s unfortunate turns included bankruptcy, then, years later, the forcible ejection of the Trump Organization from managing the hotel.
There, as elsewhere, the Trump Organization disclaimed responsibility. It emphasized that it had merely licensed the Trump name to developers who handled everything from construction to marketing. “The Trump Organization was not the owner, developer or seller of the Trump Ocean Club Panama project,” it said in a statement last year. “Because of its limited role, the company was not responsible for the financing of the project and had no involvement in the sale of units.”
That was false. For starters, Trump arranged financing — his promised commission: $2.2 million or more — by bringing in investment bank Bear Stearns, which issued the bonds that paid for the Panama project’s construction.
Trump touted himself as a “partner” of the developer. His daughter Ivanka briefly boasted that she had personally sold 40 units. (A broker on the project said he couldn’t remember her selling even one.) Meanwhile, Ivanka told a journalist at the time that “over 90 percent” of the Panama units had sold — and at prices five times as high as comparable buildings. Both statements were untrue.
Not only were the Panama sales figures inflated, but many “purchases” turned out to be an illusion. That was no coincidence. The building’s financing depended on obtaining advance commitments from buyers, often before concrete had started pouring. But in between the sale of the bonds in 2007 and 2013, the year the building went bankrupt, buyers of 458 units in the 1,000-unit building abandoned their purchase contracts. Those buyers forfeited more than $50 million in deposits, and they never took possession of finished units. Given that the “buyers” were often shadowy shell companies or other paper entities, it was nearly impossible to discern who the actual purchasers were, let alone why they backed out.
Trump licensed his name for an initial fee of $1 million. But that was just the beginning of the revenue streams, a lengthy and varied assortment that granted him a piece of everything from sales of apartment units to a cut of minibar sales, and was notable for the myriad ways in which both success and failure triggered payments to him.
much more here
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/pump-and-trump/ar-BBOuKOm?ocid=spartanntp
Quote: rxwine
much more here
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/pump-and-trump/ar-BBOuKOm?ocid=spartanntp
Con Man Cons. News at 11.
Throw it on the pile.
They forgot the BB card bubble and the Beanie Baby bubble.Quote: rxwinemystery chart
Did the Crypto bubble happen yet, I can't tell?
Quote: rxwinemystery chart
U.S. Household wealth is at its highest level in history, and is higher than nominal GDP by a larger percentage than ever before.
Following the patterns of the previous two recessions, when this bubble bursts, household wealth could fall more sharply than it did in the previous two recessions.
Everyone complains, but no one wants to do anything to stop it from happening.
Deficit spending is going to exceed $1 trillion every year from now on, mostly due to Social Security, and Medicare expansion, and interest on the debt, which is currently $523 billion annually.
Service on the debt alone, counts for nearly half the deficit spending.
Now, the dems want to add Medicare for all on top of the pile.
Makes perfect sense.
Quote: TankoUNow, the dems want to add Medicare for all on top of the pile.
Makes perfect sense.
Only one party to blame for the last 2 years.
Quote: rxwineOnly one party to blame for the last 2 years.
Quote: RS
Ok so youve proven trump is a liar
Whats new?
The mid terms are here.
My buddy in North Carolina voted today
I can vote on Oct 22
I got 100 on the Dems taking the house with WellWellWell
Quote: darkozOk so youve proven trump is a liar
Whats new?
What are you talking about?
Quote: TankoU.S. Household wealth is at its highest level in history, and is higher than nominal GDP by a larger percentage than ever before.
Following the patterns of the previous two recessions, when this bubble bursts, household wealth could fall more sharply than it did in the previous two recessions.
Everyone complains, but no one wants to do anything to stop it from happening.
Deficit spending is going to exceed $1 trillion every year from now on, mostly due to Social Security, and Medicare expansion, and interest on the debt, which is currently $523 billion annually.
Service on the debt alone, counts for nearly half the deficit spending.
Now, the dems want to add Medicare for all on top of the pile.
Makes perfect sense.
Social Security and Medicare are paid for by employees and employers. You don't get to cut entitlements unless Congress pays back the trillions they stole from those programs and THEN they're still not enough to provide the benefits they're scheduled to pay.
Quote: Dalex64All that blame, on everything but "the biggest tax cut in American history"
Yeah, sounds like while everyone was distracted by the Kavanaugh debacle, they voted themselves another bite at the rotten apple.
How do they justify giving away money they don't have? It's truly mystifying.
Yep, you all FK'ed up. Trying to make up faults sexual allegations about an innocent man will fire people up. I didn't even like Kav untill you guys tried to railroad him with your BS. If you want Trump to lose, shut your mouth, if you want him to win, keep talking sh*t just like the first time he won. Mark my words, the more you people talk sh^t the better chance he has to win.Quote: beachbumbabsYeah, sounds like while everyone was distracted by the Kavanaugh debacle, they voted themselves another bite at the rotten apple.
How do they justify giving away money they don't have? It's truly mystifying.
If you really don't want Trump to win you will stop talking about him period. It's your choice. You will deny this because you and your ego can't help but talk about him.
Trump knew what he was doing and played you guys like fools, the more controversial stuff he said the more you guys talked about and opposed him. The more you opposed him the more people wanted to vote for him
#Trump2020
#Warren1/1024
the "Proud Boys" - a few of whom are charged with inciting a riot in NYC recently
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/proud-boys-republican-party-fascist-creep_us_5bc7b37de4b055bc947d2a8c
