2020 Presidential Election -- Biden v Trump: Sleepy Joe vs Dopey Don [Results begin on page 409]

[DigglerontheHoof 21202]

32 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

 

Gritty Georgia Seasons

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

The most important person in the Republican Party, ladies and gentlemen. And probably will be for the next decade +

 

[HenryJames 66114]

 

[Esque 135]

This has been one of the most interesting political events I've seen in my life, mainly driven by the polarization of the general population.  Overall, I think the outcome was likely the best for the nation in that the executive branch has a less dividing leader, the Republicans maintained control of the Senate and the Republicans took a number of seats in the House.  Thus, as someone that is not a fan of the federal government in general, the government is positioned to be grid locked.

How are those that voted for Biden viewing the results of the Senate and the House, and the practical implications of a split government?  I'd imagine you'd have to be looking forward to 2022 and mid-term elections, in hopes of taking these back?

I think the Democrats have been dealt a tough hand, despite winning the Presidency.  We're in the midst of a global pandemic and a global recession and I don't expect there to be much reaching across the aisle, unless it's overwhelming supported by the general population, i.e. there will be more fiscal stimulus, but it will be closer to $1.6 - $1.8T, not $3.0 -  $3.1T.

Others thoughts?

[Horn Dog 9875]

7 hours ago, elfenix said:

 

 

 

So @tjhooker is actually a hooker named Kaitlin...makes sense.

[TexEx15 17543]

 

[HenryJames 66114]

 

[Dahobbs 17625]

7 minutes ago, Esque said:

This has been one of the most interesting political events I've seen in my life, mainly driven by the polarization of the general population.  Overall, I think the outcome was likely the best for the nation in that the executive branch has a less dividing leader, the Republicans maintained control of the Senate and the Republicans took a number of seats in the House.  Thus, as someone that is not a fan of the federal government in general, the government is positioned to be grid locked.

How are those that voted for Biden viewing the results of the Senate and the House, and the practical implications of a split government?  I'd imagine you'd have to be looking forward to 2022 and mid-term elections, in hopes of taking these back?

I think the Democrats have been dealt a tough hand, despite winning the Presidency.  We're in the midst of a global pandemic and a global recession and I don't expect there to be much reaching across the aisle, unless it's overwhelming supported by the general population, i.e. there will be more fiscal stimulus, but it will be closer to $1.6 - $1.8T, not $3.0 -  $3.1T.

Others thoughts?

You're right not much will get done. You're wrong for thinking that is a good thing. You're wrong for thinking Republicans maintaining control of anything is a good thing. These aren't subjective feelings. These are objective truths. 

[Esque 135]

11 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

You're right not much will get done. You're wrong for thinking that is a good thing. You're wrong for thinking Republicans maintaining control of anything is a good thing. These aren't subjective feelings. These are objective truths. 

I suppose I meant Republicans maintaining control of the Senate is a good thing in so far as they will be a check against policy that would otherwise not have wide sweeping approval.

As I mentioned, I am not a fan of centralized government and the increasing allocation of power into the federal government.  I would rather have power allocated at the local and state levels, personally.  So this is all from my personal perspective, more than anything else.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13515]

14 minutes ago, Esque said:

This has been one of the most interesting political events I've seen in my life, mainly driven by the polarization of the general population.  Overall, I think the outcome was likely the best for the nation in that the executive branch has a less dividing leader, the Republicans maintained control of the Senate and the Republicans took a number of seats in the House.  Thus, as someone that is not a fan of the federal government in general, the government is positioned to be grid locked.

How are those that voted for Biden viewing the results of the Senate and the House, and the practical implications of a split government?  I'd imagine you'd have to be looking forward to 2022 and mid-term elections, in hopes of taking these back?

I think the Democrats have been dealt a tough hand, despite winning the Presidency.  We're in the midst of a global pandemic and a global recession and I don't expect there to be much reaching across the aisle, unless it's overwhelming supported by the general population, i.e. there will be more fiscal stimulus, but it will be closer to $1.6 - $1.8T, not $3.0 -  $3.1T.

Others thoughts?

There is no House for the Dems to take back in 2022. They have control now. As for the Senate, I would agree that average, less consequential GA runoffs would result in a guaranteed GOP victories. 2020 technically 2021), who knows.

Even if the gop maintains control of the senate I actually have faith McConnell will pull back some from his obstructionist stance that we saw in 2010-2016. In many ways, McConnell will be glad that trump is gone.

[Hawndoh 2386]

McConnell will pull back nothing. He is pure evil.

[kevwun 15797]

Yeah I would expect him to be just as big of a dick as he was during Obama’s Presidency.

[horncyclist 1391]

1 minute ago, Hawndoh said:

McConnell will pull back nothing. He is pure evil.

Yep. Need to win those GA seats. I assume both sides will have unlimited resources. No idea how it's going to go.

[BurntOrange&White 39934]

8 hours ago, elfenix said:

 

 

 

That’s my kind of petty. Love it 

[TXSG8R 3362]

13 minutes ago, Esque said:

I suppose I meant Republicans maintaining control of the Senate is a good thing in so far as they will be a check against policy that would otherwise not have wide sweeping approval.

As I mentioned, I am not a fan of centralized government and the increasing allocation of power into the federal government.  I would rather have power allocated at the local and state levels, personally.  So this is all from my personal perspective, more than anything else.

That always sounds good until you find out power at state and local levels really means “we don’t want the fed prohibiting us from stomping on LGBTQ rights, creeping religious education into public schools, etc.” Government is government, the only thing skewing to local does is reduce the amount of eyes on any bullshit they are pulling. 

[TwiceHorn 31495]

20 minutes ago, Esque said:

I suppose I meant Republicans maintaining control of the Senate is a good thing in so far as they will be a check against policy that would otherwise not have wide sweeping approval.

As I mentioned, I am not a fan of centralized government and the increasing allocation of power into the federal government.  I would rather have power allocated at the local and state levels, personally.  So this is all from my personal perspective, more than anything else.

As someone who agrees with you generally about "centralized" or the federal government, there are too many pressing national problems, truly national ones, that demand a solution.  Modern life is too complicated to live with a gridlocked federal government.

Those solutions need to be the product of hard-fought compromise coming from good-faith, bipartisan efforts.

A lot of smaller problems can and should be left to the state governments.  But, gridlock actually promotes federal solutions to these problems, because it's only these minor things, on which most can agree, that get done.

[gmr548 16580]

28 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

 

Even if the gop maintains control of the senate I actually have faith McConnell will pull back some from his obstructionist stance that we saw in 2010-2016. In many ways, McConnell will be glad that trump is gone.

[G650 14263]

The upside is there is a strong chance McConnell doesn't live terribly much longer

[heso 2813]

Just got the notice that my phone usage was up 59% last week. Almost entirely in this thread. 

[Dbeasy 15068]

This has been one of the most interesting political events I've seen in my life, mainly driven by the polarization of the general population.  Overall, I think the outcome was likely the best for the nation in that the executive branch has a less dividing leader, the Republicans maintained control of the Senate and the Republicans took a number of seats in the House.  Thus, as someone that is not a fan of the federal government in general, the government is positioned to be grid locked.
How are those that voted for Biden viewing the results of the Senate and the House, and the practical implications of a split government?  I'd imagine you'd have to be looking forward to 2022 and mid-term elections, in hopes of taking these back?
I think the Democrats have been dealt a tough hand, despite winning the Presidency.  We're in the midst of a global pandemic and a global recession and I don't expect there to be much reaching across the aisle, unless it's overwhelming supported by the general population, i.e. there will be more fiscal stimulus, but it will be closer to $1.6 - $1.8T, not $3.0 -  $3.1T.
Others thoughts?

So this is an interesting post. As a former right leaning independent, your post could have been mine five years ago. But the last several years have shown me that right now the Republican Party operates in only one way. Obstructionist. It started with Obama and I don’t see changing anytime soon. So why is that relevant to your post?

Because the old Republican Party “theoretically” cared about less government spending and smaller government. In reality what we’ve seen is abysmal management of the country’s finances by the Party. There are so many ways the Republican Party could have managed the country’s finances better than it did.

For example, we’ve flushed dollars straight into people’s or business owner’s pockets to help keep the world economy from crashing. Nothing wrong with that. But, now we are almost ten months into this thing and there’s been no innovative thinking about how to keep it crashing anyway in another three months, other than arguing over how much the next big giveaway will be.

Why in the world hasn’t our government responded by now like FDR did during the depression by establishing public works projects. Instead of getting nothing back for the money, this country could be putting people to work in support of improving our infrastructure, which we all agree needs fixing.

So gridlock just guarantees trillions upon trillions more money with little to show for it except making business owners richer. Meanwhile an already unsustainable debt level that has been created by the Republican party during what was a great economy puts us in the unfortunate position of potentially losing our reserve currency status in the next ten years. You think things are bad now, see what happens if that happens.

[sidis 9832]

43 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

 

Even if the gop maintains control of the senate I actually have faith McConnell will pull back some from his obstructionist stance that we saw in 2010-2016. In many ways, McConnell will be glad that trump is gone.

While username certainly checks out, I want some of whatever shit you’re on. 

[Dark Horse 2284]

11 minutes ago, G650 said:

The upside is there is a strong chance McConnell doesn't live terribly much longer

Is the hand necrosis spreading? 

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20407]

50 minutes ago, Esque said:

As I mentioned, I am not a fan of centralized government and the increasing allocation of power into the federal government.  I would rather have power allocated at the local and state levels, personally.  So this is all from my personal perspective, more than anything else.

 

I feel this way, too, on a general/theoretical level. But so many issues that we face can only be addressed collectively. 

 

[Captainant 27680]

Checking in for day 2 of day drinking and football

[gmr548 16580]

32 minutes ago, Esque said:

I suppose I meant Republicans maintaining control of the Senate is a good thing in so far as they will be a check against policy that would otherwise not have wide sweeping approval.

As I mentioned, I am not a fan of centralized government and the increasing allocation of power into the federal government.  I would rather have power allocated at the local and state levels, personally.  So this is all from my personal perspective, more than anything else.

 

13 minutes ago, TXSG8R said:

That always sounds good until you find out power at state and local levels really means “we don’t want the fed prohibiting us from stomping on LGBTQ rights, creeping religious education into public schools, etc.” Government is government, the only thing skewing to local does is reduce the amount of eyes on any bullshit they are pulling. 

 

7 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

As someone who agrees with you generally about "centralized" or the federal government, there are too many pressing national problems, truly national ones, that demand a solution.  Modern life is too complicated to live with a gridlocked federal government.

Those solutions need to be the product of hard-fought compromise coming from good-faith, bipartisan efforts.

A lot of smaller problems can and should be left to the state governments.  But, gridlock actually promotes federal solutions to these problems, because it's only these minor things, on which most can agree, that get done.

State and local governments aren't going to be able to solve anything with McConnell hamstringing aid.

[Guest]

42 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

As someone who agrees with you generally about "centralized" or the federal government, there are too many pressing national problems, truly national ones, that demand a solution.  Modern life is too complicated to live with a gridlocked federal government.

Those solutions need to be the product of hard-fought compromise coming from good-faith, bipartisan efforts.

A lot of smaller problems can and should be left to the state governments.  But, gridlock actually promotes federal solutions to these problems, because it's only these minor things, on which most can agree, that get done.

Life isn't complicated. More government doesn't simplify it either.

[Hefeweizen 5327]

8 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Checking in for day 2 of day drinking and football

That looks like beetus right there

[aggie08 21504]

6 hours ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

My 9 yr old daughter called the fraud hotline and left the following message: "Trump is my favorite president. I tried to draw a picture of him, but I ran out of orange crayons."

 

 

 

6 hours ago, longhornmatt said:

My 5 year old daughter called the hotline and left the following message: "If I saw you in person, I’d kick you in the balls.   And when you're a 5 year old girl, they let you do it. You can do anything. Kick em in the balls. You can do anything."

Parenting goals. I am absolutely taking notes.

[Goofyboy 3293]

If Georgia can go blue again, Mitch won’t matter.

[dingleberryswitzer 2724]

33 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

Why in the world hasn’t our government responded by now like FDR did during the depression by establishing public works projects. Instead of getting nothing back for the money, this country could be putting people to work in support of improving our infrastructure, which we all agree needs fixing.

Isn't this more or less what GWB did?  

[aggie08 21504]

1 hour ago, TexEx15 said:

 

Infuriating. You know the president and his team have had it explained to them by now that there were observers--as there always are--but they couldn't let more people in because observers have to be split evenly by party. But they'll still lie through their teeth to keep their base riled up and ignorant, pissing on bedrock democratic processes be damned. I guess I shouldn't be surprised given that they've been planning this for 4 years, but it still makes me ragey.

[Snake Diggity 4625]

How the hell you gon have public works projects during a pandemic?  People ain’t outta work cause there ain’t no work, they outta work cause the damn pandemic.  Job #1 is get them shits under control then you can talmbout if some shit needs to be stimulated and how.

[aggie08 21504]

9 minutes ago, Goofyboy said:

If Georgia can go blue again, Mitch won’t matter.

x2. Hopefully this pathetic clown show (even for their standards) that will continue to ensue in the White House for the next 2 months will turn people off from the current state of the GOP. So far, Mitt Romney is the only sitting Republican to show an ounce of class.

[Francisco 2.0 32395]

11 minutes ago, Goofyboy said:

If Georgia can go blue again, Mitch won’t matter.

Crossposting, because, yeah, there's a way.  And I could see him doing this just.  I put this the Senate thread last night:

Quote

I had a sobering thought today; maybe someone else has put it in this thread.  And I can't help but to think this is already being gameplanned.

Let's assume that both the runoff seats are won by Democrats.   Sometime aftewards, if I'm Mitch McConnell, what's going to stop me from persuading a Democratic senator.....Manchin......to switch parties with the lure of a committee chairmanship or some other prize?  I can see that turtle necked motherfucker doing just that.

 

And there's recent statewide evidence to show that him switching parties might not matter:

 

Quote

 

In West Virgina, it's a miracle he has his seat as a D.  If he were to switch parties, I don't know that it would affect his future prospects.

The governor switched parties in 2017 just 6 months after winning the election as a Democrat,  and won reelection this year with 65% of the vote.  The other senator is a Repub.

 

[Esque 135]

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

There is no House for the Dems to take back in 2022. They have control now.

On the contrary, I think the 2020 elections were a huge loss for Democrats in the House.  The practical operations of the House are much more nuanced than the Senate, with Representatives being much more likely to break away from their party on any given, individual issue.  The Democrats gain of 41 seats was huge, but so is their loss of 7 to 10 seats two years later.  It will make it that much more difficult for them to pass legislation and move it to the Senate.

57 minutes ago, TXSG8R said:

That always sounds good until you find out power at state and local levels really means “we don’t want the fed prohibiting us from stomping on LGBTQ rights, creeping religious education into public schools, etc.” Government is government, the only thing skewing to local does is reduce the amount of eyes on any bullshit they are pulling. 

The increased prevalence of this perspective is deeply concerning to me.  Not all forms of government and created equal.  I would also argue strongly against the idea that local governments can pass more policy without scrutiny.  On the contrary, there is more visibility and transparency at the local government level and I would argue a lot more friction to do what is best for that community.  My favorite example is school districts, which are just another form of government.  I think smaller, local school districts operate better than these large school districts, even when accounting for tax revenue.

Also, would you have this same opinion if the GOP swept all three branches of government this year?  Or would you be arguing the other case?

51 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Those solutions need to be the product of hard-fought compromise coming from good-faith, bipartisan efforts.

Agreed with everything else you said.  I just have no faith that the representatives today are going to work together for a hard-fought compromise (both sides being too stuck in their positions), unless there is something that is absolutely pressing and there is wide approval.  As an example, I don't want taxes raised.  However, I think we need to given the current operating environment and the resulting debt.  But I also think we need to manage expenses as well.  Ideally, I'd love to see both happen.  But I think both sides are too stuck in their position (Republicans not wanting to raise taxes, Democrats not wanting to cut spending) to see any movement.

34 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

So this is an interesting post. As a former right leaning independent, your post could have been mine five years ago. But the last several years have shown me that right now the Republican Party operates in only one way. Obstructionist. It started with Obama and I don’t see changing anytime soon. So why is that relevant to your post?

Because the old Republican Party “theoretically” cared about less government spending and smaller government. In reality what we’ve seen is abysmal management of the country’s finances by the Party. There are so many ways the Republican Party could have managed the country’s finances better than it did.

For example, we’ve flushed dollars straight into people’s or business owner’s pockets to help keep the world economy from crashing. Nothing wrong with that. But, now we are almost ten months into this thing and there’s been no innovative thinking about how to keep it crashing anyway in another three months, other than arguing over how much the next big giveaway will be.

Why in the world hasn’t our government responded by now like FDR did during the depression by establishing public works projects. Instead of getting nothing back for the money, this country could be putting people to work in support of improving our infrastructure, which we all agree needs fixing.

So gridlock just guarantees trillions upon trillions more money with little to show for it except making business owners richer. Meanwhile an already unsustainable debt level that has been created by the Republican party during what was a great economy puts us in the unfortunate position of potentially losing our reserve currency status in the next ten years. You think things are bad now, see what happens if that happens.

Right-leaning independent sounds about right for me.  Basically agree with 99% of what you are saying.  This is sort of my position now.  But I think both sides need to come together to pass meaningful legislation.  I don't think the answer is centralized government into one party's hands, whether that's Republicans or Democrats.

21 minutes ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

I feel this way, too, on a general/theoretical level. But so many issues that we face can only be addressed collectively. 

Agreed, but once again - I have little to no faith in either side working together to address these issues meaningfully and compromising for the betterment of all.

 

I don't know.  Just my two cents.  It will be interesting to see how things play out over the next two years.  I am hoping Biden can provide stability and decrease some of the social unrest.  I am also hoping (perhaps beyond hope) that Trump does the right thing and concedes sooner rather than later and gives some unifying signal to the country and those that support him.

[immamac 42864]

Just now, Esque said:

On the contrary, I think the 2020 elections were a huge loss for Democrats in the House.  The practical operations of the House are much more nuanced than the Senate, with Representatives being much more likely to break away from their party on any given, individual issue.  The Democrats gain of 41 seats was huge, but so is their loss of 7 to 10 seats two years later.  It will make it that much more difficult for them to pass legislation and move it to the Senate.

The increased prevalence of this perspective is deeply concerning to me.  Not all forms of government and created equal.  I would also argue strongly against the idea that local governments can pass more policy without scrutiny.  On the contrary, there is more visibility and transparency at the local government level and I would argue a lot more friction to do what is best for that community.  My favorite example is school districts, which are just another form of government.  I think smaller, local school districts operate better than these large school districts, even when accounting for tax revenue.

Also, would you have this same opinion if the GOP swept all three branches of government this year?  Or would you be arguing the other case?

Agreed with everything else you said.  I just have no faith that the representatives today are going to work together for a hard-fought compromise (both sides being too stuck in their positions), unless there is something that is absolutely pressing and there is wide approval.  As an example, I don't want taxes raised.  However, I think we need to given the current operating environment and the resulting debt.  But I also think we need to manage expenses as well.  Ideally, I'd love to see both happen.  But I think both sides are too stuck in their position (Republicans not wanting to raise taxes, Democrats not wanting to cut spending) to see any movement.

Right-leaning independent sounds about right for me.  Basically agree with 99% of what you are saying.  This is sort of my position now.  But I think both sides need to come together to pass meaningful legislation.  I don't think the answer is centralized government into one party's hands, whether that's Republicans or Democrats.

Agreed, but once again - I have little to no faith in either side working together to address these issues meaningfully and compromising for the betterment of all.

 

I don't know.  Just my two cents.  It will be interesting to see how things play out over the next two years.  I am hoping Biden can provide stability and decrease some of the social unrest.  I am also hoping (perhaps beyond hope) that Trump does the right thing and concedes sooner rather than later and gives some unifying signal to the country and those that support him.

Holy shit an esque sighting. 

[Esque 135]

1 minute ago, immamac said:

Holy shit an esque sighting. 

Haha, yeah.  I've been busy the last few years.  I guess I've found myself with too much time on my hands with the pandemic.  Long post is long.

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13585]

7 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

Jack Posobiec -
 

 

What tweet got him that angry?



These people are hopeless.

And check out his new Twitter name.


The white male ego can be a really fragile thing.

 

We're just days away from Steve Bannon- not some random right wing nut on the internet- but Trump's former Senior Advisor broadcasting his belief that Dr Fauci should be beheaded. But I guess I can see how Joe's tweet of unity and healing would strike fear into the hearts of the typical alpha male.

[Firemans4Horn 18106]

 

[TwiceHorn 31495]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

As someone who agrees with you generally about "centralized" or the federal government, there are too many pressing national problems, truly national ones, that demand a solution.  Modern life is too complicated to live with a gridlocked federal government.

Those solutions need to be the product of hard-fought compromise coming from good-faith, bipartisan efforts.

A lot of smaller problems can and should be left to the state governments.  But, gridlock actually promotes federal solutions to these problems, because it's only these minor things, on which most can agree, that get done.

Probably also worth noting, if there's general agreement on something politically, it's probably the result of a moral panic or some other stupidity that signifies a failure to understand the nuances of the problem.  The 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act is a lovely example.

[wildcat09 29355]

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

There is no House for the Dems to take back in 2022. They have control now. As for the Senate, I would agree that average, less consequential GA runoffs would result in a guaranteed GOP victories. 2020 technically 2021), who knows.

Even if the gop maintains control of the senate I actually have faith McConnell will pull back some from his obstructionist stance that we saw in 2010-2016. In many ways, McConnell will be glad that trump is gone.

GOP gets to reset their gerrymanders in a lot of states. It’s going to be a bitch to keep the house.

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20407]

Doesn't this sound suspiciously like  "A conspiracy of Jewish financiers stabbed us in the back and that's why we lost the (first)  World War!" ?conspiracf international Jewish financiers' was the foundation of the Nazi "stab in the back" narrative of Germany's defeat in WWI.A 'conspiracy of international Jewish financiers' was the foundation of the Nazi "stab in the back" narrative of Germany's defeat in WWI.A 'conspiracy of international Jewish financiers' was the fondation of the Nazi "stab in the back" narrative of Germany's defeat in WWI.

 

Edited November 8, 2020 by Horn Under a Bad Sign

[Francisco 2.0 32395]

Hey, maybe the richest man to ever be elected (he's worth billions, folks) could fund this himself.  I'm told the #MAGA crowd often used his wealth as a sign he could not be bought, etc:

 

 

 

[TwiceHorn 31495]

46 minutes ago, slorch said:

Life isn't complicated. More government doesn't simplify it either.

Lets take a few examples.

The FDA is hugely responsible for the price of prescription drugs.  Can you honestly contend that regulation of drugs should be left to state governments?  No.  It is a complex problem that requires federal attention.  It also needs to be looked at really hard again.

Health Insurance is another.  It's a fucking clusterfuck currently in no small part because the GOP completely abdicated and refused to work on a federal solution because socialism or some shit.

Google, Facebook and others need to be regulated in some form or fashion, probably beyond what the courts can do to them.

Wall Street, big banks, and high finance are in desperate need of regulation and oversight.  You gonna leave that to the states that can't even convict Ken fucking Paxton of securities laws violations?  They can't even get him to trial.

Issues like these are a complicated product of modern life.  

Your reductio ad absurdum refusal to consider things outside your little world of personal experience cause you problems.  Sometimes simple is good.  Not everything is simple.

Edited November 8, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Nivek 16945]

Why are they mad at Kush? He booked a classy presser behind Carl Spackler's groundskeeping shed, deployed a young Texas attorney and his Red Rider BB Gun and Thor is hammering Wisconsin. Fucking Thor, man! And allow me to spell this one out for you: R.U.D.Y.!

When you think about it, It is really amazing he didn’t start a war between Israel and Antartica.

[South Austin 52519]

5 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Hey, maybe the richest man to ever be elected (he's worth billions, folks) could fund this himself.  I'm told the #MAGA crowd often used his wealth as a sign he could not be bought, etc:

 

 

That money will go toward his campaign debt. Suckers.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13515]

4 minutes ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

Doesn't this sound suspiciously like  "A conspiracy of Jewish financiers stabbed us in the back and that's why we lost the (first)  World War!" ?conspiracf international Jewish financiers' was the foundation of the Nazi "stab in the back" narrative of Germany's defeat in WWI.A 'conspiracy of international Jewish financiers' was the foundation of the Nazi "stab in the back" narrative of Germany's defeat in WWI.A 'conspiracy of international Jewish financiers' was the fondation of the Nazi "stab in the back" narrative of Germany's defeat in WWI.

 

There are many ex-politicians that end up selling themselves to fringe groups. Even if they're not true believers of those groups, they become beholden to them for income.  In a very pathetic ending, Newt needs to embrace those groups further if he wants to fly first class. 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Lets take a few examples.

The FDA is hugely responsible for the price of prescription drugs.  Can you honestly contend that regulation of drugs should be left to state governments?  No.  It is a complex problem that requires federal attention.  It also needs to be looked at really hard again.

Health Insurance is another.  It's a fucking clusterfuck currently in no small part because the GOP completely abdicated and refused to work on a federal solution because socialism or some shit.

Google, Facebook and others need to be regulated in some form or fashion, probably beyond what the courts can do to them.

Issues like these are a complicated product of modern life.  

Your reductio ad absurdum refusal to consider things outside your little world of personal experience cause you problems.  Sometimes simple is good.  Not everything is simple.

The more we fuck with scripts/ drug industry, the more costs increase.

Healthcare industry?  same fucking thing.

 

Keep solving shit...LMAO.

Edited November 8, 2020 by slorch

[Hefeweizen 5327]

I think the regulation of social media giants is a bipartisan issue that can get done.  Fuck all of them.

[Neonmoon 38129]