Joe Biden 2023: The Dark Brandon Rises

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,899]

10 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Isn't that a blow to the fox news narrative?

you mean the truth? yeah, that's very much against fox's narrative

[fattyflattie 4,638]

42 minutes ago, Js1 said:

God damnit Joe 

 

I can’t read your cadence. Are you happy or not about this? 

[Js1 85,576]

 

[Sawbonz 27,589]

On 1/24/2023 at 11:54 AM, jimmyjazz said:

it's laziness on the part of those to whom these materials have been checked out. 

It’s not that they’re lazy it’s that they just don’t care 

[Gengs1 2,583]

52 minutes ago, Js1 said:

 

Sadly most of the people who this will benefit and work at those locations still will NEVER vote for him or democrats. The jobs will be used by republicans in the state and district to say what The Rs did for them, take the credit and run

Rinse and repeat 

Edited January 26, 2023 by Gengs1

[Post Oak 20,273]

10 minutes ago, Gengs1 said:

Sadly most of the people who this will benefit and work at those locations still will NEVER vote for him or democrats. The jobs will be used by republicans in the state and district to say what The Rs did for them, take the credit and run

Rinse and repeat 

I agree with this. Republicans have shown a willingness to shoot themselves in the dick over and over again to own the libs. 

But ultimately, in the bigger picture, i think its a good thing. 

[Js1 85,576]

47 minutes ago, Post Oak said:

I agree with this. Republicans have shown a willingness to shoot themselves in the dick over and over again to own the libs. 

But ultimately, in the bigger picture, i think its a good thing. 

Fuck Republicans. 

But like you said, ultimately it's good for America as a whole.

['stache 21,866]

1 hour ago, Gengs1 said:

Sadly most of the people who this will benefit and work at those locations still will NEVER vote for him or democrats. The jobs will be used by republicans in the state and district to say what The Rs did for them, take the credit and run

Rinse and repeat 

Yup, like how most of the red states take more from the federal government than they pay in taxes, and a bunch of those maga voters are on social security and welfare, but cry about the "socialist" dems and how evil and lazy they are and just need to bootstrap their way into social security and food stamps like they do.

[StassneyHorn 6,637]

Our green energy Death Star will employ thousands of Gravy Seals and none of them will be able to stop your hero, my hero, our hero, Joey Jobs.

 

GDP at 2.9 in this devastating recession of rearranging chairs for tech workers.

[High Plains Drifter 11,052]

 

On 1/16/2023 at 1:13 PM, jimmyjazz said:

Apropos of nothing:  my favorite stall graffiti was in tiny scrawl that made you lean in to read it:  "You are now sitting at a 45 degree angle."

 

grout puns were pretty good in the third floor shitter of the architecture building back in the day.

 

 

On 1/18/2023 at 10:50 AM, 'stache said:

When I hear the former president speak I see it all in my head as comic sans. 

 

zapf dingbats for me

 

 

 

[henrygandorf 29,194]

6 hours ago, Gengs1 said:

Sadly most of the people who this will benefit and work at those locations still will NEVER vote for him or democrats. The jobs will be used by republicans in the state and district to say what The Rs did for them, take the credit and run

Rinse and repeat 

it's not really about the voters.  we already have the votes.  it's about wrecking their messaging.

we already saw that the electorate has a threshold they will not pass when it comes to ridiculous or plain idiotic claims, like the election being stolen.  they will always fear monger about abortion and guns and whatever the fuck, but the more holes you can poke in their rhetoric, the better.

when trump yells and screams about manufacturing jobs in these areas, it will ring that much more hollow.  every little bit helps, especially on the local level.

[Post Oak 20,273]

3 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

it's not really about the voters.  we already have the votes.  it's about wrecking their messaging.

we already saw that the electorate has a threshold they will not pass when it comes to ridiculous or plain idiotic claims, like the election being stolen.  they will always fear monger about abortion and guns and whatever the fuck, but the more holes you can poke in their rhetoric, the better.

when trump yells and screams about manufacturing jobs in these areas, it will ring that much more hollow.  every little bit helps, especially on the local level.

 

 

[StassneyHorn 6,637]

Thanking the good Lord tonight for giving us Raider Joe. RJ took down a team of the worst crypto bros the world has seen since since a few months ago . No telling if Barron Trump helped with the effort but this is your yearly reminder that he is very tall, and could be a l33t h4Xorz

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/doj-seizes-hive-ransomware-gang-website

DOJ seizes Hive ransomware gang website

Hive ransomware actors victimized over 1,300 companies worldwide from June 2021 through last November, US says

[TwiceHorn 31,536]

On 1/22/2023 at 9:31 AM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

So Biden had these documents for 10+ years?  And they were just now being missed?  This is embarrassing on so many levels. 

They never were missed.  They were discovered by going and looking for such things.

[cactusflinthead 27,602]

 

[Willfully Horn 8,049]

I love this lady. And she also supports the premise, as do many in the CR, that only one side has their mouths too full, of shit to critcixe their own.

 

 

[Fudge Nuggets 19,224]

On 1/25/2023 at 5:25 PM, Js1 said:

We’ll never replace all the republicans now 

The Cubans will be radicalized in days.

[henrygandorf 29,194]

so i'm in this random prediction pool and one of the questions is about which (if any) cabinet members will move on, for whatever reason.

anyone with any insight who can give me an ~educated guess?  otherwise i'm throwing darts.

[Neonmoon 38,130]

5 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

so i'm in this random prediction pool and one of the questions is about which (if any) cabinet members will move on, for whatever reason.

anyone with any insight who can give me an ~educated guess?  otherwise i'm throwing darts.

[Js1 85,576]

On 1/30/2023 at 4:32 PM, henrygandorf said:

so i'm in this random prediction pool and one of the questions is about which (if any) cabinet members will move on, for whatever reason.

anyone with any insight who can give me an ~educated guess?  otherwise i'm throwing darts.

Sauces say that Marty Walsh may head out to head up the NHL Player's Association. 

Sources - NHLPA director search focusing on Marty Walsh (espn.com)

Jump on Labor Sec 

Edited February 1, 2023 by Js1

[Js1 85,576]

 

[Js1 85,576]

Joey Jobs just fucking crushed it again for January. Is coming in 5x over expectations good?

[Voldemort86 2,259]

You know if Trump was in office the MAGA idiots and trumpeters would be spiking the football on the jobs report. 

[HamsterHookah 112]

24 minutes ago, Voldemort86 said:

You know if Trump was in office the MAGA idiots and trumpeters would be spiking the football on the jobs report. 

Truth.

And also the progressives would be saying that "yea but the jobs are all wage slavery horrible cost of living and quality of life low pay jobs while higher paying jobs are being sloughed"

[Gengs1 2,583]

1 hour ago, HamsterHookah said:

Truth.

And also the progressives would be saying that "yea but the jobs are all wage slavery horrible cost of living and quality of life low pay jobs while higher paying jobs are being sloughed"

They really need to learn to take a win and move one, most of the time they are like republicans just bitching about nothing 

[mchookem 16,386]

...well yeah, except for the whole insurrection thing. 

[StassneyHorn 6,637]

The Labor Department also issued revisions of jobs numbers over the past two years, as it does every time it issues a January report. And this time, the revisions were also huge.

The revised numbers show that employers had a total of 154.6 million workers on payrolls at the end of 2022. That's 813,000 more workers than the previous reading.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/business/live-news/stock-market-news-today-jobs-2323/index.html

[StassneyHorn 6,637]

Lowest unemployment rate since before the moon landing.

Revisions up 71k for two previous months 

Edited February 3, 2023 by StassneyHorn

[Js1 85,576]

30 minutes ago, StassneyHorn said:

Lowest unemployment rate since before the moon landing.

 

Yeah but that was fake, LIKE THE JOB NUMBERS 

[Js1 85,576]

Re-election kickoff tour? As it was rumored he’d announce around the SOTU

[Post Oak 20,273]

Brandon was about my 3rd or 4th choice I think.  

I'm happy at what he's been able to accomplish and I'll happily vote for him again.

[Voldemort86 2,259]

16 hours ago, Post Oak said:

Brandon was about my 3rd or 4th choice I think.  

I'm happy at what he's been able to accomplish and I'll happily vote for him again.

I just like that government is boring again. I also don’t have to wake up day after day and worry about the president fucking things up or supporting policies that discriminate against certain groups of Americans.

[Snake Diggity 4,627]

I still believe Joe Biden is too old to be President.  His age is inherently a national security risk.  That said, he has far exceeded my expectations of him so far.  I am proud to have voted for him in 2020 and will proudly vote for him again in 2024 assuming he is against Trump or DeSantis or any other turd that currently has a chance to win the GOP primary.

Russia losing a kinetic war that doesn’t endanger American troops.  Seeds of reform in Iran.  China more vulnerable than they’ve been in 30 years.  Lowest unemployment in history.  And, most importantly, no daily fucking deluge of idiocy that undermines our democracy, promotes racism, and reduces the presidency to a fucking insane reality show.

Edited February 6, 2023 by Snake Diggity

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

I still believe Joe Biden is too old to be President.  His age is inherently a national security risk.  That said, he has far exceeded my expectations of him so far.  I am proud to have voted for him in 2020 and will proudly vote for him again in 2024 assuming he is against Trump or DeSantis or any other turd that currently has a chance to win the GOP primary.

Russia losing a kinetic war that doesn’t endanger American troops.  Seeds of reform in Iran.  China more vulnerable than they’ve been in 30 years.  Lowest unemployment in history.  And, most importantly, no daily fucking deluge of idiocy that undermines our democracy, promotes racism, and reduces the presidency to a fucking insane reality show.

But muh stovez!

[Red Five 40,895]

I heard Bill Barr say the other day that he would vote for Trump over Biden, because of how dangerous Biden is. This is after acknowledging that Trump tried to steal the 2020 election. I wonder how these people make their brains work that way.

[Js1 85,576]

21 minutes ago, Red Five said:

I wonder how these people make their brains work that way.

Fealty to the party.  Dems see the GOP as the opposition and a threat to democracy.  GOP seems the Dems as the embodiment of evil and a threat to their hold on power over "the others."   It's really that simple.  As we've said many times, Jesus Christ himself could return to Earth, run for POTUS as a Democrat, and would only be a toss-up to win the presidency. 

[Incredulity 11,683]

2 hours ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

But muh stovez!

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/energy-department-regulations-gas-stoves-ban-jennifer-granholm-biden-administration-11675457600

 

Quote

When progressives can’t pass their agenda through the front door in Congress, they sneak it through a regulatory back window. That’s what the Biden Administration is doing with gas stoves, as the Energy Department this week proposed new rules that amount to a gradual de facto ban.

Spoiler

When progressives can’t pass their agenda through the front door in Congress, they sneak it through a regulatory back window. That’s what the Biden Administration is doing with gas stoves, as the Energy Department this week proposed new rules that amount to a gradual de facto ban.

 

OPINION: POTOMAC WATCH

Biden Takes Credit as Recession Fears Ease

 

 

20:38

1x

 

SUBSCRIBE

A Biden appointee on the Consumer Product Safety Commission ignited a firestorm last month by threatening to ban gas stoves. After criticism from West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin and others, the CPSC chairman rejected the idea, and White House officials said they didn’t support banning gas stoves.

Then why has the Energy Department proposed new efficiency standards that would ban the sale of most gas stoves currently on the market? The stated purpose of the rule-making is to reduce energy consumption and save consumers money. But these benefits are meager. The department estimates the proposed rule would reduce energy use by a mere 3.4% from the status quo, and consumers on average would save $21.89 over a cook-top’s lifetime.

Even this assumes the standards are technically achievable without compromising performance. A spokesperson for the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers tells us that gas cook-tops would have to be completely redesigned to comply. Burners might have to become smaller and heavy grate designs altered, which would increase cooking times.

---

NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP

Morning Editorial Report

All the day's Opinion headlines.

Preview

 

 

 

 

Subscribe

---

Twenty of the 21 gas stove-top models that the Energy Department tested wouldn’t comply with its proposed standards. Manufacturers would have to spend hundreds of millions of dollars redesigning stoves, if they bother.

Those costs would be passed to consumers in higher prices. The Energy Department estimates increased appliance prices will be offset by lower energy bills as well as climate and health benefits. But these benefits are speculative while higher product costs and reduced performance will directly harm consumers.

Making appliances more energy efficient involves trade-offs. Consumers and manufacturers may choose to make them, but they shouldn’t be forced. Recall how federal energy-efficiency standards reduced the performance of dishwashers. Machines that once washed and dried dishes in an hour now take two to three, and often still don’t get the job done.

Biden officials claim the proposed gas efficiency standards are feasible. But that’s what they also say about their stringent fuel-economy mandates, which effectively force manufacturers to produce more electric vehicles. In both cases the Administration is using regulation to impose policies and coerce behavior they can’t get Congress to endorse.

The new rules betray that the Administration is trying to eliminate gas stoves by whatever regulatory means possible. The Biden CPSC was preparing to use the Federal Hazardous Substances Act as a pretext to ban them before the public uproar. Richard Trumka Jr.—the commissioner who floated the ban last month—claimed that emissions from gas stoves are a “hidden hazard.” Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm flogged a dubious study claiming that 12.7% of childhood asthma cases in the U.S. are attributable to gas stoves.

The Inflation Reduction Act also includes a $840 rebate to buy electric stoves plus $500 to convert from gas. Yes, Americans, they really are coming for your gas stoves.

 

Edited February 6, 2023 by Incredulity

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/energy-department-regulations-gas-stoves-ban-jennifer-granholm-biden-administration-11675457600

 

  Reveal hidden contents

When progressives can’t pass their agenda through the front door in Congress, they sneak it through a regulatory back window. That’s what the Biden Administration is doing with gas stoves, as the Energy Department this week proposed new rules that amount to a gradual de facto ban.

 

OPINION: POTOMAC WATCH

Biden Takes Credit as Recession Fears Ease

 

 

20:38

1x

 

SUBSCRIBE

A Biden appointee on the Consumer Product Safety Commission ignited a firestorm last month by threatening to ban gas stoves. After criticism from West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin and others, the CPSC chairman rejected the idea, and White House officials said they didn’t support banning gas stoves.

Then why has the Energy Department proposed new efficiency standards that would ban the sale of most gas stoves currently on the market? The stated purpose of the rule-making is to reduce energy consumption and save consumers money. But these benefits are meager. The department estimates the proposed rule would reduce energy use by a mere 3.4% from the status quo, and consumers on average would save $21.89 over a cook-top’s lifetime.

Even this assumes the standards are technically achievable without compromising performance. A spokesperson for the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers tells us that gas cook-tops would have to be completely redesigned to comply. Burners might have to become smaller and heavy grate designs altered, which would increase cooking times.

---

NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP

Morning Editorial Report

All the day's Opinion headlines.

Preview

 

 

 

 

Subscribe

---

Twenty of the 21 gas stove-top models that the Energy Department tested wouldn’t comply with its proposed standards. Manufacturers would have to spend hundreds of millions of dollars redesigning stoves, if they bother.

Those costs would be passed to consumers in higher prices. The Energy Department estimates increased appliance prices will be offset by lower energy bills as well as climate and health benefits. But these benefits are speculative while higher product costs and reduced performance will directly harm consumers.

Making appliances more energy efficient involves trade-offs. Consumers and manufacturers may choose to make them, but they shouldn’t be forced. Recall how federal energy-efficiency standards reduced the performance of dishwashers. Machines that once washed and dried dishes in an hour now take two to three, and often still don’t get the job done.

Biden officials claim the proposed gas efficiency standards are feasible. But that’s what they also say about their stringent fuel-economy mandates, which effectively force manufacturers to produce more electric vehicles. In both cases the Administration is using regulation to impose policies and coerce behavior they can’t get Congress to endorse.

The new rules betray that the Administration is trying to eliminate gas stoves by whatever regulatory means possible. The Biden CPSC was preparing to use the Federal Hazardous Substances Act as a pretext to ban them before the public uproar. Richard Trumka Jr.—the commissioner who floated the ban last month—claimed that emissions from gas stoves are a “hidden hazard.” Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm flogged a dubious study claiming that 12.7% of childhood asthma cases in the U.S. are attributable to gas stoves.

The Inflation Reduction Act also includes a $840 rebate to buy electric stoves plus $500 to convert from gas. Yes, Americans, they really are coming for your gas stoves.

 

Ok, let's make a bet. When your gas stove is outlawed and is taken from your home and you can't go out to Lowe's and buy a gas stove anymore, I'll pay you $100. And when you realize that nothing happened and it just turned out to be hysterics, you pay me $100.

[Incredulity 11,683]

3 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

When your gas stove is outlawed and is taken from your home

This isn't going to happen, but that's not the point.

 

4 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

you can't go out to Lowe's and buy a gas stove anymore

Name a timeline.

[YGIFS 19,452]

Gas Stove Timeline 

would make a pretty cool band name. 

[Guest]

Just now, Incredulity said:

This isn't going to happen, but that's not the point.

 

Oh it's not? 
 

Just now, Incredulity said:

Name a timeline.

Feb. 6, 2028

[Incredulity 11,683]

4 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

Feb. 6, 2028

I will take the bet.

[Red Five 40,895]

You can have mine. I hardly use it, except for eggs. 

[wildcat09 29,388]

9 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

Oh it's not? 
 

Feb. 6, 2028

Goddamnit. Given their luck with these three people/things tweets, I'm going to get home today and my fucking stove is going to be sieg heiling.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

I will take the bet.

*handshake*

[Hmbre97 6,331]

6 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Goddamnit. Given their luck with these three people/things tweets, I'm going to get home today and my fucking stove is going to be sieg heiling.

 They're only going to start leaking in Jewish households...

[TexArcher 38,068]

16 minutes ago, Hmbre97 said:

 They're only going to start leaking in Jewish households...

 

[Js1 85,576]

40 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Goddamnit. Given their luck with these three people/things tweets, I'm going to get home today and my fucking stove is going to be sieg heiling.

Mine was goose stepping around my kitchen when I got back from the gym this morning.  

[jimmyjazz 46,131]

Good lord.  You'll still be able to buy your precious gas stove 5 years from now. 

[Incredulity 11,683]

Not in LA county