TimHauck 2,452 Posted October 15 3 hours ago, Horseman said: Something like that? I mean try to sound certain if you're just going to make things up tard. Here ya go. On 4/19/2023 at 7:37 AM, TimHauck said: Still begs the question of why did he even open the door On 4/19/2023 at 8:57 AM, RogerDodger said: Dumbest person on the planet folks. Because someone rang the doorbell idiot. That's the whole purpose of having a doorbell, so people can alert you that they are there so you can come OPEN THE DOOR. Lololol 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HellToupee 1,254 Posted October 15 56 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said: In the interview he mentioned Adam Schiff. You may dislike Schiff but you’ll have to explain to me how Schiff represents threat to peace. Does it bother you that you’re constantly forced to defend Donald Trump? That he never really means it when he says this crazy sh!t?? Schiff is a lying POS who harmed our country over Trump/Russia and that was confirmed by the Inspector General 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HellToupee 1,254 Posted October 15 Oof PA Senator Bob Casey didn’t want to be seen with Harris. The ship be sinking Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Real timschochet 5,232 Posted October 15 1 hour ago, Strike said: Anyone else notice how the Libs here like @The Real timschochet just ignore the issues that come up around Kamalatoe's campaign, like her plagiarism issue, CBS' 60 minutes editing controversy, etc....? They just pretend those things don't exist. I find it amusing but I do notice their silence. IMO these “issues” are either irrelevant or bullsh!t. Like so many of the “issues” you raise. I read the editorial you posted. It’s as lazy as you are. It basically offers the tired argument “despite all of Trump’s faults, things were good when he was President.” No discussion of why they were good, what he did to make them good, what he plans to do now. Because any examination of such details destroys the argument. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Real timschochet 5,232 Posted October 15 59 minutes ago, HellToupee said: Schiff is a lying POS who harmed our country over Trump/Russia and that was confirmed by the Inspector General So he deserves being arrested by the military? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Real timschochet 5,232 Posted October 15 1 hour ago, jerryskids said: I'll have to do no such thing. Answer my question. Unusual for you to make silly demands ala @Strike but whatever. I don’t even see the point of your question. Of course Trump has no legal power as President-Elect; he doesn’t have power until he becomes President. That’s when the abuse would start. Hopefully we’ll never know if Trump can use the military in awful ways because he will lose the election. But there is still the very real threat that he can call forth a mob when he loses. Recent history has shown us that liberals can handle losing; conservatives can’t. They are pretty sure to riot as they did before. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,028 Posted October 15 5 hours ago, Sean Mooney said: Video is 2 years old and is altered https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-did-crowd-chant-f-joe-biden-barack-obama-michigan-speech-1755727 https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-obama-biden-chant-260485740983 FOX News story on the event from October of 2022: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/obama-interrupted-protester-michigan-rally-come-on I assume HT and Reality will be here to scold you shortly for believing a fake news story. It's all they have They’re too focking stupid to know or care 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lickin_starfish 1,786 Posted October 15 Reddit - https://preview.redd.it/white-dudes-for-harris-v0-r9w8ywzcqsud1.jpeg?width=1080&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=6320ddbf0ce4f666f92a2b2f728268e6a14b64e9 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jonmx 2,202 Posted October 15 4 hours ago, The Real timschochet said: Unusual for you to make silly demands ala @Strike but whatever. I don’t even see the point of your question. Of course Trump has no legal power as President-Elect; he doesn’t have power until he becomes President. That’s when the abuse would start. Abuses? Do you really have your head thst far up your arse? How many reporters had there homes raided under Trump? Zero....but dozens under Biden How many political opponents did Trump prosecute? One...Biden prosecuted several including Trump and under ridiculously flimsy grounds which will all be thrown out. How many whistleblowers did Trump retaliate against? Zero....but dozens have been under Biden. You bootlick for an administration which has acted more authoritarian than any administration ever because you are brainwashed into believing lies about Trump. Really unbelievable how effective our government has become at controlling the minds of a large portion of the public. 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sean Mooney 1,815 Posted October 15 6 hours ago, TimHauck said: Here ya go. Lololol Oh man...Horseman taking a huge loss on this. He might need another burner alias to get back his "life winner" status. What thread was that? I knew he said it but I couldn't remember the context 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TimHauck 2,452 Posted October 15 7 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said: Oh man...Horseman taking a huge loss on this. He might need another burner alias to get back his "life winner" status. What thread was that? I knew he said it but I couldn't remember the context It was the thread about Ralph Yarl, the black kid who got shot for ringing an old white dude’s doorbell. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Psychic Observer 297 Posted October 15 This is every geek club righty that defends Trumps words and pretends that he meant something other than he said. It is so sad and pathetic to watch. 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Strike 4,815 Posted October 15 7 hours ago, The Real timschochet said: IMO these “issues” are either irrelevant or bullsh!t. Like so many of the “issues” you raise. I read the editorial you posted. It’s as lazy as you are. It basically offers the tired argument “despite all of Trump’s faults, things were good when he was President.” No discussion of why they were good, what he did to make them good, what he plans to do now. Because any examination of such details destroys the argument. @The Real timschochet We could discuss WHY things were good under Trump but it's irrelevant. The reality is people will look at how they were doing under that administration and compare it to the current one which Kamalatoe is a part of and who says she wouldn't change a thing they did during her time in the administration. They have DATA to compare and they will ask if they want four more years of what it was like under Trump, and will discount the Covid year as the freak incident it was, or do they want four more years of what it has been like under Kamalatoe/Biden. And they will decide they would like to unburden themselves from what has been under Kamalatoe. That's just how this works and if you don't understand that you aren't as politically astute as you think you are. On another note, for the last week or two as people have been posting betting lines and you've said repeatedly "that's only on Polymarket" or "That's only one site. The rest are for Kamalatoe." Well, now it's pretty much universal that Trump is the betting favorite: https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/trump-takes-commanding-lead-over-harris-across-betting-markets?intcmp=tw_fbn&%3Fintcmp=tw_fbn Maybe consider changing the title so you don't look like such a partisan hack? I mean, for ONE day or less you had a title that slightly suggested Trump had a chance to win and then almost as quickly as you changed it you changed it again to "dead heat." It's certainly not a dead heat at this point if only due to momentum change over the last week or so. But feel free to keep showing your true hackery if you must. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sean Mooney 1,815 Posted October 15 8 minutes ago, Strike said: @The Real timschochet We could discuss WHY things were good under Trump but it's irrelevant. The reality is people will look at how they were doing under that administration and compare it to the current one which Kamalatoe is a part of and who says she wouldn't change a thing they did during her time in the administration. They have DATA to compare and they will ask if they want four more years of what it was like under Trump, and will discount the Covid year as the freak incident it was, or do they want four more years of what it has been like under Kamalatoe/Biden. And they will decide they would like to unburden themselves from what has been under Kamalatoe. That's just how this works and if you don't understand that you aren't as politically astute as you think you are. On another note, for the last week or two as people have been posting betting lines and you've said repeatedly "that's only on Polymarket" or "That's only one site. The rest are for Kamalatoe." Well, now it's pretty much universal that Trump is the betting favorite: https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/trump-takes-commanding-lead-over-harris-across-betting-markets?intcmp=tw_fbn&%3Fintcmp=tw_fbn Maybe consider changing the title so you don't look like such a partisan hack? I mean, for ONE day or less you had a title that slightly suggested Trump had a chance to win and then almost as quickly as you changed it you changed it again to "dead heat." It's certainly not a dead heat at this point if only due to momentum change over the last week or so. But feel free to keep showing your true hackery if you must. There were warning signs in late 2018 and into 2019 that the economy was downturning under Trump. COVID exacerbated things. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 14,164 Posted October 15 8 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said: There were warning signs in late 2018 and into 2019 that the economy was downturning under Trump. COVID exacerbated things. So stupid. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sean Mooney 1,815 Posted October 15 2 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said: So stupid. Great counter argument. Go get your nurse to change your diaper loser Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Strike 4,815 Posted October 15 19 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said: There were warning signs in late 2018 and into 2019 that the economy was downturning under Trump. COVID exacerbated things. I don't agree but as I said to Tim it doesn't matter. That is not the general perception and memory people have of that time. Until Covid the perception is we were very prosperous under Trump and the exact opposite under Kamalatoe/Biden. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 4,051 Posted October 15 2 hours ago, The Psychic Observer said: This is every geek club righty that defends Trumps words and pretends that he meant something other than he said. It is so sad and pathetic to watch. I support using the national guard against radical adam schifttt Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 4,051 Posted October 15 51 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said: There were warning signs in late 2018 and into 2019 that the economy was downturning under Trump. COVID exacerbated things. their were SIGNS!!!! in leftist front yards the economy was amazing in 2018 and 2019, but you play your revisionist history 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thegeneral 2,500 Posted October 15 2 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said: their were SIGNS!!!! in leftist front yards the economy was amazing in 2018 and 2019, but you play your revisionist history US economy grew by 2.3% in 2019 US economy grew by 3% Q2 of 2024 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TrailGuy 204 Posted October 15 8 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said: their were SIGNS!!!! in leftist front yards the economy was amazing in 2018 and 2019, but you play your revisionist history GDP declined from 2018 to 2019. By all numbers the economy is better now than it was in 2019. However numbers don't matter. It felt better back then. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 4,051 Posted October 15 6 minutes ago, thegeneral said: US economy grew by 2.3% in 2019 US economy grew by 3% Q2 of 2024 economy growth is what we are looking for? I worry about middle class and poor people not being able to afford sh1t while illegals get free money 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sean Mooney 1,815 Posted October 15 45 minutes ago, Strike said: I don't agree but as I said to Tim it doesn't matter. That is not the general perception and memory people have of that time. Until Covid the perception is we were very prosperous under Trump and the exact opposite under Kamalatoe/Biden. As I've said a number of times- perception and reality are not in line with things always. There were a lot of studies done on the effect of the Trump tariffs and in aggregate it was found that the tariffs increased costs for average American households by about $830 per year, accounting for direct costs and efficiency losses. And yes I agree that those numbers are most likely higher now and will agree to that until I see something that might argue otherwise. Here is the chart that shows a bunch of the studies. **EDIT** The emojis are the html code copying it here. I didn't do that and they don't represent any feelings for me. I'm too lazy to go back and look up everything to change the code. Here is the article it is from: https://www.cato.org/blog/americans-paid-trump-tariffs-would-do-so-again This article talks about the impact but does note that too many things don't understand the way tariffs work in their studies: https://carnegieendowment.org/china-financial-markets/2021/01/how-trumps-tariffs-really-affected-the-us-job-market?lang=en This article talks about the Trump tariffs (and refers to them by Biden as well since he left on many of the Trump tariffs): https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/federal/trump-tariffs-biden-tariffs/ Table 1 Numerous studies document how Trump-era tariffs have harmed the US economy Study Tariffs covered Impact measured Estimated impact American Action Forum (2022) Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum Section 301 tariffs on imports from China Tariff costs (i.e., tax burden) $51.1 billion total tariff cost in 2022 Amiti et al., (2021) Tariffs imposed in 2018–19 and Chinese retaliation A) Decline in US stock prices (firm equity value) Decline in aggregate US welfare A) $4.12 trillion cumulative loss in firm equity value 3.0% decline in aggregate welfare Amiti, Redding, and Weinstein (2019) Safeguards on solar panels and washing machines Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports (lists 1–3) Additional tariff costs and economic deadweight (efficiency) losses $106.07 billion total annual tariff cost (averages to $831 annual cost per household) Caldara et al. (2020) Tariffs imposed in 2018 Decline in aggregate US investment as a result of higher trade policy uncertainty 1.5% decline in US investment in 2018 Caliendo and Parro (2022) Tariffs imposed on Chinese imports A) Decline in aggregate US real wages Decline in aggregate US real income C) Decline in aggregate US households' welfare A) 0.16% decline in US real wages 0.14% decline in US real income C) 0.1% decline in US households' welfare Carter and Steinbach (2020) Retaliation from tariffs imposed in 2018 Decline in US agricultural and food exports Over $15.6 billion in trade with retaliatory countries lost Cavallo et al. (2021) Tariffs imposed on Chinese imports since 2018 Tariff pass-through to import and retail prices Tariffs passed "almost fully" through to US import prices, yet only marginally to retail prices, suggesting that retailers are absorbing most of the cost. For instance, a 20% tariff is associated with an 18.9% increase in the price paid for an affected good by US importers, but only a 0.7% increase in the relative retail price for the good. Congressional Budget Office (2020) Tariffs imposed between January 2018 and January 2020 Loss in output and higher consumer prices Per household cost of $1,277 in 2020 (from lower output and higher prices) Fajgelbaum et al. (2021) Safeguards on solar panels and washing machines Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports (lists 1–3) Tariffs on European Union imports A) Increase in import prices (gross costs) Economywide loss in output (net costs) A) $114 billion annual increase in import costs Economy-wide net annual losses of $24.8 billion Flaaen, Hortaçsu, Tintelnot (2020) Safeguards on washing machines A) Tariff pass-through Increase in consumer costs A) Pass-through of 108–225 percent, due to increase in prices of domestic brands and complementary goods (e.g., dryers) $1.5 billion annual cost to consumers Gerarden et al. (2024) Tariffs on solar panels, including: Obama-era antidumping and countervailing duties; and Trump-era Section 201 (safeguard) tariffs and Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports A) Change in welfare from 2010 to 2020 Change in employment (job-years and wages) from 2010 to 2020 A) Loss of $56.6 billion in US welfare (including loss of $65.5 billion in local environmental benefits from solar panel adoption) relative to scenario with no tariffs. Loss of 370,100 job-years and and $15.8 billion in total wages, driven by losses in solar panel installation jobs. Handley, Kamal, and Monarch (2020) Tariffs imposed in 2018–19 A) Additional tariff costs for US firms exposed to import tariffs, per worker Decline in export growth A) $900 tariff cost per worker overall and $1,600 per worker for manufacturing firms Decline in US exports in 2019 is equivalent to a 1.5% tariff on the average export Tariffs Hurt the Heartland (2022) Tariffs imposed from February 2018 to April 2021 Additional tariff costs $94 billion total tariff cost since 2018 Tax Foundation Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports A) Additional tariff costs Loss in economic output (GDP) A) $79 billion annual tariff cost (averages to $625 per household) Decline in long-run GDP of 0.2 percent Trade Partnership (2019) Tariffs imposed or announced as of November 2018, plus foreign retaliation A) Loss in national income (net) Net US job loss A) Annual decline of $62.3 billion in net national income Net loss of 934,700 US jobs US International Trade Commission (2023) Section 232 and Section 301 tariffs A) Tariff pass-through (Sec. 301) Effect on prices (Sec. 232) C) Effect on downstream production (Sec. 232) A) Full pass-through of Section 301 tariffs to prices paid by US importers. Section 232 tariffs led to a weighted-average steel price increase of ~2.4% and a weighted-average aluminum price increase of ~1.6% C) Downstream (i.e., steel- and aluminum-consuming) industries in the US experienced a $3.48 billion decline in production (measured by value) because of the Section 232 tariffs. 1 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sean Mooney 1,815 Posted October 15 13 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said: their were SIGNS!!!! in leftist front yards the economy was amazing in 2018 and 2019, but you play your revisionist history I shared plenty of real information that you can peruse on your own if you want some reality in your life. You can also note I pointed out the Biden role in the tariffs. Or you can keep playing "fake centrist" like you often do here Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thegeneral 2,500 Posted October 15 2 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said: economy growth is what we are looking for? I worry about middle class and poor people not being able to afford sh1t while illegals get free money Yeah economic growth is typically good. Economy growing is bad! Stock market all time highs bad! Unemployment historically low bad! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kilroy69 1,162 Posted October 15 The new plan by Harris is to just by the votes of blacks as she is starting to show concern that she is fading in the polls. Her new plan is to give blacks a 20k loan they do not have to pay back to start a business. Also she will legalize marijuana at the federal level. LITERALLY pandering to the black voter. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
purdygood 306 Posted October 15 30 minutes ago, thegeneral said: Yeah economic growth is typically good. Economy growing is bad! Stock market all time highs bad! Unemployment historically low bad! Maybe the middle class and poor people should find their boot straps and get a piece of the economic growth. Or just join a cult and hope dear leader bails them out with free kool aid. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fireballer 2,601 Posted October 15 Holy sh!t this is laughable Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 14,164 Posted October 15 12 minutes ago, Fireballer said: Holy sh!t this is laughable Wow. You mean Bidenomics didn't benefit black men? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sean Mooney 1,815 Posted October 15 14 minutes ago, Fireballer said: Holy sh!t this is laughable Whoever workshopped and went with "Opportunity economy/agenda" should be barred from helping with any future campaigns. It just doesn't accomplish what they think it accomplishes. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Real timschochet 5,232 Posted October 15 2 hours ago, Strike said: @The Real timschochet We could discuss WHY things were good under Trump but it's irrelevant. The reality is people will look at how they were doing under that administration and compare it to the current one which Kamalatoe is a part of and who says she wouldn't change a thing they did during her time in the administration. They have DATA to compare and they will ask if they want four more years of what it was like under Trump, and will discount the Covid year as the freak incident it was, or do they want four more years of what it has been like under Kamalatoe/Biden. And they will decide they would like to unburden themselves from what has been under Kamalatoe. That's just how this works and if you don't understand that you aren't as politically astute as you think you are. On another note, for the last week or two as people have been posting betting lines and you've said repeatedly "that's only on Polymarket" or "That's only one site. The rest are for Kamalatoe." Well, now it's pretty much universal that Trump is the betting favorite: https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/trump-takes-commanding-lead-over-harris-across-betting-markets?intcmp=tw_fbn&%3Fintcmp=tw_fbn Maybe consider changing the title so you don't look like such a partisan hack? I mean, for ONE day or less you had a title that slightly suggested Trump had a chance to win and then almost as quickly as you changed it you changed it again to "dead heat." It's certainly not a dead heat at this point if only due to momentum change over the last week or so. But feel free to keep showing your true hackery if you must. I don’t believe Trump has the edge. I think it’s a dead heat and if I favored anyone it would still be Kamala Harris. This morning Morning Consult released their latest poll- Harris by 4 points. Two weeks ago they had her up by 5 so Trump is gaining a little but he hasn’t caught up in that poll. He caught up in the NBC poll but he hasn’t taken the lead. She’s still ahead in Pennsylvania which to me is the poll that matters the most. So no I’m not changing the title. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryskids 6,174 Posted October 15 Point of order: if you give someone $20K and they don't have to pay it back, is it really a "loan"? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 4,051 Posted October 15 1 hour ago, Sean Mooney said: I shared plenty of real information that you can peruse on your own if you want some reality in your life. You can also note I pointed out the Biden role in the tariffs. Or you can keep playing "fake centrist" like you often do here You can post all the nonsense you want and I can goto the gas station and grocery store and see the reality. once again with your derp derp fake centrist crap 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mark Davis 280 Posted October 15 2 minutes ago, jerryskids said: Point of order: if you give someone $20K and they don't have to pay it back, is it really a "loan"? If this thing goes through, Rachel Dolezal is leaving a fortune on the table if she doesn't open up her own consulting business. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Real timschochet 5,232 Posted October 15 2 hours ago, Strike said: @The Real timschochet We could discuss WHY things were good under Trump but it's irrelevant. The reality is people will look at how they were doing under that administration and compare it to the current one which Kamalatoe is a part of and who says she wouldn't change a thing they did during her time in the administration. They have DATA to compare and they will ask if they want four more years of what it was like under Trump, and will discount the Covid year as the freak incident it was, or do they want four more years of what it has been like under Kamalatoe/Biden. And they will decide they would like to unburden themselves from what has been under Kamalatoe. That's just how this works and if you don't understand that you aren't as politically astute as you think you are. As to this part- when you posted the article you did not write “this is why many people support Trump”; you wrote “this is why I support Trump” and that’s why I called you lazy. Of course many in the public who don’t follow politics carefullly will be lazy and think “well things were better then so Trump must be better.” You participate in these political discussions so you should know better. But you don’t, 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryskids 6,174 Posted October 15 1 minute ago, Mark Davis said: If this thing goes through, Rachel Dolezal is leaving a fortune on the table if she doesn't open up her own consulting business. On a different note: I was reading back thru the bullet points above, and saw something about "protecting crypto investments." Wut? Is this the start of a power grab the the US govt on crypto markets? At a minimum, if the government agrees to provide downside protection on crypto investments... what could go wrong? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sean Mooney 1,815 Posted October 15 9 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said: You can post all the nonsense you want and I can goto the gas station and grocery store and see the reality. once again with your derp derp fake centrist crap Yeah...I get it- you'd rather not learn something and remain ignorant. Carry on 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Real timschochet 5,232 Posted October 15 Here’s an interesting poll but not a shocker: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/harris-holds-big-advantage-among-early-voters-trump-election-day-voters-poll.amp If you’re voting early chances are you’re voting for Harris…by a wide margin. If you’re voting on Election Day chances are you’re voting for Trump…by a wide margin. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Real timschochet 5,232 Posted October 15 I need to modify something I just wrote before I get taken to task for it by @Strike I wrote that Harris has the aggregate lead in Pennsylvania. That’s according to 538. According to RCP, Harris has the aggregate lead. Both are by very slim margins. So…dead heat. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
