SoTier

What was so "horrible" about it? That she said that Trump couldn't do anything that he wanted to do or was it that she made a crappy joke about the POTUS' son's name? The quote in question: "Contrary to what President Trump has said, Article 2 [of the Constitution] does not give him the power to do anything he wants. The Constitution says there can be no titles of nobility, so while the president can name his son Barron, he can't make him a baron."

What bull manure! All of the supposed "***** ups along the way to certifying a winner" were fully explained, but you simply refuse to accept them. FTR, there were more proven cases of voting fraud in Louisiana than there were in Pennsylvania. I believe it was 4 or 5 in LA to 3 in PA.

Maybe the reason that blue counties are successful in business activity is the same reason that they are "complaining all the time": the people who live in those counties aren't willing to accept a low bar status quo but are always looking for better, for themselves and others in their communities. I grew up in a small rural area and have now lived in a small city in a rural area of New York for 20+ years -- Trump country -- but in between that I lived and worked in large urban metros. Even in the late 1960s when I graduated from high school, economic opportunities in my town were so limited that ambitious young people left town to go to college or to find jobs in Buffalo or Erie, PA, or elsewhere. That has been the story of small town, rural America throughout the 20th and 21st centuries: the migration of ambitious and creative young people to larger areas in search of more opportunity, even when they come from families that have found economic success in their small towns. Most never return because there's little incentive to do so. I think that the young people who don't leave small towns/rural areas are probably not temperamentally inclined to be ambitious or adventurous and much more inclined to be accepting of the existing status quo however poor that status quo might be.

Plumbers and electricians aren't unskilled or semi-skilled workers. Most take coursework in high school or community college and then work under the supervision of experienced plumbers or electricians for several months or years. Unionized plumbers and electricians make really good money and have benefits, but those that work for small plumbing businesses don't make all that much. The high hourly rates are divided between the actual worker(s) and the business owner.

Remember when the US Capitol didn't resemble a military base? I do.

Another day, another Trumpist posting propaganda in the form of an "article" from far right conspiracy website, Summit News, which turns out to be simply a collection of tweets purporting to represent the thoughts of Black Lives Matter supporters. Dumbasses gonna be dumbasses.

As an ex-teacher, I will second this. Teaching is a mentally exhausting job ... as many parents have been finding out dealing with only 1 or 2 or 3 kids. Most teachers regularly deal with 20 or more most of the day. As a retiree who worked most of my career in IT, I will also second this. Days off are nice, but weeks off are better. The really sad thing is that so many American workers either have only limited vacation time (like 2 weeks max) or, worse, earn more time off that they can't use because of the demands of their jobs. When I retired, I got paid for 6 or 7 weeks of vacation time that I never got to use.

That's what all the teams that have been consistently successful during the salary cap era have done. Back in the early 2000s, it was assumed that the salary cap would end the rise of dynastic teams like the Cowboys, 49ers, Bills of the 1990s. Teams would use rookie contracts to build a team to make one or two runs at the playoffs and maybe the SB, and then sink like rocks under the weight of star contracts. Some fans still have that mindset but the reality is that there are probably just as many if not more consistently successful teams between 2000 and 2020 than there were between 1980 and 2000. Teams have adjusted to the salary cap, and some have done a better job than others. The key, IMO, is the quality of team management and ownership commitment to winning. The good teams negotiate and re-negotiate player contracts to move money around so that they don't have to gut their rosters, and they can do this because they also have excellent collegiate and professional talent evaluators, so they also have younger talent able to step in. They also have larger and better coaching and support staffs to bring young players up to speed faster, to figure out hide/make up for a lack of talent at one position, to keep players healthy, etc. I think the successful teams probably spend more time and money on the administration, coaching, and support than do unsuccessful teams -- or they get more value for their money -- because they have astute management. One of the reasons for the Bills long playoff drought was that their front office was stuck in the 1990s. They didn't adjust to the modern NFL, and it cost them on the field. It took new ownership and then a new management team to put them on the road to consistent success on the field. Just four years removed from a seventeen year long playoff drought, the Bills came up just one win short of going back to the Super Bowl. The big test for the Bills management going forward will now be to "manipulate the salary cap" just like New Orleans and other successful teams have done in order to put as good or even better team on the field every season.

The US has had a relatively large middle class throughout most of its history. Prior to WW II, the middle class was primarily comprised of small businessmen, including successful farmers and craftsmen, and professionals. As the US economy expanded after the Civil War, an expanding group of managers and technicians joined the middle class. The expansion of the middle class to include significant numbers of unskilled and semi-skilled wage earners coincided with the implementation of wage and hour regs that were part of the New Deal and the rise of unionization of major industries after WW II that significantly raised income and provided benefits. Unfortunately, technology has shrunk the need for -- and therefore the value of --- unskilled and semi-skilled labor, which has translated into job losses and wage declines. That's been a reality since at least the early 1970s. Fewer workers produce more product, and that's not just the reality for blue collar workers but also for pink collar office workers (ie, there's no longer a typing pool). Unskilled and semi-skilled workers face a bleak future with limited job opportunities and low wages. Politicians who claim otherwise are conning their constituents. There is no "bending back the curve" because we can't turn the clock back 60 or 70 years.

Dumbass Trumpists gonna make dumbass arguments defending their hero's lies and failures.

So Katja Guenther is a nutcase. So what? So is Marjorie Taylor-Greene. At least Guenther isn't sitting in the US House of Representatives.

My point is that it's Republicans who have made -- and continue to make -- their own trouble. Huntsman isn't acceptable to most of the GOP because he's not close enough to Wacko Trumpism. Marjorie Taylor-Greene obviously is acceptable because she's a true believer in Wacko Trumpism. Right now, "moderate Republicans" -- ie, Republicans unwilling to kiss Trump's ass -- are an endangered species in the GOP. When the Republicans fix their own issues, then you can complain about the left wing of the Democratic Party not being willing to work with "moderate" Republicans.

The left wing of the Democratic Party doesn't control what the Republican Party does, so don't try to shift the blame from where it belongs. The Republicans used to have a left wing, back in the 1960s and early 1970s. Now, they all they have are Right Wingers, Far Right Wingers, Far Right Extremists, and Wacko Trumpists (ie, traitors and fascists). That's their "big tent", and the Wacko Trumpists want to purge the Right Wingers for not being "pure" enough.

Righties are desperately trying to find new topics to divert attention from the GOP's embrace of fascism and treason.

The GOP has a "far left"? Seriously? Who would be in that group?

The silence is deafening because there's nothing here. It's a private school that sets its own policies. If you don't like their philosophy, don't send your kids there.

Not all threats are equal. On a threat scale of 0 to 10, with 0 being "None", WEF is about a 1.

Small groups that meet secretly to plan illegal activities to advance their personal political or financial agendas are dangerous, not organizations that have open membership lists, that hold public meetings, sponsor conferences, etc like the World Economic Forum. Individuals, not countries, are members. The president of France and the prime minister of India can agree to something that this group wants but that doesn't mean that they can get their countries to go along with them. So, their view of the future isn't the same as some others'. So what? What actual power does the World Economic Forum have? Can this group enforce sanctions? Can it raise a military force? At best, they might, over decades, convince enough people in enough countries to accept their ideas but so what? Peoples' attitudes towards issues change all the time, and have been changing all the time since ***** sapiens developed the brain power to have attitudes. The US needs to worry about Russians hacking into our computer systems not the fact that the President of China is going to be speaking at the World Economic Forum's 2021 conference. The US needs to worry about white supremacists planning terrorist acts like kidnapping governors or attacking the US Capitol not the fact that some left wing think tank publishes its vision on how to fix climate change.

What I know is that a voluntary organization of world political, business, and economic leaders isn't some kind threat to the US. The Presidents/Prime Ministers of France, Germany, Singapore, and India and the Secretary General of the UN and the managing director of the IMF are hardly dangerous radicals. If you believe that this organization has some sinister power to control the world because of some of video you see on the Internet says so, then you are a dumbass.

I have a Griddler by Cuisinart which is a combination of electric griddle, grill, panini maker, and sandwich maker. Love it. It has 2 reversible plates, one side a flat plate and the other side is a grill plate, that pop out that you can wash in the dishwasher.

I didn't call the World Economic Forum "right wing wackos". I called you and your fellow dumbasses "right wing wackos".

I did. The OP accused the Lincoln Project of being full of full of pedos and pervs, so I pointed out that Trump has had some notable connections to pedos and pervs. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, too, dude. Not my problem the OP has nothing real/significant/timely to post about so settles for spreading manure.

Hmmm ... Trump's been accused of rape, Trump's bestie Epstein was a convicted pedophile and now one of Trump's new lawyers for the impeachment trial defended pedo/perv Bill Cosby and then sued one of Cosby's victims. It seems that Trump's the pervert who surrounds himself with pedos and their defenders.

Another day, another right wing wacko conspiracy theory.

The GOP wants Trump to use his $250-300 million slush fund to help regain Congress in 2022 ... ... that money will be long gone down some rabbit hole if it hasn't already disappeared just like all those tens of millions of 2020 campaign funds that Trump squandered.