Joe Ferguson forever Posted 21 hours ago Posted 21 hours ago 33 minutes ago, B-Man said: Schumer. No. You. I linked the front page article of last Cortland Standard which included a 25% tariff on newsprint as a cause for closing. And you double down...on lying. Shameless 1 hour ago, Doc Brown said: How in the world do we let one guy have this much power over tariffs? Just don't look at your 401(k's) folks. I heard an R commentator on CNN say that 56% of Americans can't drum up $1000 for an emergency expense. They mostly voted for trump. They don't have 401k's. They don't care except they really, really want to "own the libs". But, yeah, I'm not looking. Unfortunately, my mental arithmetic is still fairly good. 1
Doc Brown Posted 21 hours ago Posted 21 hours ago 5 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: I heard an R commentator on CNN say that 56% of Americans can't drum up $1000 for an emergency expense. They mostly voted for trump. They don't have 401k's. They don't care except they really, really want to "own the libs". But, yeah, I'm not looking. Unfortunately, my mental arithmetic is still fairly good. Link? 2
Doc Posted 21 hours ago Posted 21 hours ago (edited) 1 hour ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: No. You. I linked the front page article of last Cortland Standard which included a 25% tariff on newsprint as a cause for closing. And you double down...on lying. Shameless I heard an R commentator on CNN say that 56% of Americans can't drum up $1000 for an emergency expense. They mostly voted for trump. They don't have 401k's. They don't care except they really, really want to "own the libs". But, yeah, I'm not looking. Unfortunately, my mental arithmetic is still fairly good. The CS moved their printing to Oswego last August to try and cut costs. And while newsprint cost was mentioned, it was just one of half a dozen things that had nothing to do with tariffs. Newspapers are dying, especially small ones like this. And people haven't been able to cover a $1000 emergency for years. Edited 20 hours ago by Doc 1 1
B-Man Posted 21 hours ago Posted 21 hours ago (edited) 22 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: I quoted the PUBLISHER of the paper , Open it and see. There is NO mention of tariffs from him. YOU quoted the frontpage news story by THE STAFF, which added (including an expected 25% tariff on newsprint). A note from the publisher Posted Thursday, March 13, 2025 3:00 am This is the last edition of the Cortland Standard. The presses have been silent since August, when we shifted our printing to a facility in Oswego. At the time, I had hoped that cost-saving measure would give us some wiggle room. Unfortunately, despite the hard work and dedication of my talented colleagues, we cannot go any further. Continues at the link: https://www.cortlandstandard.com/stories/a-note-from-the-publisher,133577 Schumer , and sheep like you are spinning this, and I know that you won't admit you were wrong but double down again. This paper has been closing for a half a year or more, and you ridiculously blame it on EXPECTED increases Shameless ? Check out your mirror ADDED: 17 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: Link? He doesn't need a link Doc. Joe's claim is all he needs. Edited 21 hours ago by B-Man 1
Doc Brown Posted 21 hours ago Posted 21 hours ago 5 minutes ago, B-Man said: He doesn't need a link Doc. Joe's claim is all he needs. Voters in all income tiers rarely vote more than 40 to 60% in either direction for different parties. That's why it's hard for me to believe that almost all of the 56% of people who can't come up with $1,000 in case of emergency "mostly voted for Trump." Could be wrong through. 1 1
The Frankish Reich Posted 20 hours ago Author Posted 20 hours ago 33 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: Voters in all income tiers rarely vote more than 40 to 60% in either direction for different parties. That's why it's hard for me to believe that almost all of the 56% of people who can't come up with $1,000 in case of emergency "mostly voted for Trump." Could be wrong through. I wouldn't be surprised if it was 56% of white people. Let's listen to the words of an expert analyst: "Vance said he noticed as a child that his peers seemed to fall into two groups: “My grandparents embodied one type: old-fashioned, quietly faithful, self-reliant, hardworking. My mother and, increasingly, the entire neighborhood embodied another: consumerist, isolated, angry, distrustful.” What might the government do differently? Vance notes that hillbillies love to complain, a la Trump, that the system is holding them back. “Never be like those f—ing losers who think the deck is stacked against them,” Mamaw used to tell her grandson. And yet hillbillies create so many varieties of misery for themselves. Vance recalls that in high school, a neighbor ran a bath, took some painkillers and passed out. When she awoke, the bath had overflowed and ruined the top floor of her house. “This is the reality of our community,” Vance writes. “It’s about a naked druggie destroying what little of value exists in her life. It’s about children who lose their toys and clothes to a mother’s addiction.” 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted 20 hours ago Posted 20 hours ago (edited) 2 hours ago, B-Man said: This is the last edition of the Cortland Standard. The presses have been silent since August, when we shifted our printing to a facility in Oswego. At the time, I had hoped that cost-saving measure would give us some wiggle room. Unfortunately, despite the hard work and dedication of my talented colleagues, we cannot go any further. [...] Our print readership continues to decline, and our digital subscriptions have grown too slowly to make up the difference. Advertisers increasingly want to focus their marketing efforts online, at much lower prices. The cost of essential software goes up every year. The cost of fuel is up. The cost of newsprint is up. I can’t afford to pay my people what they’re worth. I can’t afford to publish this newspaper any more. That was what actually happened. Did you see the words "Trump's tariffs" anywhere in that entire statement? Neither did we. That's because you and the "we" responsible for this yellow journalistic garbage supposedly didn't bother to look at the front page article that links the publisher's letter somehow (doesn't surprise me that you didn't fact check what you shared). !/2 truths are untruths...but that's who you are. Edited 20 hours ago by Joe Ferguson forever
Joe Ferguson forever Posted 20 hours ago Posted 20 hours ago 1 hour ago, Doc Brown said: Link? This link actually says 59% https://www.cbsnews.com/news/saving-money-emergency-expenses-2025/ I said "mostly voted for trump". Look at the voter demographics from 2024
Doc Brown Posted 20 hours ago Posted 20 hours ago 8 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: I wouldn't be surprised if it was 56% of white people. Let's listen to the words of an expert analyst: "Vance said he noticed as a child that his peers seemed to fall into two groups: “My grandparents embodied one type: old-fashioned, quietly faithful, self-reliant, hardworking. My mother and, increasingly, the entire neighborhood embodied another: consumerist, isolated, angry, distrustful.” What might the government do differently? Vance notes that hillbillies love to complain, a la Trump, that the system is holding them back. “Never be like those f—ing losers who think the deck is stacked against them,” Mamaw used to tell her grandson. And yet hillbillies create so many varieties of misery for themselves. Vance recalls that in high school, a neighbor ran a bath, took some painkillers and passed out. When she awoke, the bath had overflowed and ruined the top floor of her house. “This is the reality of our community,” Vance writes. “It’s about a naked druggie destroying what little of value exists in her life. It’s about children who lose their toys and clothes to a mother’s addiction.” Okay. Now I need both a study citing the race of the 56% of the voters from who don't have $1000.00 in case of an emergency and a study showing how those in that group "mostly voted" for Trump.
B-Man Posted 20 hours ago Posted 20 hours ago 3 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: That's because you and the "we" responsible for this yellow journalistic garbage supposedly didn't bother to look at the front page article that links the publisher's letter somehow (doesn't surprise me that you didn't fact check what you shared). !/2 truths are untruths...but that's who you are. Gibberish. The publisher of the paper did not blame the tariffs for the closure. That's what matters, NOT the front page story. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. Schumer, and nitwits like you try and spin it your way. You cant admit when you are wrong, so in your eagerness to try and disprove a verifiable fact you keep doubling down. If you weren't such a gigantic fool, I would almost feel sorry for you. .
Doc Brown Posted 20 hours ago Posted 20 hours ago (edited) 4 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: This link actually says 59% https://www.cbsnews.com/news/saving-money-emergency-expenses-2025/ I said "mostly voted for trump". Look at the voter demographics from 2024 There is nothing in the article that breaks down the voter demographics of the now changed 59%. Edited 20 hours ago by Doc Brown 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted 20 hours ago Posted 20 hours ago (edited) 10 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: There is nothing in the article that breaks down the voter demographics of the now changed 59%. 17 The number of points that voters who make less than $100,000 a year shifted in Trump's favor. The country is in a political realignment with working-class voters moving even more in Republicans' favor and wealthier and more educated voters moving in Democrats' direction. Four years ago, Biden won voters who make less than $100,000 a year, 56%-43%, but Trump won them 51%-47% in this election. On the flip side, in 2020, Trump won those making $100,000 a year by 12 points four years ago, and Harris won them this time by 4. from npr https://www.npr.org/2024/12/27/nx-s1-5222570/2024-politics-recap Edited 20 hours ago by Joe Ferguson forever
Doc Brown Posted 20 hours ago Posted 20 hours ago (edited) 16 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: 17 The number of points that voters who make less than $100,000 a year shifted in Trump's favor. The country is in a political realignment with working-class voters moving even more in Republicans' favor and wealthier and more educated voters moving in Democrats' direction. Four years ago, Biden won voters who make less than $100,000 a year, 56%-43%, but Trump won them 51%-47% in this election. On the flip side, in 2020, Trump won those making $100,000 a year by 12 points four years ago, and Harris won them this time by 4. from npr https://www.npr.org/2024/12/27/nx-s1-5222570/2024-politics-recap So "mostly voted for Trump" is 51% to you? I see that as a tiny majority. I do appreciate you doing some research on it though because it's interesting. Why do you think they swung their vote that much? Edited 20 hours ago by Doc Brown 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted 18 hours ago Posted 18 hours ago (edited) 1 hour ago, Doc Brown said: So "mostly voted for Trump" is 51% to you? I see that as a tiny majority. I do appreciate you doing some research on it though because it's interesting. Why do you think they swung their vote that much? 51 is more than 47. by a margin significantly greater than that which the president was elected. it's arguable whether that demographic won it for him. That Trump won 77,284,118 votes, or 49.8 percent of the votes cast for president. That is the second highest vote total in U.S. history, trailing only the 81,284,666 votes that Joe Biden won in 2020. Trump won 3,059,799 more popular votes in 2024 than he won in 2020 and 14,299,293 more than he won in 2016. He now holds the record for the most cumulative popular votes won by any presidential candidate in U.S. history, surpassing Barack Obama. Running three times for the White House obviously helps. Kamala Harris won 74,999,166 votes or 48.3 percent of the votes cast. That was 6,285,500 fewer popular votes than Biden won in 2020, but 774,847 more than Trump won in 2020. Edited 18 hours ago by Joe Ferguson forever
stevestojan Posted 18 hours ago Posted 18 hours ago Trump: Why should we be buying lumber from other countries? Answer: because that’s where the trees are. https://www.instagram.com/reel/DG_B3Dpu9h2/?igsh=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ== 1
Buddy Hix Posted 17 hours ago Posted 17 hours ago (edited) 2 hours ago, B-Man said: Gibberish. The publisher of the paper did not blame the tariffs for the closure. That's what matters, NOT the front page story. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. Schumer, and nitwits like you try and spin it your way. You cant admit when you are wrong, so in your eagerness to try and disprove a verifiable fact you keep doubling down. If you weren't such a gigantic fool, I would almost feel sorry for you. . You get fooled by the propaganda you indulge in, and then call others nitwits. Just the most pathetic people, and so easy to fool. BTW, the publisher is responsible for all content of a paper. So when they decided to cite tariffs as one of the final straws that forced them to fold (in the lead story, lol), they probably didn’t feel the need to repeat themselves. Edited 17 hours ago by Buddy Hix 1
IrishLass Posted 17 hours ago Posted 17 hours ago 1 hour ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: 51 is more than 47. by a margin significantly greater than that which the president was elected. it's arguable whether that demographic won it for him. The hispanics won it for Trump.
Doc Brown Posted 17 hours ago Posted 17 hours ago 1 hour ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: 51 is more than 47. by a margin significantly greater than that which the president was elected. it's arguable whether that demographic won it for him. That Trump won 77,284,118 votes, or 49.8 percent of the votes cast for president. That is the second highest vote total in U.S. history, trailing only the 81,284,666 votes that Joe Biden won in 2020. Trump won 3,059,799 more popular votes in 2024 than he won in 2020 and 14,299,293 more than he won in 2016. He now holds the record for the most cumulative popular votes won by any presidential candidate in U.S. history, surpassing Barack Obama. Running three times for the White House obviously helps. Kamala Harris won 74,999,166 votes or 48.3 percent of the votes cast. That was 6,285,500 fewer popular votes than Biden won in 2020, but 774,847 more than Trump won in 2020. That’s like telling someone it was “mostly heads” if you flipped a coin heads 51 out of a 100 times.
Andy1 Posted 17 hours ago Posted 17 hours ago China is hitting back at Trump country. When the ranchers can’t sell their cows, it will be a nanosecond before they ask for a federal bailout. Trump bailed out the farmers last time. So stupid and what a mess!
IrishLass Posted 17 hours ago Posted 17 hours ago 21 minutes ago, Buddy Hix said: You get fooled by the propaganda you indulge in, and then call others nitwits. Just the most pathetic people, and so easy to fool. BTW, the publisher is responsible for all content of a paper. So when they decided to cite tariffs as one of the final straws that forced them to fold (in the lead story, lol), they probably didn’t feel the need to repeat themselves. 127 newspapers closed last year, following a trend of 3300 newspapers folding since 2005. So sure, TARIFFS! It couldn't be that hardly anyone bothers to read a physical newspaper any more. 1
Recommended Posts