Doc Posted June 28 Posted June 28 17 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said: Thank you for posting this! Took awhile to realize what many of us knew months ago. But I guess the good thing is he finally got there. 1
Westside Posted June 28 Posted June 28 Just now, stevestojan said: ***** off. How’s that sound? You should be happy that I said what I said. But you’d rather continue the divide because… ? So again, ***** off. I’m not the one who came here calling anyone who disagrees with you every name in the book. Am I and everyone who was your target should just forget the way you acted because you finally realized your favorite candidate is a stumbling bumbling old fool? I should be happy with what you said? I seriously doubt if the shoe was on the other foot you’d be so forgiving. So go ahead and call me names. I really don’t care. It just shows you are not serious about your so called apology.
muppy Posted June 28 Posted June 28 8 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Hi Mup, I didn't watch much, I find debates to be mostly a waste of time. In any presidential debate at any time you'll find facts mixed up, misremembered, lies and manipulation. Then, you have the debrief where others tell you what you should or should not think about what was or was not said. This debate, however, was special in the fact that it was the televised implosion the image of a presidential candidate on a foundational level, though the image was obviously false based on an sensible look at the man in question. We've had dialogue on this...you should vote your heart and it's not my place to suggest otherwise. Since you reached out, however, I'll share what I think about what you think, and hope no hard feelings ensue thereafter. Many people feel there is some existential threat (that's the phrase they use, sounds ominous) if either of these guys wins. I don't think that. It's an election, some will be happy with the results, others not. Some policies will hurt some people one way or the other. Trump implied we're doomed one way, Biden claimed it was the end of democracy the other. Whatever. If you mourn for Biden that Trump suggested he "encouraged" Russia to invade Ukraine, it's a wasted emotion. Biden blamed Trump for the same thing. What I can tell you is that countries in that neck of the woods tend to fare poorly when Democrats are in office. Crimea. Ukraine. And lots of money passing through a few hands thereafter. Very few candidates, if any, answer questions. I expect very little in that regard. If Trump's tax policies bother you, vote for Biden. He's as completely full of **** as anyone else. Between inflation, taxation and government spending, a dollar doesn't stretch very far on his watch and he's in the pocket of billionaires and multi-millionaires just like everyone else, though some of his are apparently from China. On election results, this question and subsequent argument is overly simplistic. If you think that the dems "accepted" the results of 2016 because of HRCs "concession", we disagree. We only disagree because the democrats launched a systemic and sustained misinformation campaign claiming the election was illegitimate, which where I come from means "not legitimate". Consider, btw, this letter from Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar and others suggesting the lead up to 2020 was not paved with guarantees of the freest, fairest, and what has come to be known as THE ELECTION NOT TO BE CONTESTED: https://www.warren.senate.gov/oversight/letters/warren-klobuchar-wyden-and-pocan-investigate-vulnerabilities-and-shortcomings-of-election-technology-industry-with-ties-to-private-equity Election security experts have noted for years that our nation's election systems and infrastructure are under serious threat, but voting machines reportedly continue to fail and breakdown across the country, as vendors fail to innovate, improve, and protect voting systems, putting U.S. elections at avoidable and increased risk. Bottom line--2020 was going to be contested as unfair or illegitimate or stolen any way you slice it. homey I tag you on events I enter PPP for because you give me thinking that I Trust. Do we always agree? no but that to me is irrelevent. Gracias and as usual a pleasure 😉 In regards to the Uber rich not paying their share do YOU think they do? Now back to work. for me. And for you too. Senora Leo told me telepathically she needs a new outfit and shoes. snap snap. lmao 🙂 1
stevestojan Posted June 28 Posted June 28 2 minutes ago, Westside said: I’m not the one who came here calling anyone who disagrees with you every name in the book. Am I and everyone who was your target should just forget the way you acted because you finally realized your favorite candidate is a stumbling bumbling old fool? I should be happy with what you said? I seriously doubt if the shoe was on the other foot you’d be so forgiving. So go ahead and call me names. I really don’t care. It just shows you are not serious about your so called apology. GFC 2
Westside Posted June 28 Posted June 28 Just now, stevestojan said: GFC You’re such a small minded little child. 1 1
stevestojan Posted June 28 Posted June 28 4 minutes ago, Westside said: You’re such a small minded little child. And you’re a ***** who can’t realize the goal of something like a debate is to let people see the candidates and decide. You’d rather I had come out bashing Drumpf again so the endless back and forth can continue. Proud of you. Dolt. 1 1
Roundybout Posted June 28 Posted June 28 5 minutes ago, RiotAct said: Great Financial Crisis? Gluten free cheesecake 3
AlBUNDY4TDS Posted June 28 Posted June 28 16 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Comon man, today is definitely not the day to post this. 1
Westside Posted June 28 Posted June 28 17 minutes ago, stevestojan said: And you’re a ***** who can’t realize the goal of something like a debate is to let people see the candidates and decide. You’d rather I had come out bashing Drumpf again so the endless back and forth can continue. Proud of you. Dolt. I don’t care if you bashed Trump, but you bashed ANYONE who disagreed with you. Keep up the name calling, it’s really making your case for you.
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted June 28 Posted June 28 27 minutes ago, muppy said: homey I tag you on events I enter PPP for because you give me thinking that I Trust. Do we always agree? no but that to me is irrelevent. Gracias and as usual a pleasure 😉 In regards to the Uber rich not paying their share do YOU think they do? Now back to work. for me. And for you too. Senora Leo told me telepathically she needs a new outfit and shoes. snap snap. lmao 🙂 With regard to the über rich, I think the argument is often dialed down to the least common denominator. If an extremely wealthy taco heiress, let's call her Taquito Muppito, earns income directly, Taquito Muppito is taxed accordingly. If she has income related to the sales of investments, capital gains, dividends, offsets with losses, she is taxed accordingly. If she lies, she is supposed to be caught. if she calls it straight, she's not finding loopholes, she's following tax law. On one other note, try and get this story straight in the context of wealthy politicians going to bat for the little guy: https://www.therobinsonadvocacygroup.com/the-passing-of-senator-dianne-feinstein-estate-plan-lessons-for-blended-families A judge has ordered the dispute to be resolved in private mediation.[1] While this could keep the final resolution outside public view, the legal drama offers lessons illustrating the need for careful estate planning in blended families. Do you think, Mup, that Diane Feinstein called it straight and looked out for the little people along the way? When push came to shove, she had infinite wealth, took advantage of the planning option with some of the finest minds in the world, dodged tax wherever and however she could, and wanted all her vast wealth spoken for on her death. It's malarkey, Mup, and all the Joe Bidens, Hillary Clintons and Liz Warrens in the world aren't changing that. So, I stay in my lane, mostly. 1 1
muppy Posted June 28 Posted June 28 (edited) 25 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: With regard to the über rich, I think the argument is often dialed down to the least common denominator. If an extremely wealthy taco heiress, let's call her Taquito Muppito, earns income directly, Taquito Muppito is taxed accordingly. If she has income related to the sales of investments, capital gains, dividends, offsets with losses, she is taxed accordingly. If she lies, she is supposed to be caught. if she calls it straight, she's not finding loopholes, she's following tax law. On one other note, try and get this story straight in the context of wealthy politicians going to bat for the little guy: https://www.therobinsonadvocacygroup.com/the-passing-of-senator-dianne-feinstein-estate-plan-lessons-for-blended-families A judge has ordered the dispute to be resolved in private mediation.[1] While this could keep the final resolution outside public view, the legal drama offers lessons illustrating the need for careful estate planning in blended families. Do you think, Mup, that Diane Feinstein called it straight and looked out for the little people along the way? When push came to shove, she had infinite wealth, took advantage of the planning option with some of the finest minds in the world, dodged tax wherever and however she could, and wanted all her vast wealth spoken for on her death. It's malarkey, Mup, and all the Joe Bidens, Hillary Clintons and Liz Warrens in the world aren't changing that. So, I stay in my laneAnd Im you had me at taquito muppito. LOL but seriously though me being who I am, speaking only for myself, if I had Uber wealth clearly there was a reason for it. And I am not a socialist who thinks that rich people don't deserve to have money Lots of it. I am thinking of proportional responsibility as citizens with the most able to afford it Fairness amigo. I don't think I'm wrong *shrugs* Either side PS: you stay in your lane dearie . as soon as I read that this song came to mind LOL I claim you as my PPP bestie Its all Good 🙂 CHEERS Edited June 28 by muppy
Pokebball Posted June 28 Posted June 28 1 hour ago, Tiberius said: Is this a defense of Biden, in some contourted way?>
The Frankish Reich Posted June 28 Posted June 28 4 hours ago, JDHillFan said: And to think you told us he is mentally fit just a couple days ago… Well, you seemed to think that he'd be jacked up on some PEDs and would turn in a State of the Union yelling performance. Which, by the way, he seemed to be doing at a rally today. Teleprompter? I guess, I don't know. I still stand with Nate Silver: even if propped up by his staff he's preferable to Trump. Better still, a whole new nominee. 1
Biden is Mentally Fit Posted June 28 Posted June 28 Just now, The Frankish Reich said: Well, you seemed to think that he'd be jacked up on some PEDs and would turn in a State of the Union yelling performance. Which, by the way, he seemed to be doing at a rally today. Teleprompter? I guess, I don't know. I still stand with Nate Silver: even if propped up by his staff he's preferable to Trump. Better still, a whole new nominee. I did and quite clearly I was wrong. The cortisone shot didn’t even help him. 1 1
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted June 28 Posted June 28 13 minutes ago, muppy said: you had me at taquito muppito. LOL but seriously though me being who I am, speaking only for myself, if I had Uber wealth clearly there was a reason for it. And I am not a socialist who thinks that rich people don't deserve to have money Lots of it. I am thinking of proportional responsibility as citizens with the most able to afford it Fairness amigo. I don't think I'm wrong *shrugs* Either side PS: you stay in your lane dearie . as soon as I read that this song came to mind LOL I claim you as my PPP bestie Its all Good 🙂 CHEERS You're not advocating for 'fairness', though. You're advocating for seizing assets. And, even if I agreed with you, see Feinstein, Diane, and how she felt about fairness.
Recommended Posts