It is time for Biden to step aside - Page 21 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15093219
late wrote:Love the crazy.

On a good day, Biden is pretty articulate. Trump never has a good day...

If Biden meets Trump in a debate, Biden's good days will be over for sure. :lol:
#15093228
Biden is like a "Frankenstein candidate" who was built to be the worst possible man to run against Trump.

1) Don't want an old white male? They haven't even been using that line for months now but it's been one of their favorites for at least a decade.
2) Sexism? Sniff sniff.
3) Going after Trump's kids? Never really effective but they clearly like doing it. Hunter Biden.
4) Economy? Even after a historic event, Trump's economy is probably going to be net better than the Obama/Biden economy.
5) Muh Russia and Ukraine? Biden has weaknesses there that other candidates might not have had.
6) Geopolitical stuff like saber rattling towards China, Biden is far weaker in that area than Trump is.

There's always talking about racism while running an old white man I guess. Where's my Trayvon Martin thread? Do we even have a thread on the latest Trayvon?
#15093289
Remember Obama's first run?

The racists were making comments like "stump turtle".

Odd they've stopped saying it, because Trump is pure unadulterated stump turtle.. Besides the BS, he's got nothing.
#15093315
Unthinking Majority wrote:Corporate influence has rotted out America for the last 40 years. He's a massive ass but i'm glad Trump beat Hillary. At least he doesn't answer to them. You need to be extremely ethical or literally not give a f--- in order to pull that off.


Trump does not answer to them?

Trump is literally one of them. He is the corporate influence you discuss.
#15093326
Pants-of-dog wrote:Trump does not answer to them?

Trump is literally one of them. He is the corporate influence you discuss.


Yes he is, but he doesn't take orders from others including all the interests of across every industry. Maybe he'll act in the interests of real estate or the wealthy in general (ie: tax cuts), but not much else. If he ran a business that was manufacturing-heavy would he be having a trade war with China? Unlikely.
#15093327
skinster wrote:Leftists in this thread supporting rightwingers like Biden and Warren. :eh:



Biden is a moderate or maybe moderate-left. Warren is on the left. They'd only look like the right to someone on the extreme left.
#15093330
Unthinking Majority wrote:Yes he is, but he doesn't take orders from others including all the interests of across every industry. Maybe he'll act in the interests of real estate or the wealthy in general (ie: tax cuts), but not much else. If he ran a business that was manufacturing-heavy would he be having a trade war with China? Unlikely.


Whether or not he takes orders is immaterial, since he is one of the people giving orders.

And yes, he does act in the interests of corporate influence in general, because he is a member of that class, just like the Bushes.

Why do you think he slashed environmental regulations?

Plus, he (like other corporate influence types) think government is there to serve them, which explains why he is so easygoing about his position for personal gain.

And he has always been like this. His (classist) idea that society is here to serve him is also consistent with his long pattern of rapist behaviour.

Unthinking Majority wrote:Biden is a moderate or maybe moderate-left. Warren is on the left. They'd only look like the right to someone on the extreme left.


Only if you look at it solely through a US lens. If you look at politicians from all across the developed world, Sanders is a centrist, Trump is far right, and most other US politicians are right to centre right.
#15093386
Pants-of-dog wrote:Whether or not he takes orders is immaterial, since he is one of the people giving orders.


He's the POTUS, that's his job. It's not the POTUS or Congress's job to take cues from the corporations and every wealthy donor you can shake a stick at. Trump created his own hype in 2016, he was on every news channel almost 24/7 the whole year, thus he was able to spend half as much fundraising money as Hillary did.

And yes, he does act in the interests of corporate influence in general, because he is a member of that class, just like the Bushes.


They were oil barons. Oil has huge foreign policy implications. What implications does real estate have in politics for a POTUS? Trump is outside the establishment, just like Bernie. Trump doesn't give an eff what anyone wants him to do. Outside money doesn't control him, that was my point. Not saying his own greed isn't a factor.

Why do you think he slashed environmental regulations?


He's an anti-science idiot? Maybe there's real estate implications there, maybe it's harder to build.
#15093389
Unthinking Majority wrote:

Trump is outside the establishment



He is, by definition part of the establishment.

Using your own analogy, he is being spectacularly generous to the energy sector. Which should be getting pretty much nothing.
#15093390
Unthinking Majority wrote:He's an anti-science idiot? Maybe there's real estate implications there, maybe it's harder to build.

Obama Sets the Record for Job-Killing Regulations
September 6, 2016

Regulations are often intended to improve safety and welfare, but all too often they produce more harm than the problems they are intended to correct. Poorly conceived, designed, or executed regulations cost jobs, reduce income, and also—at least in some cases—result in premature death.

In 2014, 224 laws were enacted by Congress, whereas, according to Crews’ report, 3,554 rules were issued by agencies. This means, on average, 16 rules were issued for every law enacted. The regulations resulted in an estimated annual regulatory compliance and economic cost of $1.88 trillion. If the costs of all federal regulations flowed all the way down to households, U.S. households would “pay” $14,976 every year in a hidden regulatory tax. That is more than the average household spends on virtually any other single item or service, other than housing.

More recently, a new study by the American Action Forum (AAF), titled “600 Major Regulations,” revealed in just six years in office, President Barack Obama had imposed more major regulations—regulations having an economic impact of $100 million or more on the economy— than President George W. Bush did in eight years. According to AAF, the Obama administration issued a record-breaking 600 major regulations, imposing a combined economic burden on the economy of at least $743 billion, which is larger than the gross domestic product (GDP) of Israel and Norway combined and amounts to $2,294 in regulatory costs on every person in the United States.

This is important, because poverty is by far the biggest killer of people. Nations and regions lacking inexpensive and reliable energy, readily available health care, and abundant, nutritious food suffer more premature deaths, have higher infant mortality, lower disease survival rates, and have shorter lifespans, compared to wealthier nations and people. This is an undisputed fact.

Federal regulations usually ignore the link between wealth and health. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations targeting carbon dioxide and mercury, for instance, have costs far exceeding any expected benefits. Carbon dioxide is a nontoxic, naturally occurring gas that poses no threat at all to human health at present levels or at the levels reasonably estimated for the foreseeable future. Mercury, while a potentially lethal toxin, poses no or minimal risk of harm at current levels in the United States.

EPA regulations limiting mercury were so unnecessary, they were tossed out by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2015. Writing for the majority, the now-deceased Justice Antonin Scalia wrote, “It is not rational, never mind ‘appropriate,’ to impose billions of dollars in economic costs in return for a few dollars in health or environmental benefits.”

In early 2016, ignoring the Supreme Court’s ruling, EPA upheld the mercury regulation, saying its benefits exceeded its costs without providing any new evidence to support its claim. Various estimates show the mercury rule will produce just $4 million to $6 million in health benefits—at a cost of more than $9.6 billion.

Since, the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has estimated every $7.5 million to $12 million in regulatory costs imposed on the economy results in a life lost, the mercury regulations could result in between 800 and 1,250 premature deaths, while failing to save even a single life.

EPA’s Clean Power Plan (CPP) could be even deadlier. It aims to cut emissions of carbon dioxide from the nation’s power sector by 32 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. EPA, with reason to paint the benefits of its plan in the best light possible, estimates CPP would result in avoidance of 21,000 total premature deaths through 2030. By comparison, the Energy Information Administration has pegged the cumulative costs of the rule through 2030 at $1.23 trillion in lost GDP (in 2014 dollars), thus the estimated 21,000 lives saved is dwarfed by the 102,500 to 164,000 early deaths CPP is expected to cause, if the OMB is right about the costs.

https://www.redstate.com/diary/Heartlan ... gulations/
#15093394
Unthinking Majority wrote:He's the POTUS, that's his job. It's not the POTUS or Congress's job to take cues from the corporations and every wealthy donor you can shake a stick at. Trump created his own hype in 2016, he was on every news channel almost 24/7 the whole year, thus he was able to spend half as much fundraising money as Hillary did.


I was not saying that he was the one giving orders as POTUS.

I meant that he is one of those who gave orders and was (and is) part of the corporate influence on US politics.

They were oil barons. Oil has huge foreign policy implications. What implications does real estate have in politics for a POTUS? Trump is outside the establishment, just like Bernie. Trump doesn't give an eff what anyone wants him to do. Outside money doesn't control him, that was my point. Not saying his own greed isn't a factor.


He is just as controlled by outside money as the Bushes are: by whatever amount he is working for people like himself. Other construction magnates profit from his policies in immigration, even though he is primarily doing it for himself, just like other shareholders in oil and defense get rich even though the Bushes do it for themselves.

He's an anti-science idiot? Maybe there's real estate implications there, maybe it's harder to build.


He probably got paid to do it via lobbyists. And it looks good for his mouthbreathing base.
#15093401
Hindsite wrote:
https://www.redstate.com/diary/Heartlan ... gulations/



Heartland is a Koch propaganda mill.

"The Heartland Institute, a conservative think tank, launched a billboard campaign in 2012 to compare believers in global warming to "murderers and madmen" such as the Unabomber, Charles Manson and Osama bin Laden. The backlash was so severe that Heartland pulled the plug within 24 hours, but it still lost major donors and political allies and faced criticism that its fight against climate science was beyond extreme."
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/2212 ... nfographic

They are so crazy that Big Oil has stepped in to oppose them a number of times. That would not include the Kochs, for the obvious reason.
#15093402
late wrote:Heartland is a Koch propaganda mill.

"The Heartland Institute, a conservative think tank, launched a billboard campaign in 2012 to compare believers in global warming to "murderers and madmen" such as the Unabomber, Charles Manson and Osama bin Laden. The backlash was so severe that Heartland pulled the plug within 24 hours, but it still lost major donors and political allies and faced criticism that its fight against climate science was beyond extreme."
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/2212 ... nfographic

They are so crazy that Big Oil has stepped in to oppose them a number of times. That would not include the Kochs, for the obvious reason.

The article was written by H. Sterling Burnett, Ph.D., who is no crazy.
On June 1, 2017 he also wrote the following article:

Trump's Paris climate decision should be celebrated by Democrats, Republicans and independents

Americans of every stripe should celebrate the Paris agreement’s demise, for it represents a stunning victory for taxpayers and middle- and lower-income families and the elevation of science over irrational fears about the future of Earth’s climate.
#15093404
@Unthinking Majority They should have all-black schools that are fiercely disciplined and don't put up with misbehaviour or a lack of effort, which is endemic to low-achieving students and schools, with teachers who need to meet the strictest standards.


Really? Separate but equal? Well it is a dog whistle that will appeal to Trump's racist supporters no doubt.

On race. It is time the democrats stopped worrying about how to attract minorities who are already mostly in the bag. They need to peel off from Trump one group; white women voters. If they can do that they have it made.

Trump and the republicans will try anything to get him reelected. We already see his pathetically unintelligent supporters going for the dementia and sex abuse stuff. We even have some here on the left side of the scale referring to him as a rapist. Stupid, foolish and wrong. But then the republicans do not have a patent on stupid, foolish and wrong.

One person earlier @Hindsite posted about Obama's job killing regulations despite the fact that unemployment fell dramatically under Obama. Of course that was no problem for him because under Bush just as now, the economy was pushed into a recession.
#15093405
Hindsite wrote:

The article was written by H. Sterling Burnett, Ph.D., who is no crazy.




He works for Koch...

"Sterling Burnett, a “senior fellow” at the oil industry friendly National Center for Policy Analysis is claiming in a release today that global warming is a hoax because it is cold in Minnesota this winter. Really?

If only Burnett were right, we could move on and forget about this whole global warming thing. Unfortunately, Burnett is way off base which is no surprise considering this is the same Fox News pundit that compared Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth to Nazi war-time propaganda."
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/does-sterling-burnett-act_b_157915

He's batshit crazy, in it for the money or most likely both.
  • 1
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 36

And do what? Vote for the Democrats who gave tr[…]

@wat0n You seem to be discussing a detail of […]

Provide evidence for this claim. And you do real[…]

Defrauding the worker of his wages in order to en[…]