Looking Forward to the Biden Administration - Page 5 - 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.
#15161542
blackjack21 wrote:

That's because bond holders get bailed out at taxpayer's expense.




No, it's because cities that have gone through bankruptcy won't recover for a generation or two, with no guarantee they will ever recover.

People and businesses move out because the police dept was massively cut, the fire dept got cut, the schools decline, and even the streets turn to crap.

Reality, get a shrink and find it.
#15161543
Godstud wrote::lol: Irregularities? There were none except in the minds of mental midget Trumpanzees.

No. Trump supporters are racists and fascists. Opponents to Trump are people who support the Constitution and the Democratic process.

No, they are not. But you are a fascist. You are attacking every pro-Trump poster here. Anti-Trumpists are fanatics like you.

late wrote:
No, it's because cities that have gone through bankruptcy won't recover for a generation or two, with no guarantee they will ever recover.

People and businesses move out because the police dept was massively cut, the fire dept got cut, the schools decline, and even the streets turn to crap.

Reality, get a shrink and find it.

Those blue states and cities are about to be going bankrupt because Dems policies are bankrupt. You are now proposing more failed policies to combat other failed policies. It is hilarious.

Bailing out failed Dem governors, mayors and people will not solve the problem. Those idiots will continue to be irresponsible.

Only way to turn them into responsible people is to make them face consequences of their actions. But Dems are not okay with responsibility which is a conservative principle.
#15161544
Istanbuller wrote:

Those blue states and cities are about to be going bankrupt



There are plenty of Red states, cities and towns that are in trouble. They were before, that's why they get more Fed money than Blue states.

Bet hey, enjoy that fantasy as long as you can. Right up to the moment where you get your wish and the poor Southern states go straight to hell.

Unf***ingbelievable.
#15161551
late wrote:There are plenty of Red states, cities and towns that are in trouble. They were before, that's why they get more Fed money than Blue states.

Bet hey, enjoy that fantasy as long as you can. Right up to the moment where you get your wish and the poor Southern states go straight to hell.

Unf***ingbelievable.

No. There were no riots in red states and cities. Red states do not shut down entire economies. There are terms like balanced budget and surplus budget in conservative finance. Did you guys ever heard of them? These things make Republicans transparent and accountable.

Dems should stop being big spending party. This would be first right thing for them to switch to bright side of history. Let people face consequences.
#15161553
istanbuller wrote:No, they are not. But you are a fascist. You are attacking every pro-Trump poster here. Anti-Trumpists are fanatics like you.
Oh boo hoo. Would you like a soother, for your hurt feelings?

For Trump cultists, being Pro-Democracy is fascist. :knife:

This thread isn't about Trump, but his cultists sure like to think it is. When you post about him, I will continue to lambaste him and his loser followers.
#15161559
Godstud wrote:Who cares if Trump got more votes than in 2016, @blackjack21.

Your contention implies Trump lost support, because he behaved badly in office. The evidence shows otherwise. The 2020 election demonstrates exactly why throwing elections is a terrible idea. It didn't work in Ukraine either. Instead, it precipitated a civil war which they are still dealing with.

Istanbuller wrote:Washington Post's lies are proofs that the election irregularities were driven by anti-Trumpist motives.

It illustrates that the Time's story was true--that they did coordinate this whole thing. The problem for the WaPo is that you don't get your credibility back by merely retracting a story you knew to be false when you published it in the first place.

late wrote:No, it's because cities that have gone through bankruptcy won't recover for a generation or two, with no guarantee they will ever recover.

It's because among other things, their public employee pension funds also buy those bonds and they will take quite a haircut. Between rich bond holders and government pension funds, it's all about protecting the political class. It has nothing to do with the public welfare.

late wrote:People and businesses move out because the police dept was massively cut, the fire dept got cut, the schools decline, and even the streets turn to crap.

Democrats did this voluntarily in 2020. Defund the police was a political move. If you decide you aren't going to prosecute shoplifting--as they have in many areas of California--of course businesses are going to leave, particularly retailers.

Godstud wrote:This thread isn't about Trump, but his cultists sure like to think it is.

Hah! QatzelOk is certainly not a Trumpist. That's the problem for the fraudsters. The Bernie bros hate Biden too, making it obvious that the occupant of the White House has changed but the politics have not. I find it amusing that political conversations virtually everywhere continue to be about Trump, not Biden. In fact, Biden has yet to hold a press conference and take questions.
#15161563
Istanbuller wrote:
No. There were no riots in red states and cities. Red states do not shut down entire economies. There are terms like balanced budget and surplus budget in conservative finance. Did you guys ever heard of them? These things make Republicans transparent and accountable.

Dems should stop being big spending party. This would be first right thing for them to switch to bright side of history. Let people face consequences.



You are babbling.

What you want would set off a deflationary spiral in most states.

We would wind up in a Great Depression. This is above your proverbial pay grade.
#15162430
So the Democrats have run into some hiccups in their drive to push through "the most progressive bill in history" (as I believe Senator Sanders called it). There are two major problems with the new law. The big one for Democrats is the coming $381 billion in mandatory spending cuts--including $36 billion to Medicare. Their problem is the 2010 law requiring pay-as-you-go. That law includes the ability to make exceptions for emergency spending, but because the Democrats chose to push it through using reconciliation and so without Republican support they couldn't use that. So now they need to pass that emergency exception as a separate bill which can be filibustered. So Republicans are in a position that they can demand that rather than okay the emergency bill, that $381 billion be carved out of the law just passed. Considering that 90% of the bill wasn't directly related to pandemic relief, that shouldn't be too hard to manage--unless you're Leftists that have to pick and choose which of your supporters you're willing to tell that they aren't getting their candy, after all.

The other major problem is the language forbidding the states to use any of the funds to offset tax cuts. This is essentially Blue State supporters telling Red States that they can't try to compete economically with the big-spending, high-cost-of-living states. And since the Left refuses to admit that tax cuts improve economies, they'll consider tax cuts to be anything but an illegal reduction in revenues. So essentially, they are trying to use Congress's tax-and-spend authority to regulate the Red States' tax policies. That one is going to be on a fast track to the Supreme Court if Treasury Secretary Yellen doesn't flatly state that no state or local government will have their funding cut if they reduce their taxes, and maybe even if she does.

In the middle of all this, naturally Democrats are looking for some form of alteration to the filibuster that'll satisfy Manchin and Sinema. Personally, while their idea of a "democracy carve out" is a nonstarter (if Democrats choose to carve out exemptions for their pet projects, Republicans will simply do the same once they recover control), I don't mind the idea of reinstating the "talking filibuster" in some form--so long as the change doesn't take effect until the Republicans regain control of the Senate. After all, just four years ago 27 Democratic Senators signed a letter to then-Majority Leader McConnell opposing any alteration to the filibuster at all, and most of those 27 are still serving Senators. If they want me to believe they've had an honest change of heart rather than that they are simply playing power politics, they need to prove it by holding off on the change until they don't personally benefit from it.
#15162432
Come on, Doug. Traitor or bitch?

Tell us why Trump, the man who actually won the election, stopped fighting for you. Is it because he never cared about you or is it because your hero strongman was actually a weak little bitch?

Doug64 wrote:The other major problem is the language forbidding the states to use any of the funds to offset tax cuts. This is essentially Blue State supporters telling Red States that they can't try to compete economically with the big-spending, high-cost-of-living states.


Why do you think blue states have higher than average tax basis and higher COL? Do you think it's because people want to live there?

Doug64 wrote:I don't mind the idea of reinstating the "talking filibuster" in some form--so long as the change doesn't take effect until the Republicans regain control of the Senate. After all, just four years ago 27 Democratic Senators signed a letter to then-Majority Leader McConnell opposing any alteration to the filibuster at all, and most of those 27 are still serving Senators. If they want me to believe they've had an honest change of heart rather than that they are simply playing power politics, they need to prove it by holding off on the change until they don't personally benefit from it.


Nobody cares about your stupid "If my enemy who has all the power now let me make decisions" fantasy. You believe Trump won the election, your opinion is fucking garbage backed by angry white man emotions so volatile that they would explode if I looked at them blackly. Everything you believe is stupid and inconsistent. Why do you believe the people who upended all of democracy to make Biden president give a shit about your idea of what's "fair" in the Senate? Like, you are just breezing past the idea that a presidential election was stolen lmfao.

This is because all of conservative thought is stupid and inconsistent, and is only meant to appeal to people with the mental strength and memory retention of a fucking goldfish.

"Yes, the election was stolen. But also, it's important that we retain the filibuster" lmfao. Just listen to yourself. You can't even think out your own beliefs over whether Trump is a bitch or a traitor, you wimp.

Image

How could a man who brags about having a 50% approval rating ever lose a popularity contest? Watson, games are afoot. I am very smart. Everyone agrees with me and I will be invited to my family's Thanksgiving dinners again. Lmfao.
#15162674
@SpecialOlympian, you're wasting your time. As I've said before, I try to avoid wasting my own time on mockers.

Image
Image

The whole situation at the border reminds me of a point made by Machiavelli in The Prince, about Hannibal:

    Among the wonderful deeds of Hannibal this one is enumerated: that having led an enormous army, composed of many various races of men, to fight in foreign lands, no dissensions arose either among them or against the prince, whether in his bad or in his good fortune. This arose from nothing else than his inhuman cruelty, which, with his boundless valour, made him revered and terrible in the sight of his soldiers, but without that cruelty, his other virtues were not sufficient to produce this effect. And short-sighted writers admire his deeds from one point of view and from another condemn the principal cause of them.

The Democrats condemned the means by which Trump gained control of our southern border while ignoring that they worked. So Biden gets into power, shuts down all the "inhumane" means that Trump instituted, and promptly kicks off what's on track to be the greatest surge of undocumented aliens across our borders in a generation or more.

And don't think the public hasn't noticed. Rasmussen's Immigration Index has been below its baseline since early December, dropping with every survey since late December, and setting a new record low with the last four surveys stretching back to the beginning of February. The Democrats are losing the public on this one. For the actual questions:

On the question of illegal immigration, is the government doing too much or too little to reduce illegal border crossings and visitor overstays? Or is the level of action about right?

  • Too much 14% (-6)
  • Too little 59% (+9)
  • About right 19% (-2)
  • Not sure 7% (-2)

Republicans
  • Too much 13% (-1)
  • Too little 79% (+7)
  • About right 6% (-4)
  • Not sure 2% (-2)

Independents
  • Too much 11% (-3)
  • Too little 65% (+12)
  • About right 15% (-7)
  • Not sure 9% (-3)

Democrats
  • Too much 18% (-11)
  • Too little 37% (+6)
  • About right 35% (+5)
  • Not sure 10% (-2)

In trying to control illegal immigration, should the government mandate that all employers use the federal electronic E-Verify system to help ensure that they hire only legal workers for U.S. jobs?

  • Yes 70% (-1)
  • No 16% (-2)
  • Not sure 14% (+2)

Republicans
  • Yes 85% (-2)
  • No 8% (+1)
  • Not sure 8% (+2)

Independents
  • Yes 71% (+4)
  • No 13% (-4)
  • Not sure 15% (-1)

Democrats
  • Yes 57% (-2)
  • No 25% (-3)
  • Not sure 17% (+3)

Do you strongly favor, somewhat favor, somewhat oppose or strongly oppose giving lifetime work permits to most of the approximately two million illegal residents who came to this country when they were minors?

  • Strongly favor 25% (-5)
  • Somewhat favor 24% (+1)
  • Somewhat oppose 17%
  • Strongly oppose 29% (+5)
  • Not sure 5% (-1)

Republicans
  • Strongly favor 12%
  • Somewhat favor 20%
  • Somewhat oppose 20% (-1)
  • Strongly oppose 43% (+3)
  • Not sure 6%

Independents
  • Strongly favor 18% (-8)
  • Somewhat favor 21%
  • Somewhat oppose 22% (+1)
  • Strongly oppose 33% (+10)
  • Not sure 6% (-2)

Democrats
  • Strongly favor 41% (-9)
  • Somewhat favor 29% (+3)
  • Somewhat oppose 12% (+3)
  • Strongly oppose 14% (+3)
  • Not sure 4%

Do you strongly favor, somewhat favor, somewhat oppose or strongly oppose giving lifetime work permits to most of the estimated 12 million illegal residents of all ages who currently reside in the United States?

  • Strongly favor 18% (-2)
  • Somewhat favor 22% (+1)
  • Somewhat oppose 15% (-2)
  • Strongly oppose 40% (+4)
  • Not sure 5%

Republicans
  • Strongly favor 9% (+2)
  • Somewhat favor 13% (+2)
  • Somewhat oppose 13% (-4)
  • Strongly oppose 60%
  • Not sure 4%

Independents
  • Strongly favor 13% (-2)
  • Somewhat favor 18% (-3)
  • Somewhat oppose 16% (-5)
  • Strongly oppose 47% (+10)
  • Not sure 5% (-1)

Democrats
  • Strongly favor 29% (-8)
  • Somewhat favor 33% (+2)
  • Somewhat oppose 16% (+3)
  • Strongly oppose 17% (+3)
  • Not sure 5%

Now, I'm going to ask you about authorized legal immigration: Recent federal policies have added about one million new permanent immigrants to the United States each year. Which is closest to the number of new immigrants the government should be adding each year -- fewer than 500,000, 750,000, one million, one and a half million, or more than one and a half million?

  • Fewer than 500,000 43% (+4)
  • 750,000 15% (-1)
  • One million 17% (-2)
  • One an a half million 6% (-1)
  • More than one and a half million 7% (-1)
  • Not sure 12%

Republicans
  • Fewer than 500,000 61% (+1)
  • 750,000 14%
  • One million 14% (+2)
  • One an a half million 2% (-1)
  • More than one and a half million 2% (-2)
  • Not sure 6% (-1)

Independents
  • Fewer than 500,000 39% (+2)
  • 750,000 16% (+2)
  • One million 17% (-3)
  • One an a half million 6% (-1)
  • More than one and a half million 6% (-2)
  • Not sure 15% (+1)

Democrats
  • Fewer than 500,000 29% (+7)
  • 750,000 16% (-3)
  • One million 19% (-4)
  • One an a half million 10% (+1)
  • More than one and a half million 11% (-1)
  • Not sure 14% (-1)

Do you favor legal immigrants being allowed to bring with them only a spouse and minor children, or do you favor them also eventually bringing in other adult relatives in a process that can include extended family and their spouses' families?

  • You favor legal immigrants being allowed to bring with them only a spouse and minor children 63% (-1)
  • You favor also eventually bringing in other adult relatives that can include extended family and their spouses' families 27% (+1)
  • Not sure 10%

Republicans
  • You favor legal immigrants being allowed to bring with them only a spouse and minor children 75% (-2)
  • You favor also eventually bringing in other adult relatives that can include extended family and their spouses' families 14% (-1)
  • Not sure 10% (+2)

Independents
  • You favor legal immigrants being allowed to bring with them only a spouse and minor children 64% (+3)
  • You favor also eventually bringing in other adult relatives that can include extended family and their spouses' families 23% (-4)
  • Not sure 14% (+1)

Democrats
  • You favor legal immigrants being allowed to bring with them only a spouse and minor children 52% (-2)
  • You favor also eventually bringing in other adult relatives that can include extended family and their spouses' families 41% (+5)
  • Not sure 6% (-4)

When businesses say they are having trouble finding Americans to take jobs in construction, manufacturing, hospitality and other service work, what is generally best for the country? Is it better for businesses to raise the pay and try harder to recruit non-working Americans even if it causes prices to rise, or is it better for the government to bring in new foreign workers to help keep business costs and prices down?

  • Better for businesses to raise the pay and try harder to recruit non-working Americans even if it causes prices to rise 66% (+1)
  • Better for the government to bring in new foreign workers to help keep business costs and prices down 18%
  • Not sure 16% (-1)

Republicans
  • Better for businesses to raise the pay and try harder to recruit non-working Americans even if it causes prices to rise 73% (+2)
  • Better for the government to bring in new foreign workers to help keep business costs and prices down 13% (+1)
  • Not sure 14% (-3)

Independents
  • Better for businesses to raise the pay and try harder to recruit non-working Americans even if it causes prices to rise 62% (-6)
  • Better for the government to bring in new foreign workers to help keep business costs and prices down 18% (+3)
  • Not sure 20% (+2)

Democrats
  • Better for businesses to raise the pay and try harder to recruit non-working Americans even if it causes prices to rise 63% (+7)
  • Better for the government to bring in new foreign workers to help keep business costs and prices down 23% (-3)
  • Not sure 13% (-4)

Should Congress increase the number of foreign workers taking higher-skill U.S. jobs or does the country already have enough talented people to train and recruit for most of those jobs?

  • Increase the number of foreign workers taking higher-skill U.S. jobs 23% (-5)
  • The country already has enough talented people to train and recruit for most of those jobs 65% (+4)
  • Not sure 12%

Republicans
  • Increase the number of foreign workers taking higher-skill U.S. jobs 16% (+2)
  • The country already has enough talented people to train and recruit for most of those jobs 78%
  • Not sure 7% (-1)

Independents
  • Increase the number of foreign workers taking higher-skill U.S. jobs 17% (-5)
  • The country already has enough talented people to train and recruit for most of those jobs 71% (+5)
  • Not sure 13% (+1)

Democrats
  • Increase the number of foreign workers taking higher-skill U.S. jobs 36% (-9)
  • The country already has enough talented people to train and recruit for most of those jobs 49% (+8)
  • Not sure 16% (+1)

The Census Bureau projects that current immigration policies are responsible for most U.S. population growth and will add 75 million people over the next 40 years. In terms of the effect on the overall quality of life in the United States, do you favor continuing this level of immigration-driven population growth, slowing down immigration-driven population growth or having no immigration-driven population growth at all?

  • Continue immigration driven population growth at the current levels 27% (-2)
  • Slow down immigration driven population growth 47%
  • Have no immigration driven population growth at all 18% (+1)
  • Not sure 8%

Republicans
  • Continue immigration driven population growth at the current levels 14% (+1)
  • Slow down immigration driven population growth 54% (-4)
  • Have no immigration driven population growth at all 28% (+3)
  • Not sure 4%

Independents
  • Continue immigration driven population growth at the current levels 21% (-2)
  • Slow down immigration driven population growth 52%
  • Have no immigration driven population growth at all 18% (+2)
  • Not sure 10% (+1)

Democrats
  • Continue immigration driven population growth at the current levels 43% (-4)
  • Slow down immigration driven population growth 37% (+5)
  • Have no immigration driven population growth at all 10%
  • Not sure 10% (-1)

Should immigration-driven population growth be reduced to limit the expansion of cities into U.S. wildlife habitats and farmland?

  • Yes 46% (+2)
  • No 26% (-1)
  • Not sure 28% (-1)

Republicans
  • Yes 50% (+2)
  • No 23% (+4)
  • Not sure 27% (-5)

Independents
  • Yes 49% (+7)
  • No 23% (-3)
  • Not sure 28% (-4)

Democrats
  • Yes 41%
  • No 30% (-5)
  • Not sure 29% (+5)
#15162730
SpecialOlympian wrote:Come on, Doug. Traitor or bitch?

Tell us why Trump, the man who actually won the election, stopped fighting for you. Is it because he never cared about you or is it because your hero strongman was actually a weak little bitch?

Do you lift?

How powerful is your pickup, Spesh? Is it a 350, or just an F-150?
#15163029
Doug64 wrote:@SpecialOlympian, you're wasting your time. As I've said before, I try to avoid wasting my own time on mockers.


One way to avoid being mocked is to not publicly announce that you believe in obviously stupid things which present opportunities for mockery. I know you write my question off as mockery, and I am absolutely mocking you because you believe stupid things, but that doesn't mean my mockery has no intellectual merit.

I am simply asking you to follow the premise you have laid out to its logical conclusion. You, as a big brained smarty boy who is accepting the results of the election in the most mature way possible, believe Trump's victory was stolen in a nationwide conspiracy that would involve thousands of people despite there being literally evidence no for this.

Now, assuming you accept this incredibly stupid premise as true, how do you explain Trump's actions in response to the largest and most blatant fraud ever committed in the history of American electoral politics? I mean the election fraud is obvious to you, so it should be even more obvious to Trump.

Was Trump simply too weak and stupid to stop Biden from ripping that clear and obvious victory from his hands because Trump is a weak little bitch?

Or did Trump sell you out because he was lying about how much he loves America and how he wanted to serve you?

Which is it Doug? You're going to have to confront this at some point if you continue to be a sore loser about the election. Even assuming the election was stolen, which it wasn't, why is having Trump president over Biden preferable in either case when he is either incredibly incompetent or incredibly corrupt?

QatzelOk wrote:Do you lift?

How powerful is your pickup, Spesh? Is it a 350, or just an F-150?


Where does your mom fall between 350 and an F-150? Because I lift her up and down on my cock.

There are conditions that must be met for Ukraine[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

@JohnRawls There is no ethnic cleansing going o[…]

They are building a Russian Type nuclear reactor..[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Hamas are terrorist animals who started this and […]