JPMorgan CEO: Democrats have no chance in 2020

[Chris]

https://dmlnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Screen-Shot-2018-01-13-at-5.46.51-PM-800x350.png



The Democratic party does not yet have a strong candidate for the 2020 presidential election, according to JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon in an interview on Friday.

“The thing about the Democrats is they will not have a chance, in my opinion. They don’t have a strong centrist, pro-business, pro-free enterprise person,” Dimon told Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business’s “Wall Street Week.”

“The American public is not clamoring for more government. They were angry about the Great Recession, they blamed banks, they blamed Washington, but they’re also angry about the bureaucracy,” he said.

Dimon’s comments come as Democrats plan to take back both chambers of Congress in 2018. Speculation has been swirling around a slew of potential candidates who want to take on President Trump in 2020.

Figures such as Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and former Vice President Joe Biden have all been floated as possible contenders, according to a report in The Hill.

Dimon, who serves as the chairman of the Business Roundtable, said in November that Trump would likely be a one-term president. He has since said he regrets those comments.

952175102577270784

e202Zb7np8Y

https://dmlnews.com/jpmorgan-ceo-democrats-no-chance-2020/

[Pavlov]

What's your definition of a globalist, Chris?

[Reck]

He doesn't like Bernie or Warren? I wonder why. :lol

[koriwhat]

He doesn't like Bernie or Warren? I wonder why. :lol

well for starters bernie is a 2 face sellout and warren is a fucking lying ass fraud.

but here's to another exciting bs 2020 voting hoax that has all of america believing they have a voice in anything to do with big brother.

[AaronY]

"Dimon, who serves as the chairman of the Business Roundtable, said in November that Trump would likely be a one-term president."

ROFL two months ago he said that

[rmt]

"Dimon, who serves as the chairman of the Business Roundtable, said in November that Trump would likely be a one-term president."

ROFL two months ago he said that

Maybe he's changed his mind after the tax plan passing, other regulations lifted and the stock market still soaring.

[Pavlov]

Maybe he's changed his mind after the tax plan passing, other regulations lifted and the stock market still soaring.So will he change his mind if the stock market goes down?

[rmt]

So will he change his mind if the stock market goes down?

Are you liberals afraid that people will change their minds and re-elect Trump regardless of his tweets, his infidelity, his calling countries "shit holes", his un-presidential whatever because the economy is doing better? That Trump exactly fits this chairman of the Business Roundtable (whatever that is) idea of a "strong centrist, pro-business, pro-free enterprise person"?

[Pavlov]

Are you liberals afraid that people will change their minds and re-elect Trump regardless of his tweets, his infidelity, his calling countries "shit holes", his un-presidential whatever because the economy is doing better? That Trump exactly fits this chairman of the Business Roundtable (whatever that is) idea of a "strong centrist, pro-business, pro-free enterprise person"?Nice rant.

You didn't answer though.

lol afraid. He'll probably be re-elected if he stops fucking up for one straight month. Thanks for the cop out.

[rmt]

Nice rant.

You didn't answer though.

lol afraid. He'll probably be re-elected if he stops fucking up for one straight month. Thanks for the cop out.

I fail to see why you think you know me well enough to state that I am disingenuous or afraid. And Trump will probably be re-elected if the economy continues to improve especially since the Dems don't seem to have anyone yet.

[boutons_deux]

Fuck criminal Dimon and his vampire-squid criminal bank

[Pavlov]

I fail to see why you think you know me well enough to state that I am disingenuous or afraid. And Trump will probably be re-elected if the economy continues to improve especially since the Dems don't seem to have anyone yet.I was mocking your saying that liberals would be afraid.

[rmt]

Fuck criminal Dimon and his vampire-squid criminal bank

I have no qualms with Chase except that they refuse to accept cash deposited in my daughter's account (since I'm not the account holder) - so ridiculous. How am I to get her money in a pinch? It's Wells Fargo that's criminal - unfortunately, it's the main bank at University of Florida - with a branch in their student union and Wells Fargo ATMs on campus. I absolutely hate supporting them but gotta because of the convenience. The day he graduates that account is gonna be closed.

[rmt]

I was mocking your saying that liberals would be afraid.

My apologies. I shouldn't have used the word afraid - maybe concerned.

[Pavlov]

My apologies. I shouldn't have used the word afraid - maybe concerned.It's simple incumbency. He'll fuck up practically every way he can until the election and you and his other supporters will make every excuse you can for him.

[rmt]

It's simple incumbency. He'll fuck up practically every way he can until the election and you and his other supporters will make every excuse you can for him.

Pav, what it is, is that his supporters are past the point of whatever he says or tweets or whatever the media says about him - as long as his policies have the economy (and our future) improving, pretty much nothing else matters. I don't need to make excuses for him - he's not my husband, child or friend - his job is to DO what is in the best interest of Americans - so what if he's got a foul mouth, bad manners, xxxx whatever you can think of. Don't let whatever he says or tweets bother you - I don't.

[Pavlov]

Pav, what it is, is that his supporters are past the point of whatever he says or tweets or whatever the media says about himYou never did care. That's the whole point.

[koriwhat]

It's simple incumbency. He'll fuck up practically every way he can until the election and you and his other supporters will make every excuse you can for him.

how's he fucked up yet?

[Pavlov]

how's he fucked up yet?See what I mean? Nothing matters to any of you.

[koriwhat]

See what I mean? Nothing matters to any of you.

just like rmt said, i don't get my "feelings" involved because they don't fucking matter! i want to see growth in our nations economy and whatnot. i am not concerned with trumps tweets or anything else to do with trump as long as he rights this ship.

[Chris]

It's simple incumbency.

?

[Pavlov]

just like rmt said, i don't get my "feelings" involved because they don't fucking matter! i want to see growth in our nations economy and whatnot. i am not concerned with trumps tweets or anything else to do with trump as long as he rights this ship.So you were fine with Obama because there was growth in the nation's economy and whatnot?

[Pavlov]

?Look it up.

[Chris]

Look it up.

Makes no sense.

[Pavlov]

Makes no sense.To you.

[koriwhat]

So you were fine with Obama because there was growth in the nation's economy and whatnot?

i didn't have much of a problem with the dude himself but overall growth was minimal and his tactics created a generation of pussies.

[rmt]

No, I don't care what his marital status, his personality, his past was. Although it had to be someone with his personality or he would never survive the attacks from almost everyone. That's how bad it's gotten - that a thrice married adulterer with a foul mouth, crass manners and huge ego got elected - simply because people are fed up with the smooth talking, politically correct people in Washington who say all the "right" things and DO all the wrong things for Americans - they'd rather cater to their donors and the rest of the world than take care of Americans (see all these Dems and RINOs who want to let in those who would DRAIN us instead of those who would help us).

[Pavlov]

No, I don't care.:tu

[Trainwreck2100]

They don’t have a strong centristagreed, pro-businesswho gives a fuck, pro-free enterprise person,:lol

They don't have a strong candidate right now because they're doing the smart thing and waiting on 2018 returns to see what candidate they can get away with

[Pavlov]

i didn't have much of a problem with the dude himself but overall growth was minimal and his tactics created a generation of pussies.lol minimal

[rmt]

They don't have a strong candidate right now because they're doing the smart thing and waiting on 2018 returns to see what candidate they can get away with

Do you mean which way the wind blows? what candidates the Dems get elected?

Why is pro-business a dirty word? Chances are most people here have jobs connected with some business or other. Unless you are independently wealthy, you should be pro-business - because that means jobs, which is the way most of us make our living. Even government is treating the public as "customers" now (at least my orientation did).

[ElNono]

If the Dems win, he'll be first in line to ask for corporate handouts and will be the Dem's president best friend... talk about two faced...

[Trainwreck2100]

Do you mean which way the wind blows? what candidates the Dems get elected?

Why is pro-business a dirty word? Chances are most people here have jobs connected with some business or other. Unless you are independently wealthy, you should be pro-business - because that means jobs, which is the way most of us make our living. Even government is treating the public as "customers" now (at least my orientation did).
We won't know till 2018 which is literally what I said. I ain't sheeple enough to be pro-business and thinking helping my coporate bosses helps me in any way.

[ElNono]

We won't know till 2018 which is literally what I said. I ain't sheeple enough to be pro-business and thinking helping my coporate bosses helps me in anyway.

Trickle down, bro

[AaronY]

Do you mean which way the wind blows? what candidates the Dems get elected?

Why is pro-business a dirty word? Chances are most people here have jobs connected with some business or other. Unless you are independently wealthy, you should be pro-business - because that means jobs, which is the way most of us make our living. Even government is treating the public as "customers" now (at least my orientation did).
I think you arre under estimating extraordinarily anti business or anti Elite sentiment right now. Even among Republicans and Trump base the income inequality is aggravating a good amount of them according to studies. I hate Warren and Bernie and would prefer a Centrist candidate but I would not be surprised to see someone like Bernie win in 2020 even though I think it would be a disaster

[Trainwreck2100]

I think you were under estimating extraordinarily anti business or anti Elite sentiment right now. Even among Republicans and Trump base the income inequality is aggravating a good amount of them according to studies. I hate Warren and Bernie and would prefer a Centrist candidate but I would not be surprised to see someone like Bernie win 2020 even though I think it would be a disaster

Bernie probably gets the black vote to show up and probably flips the college educated suburbanites who voted for trump cause they were smart enough to see through hillary's shit, but naive enough to think trump was somehow a better option. I can definitiely see a white male dem candidate pulling a mccain 2008 and nominating a woman VP for no fucking reason.

[AaronY]

Look at Republicans here for "too little"

https://i.imgur.com/t7FYWOx.png

https://m.imgur.com/t7FYWOx
http://news.gallup.com/poll/190775/americans-say-upper-income-pay-little-taxes.aspx

[AaronY]

I think people are getting tired of seeing horseshit like this and then being told its just because the top 1% is working harder than them lately

http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2013/12/incomeinequality.gif

[rmt]

I think people are getting tired of seeing horseshit like this and then being told its just because the top 1% is working harder than them lately

http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2013/12/incomeinequality.gif

The other side of the REVILED top 1% - probably 2 middle-aged/end career, professionals with investment income:

Florida
Annual income required to be in the top one percent: $385,410

Texas
Annual income required to be in the top one percent: $424,507

California
Annual income required to be in the top one percent: $453,772 (and at those high real estate prices)

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/12/how-much-you-have-to-earn-to-be-in-the-top-1-percent-in-every-us-state.html

[Pavlov]

The other side of the REVILED top 1% - probably 2 middle-aged/end career, professionals with investment income:

Florida
Annual income required to be in the top one percent: $385,410

Texas
Annual income required to be in the top one percent: $424,507

California
Annual income required to be in the top one percent: $453,772 (and at those high real estate prices)

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/12/how-much-you-have-to-earn-to-be-in-the-top-1-percent-in-every-us-state.htmlAll hurting and in need of help from Santa!

[spurraider21]

Pav, what it is, is that his supporters are past the point of whatever he says or tweets or whatever the media says about him - as long as his policies have the economy (and our future) improving, pretty much nothing else matters. I don't need to make excuses for him - he's not my husband, child or friend - his job is to DO what is in the best interest of Americans - so what if he's got a foul mouth, bad manners, xxxx whatever you can think of. Don't let whatever he says or tweets bother you - I don't.
agreed. i care about the important things like if he's an elitist because he likes dijon mustard or wears a tan suit

[rmt]

Look at Republicans here for "too little"

https://i.imgur.com/t7FYWOx.png

https://m.imgur.com/t7FYWOx
http://news.gallup.com/poll/190775/americans-say-upper-income-pay-little-taxes.aspx

I don't see what the poll considers upper income. What does this poll say about the American Dream and striving for it (to have it taken from you and re-distributed)?

Ds' classmate: Free healthcare and free college sounds good to me.
Ds' teacher: Until it comes out of YOUR paycheck. What are you studying hard for?

[rmt]

agreed. i care about the important things like if he's an elitist because he likes dijon mustard or wears a tan suit

Or drinks 12 Diet Cokes a day!

[rmt]

All hurting and in need of help from Santa!

Careful - that'll be spurraider21 in 30 years :-)

[spurraider21]

I don't see what the poll considers upper income. What does this poll say about the American Dream and striving for it (to have it taken from you and re-distributed)?

Ds' classmate: Free healthcare and free college sounds good to me.
Ds' teacher: Until it comes out of YOUR paycheck. What are you studying hard for?
that's not even the point. the point is that there is a general feeling that the wealthy (however you choose to define it) dont pay their fair share

[Pavlov]

Careful - that'll be spurraider21 in 30 years :-)Doubt he'll say he's hurting like so many do.

[rmt]

that's not even the point. the point is that there is a general feeling that the wealthy (however you choose to define it) dont pay their fair share

Well, my point is that that top 1%er in California earning $450k ain't all that rich after all those taxes and real estate so high. And of course, if one earns under 30K a year, $70k seems rich - so even they aren't paying their fair share.

[spurraider21]

Well, my point is that that top 1%er in California earning $450k ain't all that rich after all those taxes and real estate so high. And of course, if one earns under 30K a year, $70k seems rich - so even they aren't paying their fair share.
:lol if you're earning 450k in CA you're living quite well tbh. if you're earning that much money, the real estate prices dont bother you since you're buying not renting anyway, and so you keep the value

[rmt]

:lol if you're earning 450k in CA you're living quite well tbh. if you're earning that much money, the real estate prices dont bother you since you're buying not renting anyway, and so you keep the value

I don't see a home like that. I have to live somewhere and if RE prices are high, that's a much higher downpayment and % of my income that's tied up (either in mortgage or rent). If I stay in California, I still have to live somewhere when my mortgage is paid off. The only time all that money tied up in a home is an "asset" is if I sell my home in California and move to some where that's really cheap and then the difference in houses is freed up.

[baseline bum]

I think people are getting tired of seeing horseshit like this and then being told its just because the top 1% is working harder than them lately

http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2013/12/incomeinequality.gif

None of that shit matters when you can just run a campaign based on racism and white anger.

[Pavlov]

I think people are getting tired of seeing horseshit like this and then being told its just because the top 1% is working harder than them lately

http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2013/12/incomeinequality.gifDAMN IT JUST LOOK AT HOW LONG THOSE FAT CAT IMMIGRANTS HAVE BEEN SCREWING REAL AMERICANS

[Chris]

So you were fine with Obama because there was growth in the nation's economy and whatnot?

Obama sucked.

Only president in the past 50 years not to have even a single year of 3% GDP growth.

Real GDP growth rate during Obama’s tenure as president, according to Statista:

2009: -2.8
2010: 2.5
2011: 1.6
2012: 2.2
2013: 1.7
2014: 2.4
2015: 2.6
2016: 1.5

Donald Trump has seen quarterly GDP rates of 1.2, 3.1, and 3.3.

[AaronY]

None of that shit matters when you can just run a campaign based on racism and white anger.
I agree to a certain extent I mean this is one of my favorite images of all time for a reason

https://pbs-h2.twimg.com/media/C8I_A1wUAAEHXSr.jpg

But someone like Bernie wouldn't even have stood a snowball's chance in hell 30-40 years ago. If you watch some of them debates of his like the one with Ted Cruz on CNN the guys just full-on socialist practically communist

[Pavlov]

Obama sucked.

Only president in the past 50 years not to have even a single year of 3% GDP growth.:lol let's all pretend everything was perfect when he took office.

[AaronY]

Bernie would have been laughed right off the scene even 20-25 years ago soon as he opened his mouth

[DMC]

I think people are getting tired of seeing horseshit like this and then being told its just because the top 1% is working harder than them lately

http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2013/12/incomeinequality.gif

Provide raw numbers instead of bumper sticker offerings like that misleading graph.

[AaronY]

Provide raw numbers instead of bumper sticker offerings like that misleading graph.
The right hand column has numbers on it. I don't see how it's misleading unless you're saying the numbers are made up. Pretty much no one disagrees income inequality has drastically increased that I know of

[DMC]

The right hand column has numbers on it. I don't see how it's misleading unless you're saying the numbers are made up. Pretty much no one disagrees income inequality has drastically increased that I know of

It has low resolution. What are the actual numbers for the bottom 99%? What about the top 30%? Why top 1% instead of top .5%?

Income inequality has always existed. Are you saying the native americans and recently freed slaves had income equality with the land owners and politicians and business tycoons 200 or so years ago?

Did the ability to move into the top 1% diminish over time? Was it easier to be in the top 1% in the 1960s than it is today?

[AaronY]

Pretty much no one not even Republicans argues that income inquality hasn't drastically increased the last 40 years. I'm not gonna sit here and debate basic common facts with you.

[DMC]

And still, it's not because they aren't paying enough taxes. There are a number of factors that allow investors including entrepreneurs to make money exponentially faster than wage workers who are on basically a fixed income, where their salaries are locked by a false notion of "salary cap" which basically guarantees the investor maximum return 1st, and the worker perhaps a decent salary 2nd. When the 1st is in jeopardy, the 2nd is sacrificed to preserve the 1st in the form of layoffs and relocation of factories to countries that have much lower wage demands. The shithole countries. But hey, they are great countries and I don't want to come across as a racist.

The system exists only because of the investor however, as the worker hasn't provided jobs for anyone, hasn't provided ideas or created an economically advantageous situation for anyone but themselves. This is, of course, considering intellectual property belongs to the investor. There are always exceptions, and some "workers" are in the top 1%.

Some here act like there's all this money falling from the sky and the top 1% is grabbing it all before the rest can get to it, when in reality the top 1% is why the bottom 99% are as obese and technology saturated as they are.

[Chris]

I'm not gonna sit here and debate basic common facts with you.

Good idea. You would get squashed.

[AaronY]

And still, it's not because they aren't paying enough taxes. There are a number of factors that allow investors including entrepreneurs to make money exponentially faster than wage workers who are on basically a fixed income, where their salaries are locked by a false notion of "salary cap" which basically guarantees the investor maximum return 1st, and the worker perhaps a decent salary 2nd. When the 1st is in jeopardy, the 2nd is sacrificed to preserve the 1st in the form of layoffs and relocation of factories to countries that have much lower wage demands. The shithole countries. But hey, they are great countries and I don't want to come across as a racist.

The system exists only because of the investor however, as the worker hasn't provided jobs for anyone, hasn't provided ideas or created an economically advantageous situation for anyone but themselves. This is, of course, considering intellectual property belongs to the investor. There are always exceptions, and some "workers" are in the top 1%.

Some here act like there's all this money falling from the sky and the top 1% is grabbing it all before the rest can get to it, when in reality the top 1% is why the bottom 99% are as obese and technology saturated as they are.
I agree with a lot of this but it overstates how much easier it is to conglomerate wealth now. It also laughably makes it seems the CEOs of yesteryear were just not as good sincerity couldn't make a wealth concentrate at the top as much.

Also, even ignoring the reasons for income inequality objectively compare the salary and housing costs for like a schoolteacher in 1970 vs today or a carpenter and the same. It's way harder.

I mean do you even read my posts? I am very pro capitalist and hate Bernie as I have said over and over but income inequality drastically increasing like this pisses people off and will cause them to seek drastic solutions

[AaronY]

Good idea. You would get squashed.
Yeah, I could use some help. Know of any cartoons out there that could help me win this argument?

[ElNono]

Trump won not because he was business-friendly (he didn't even run on the typical Republican platform, and you could even argue he ran an anti-business campaign when he kept saying him and the hedge funds would have to pay more in taxes, all bullshit obviously), but because he was a populist with the right message for those in need (see: Rust Belt). The fact that he ended up enacting a lot of the Republican platform has to do with Congress running the Republican agenda and him having a vested interest that he did something, anything, during his presidency.

[ElNono]

I agree with a lot of this but it overstates how much easier it is to conglomerate wealth now. It also laughably makes it seems the CEOs of yesteryear were just not as good sincerity couldn't make a wealth concentrate at the top as much.

Also, even ignoring the reasons for income inequality objectively compare the salary and housing costs for like a schoolteacher in 1970 vs today or a carpenter and the same. It's way harder.

I mean do you even read my posts? I am very pro capitalist and hate Bernie as I have said over and over but income inequality drastically increasing like this pisses people off and will cause them to seek drastic solutions

There's also the fact that in a fiat economy, you don't have to invest in the 99%. You can invest in all sorts of fictitious capital with a given value (aka financial instruments), that never touches the 99%. Heck, some will argue some of those instruments will give a better ROI or carry less risks than investing in the 99%.

This is where the populist message from the campaign trail resonated. Bringing manufacturing back, etc, etc, etc... those are investments that touch the 99%, and easy to relate to.

[DMC]

I agree with a lot of this but it overstates how much easier it is to conglomerate wealth now. It also laughably makes it seems the CEOs of yesteryear were just not as good sincerity couldn't make a wealth concentrate at the top as much.

Also, even ignoring the reasons for income inequality objectively compare the salary and housing costs for like a schoolteacher in 1970 vs today or a carpenter and the same. It's way harder.

I mean do you even read my posts? I am very pro capitalist and hate Bernie as I have said over and over but income inequality drastically increasing like this pisses people off and will cause them to seek drastic solutions

Do you think it detracts from your life that some Jeff Bezos is worth 100 billion dollars? It's not about capitalism. It's about what causes growth and who benefits from it. Signal to noise ratio, higher signals usually mean higher noise as well, but not in a very efficient system that finds ways of become more effective at increasing the signal without increasing the noise. I'm not calling workers noise, but if you're going to lump everyone in who falls outside of the 1% as the comparison, then they are the noise by default.

If the gap was closer, if Americans in general all made about the same, it would be just the .05% who were on a different playing field financially. The 1% talk is just a random number. It's really the very top, the financially elte, not the 500K a year earners, who should be looked at as using their capital power to rig a system in their favor, for centuries perhaps. I know several people who fall into the 1%.

But that's why I asked for raw numbers. Has your income doubled in the past 10 years? Has it tripled? It could have and yet you could still not be close to the 1%, but the growth % would be the same. The higher end would just get more separation from you. Imagine you make a dime, then next week you make a dollar. You just saw a 10x earning increase, however the upper echelon could see a .5% earning increase in they would be putting distance between themselves and you still.

So what's your proposed solution? How do you think the laws of supply and demand can be tweaked to make more money go to lower demand skillsets, where the workforce may be near saturation, and less money go to the owners of businesses that are super successful? Wealth redistribution? If so, how long would that last before the capitalist system collapsed since money is the incentive to create Amazon or Walmart or AT&T or Tesla?

[AaronY]

Do you think it detracts from your life that some Jeff Bezos is worth 100 billion dollars? It's not about capitalism. It's about what causes growth and who benefits from it. Signal to noise ratio, higher signals usually mean higher noise as well, but not in a very efficient system that finds ways of become more effective at increasing the signal without increasing the noise. I'm not calling workers noise, but if you're going to lump everyone in who falls outside of the 1% as the comparison, then they are the noise by default.

If the gap was closer, if Americans in general all made about the same, it would be just the .05% who were on a different playing field financially. The 1% talk is just a random number. It's really the very top, the financially elte, not the 500K a year earners, who should be looked at as using their capital power to rig a system in their favor, for centuries perhaps. I know several people who fall into the 1%.

But that's why I asked for raw numbers. Has your income doubled in the past 10 years? Has it tripled? It could have and yet you could still not be close to the 1%, but the growth % would be the same. The higher end would just get more separation from you. Imagine you make a dime, then next week you make a dollar. You just saw a 10x earning increase, however the upper echelon could see a .5% earning increase in they would be putting distance between themselves and you still.

So what's your proposed solution? How do you think the laws of supply and demand can be tweaked to make more money go to lower demand skillsets, where the workforce may be near saturation, and less money go to the owners of businesses that are super successful? Wealth redistribution? If so, how long would that last before the capitalist system collapsed since money is the incentive to create Amazon or Walmart or AT&T or Tesla?
Who are arguing with here? You act like I'm anti-capitalist.

[AaronY]

Capitalism is awesome but the money has a tendency to conglomerate at the top so it's needs to redistributed some by the government is my points basically

Tell these Republicans your lectures as even they agree with this

https://i.imgur.com/t7FYWOx.png

[AaronY]

There's also the fact that in a fiat economy, you don't have to invest in the 99%. You can invest in all sorts of fictitious capital with a given value (aka financial instruments), that never touches the 99%. Heck, some will argue some of those instruments will give a better ROI or carry less risks than investing in the 99%.

This is where the populist message from the campaign trail resonated. Bringing manufacturing back, etc, etc, etc... those are investments that touch the 99%, and easy to relate to.
Yep. Schoolteachers, carpenters, plumbers, etc compare their salary and housing costs from 1970 to today and then seeing how much harder it is jarring. Capitalism and Globalism has been great for decreasing the costs electronics and technologies but have hurt in a lot of other areas

[boutons_deux]

Trump won not because he was business-friendly (he didn't even run on the typical Republican platform, and you could even argue he ran an anti-business campaign when he kept saying him and the hedge funds would have to pay more in taxes, all bullshit obviously), but because he was a populist with the right message for those in need (see: Rust Belt). The fact that he ended up enacting a lot of the Republican platform has to do with Congress running the Republican agenda and him having a vested interest that he did something, anything, during his presidency.

You grant him some honesty, WRONG!

As an billionaire elitist, he ran on pro-white working class / anti-elitist / anti-DC-swamp bullshit, was a LIE then, proven to be a LIE now.

[boutons_deux]

Why is pro-business a dirty word? Chances are most people here have jobs connected with some business or other. Unless you are independently wealthy, you should be pro-business - because that means jobs, which is the way most of us make our living. Even government is treating the public as "customers" now (at least my orientation did).

goddamn! you're fucking stupid

pro-business means anti-customer, anti-Labor, anti-EVERYTHING except profits for Capitalists.

the oligarchy only interest is accumulation of capital which has and does now include fucking over employees, which we see in that household REAL income that essentially flat since St Ronnie came into office, and 10Ms of jobs exported.

[pgardn]

well for starters bernie is a 2 face sellout and warren is a fucking lying ass fraud.

.

These did not stop Trump from winning.
So find some other characteristics that prohibits a candidate from winning the presidency.

[pgardn]

You grant him some honesty, WRONG!

As an billionaire elitist, he ran on pro-white working class / anti-elitist / anti-DC-swamp bullshit, was a LIE then, proven to be a LIE now.


goddamn! you're fucking stupid

pro-business means anti-customer, anti-Labor, anti-EVERYTHING except profits for Capitalists.

the oligarchy only interest is accumulation of capital which has and does now include fucking over employees, which we see in that household REAL income that essentially flat since St Ronnie came into office, and 10Ms of jobs exported.

You are a perfect example of why the Democrats deserve to lose.

[pgardn]

Good idea. You would get squashed.

You are in completely over your head.
Just stop.
Even boots can argue a point with pure zealotry.

[rmt]

One of the reasons I think that chart has significantly gone toward people believing the upper income should be more heavily taxed is government interference/safety nets. Human nature, being what it is, if one is receiving something for nothing (or little to nothing), one is going to want to hold on to it. This is why I am a big proponent of work requirements for any government assistance - I read somewhere (and don't have time to look it up now) that work requirements for Medicaid reduces participation. Anything that requires some work instead of none, some people are going to decide that it's not worth it to work.

Because of this government "help" and the way in which one loses it if one's income reaches a certain level, no one is incentivized to earn more lest they lose their benefits. And of course, the more people on welfare and who have less, the more they look to those who have to tax them and continue getting this government "help". I think that explains why over time (the recent decades), more and more of this thinking has become prevalent. Imo, it is the explosion of the welfare state that is the cause of people NOT trying to better themselves financially and actively seeking to stay under a certain income - part of the reason why I hate Obamacare and its insiduousness regarding Medicaid (able-bodied people under a certain income getting free healthcare with no work requirements - although Trump administration is trying to change that - I'm sure the first lawsuit is ready when it gets implemented).

Money earned from capital gains is not taxed with SS and Medicare as is earned income - you get to keep more of it. So, it is much more profitable to make money investing your money than through labor - and this is what the top x%ers do and those who earn only enough to pay living expenses can't. Most of you scoff at me and think I'm crazy when I day trade bit coin. How do you think we survived on one income all these years? Yes, I took a lot of risk - some I win and some I lose but overall, it's on the win side. And because I took such risk with my money, I should be allowed to keep it - not have it taken and re-distributed to some one who has done nothing and taken no risk. On that chart, as income rises, more people think that they (or others) should not be taxed more. Now, if you do not feel the same way, please feel free to give away what you have but keep your hands off mine. Many of you are young now, but as you earn more, your thoughts on this matter may change.

AaronY, please don't fool yourself into thinking that the man holding the bag of money only applies to Republicans - just like the sexual scandal that crosses party lines, both sides have stacked the deck with their law-making/policies (or been donor to) - Democrats too don't care a rat's behind about the little man - these policies are all to gain voters in order to stay in power and enrich themselves (see the immigration mess).

[rmt]

That last bit is part of the reason why I voted for Trump. I did not think that he was in it to enrich himself - in fact, being in politics has severely HURT his brand. Yes, he wanted the estate tax repealed, but as you know, it's only temporary and the increase in exemption doesn't really affect him. But for the future of his luxury hotels, if things continue on the path they were going, the top x% would just get more reviled and taxed more and he'd have less and less people staying at his hotels and playing golf. If I were him, I would never put myself through all this criticism and censure - why? he doesn't have to - he could just play golf for the rest of his life.

IMO, the way out of this mess is to institute policies that encourage investment, risk, small business and yes, OMG get people working instead of relying on the government - try to change the mentality toward the American Dream. Closing off the border, dealing with illegal immigration (including visa overstays), mandatory e-verify and STIFF penalties toward employers who don't comply would help with lifting wages and getting Americans back to work. I so dislike hearing about the jobs that Americans won't do. I think people get a sense of pride and accomplishment in work - no matter what it is. Just as with children, when things are handed to them, they don't appreciate or value it. This is not to say that I don't think we should give a helping hand when things are rough but it should be temporary and not a lifestyle. IMO, we need to concentrate on lifting the Americans here - not import immigrants who end up on welfare - if you want immigrants, look to Canada (particularly Vancouver) and how they have brought in so many rich investors (who pay taxes and help Canada pay for their services). I was optimistic in the 2018 Predictions thread, but I now don't think the DACA/immigration solution is gonna be done - the sides are too far apart (and if that so-called bipartisan group had brought me that bill, I'd be saying some expletives myself).

I think I've said enough today - flame away.

[pgardn]

One of the reasons I think that chart has significantly gone toward people believing the upper income should be more heavily taxed is government interference/safety nets. Human nature, being what it is, if one is receiving something for nothing (or little to nothing), one is going to want to hold on to it. This is why I am a big proponent of work requirements for any government assistance - I read somewhere (and don't have time to look it up now) that work requirements for Medicaid reduces participation. Anything that requires some work instead of none, some people are going to decide that it's not worth it to work.

Because of this government "help" and the way in which one loses it if one's income reaches a certain level, no one is incentivized to earn more lest they lose their benefits. And of course, the more people on welfare and who have less, the more they look to those who have to tax them and continue getting this government "help". I think that explains why over time (the recent decades), more and more of this thinking has become prevalent. Imo, it is the explosion of the welfare state that is the cause of people NOT trying to better themselves financially and actively seeking to stay under a certain income - part of the reason why I hate Obamacare and its insiduousness regarding Medicaid (able-bodied people under a certain income getting free healthcare with no work requirements - although Trump administration is trying to change that - I'm sure the first lawsuit is ready when it gets implemented).

Money earned from capital gains is not taxed with SS and Medicare as is earned income - you get to keep more of it. So, it is much more profitable to make money investing your money than through labor - and this is what the top x%ers do and those who earn only enough to pay living expenses can't. Most of you scoff at me and think I'm crazy when I day trade bit coin. How do you think we survived on one income all these years? Yes, I took a lot of risk - some I win and some I lose but overall, it's on the win side. And because I took such risk with my money, I should be allowed to keep it - not have it taken and re-distributed to some one who has done nothing and taken no risk. On that chart, as income rises, more people think that they (or others) should not be taxed more. Now, if you do not feel the same way, please feel free to give away what you have but keep your hands off mine. Many of you are young now, but as you earn more, your thoughts on this matter may change.

AaronY, please don't fool yourself into thinking that the man holding the bag of money only applies to Republicans - just like the sexual scandal that crosses party lines, both sides have stacked the deck with their law-making/policies (or been donor to) - Democrats too don't care a rat's behind about the little man - these policies are all to gain voters in order to stay in power and enrich themselves (see the immigration mess).

This is a perfect example of why people follow a particular party based on what is emphazied. We all know what you have said is basically correct. There are people who want something for nothing. And this absolutely infuriates some people, especially Republicans. There are also cases where people work very hard to find loopholes and essentially cheat other people out of money. This absolutely infuriates Democrats.

So now it becomes essential to identify obvious flaws in government to fix the above. Because neither help the country as a whole. And not only identify, but more importantly get A SENSE OF SCALE MONETARILY.

So what type of infuriating behavior costs US more? Examples: The financial sector takes a few evil people to extract a whole lot of income that is detrimental to the whole. A whole lot of people taking small sums out of the belief of getting something for nothing can become a huge drain as well. Just like a few people taking a few dollars from a large population (who may not even realize it).

So what do you personally always focus on?
Republicans-----> something for nothing by the masses
Democrats------> A few taking a little from a large number of people.

This is obviously a very basic argument but I believe it really does drive what information people seek out. They seek what erks them the most. Even though both behaviors MIGHT hurt them as an individual. Small businessmen see their employees taking work off for no good reason costing them the months lease and no profit after very hard work making up for those that did not show. A destitute couple might spend all their savings on paying a vastly overpriced heating/cooling bill (yea, a few old folks die when temps go to extremes; the bill. A whole lot more are probably very uncomfortable)

Now the blame:

But, but, but... if the small business had just treated the employees well they would not take off work during high volume

But, but, but... If those old folks had good family and had actually made money for themselves it would not be a problem


This is the game we play.

[sickdsm]

These did not stop Trump from winning.
So find some other characteristics that prohibits a candidate from winning the presidency.

This attitude is EXACTLY why Trump won and why re-election is a strong possibility. With the way Bernie got pushed around by the DFL behind the scenes and bitch slapped by DWS and Hillary, the idea that he would be able to be a strong leader is rediculous. He's the type of guy that's shown you could strong arm into taking his lunch money, stealing his bitch and making you do your homework. On the other hand, Hillary was the bitch that would steal your lunch money, steal your Butch, make you do her homework and wish herself happy birthday. And Dems thought she was electable?


Then we get the Warren's, Schumer, Biden. Might as well send another Bush or Clinton while we're at it. I think it would surprised everyone on both sides how electable an Oprah or The Rock would be. Fuck politicians.

[rmt]

This is a perfect example of why people follow a particular party based on what is emphazied. We all know what you have said is basically correct. There are people who want something for nothing. And this absolutely infuriates some people, especially Republicans. There are also cases where people work very hard to find loopholes and essentially cheat other people out of money. This absolutely infuriates Democrats.

So now it becomes essential to identify obvious flaws in government to fix the above. Because neither help the country as a whole. And not only identify, but more importantly get A SENSE OF SCALE MONETARILY.

So what type of infuriating behavior costs US more? Examples: The financial sector takes a few evil people to extract a whole lot of income that is detrimental to the whole. A whole lot of people taking small sums out of the belief of getting something for nothing can become a huge drain as well. Just like a few people taking a few dollars from a large population (who may not even realize it).

So what do you personally always focus on?
Republicans-----> something for nothing by the masses
Democrats------> A few taking a little from a large number of people.

This is obviously a very basic argument but I believe it really does drive what information people seek out. They seek what erks them the most. Even though both behaviors MIGHT hurt them as an individual. Small businessmen see their employees taking work off for no good reason costing them the months lease and no profit after very hard work making up for those that did not show. A destitute couple might spend all their savings on paying a vastly overpriced heating/cooling bill (yea, a few old folks die when temps go to extremes; the bill. A whole lot more are probably very uncomfortable)

Now the blame:

But, but, but... if the small business had just treated the employees well they would not take off work during high volume

But, but, but... If those old folks had good family and had actually made money for themselves it would not be a problem


This is the game we play.

Why not work on solving both? Trump is allowing the states to decide whether to implement work requirements for Medicaid. How do you address the loopholes other than term limits (which will never fly) or wholesale turnover of the politicians who make laws to benefit their donors? That's not going away - because of the politics and need to control power, each side will support whoever will be elected - usually incumbents - regardless of mainstream/centrist or hard left/right.

[pgardn]

This attitude is EXACTLY why Trump won and why re-election is a strong possibility. With the way Bernie got pushed around by the DFL behind the scenes and bitch slapped by DWS and Hillary, the idea that he would be able to be a strong leader is rediculous. He's the type of guy that's shown you could strong arm into taking his lunch money, stealing his bitch and making you do your homework. On the other hand, Hillary was the bitch that would steal your lunch money, steal your Butch, make you do her homework and wish herself happy birthday. And Dems thought she was electable?


Then we get the Warren's, Schumer, Biden. Might as well send another Bush or Clinton while we're at it. I think it would surprised everyone on both sides how electable an Oprah or The Rock would be. Fuck politicians.

And so describe our current president and what makes his re election possible? I don't think there is ANY way he gets re elected. This post is exactly why the Democrats will retake the presidency, default. You want a guy who is NOT a politician? Surprise, surprise he is one! EVERYBODY plays a game of persuasion. This is not big news. Oh look he's bucking what is normal politics to please people who want to be persuaded he is NOT a politician.

Wrong. This makes him a politician.

[pgardn]

Why not work on solving both? Trump is allowing the states to decide whether to implement work requirements for Medicaid. How do you address the loopholes other than term limits (which will never fly) or wholesale turnover of the politicians who make laws to benefit their donors? That's not going away - because of the politics and need to control power, each side will support whoever will be elected - usually incumbents - regardless of mainstream/centrist or hard left/right.

Because by your voting you focus heavily one way. It's very obvious.

[rmt]

Because by your voting you focus heavily one way. It's very obvious.

So your voting to practically allow open borders helps Americans? Flooding us with people who eventually end up on welfare instead of a merit system choosing those who would help us is what you want?

[pgardn]

So your voting to practically allow open borders helps Americans? Flooding us with people who eventually end up on welfare instead of a merit system choosing those who would help us is what you want?

And so your voting to enrich the very folks that are already uber wealthy and just stash the cash helps the country?

See how this works...

Now the but, but, but... Rebuttals.

This perfectly illustrates my long response.

[sickdsm]

And so describe our current president and what makes his re election possible? I don't think there is ANY way he gets re elected. This post is exactly why the Democrats will retake the presidency, default. You want a guy who is NOT a politician? Surprise, surprise he is one! EVERYBODY plays a game of persuasion. This is not big news. Oh look he's bucking what is normal politics to please people who want to be persuaded he is NOT a politician.

Wrong. This makes him a politician.

Love you Hillary attitude there. You gave no reasons why I'm wrong but insisting it is there way should force me to believe you. Pretty simple tbh on what a politician is. Of course if your running for a major office at that point you area politician but it's ludicrous to say that when you've spent your whole life in the private sector that somehow your in the same boat as a Bernie. It should scare you that there is lots of people that DID NOT vote for Trump that when forced to vote in a few years against a break pool of washed up politicians, Trump may very well get their vote for the first time. I'd be shocked if the DFL is as stupid as those in this forum and run a retread again though

[rmt]

And so describe our current president and what makes his re election possible? I don't think there is ANY way he gets re elected. This post is exactly why the Democrats will retake the presidency, default. You want a guy who is NOT a politician? Surprise, surprise he is one! EVERYBODY plays a game of persuasion. This is not big news. Oh look he's bucking what is normal politics to please people who want to be persuaded he is NOT a politician.

Wrong. This makes him a politician.

The economy is improving - that's why - in the end, the average American is only concerned with how it affects them personally (meaning their pocket book). And I don't think Trump fits the characteristics of a politician - he's way too politically incorrect for that - a politician would never say the things he does and would have bowed to party/donor pressure long ago.

[baseline bum]

Bernie would have been laughed right off the scene even 20-25 years ago soon as he opened his mouth

Cruz and Trump would have been too.

[pgardn]

Love you Hillary attitude there. You gave no reasons why I'm wrong but insisting it is there way should force me to believe you. Pretty simple tbh on what a politician is. Of course if your running for a major office at that point you area politician but it's ludicrous to say that when you've spent your whole life in the private sector that somehow your in the same boat as a Bernie. It should scare you that there is lots of people that DID NOT vote for Trump that when forced to vote in a few years against a break pool of washed up politicians, Trump may very well get their vote for the first time. I'd be shocked if the DFL is as stupid as those in this forum and run a retread again though

So if I don't like Trump I must love Hillary. The same Hillary that was beautifully exposed thru the rancid Clinton foundation, sure thing. Good Trumpeteer response.

Trump is playing a huge political game promising jobs to the disaffected white voters (oh coal is a booming industry) while at the same time playing tax games enriching his basic circle, the rich getting richer. All at the expense of a huge deficit which he has now persuaded the deficit hawks to re state the trickle down theories that have no merit.

And so he's NOT a politician. That's so cute.

[Trainwreck2100]

And so describe our current president and what makes his re election possible? I don't think there is ANY way he gets re elected. This post is exactly why the Democrats will retake the presidency, default. You want a guy who is NOT a politician? Surprise, surprise he is one! EVERYBODY plays a game of persuasion. This is not big news. Oh look he's bucking what is normal politics to please people who want to be persuaded he is NOT a politician.

Wrong. This makes him a politician.
It's attitude like that which helped him get elected in the first place.

[rmt]

And so your voting to enrich the very folks that are already uber wealthy and just stash the cash helps the country?

See how this works...

Now the but, but, but... Rebuttals.

This perfectly illustrates my long response.

Because of my religious beliefs (Supreme Court) and conservative bend, I have no choice but to vote Republican. Sorry to break it to you, but Democrats also helped those uber wealthy stash the cash - just like the RINOs are for open borders because of their donors - both sides want illegal immigration - not for different reasons - the Repubs for their donors and the Dems for votes and their donors too.

[pgardn]

The economy is improving - that's why - in the end, the average American is only concerned with how it affects them personally (meaning their pocket book). And I don't think Trump fits the characteristics of a politician - he's way too politically incorrect for that - a politician would never say the things he does and would have bowed to party/donor pressure long ago.

The economy was improving before Trump and on its way. Unemployment was already moving quickly down. The disparity in wealth was increasing and continues to do so. The stock market has made huge gains... This means all is well. Not.

As for what a politician is in my view, see my other response.

[AaronY]

Cruz and Trump would have been too.
Yep.

[sickdsm]

So if I don't like Trump I must love Hillary. The same Hillary that was beautifully exposed thru the rancid Clinton foundation, sure thing. Good Trumpeteer response.

Trump is playing a huge political game promising jobs to the disaffected white voters (oh coal is a booming industry) while at the same time playing tax games enriching his basic circle, the rich getting richer. All at the expense of a huge deficit which he has now persuaded the deficit hawks to re state the trickle down theories that have no merit.

And so he's NOT a politician. That's so cute.
Because I said you have an attitude like Hillary did, you assume I said you love her?


Didn't vote Trump. May go third party but more than likely will vote for a pushback if DFL continue to trot out that same tired attitude (and candidates) that you do. I do not believe that I am in the minority of third party voters.

[sickdsm]

The economy was improving before Trump and on its way. Unemployment was already moving quickly down. The disparity in wealth was increasing and continues to do so. The stock market has made huge gains... This means all is well. Not.

As for what a politician is in my view, see my other response.
I've been on Township board for about 6 years now. Am I considered a politician by your standards?

[pgardn]

Because of my religious beliefs (Supreme Court) and conservative bend, I have no choice but to vote Republican. Sorry to break it to you, but Democrats also helped those uber wealthy stash the cash - just like the RINOs are for open borders because of their donors - both sides want illegal immigration - not for different reasons - the Repubs for their donors and the Dems for votes and their donors too.

There is a significant portion of Republicans that think the ONLY reason they don't crush it in elections is hanging on to that "silly" social issue.

But you are indeed correct. Now that you must be a one issue voter, you are much more likely to want a Republican. I suppose God will not judge the women that has an abortion, we will pre empt the problem on this end thru government.

[Reck]

Because I said you have an attitude like Hillary did, you assume I said you love her?


Didn't vote Trump. May go third party but more than likely will vote for a pushback if DFL continue to trot out that same tired attitude (and candidates) that you do. I do not believe that I am in the minority of third party voters.

Every Trump voter say they didn't vote for him. :lol What a conundrum.

[rmt]

So if I don't like Trump I must love Hillary. The same Hillary that was beautifully exposed thru the rancid Clinton foundation, sure thing. Good Trumpeteer response.

Trump is playing a huge political game promising jobs to the disaffected white voters (oh coal is a booming industry) while at the same time playing tax games enriching his basic circle, the rich getting richer. All at the expense of a huge deficit which he has now persuaded the deficit hawks to re state the trickle down theories that have no merit.

And so he's NOT a politician. That's so cute.

Enriching his friends? Who would go through all that - spending a lot of time, energy and money to enrich his friends? Do you think that Trump has helped or hurt his brand by going into politics? I think he has severely hurt his brand, his name, his reputation, his family's security, etc.

[pgardn]

I've been on Township board for about 6 years now. Am I considered a politician by your standards?

I have no idea. Do you make judgments on issues based on being re elected?

[pgardn]

Enriching his friends? Who would go through all that - spending a lot of time, energy and money to enrich his friends? Do you think that Trump has helped or hurt his brand by going into politics? I think he has severely hurt his brand, his name, his reputation, his family's security, etc.

Not his friends. His socioeconomic group that he was born into and understands by far the best. His life has been important in his decision making, imagine that...

[Trainwreck2100]

Every Trump voter say they didn't vote for him. :lol What a conundrum.

i'd imagine a few conservatives didn't vote trump but actually had the fortitude to wait n line and write-in, you can tell the true trump vote as the guy who plays the "what about hillary" card.

[pgardn]

Because I said you have an attitude like Hillary did, you assume I said you love her?


Didn't vote Trump. May go third party but more than likely will vote for a pushback if DFL continue to trot out that same tired attitude (and candidates) that you do. I do not believe that I am in the minority of third party voters.

I held my crushed my nostrils very tightly and pushed Hillary.

It was the worst I ever felt about a vote. It did not matter, I knew it would not matter in Texas. I voted against someone essentially and it was awful. But now... Yeah, I pretty much feel vindicated in voting against Trump. After he got elected I went through the maybe this and maybe that stage... all in vain.

[sickdsm]

I held my crushed my nostrils very tightly and pushed Hillary.

It was the worst I ever felt about a vote. It did not matter, I knew it would not matter in Texas. I voted against someone essentially and it was awful. But now... Yeah, I pretty much feel vindicated in voting against Trump. After he got elected I went through the maybe this and maybe that stage... all in vain.

Voted Johnson. Worst libertarian candidate of all of them but hoped to show some backlash against the major parties. DFL deniers not believing independent voters exist will swing votes back toward Trump if they don't get their shit together.


Huge Austin Peterson fan BTW. Didn't get the party nominee but excited to see him run in Missouri Senate.

[sickdsm]

And you know what? Felt refreshed and proud the next day. Nota hint of regret. I was thinking of writing in Bernie but after he acted like a cuck I thought better.

[sickdsm]

I have a picture on my old phone of the ballot. Might be stored in the cloud. I live in South Dakota. Jesus himself could run as a Dem. And it wouldn't matter. Do you honestly think those of us are scared to throw our vote away? There that attitude shows through again........I thought stupid people were supposed to flock towards the rep party........

[pgardn]

Voted Johnson. Worst libertarian candidate of all of them but hoped to show some backlash against the major parties. DFL deniers not believing independent voters exist will swing votes back toward Trump if they don't get their shit together.


Huge Austin Peterson fan BTW. Didn't get the party nominee but excited to see him run in Missouri Senate.

Personally I have done very very well with Trump as president.

But investing and making money thru real work in which I feel a sense of accomplishment are not even close to the same. In times like these it almost feels like cheating. It just does for me. I don't expect others to feel the same over hard earned money. I guess it's because I got lucky in really enjoying work.

I get you. We had two absolutely awful candidates. So it's hard to begrudge any vote in November. Although the Republicans must be given credit for actually going thru a tough process in choosing their candidate.

[pgardn]

I have a picture on my old phone of the ballot. Might be stored in the cloud. I live in South Dakota. Jesus himself could run as a Dem. And it wouldn't matter. Do you honestly think those of us are scared to throw our vote away? There that attitude shows through again........I thought stupid people were supposed to flock towards the rep party........

South Dakota!!!

Absolutely awesome!

I would be wandering around collecting rocks and fossils all day. And then fishing. Man that might be hard to work with stuff waiting for me to do.

[vy65]

The economy is improving - that's why - in the end, the average American is only concerned with how it affects them personally (meaning their pocket book). And I don't think Trump fits the characteristics of a politician - he's way too politically incorrect for that - a politician would never say the things he does and would have bowed to party/donor pressure long ago.

The stock market isn’t the economy.

[Spurminator]

I'm sure the coal miners and the now laid-off Carrier workers who voted for Trump are happy their stock portfolios are doing well.

[DMC]

Capitalism is awesome but the money has a tendency to conglomerate at the top so it's needs to redistributed some by the government is my points basically

Tell these Republicans your lectures as even they agree with this

https://i.imgur.com/t7FYWOx.png

If you had every factory that ever closed and moved abroad back in the US, you'd raise the lower bar on income average but you wouldn't get closer to the 1% if you were already gainfully employed. There's a glass ceiling for people who don't pursue high income type careers. Skilled labor jobs like craftsmen and engineers typically will have their incomes capped so that the shareholders, owners, etc... will make enough to hang around in the 1% range. So if you want to be in the 1%, start a business. Tax laws that stifle small businesses also present road blocks getting to that 1% range.

However, move the opposite way: Close factories and move them abroad where lower emission standards, cheaper labor and almost zero oversight exists (and lower taxes), you get higher profits and richer 1%ers, and a wider gap between the classes. The middle class family loses ground while the wealthy business CEOs and large shareholders capitalize.

Seems to me that's why Trump won.

BTW, that poll was taken before Trump took office, when Obama had 8 years to close the gap.

[baseline bum]

And you know what? Felt refreshed and proud the next day. Nota hint of regret. I was thinking of writing in Bernie but after he acted like a cuck I thought better.

Yeah but if you actually jerked off rather than doing it metaphorically with that vote you would have felt even better.

[rmt]

There is a significant portion of Republicans that think the ONLY reason they don't crush it in elections is hanging on to that "silly" social issue.

But you are indeed correct. Now that you must be a one issue voter, you are much more likely to want a Republican. I suppose God will not judge the women that has an abortion, we will pre empt the problem on this end thru government.

What don't you understand about the words "and conservative bend"? You might want to call me a one issue voter (like isn't it anyone's prerogative to BE a one issue voter - like being a multi-issue voter is somehow "better" than being a one-issue voter) but outside of religion, once they are past the age of viability outside of the mother (22 weeks?), imo, it is barbaric to snuff out their lives. You might so defend a mother's right to abort right up until delivery, but I am absolutely against that. Given society today, I think a reasonable limit is up until the child is viable outside the mother's womb - that's over 5 months - plenty of time for someone to decide they want an abortion.

[pgardn]

Yeah but if you actually jerked off rather than doing it metaphorically with that vote you would have felt even better.

My voting against Trump in Texas had no practical effect.

I have always kind of wished I got in on an exit poll as a white male so it might have some sort of meaning.
Almost everyone I don't know that starts a conversation concerning politics assumes I like Trump.

Just yesterday " Can you believe England just uninvited Trump?"
I must look so Trumpish. Can't figure it. People of color and women do not appear to flee from me however.

[pgardn]

It's attitude like that which helped him get elected in the first place.

Poor white guy in Mid west ain't falling for it again.

And if they do, so be it.

[rmt]

And so describe our current president and what makes his re election possible? I don't think there is ANY way he gets re elected. This post is exactly why the Democrats will retake the presidency, default. You want a guy who is NOT a politician? Surprise, surprise he is one! EVERYBODY plays a game of persuasion. This is not big news. Oh look he's bucking what is normal politics to please people who want to be persuaded he is NOT a politician.

Wrong. This makes him a politician.

Please keep thinking that there isn't ANY way he gets re elected. No one knows - there are too many variables - but each side should be concerned - on the Repub side, that there will be backlash and many will vote against Trump and his personality, words, racism, whatever. On the Dem side, that the economy continues to improve and people vote their pocket book and because as of now, they don't have a candidate. Maybe Cuban wants to run but as a Republican so he'd have to wait for Trump to leave. Zuckerberg - not old enough? Oprah would definitely win if she were crazy enough to get into politics when she doesn't have to.

[rmt]

My voting against Trump in Texas had no practical effect.

I have always kind of wished I got in on an exit poll as a white male so it might have some sort of meaning.
Almost everyone I don't know that starts a conversation concerning politics assumes I like Trump.

Just yesterday " Can you believe England just uninvited Trump?"
I must look so Trumpish. Can't figure it. People of color and women do not appear to flee from me however.

It's the opposite for me. At work, people come up to me and start trashing Trump. They just ASSUME that everyone thinks the same way they do - I just keep smiling.

[pgardn]

Because of my religious beliefs (Supreme Court) and conservative bend, I have no choice but to vote Republican. .

So if you had two Republican candidates, and one was pro choice the other pro life, you could possibly take the pro choice candidate? Because the pro lifer had LESS of a "conservative bend"

This is what you are saying?
If it is, I apologize for the misinterpretation.

I have a lot of very Christian friends that take abortion before anything else.
Then once they got two pro lifers its up for debate.
The above example is a one issue voter. Must be pro life... automatically disqualified if not.

[DMC]

My voting against Trump in Texas had no practical effect.

I have always kind of wished I got in on an exit poll as a white male so it might have some sort of meaning.
Almost everyone I don't know that starts a conversation concerning politics assumes I like Trump.

Just yesterday " Can you believe England just uninvited Trump?"
I must look so Trumpish. Can't figure it. People of color and women do not appear to flee from me however.

This means either

A: You're a business owner
B: You tuck your shirt

[AaronY]

If you had every factory that ever closed and moved abroad back in the US, you'd raise the lower bar on income average but you wouldn't get closer to the 1% if you were already gainfully employed. There's a glass ceiling for people who don't pursue high income type careers. Skilled labor jobs like craftsmen and engineers typically will have their incomes capped so that the shareholders, owners, etc... will make enough to hang around in the 1% range. So if you want to be in the 1%, start a business. Tax laws that stifle small businesses also present road blocks getting to that 1% range.

However, move the opposite way: Close factories and move them abroad where lower emission standards, cheaper labor and almost zero oversight exists (and lower taxes), you get higher profits and richer 1%ers, and a wider gap between the classes. The middle class family loses ground while the wealthy business CEOs and large shareholders capitalize.

Seems to me that's why Trump won.

BTW, that poll was taken before Trump took office, when Obama had 8 years to close the gap.
Lol blaming that all on Obama thats the new economy moving away from manufacturing and 40 years of mostly trickle down economics

85% of the manufacturing jobs were lost due to automation according to a study I read (https://www.ft.com/content/dec677c0-b7e6-11e6-ba85-95d1533d9a62O (so you could bring it all back and it wouldn't matter and it would raise prices astronomically. Globalism is good for electronics people's iphone cost $600 instead of $2000 due to globalism: https://www.marketplace.org/2014/05/20/business/ive-always-wondered/how-much-would-all-american-iphone-cost and imagine trying to sell that on the global market? competing against Samsung who's building it in china for 1/3 the price. No point in bringing pback the phone and TV manufacturing jobs to employ what 40,000 people and screw over who buys them

You could raise tariffs to a million percent and build a thousand walls those 1950s manufacturing ain't coming back.

[pgardn]

This means either

A: You're a business owner
B: You tuck your shirt

Its the Fckn tie, sometimes with a suit. And always tucked. Always.
Been asked to join the guys I work with but don't want to get tied down and not getting to work with others in the same field. Too much to hide and not share, that's no fun.

[rmt]

So if you had two Republican candidates, and one was pro choice the other pro life, you could possibly take the pro choice candidate? Because the pro lifer had LESS of a "conservative bend"

This is what you are saying?
If it is, I apologize for the misinterpretation.

I have a lot of very Christian friends that take abortion before anything else.
Then once they got two pro lifers its up for debate.
The above example is a one issue voter. Must be pro life... automatically disqualified if not.

Roe v Wade is not going to be overturned - I am not delusional. Why would I choose someone on the basis of something that's never gonna happen over someone who could make my and my kids' life/future better? You know I voted for Trump - does he seem like some conservative, religious (two Corinthians), high moral guy? I voted for him because he was the only one who could take the heat/attacks, the only one who was rich enough that he wouldn't be influenced by party or donors, the only with enough business/common sense to possibly change the direction we were going in, the only one who didn't have to do it, the only one who has lost money, energy, time, future family security and probably his brand by doing it.

[ElNono]

You grant him some honesty, WRONG!

As an billionaire elitist, he ran on pro-white working class / anti-elitist / anti-DC-swamp bullshit, was a LIE then, proven to be a LIE now.

There's another example... what's the 'anti-DC-swamp bullshit'? That DC only listens to 'special interests' (aka businesses) instead of the 99%. Typical populist message to appeal to the 99%.

[sickdsm]

Yeah but if you actually jerked off rather than doing it metaphorically with that vote you would have felt even better.
Baseline worried about picking the winner like he's betting on the Superbowl instead of going with what he believes. That's the main problem with the political system.

[pgardn]

Please keep thinking that there isn't ANY way he gets re elected. No one knows - there are too many variables - but each side should be concerned - on the Repub side, that there will be backlash and many will vote against Trump and his personality, words, racism, whatever. On the Dem side, that the economy continues to improve and people vote their pocket book and because as of now, they don't have a candidate. Maybe Cuban wants to run but as a Republican so he'd have to wait for Trump to leave. Zuckerberg - not old enough? Oprah would definitely win if she were crazy enough to get into politics when she doesn't have to.

When I say I don't think, that's an opinion.
And I'll take a bet on it.

It does not mean I won't vote.

[rmt]

Not his friends. His socioeconomic group that he was born into and understands by far the best. His life has been important in his decision making, imagine that...

Nobody does something so life changing for his socioeconomic group - only for himself or his family. In case you haven't noticed, hardly any of those rich people are Trump supporters - maybe only Peter Thiel. All those Zuckerberg, Gates, Buffet, Hollywood, academia, DC, elite types are against him.

[Pavlov]

Nobody does something so life changing for his socioeconomic group - only for himself or his family. In case you haven't noticed, hardly any of those rich people are Trump supporters - maybe only Peter Thiel. All those Zuckerberg, Gates, Buffet, Hollywood, academia, DC, elite types are against him.
JPMorgan's CEO seems to support him.

Dude didn't think he was going to win and he didn't think he would be as hated as he is. You're trying to paint this as some huge sacrifice on his part -- it's just another fuckup.

[pgardn]

Roe v Wade is not going to be overturned - I am not delusional. Why would I choose someone on the basis of something that's never gonna happen over someone who could make my and my kids' life/future better? You know I voted for Trump - does he seem like some conservative, religious (two Corinthians), high moral guy? I voted for him because he was the only one who could take the heat/attacks, the only one who was rich enough that he wouldn't be influenced by party or donors, the only with enough business/common sense to possibly change the direction we were going in, the only one who didn't have to do it, the only one who has lost money, energy, time, future family security and probably his brand by doing it.

So you knew Trump was not a true pro lifer and I agree. So you used your conservative bend on other issues to go with go with Trump. Bottom line, if you are like the vast majority of my Christian friends, you look at pro choice as an automatic disqualification. And I'm gonna say you do.

As far as Roe v. Wade being overturned... Who knows. Get 4 more like Trump's last nominee accepted and I can see it clearly. And it does not have to be overturned to effectively end legal abortion in the US.

[rmt]

JPMorgan's CEO seems to support him.

Dude didn't think he was going to win and he didn't think he would be as hated as he is. You're trying to paint this as some huge sacrifice on his part -- it's just another fuckup.

Two months ago, this same JPMorgan's CEO didn't seem to support him. Only after the tax plan passed.

Why do you think Trump ran?

[pgardn]

Nobody does something so life changing for his socioeconomic group - only for himself or his family. In case you haven't noticed, hardly any of those rich people are Trump supporters - maybe only Peter Thiel. All those Zuckerberg, Gates, Buffet, Hollywood, academia, DC, elite types are against him.

What was life changing? He's a thrill seeker who is a narcissistic rich guy from early on.

They are snowflaking.

And you are going to have to know these people better.
They were not all born into that socioeconomic group.
They lived the other side or were actually able to empathize with something they did not live. Narcissistic people.. that's a big ask.

[Pavlov]

Two months ago, this same JPMorgan's CEO didn't seem to support him. Only after the tax plan passed. That's politics. The elites were pushing the Republicans in congress to pass it by threatening to cut off their money supply. Would've happened under any Republican president.


Why do you think Trump ran?Ego and money through resulting opportunities. Not to win. Not for love of country. Not for working people. You're fooling yourself if you thought he did it for anything other than ego and money.

[rmt]

So you knew Trump was not a true pro lifer and I agree. So you used your conservative bend on other issues to go with go with Trump. Bottom line, if you are like the vast majority of my Christian friends, you look at pro choice as an automatic disqualification. And I'm gonna say you do.

As far as Roe v. Wade being overturned... Who knows. Get 4 more like Trump's last nominee accepted and I can see it clearly. And it does not have to be overturned to effectively end legal abortion in the US.

Trump is a typical New Yorker - a social Democrat but he thinks the economy is better served by Republican policies. He "says" the right things to get the evangelical vote (but lives his life as a [social] Democrat as opposed to Pence who is a true Christian) - no one should be fooled - it's obvious.

There is no going back on abortion or gay rights - btw, I'm really ticked off on something related to that - gonna create a separate thread for that.

[ElNono]

If you had every factory that ever closed and moved abroad back in the US, you'd raise the lower bar on income average but you wouldn't get closer to the 1% if you were already gainfully employed. There's a glass ceiling for people who don't pursue high income type careers. Skilled labor jobs like craftsmen and engineers typically will have their incomes capped so that the shareholders, owners, etc... will make enough to hang around in the 1% range. So if you want to be in the 1%, start a business. Tax laws that stifle small businesses also present road blocks getting to that 1% range.

However, move the opposite way: Close factories and move them abroad where lower emission standards, cheaper labor and almost zero oversight exists (and lower taxes), you get higher profits and richer 1%ers, and a wider gap between the classes. The middle class family loses ground while the wealthy business CEOs and large shareholders capitalize.

Seems to me that's why Trump won.

It's more complicated than that, and there's economic reasons why it was never doable and was never going to work. If you actually do bring those factories back and pay US standard-of-living rates, then you bring inflation, which affects the 99% the same (because the 99% would now be making more, but the 1% would have a higher cost, which they translate to prices to retain their profit margins, which largely gets paid by the 99%). But the other side effect is that you become non-competitive around the world, thus your commercial ceiling is internal demand. That does hurt the 1%'ers and theoretically might close some of the gap. However, the 1% always has the option to move the company out of the US and import. Thus Trump's populist message of taxing import of goods.

Does all that sounds like a pro-business, capitalist campaign to you? It sure as heck doesn't sound like that to me. It sounds a lot more like Cuba.

None of that is going to happen, and Trump didn't become pro-business overnight. He's just a tool that enabled the current Congress (the swamp, really) to pass all the typical pro-business Republican agenda, plus the globalist agenda (which involves both parties).

But people that voted for Trump will never admit to it, tbh, much like people that voted for Obama never admitted the H&C was all bs...

[pgardn]

Trump is a typical New Yorker - a social Democrat but he thinks the economy is better served by Republican policies. He "says" the right things to get the evangelical vote (but lives his life as a [social] Democrat as opposed to Pence who is a true Christian) - no one should be fooled - it's obvious.

There is no going back on abortion or gay rights - btw, I'm really ticked off on something related to that - gonna create a separate thread for that.

So yes.

You will always go with the pro lifer over the pro choice.
Thats the single issue that begins the flow chart of ID ing your candidate. With Trump v. Clinton that singular issue was not present.

[AaronY]

Both parties have done a bad job addressing income inequality over the last 40 years and I think the rise of Bernie is due to that. Hopefully he doesn't win in 2020 but I don't think its so far fetched. Remember most of us liberals were ecstatic when Trump got the Republican nom thinking he could never win.

[pgardn]

Both parties have done a bad job addressing income inequality over the last 40 years and I think the rise of Bernie is due to that. Hopefully he doesn't win in 2020 but I don't think its so far fetched. Remember most of us liberals were ecstatic when Trump got the Republican nom thinking he could never win.

The rise of Bernie and Trump IMO...

But they shall see the truth with Trump. No coal economic explosion.

[vy65]

What don't you understand about the words "and conservative bend"? You might want to call me a one issue voter (like isn't it anyone's prerogative to BE a one issue voter - like being a multi-issue voter is somehow "better" than being a one-issue voter) but outside of religion, once they are past the age of viability outside of the mother (22 weeks?), imo, it is barbaric to snuff out their lives. You might so defend a mother's right to abort right up until delivery, but I am absolutely against that. Given society today, I think a reasonable limit is up until the child is viable outside the mother's womb - that's over 5 months - plenty of time for someone to decide they want an abortion.

I’m curious as to why you think being a “multi issue” voter is the same, if not worse, than being a single issue voter?

[rmt]

I’m curious as to why you think being a “multi issue” voter is the same, if not worse, than being a single issue voter?

I don't think being a multi issue voter is better or worse than being a single issue voter. Everyone is FREE is make their own decision - whether based on a single issue or multiple issues.

[vy65]

I don't think being a multi issue voter is better or worse than being a single issue voter. Everyone is FREE is make their own decision - whether based on a single issue or multiple issues.

Well, they’re free to make their decision among the field of candidates. Is that the reason why, in your mind, being a “multi issue” voter is no better or worse than being a single issue voter?

[rmt]

So yes.

You will always go with the pro lifer over the pro choice.
Thats the single issue that begins the flow chart of ID ing your candidate. With Trump v. Clinton that singular issue was not present.

Am I not being clear to you? I just finished saying that Trump is not conservative or religious and listing a whole bunch of reasons why I voted for him. Maybe you missed some of my posts while writing your posts? His economic views are more Republican leaning - not his social views.

[rmt]

Well, they’re free to make their decision among the field of candidates. Is that the reason why, in your mind, being a “multi issue” voter is no better or worse than being a single issue voter?

I'm not getting why you're beleaguring this topic. They're free to make their decision based on a single issue or on multiple issues. Why should anyone care why some one chooses who they choose?

What's going on? Am I not being clear in all my posts?

[vy65]

I'm not getting why you're beleaguring this topic. They're free to make their decision based on a single issue or on multiple issues. Why should anyone care why some one chooses who they choose?

What's going on? Am I not being clear in all my posts?

I understand - and agree - that voters are free to choose whomever they want from the field of candidates. That’s not my question.

I want to know why you think single vs. multi issue is a wash. Is it because people can choose whomever they want? Or is there some other reason?

[vy65]

I'm not getting why you're beleaguring this topic. They're free to make their decision based on a single issue or on multiple issues. Why should anyone care why some one chooses who they choose?

What's going on? Am I not being clear in all my posts?

I also find it ironic that you’re emphasizing freedom in this context to the point of asking why would anyone care about another’s choice(s) while at the same time emphasizing the lack of freedom and concern about a woman’s choice to abort. But that’s another conversation.

[rmt]

I understand - and agree - that voters are free to choose whomever they want from the field of candidates. That’s not my question.

I want to know why you think single vs. multi issue is a wash. Is it because people can choose whomever they want? Or is there some other reason?

[vy65]

So it doesn’t matter who you choose to vote for because you’re free to vote for whomever I want? You wouldn’t have any issues with me if I wrote Hitler in on my ballot?

[rmt]

I also find it ironic that you’re emphasizing freedom in this context to the point of asking why would anyone care about another’s choice(s) while at the same time emphasizing the lack of freedom and concern about a woman’s choice to abort. But that’s another conversation.

When the child becomes viable outside the womb (can survive separate of the mother), then (imo) you are talking about killing a life - not just a woman's choice/freedom.

[vy65]

When the child becomes viable outside the womb (can survive separate of the mother), then (imo) you are talking about killing a life - not just a woman's choice/freedom.

When you choose a candidate who has the ability to implement really regressive/bad policy, then (imo) you are talking about harming a life - not just a person’s choice/vote.

[rmt]

When you choose a candidate who has the ability to implement really regressive/bad policy, then (imo) you are talking about harming a life - not just a person’s choice/vote.

Are you referring to abortion? If so, I already said in a previous post, that the boat has sailed on Roe vs Wade (and gay rights). I think I took too long writing a post and some of you missed my post.

If not, what you consider really regressive/bad policy, I might not think it so - that is a matter of opinion.

[vy65]

Are you referring to abortion? If so, I already said in a previous post, that the boat has sailed on Roe vs Wade (and gay rights). I think I took too long writing a post and some of you missed my post.

If not, what you consider really regressive/bad policy, I might not think it so - that is a matter of opinion.

This is all really secondary to the point being made.

[vy65]

You wouldn’t have any issues with me if I wrote Hitler in on my ballot?

??

[Spurtacular]

That's politics. The elites were pushing the Republicans in congress to pass it by threatening to cut off their money supply. Would've happened under any Republican president.

Ego and money through resulting opportunities. Not to win. Not for love of country. Not for working people. You're fooling yourself if you thought he did it for anything other than ego and money.

Did Hillary run for love of country or for ego and money?

[DMC]

Did Hillary run for love of country or for ego and money?

She ran because she was the only one in the DNC that had any real face time with the American public, albeit not recently good face time for her. It's why she ran the last time as well. I'm surprised Michelle Obama isn't mentioned more as a consideration, as it would put Barack back into the WH. She doesn't seem egotistical enough though to want more years of that.

[rmt]

She ran because she was the only one in the DNC that had any real face time with the American public, albeit not recently good face time for her. It's why she ran the last time as well. I'm surprised Michelle Obama isn't mentioned more as a consideration, as it would put Barack back into the WH. She doesn't seem egotistical enough though to want more years of that.

Why should anyone who is set in life subject herself to all that?

[Spurtacular]

She ran because she was the only one in the DNC that had any real face time with the American public, albeit not recently good face time for her. It's why she ran the last time as well. I'm surprised Michelle Obama isn't mentioned more as a consideration, as it would put Barack back into the WH. She doesn't seem egotistical enough though to want more years of that.

MO ain't smart enough; and her pre-WH history is not good history. She'd crack on the campaign trail.

[DMC]

Why should anyone who is set in life subject herself to all that?

Same for Oprah. Power is alluring.

[DMC]

MO ain't smart enough; and her pre-WH history is not good history. She'd crack on the campaign trail.

:lol She's a graduate of Princeton and Harvard Law

She's smart enough

[Spurtacular]

:lol She's a graduate of Princeton and Harvard Law

She's smart enough

Not adept enough. Not quick on her feet whatsoever. It's one thing the white guilt liberals coddling her. It's another thing having to know her shit on the fly.

[pgardn]

You will always go with the pro lifer over the pro choice.
.

No you are not getting me.
The above is the first bifurcation.



If I'm wrong, just tell me you will vote for a pro abortion ( use your criteria of when a life begins) candidate over a pro life candidate. And that will separate you from what I see from my Christian friends.
Simples.

[rmt]

No you are not getting me.
The above is the first bifurcation.



If I'm wrong, just tell me you will vote for a pro choice candidate over a pro life candidate. And that will separate you from what I see from my Christian friends.
Simples.

You're right - I'm not getting you. How can I tell you if I will vote for a pro choice candidate over a pro life candidate when I don't know anything else about the candidates? I already told you that Roe v Wade is here is stay and I voted Trump (who might be pro-life or pro-choice) over someone like Cruz who is your typical Christian conservative and definitely pro-life. At this point, I am not interested in overturning Roe v Wade and Trump suits my goals/aims for the country more than Cruz.

[pgardn]

Why should anyone who is set in life subject herself to all that?

You don't get it.
Set for life has to be a $ thing.
Thats really damn simplistic.

Michael Jackson was set for life monetarily.
And you are a Christian? So you can never be set for life spiritually unless you have enough money? Or there is a difference? Besides the obvious power thing, there are people in government who don't need money and just serve. The cynics on this board are not gonna buy it with the Darwinian selfish thingy they think makes sense. Pence is actually one of those guys IMO. He really believes he needs to serve. But the power thing weighs on him as well. He has admitted as much.

[rmt]

You don't get it.
Set for life has to be a $ thing.
Thats really damn simplistic.

Michael Jackson was set for life monetarily.
And you are a Christian? So you can never be set for life spiritually unless you have enough money? Or there is a difference? Besides the obvious power thing, there are people in government who don't need money and just serve. The cynics on this board are not gonna buy it with the Darwinian selfish thingy they think makes sense. Pence is actually one of those guys IMO. He really believes he needs to serve. But the power thing weighs on him as well. He has admitted as much.

I disagree with you about Pence. If you see his hemming and hawing, when he endorsed Cruz at the same time sucking up to Trump (iirc Trump was leading) - iow, angling to be VP - hitching on to Trump's coat tails - it's the only way he'd ever get close to the WH (saying all this, I do admire the man personally regarding his policy to never be alone with another non-family female other than his wife [following in the steps of Billy Graham] - that's one lucky wife to be honored like that). Never heard an endorsement like this before:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EILRZjXoxE

I already said a long time ago that I'm not going to discuss (my) religion on this board.

[pgardn]

You're right - I'm not getting you. How can I tell you if I will vote for a pro choice candidate over a pro life candidate when I don't know anything else about the candidates? I already told you that Roe v Wade is here is stay and I voted Trump (who might be pro-life or pro-choice) over someone like Cruz who is your typical Christian conservative and definitely pro-life. At this point, I am not interested in overturning Roe v Wade and Trump suits my goals/aims for the country more than Cruz.

You said it.

You are different from the typical voter I have met on this issue.
A. pro choice... conservative on financial policy and every other issue you deem important

v.

B. Pro life.... Liberal on financial policy and every other issue you deem important

You vote A.

[pgardn]

I disagree with you about Pence. If you see his hemming and hawing, when he endorsed Cruz at the same time sucking up to Trump (iirc Trump was leading) - iow, angling to be VP - hitching on to Trump's coat tails - it's the only way he'd ever get close to the WH (saying all this, I do admire the man personally regarding his policy to never be alone with another non-family female other than his wife [following in the steps of Billy Graham] - that's one lucky wife to be honored like that). Never heard an endorsement like this before:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EILRZjXoxE

I already said a long time ago that I'm not going to discuss (my) religion on this board.

Oh I never saw that as you were discussing religion on this board. (musta been way back. I just assumed you were Christian)
My fault.

[rmt]

You said it.

You are different from the typical voter I have met on this issue.
A. pro choice... conservative on financial policy and every other issue you deem important

v.

B. Pro life.... Liberal on financial policy and every other issue you deem important

You vote A.

You seem to think that I can't separate my personal beliefs and what I would do in my life with who I choose as President. I've have made it very clear - I am much closer in my personal life to Cruz/Pence than to Trump but he was the one who could possibly change the direction we were going in. Cruz, Pence or any one like them are too dependent on donor money, Republican party and their Christian principles to do the job. Trump doesn't care about any of those things.

[rmt]

Oh I never saw that as you were discussing religion on this board. (musta been way back. I just assumed you were Christian)
My fault.

I am Christian - evangelical Christian - just like Cruz and Pence. I just don't want to open myself up to the inevitable attacks on this board that will come in any discussion on that subject.

[DMC]

Not adept enough. Not quick on her feet whatsoever. It's one thing the white guilt liberals coddling her. It's another thing having to know her shit on the fly.

She can learn the canned answers just like Hillary did, with help from CNN.

[pgardn]

You seem to think that I can't separate my personal beliefs and what I would do in my life with who I choose as President. I've have made it very clear - I am much closer in my personal life to Cruz/Pence than to Trump but he was the one who could possibly change the direction we were going in. Cruz, Pence or any one like them are too dependent on donor money, Republican party and their Christian principles to do the job. Trump doesn't care about any of those things.

Yes.

Exactly.

Which is why I proposed you would vote for A based on the post I quoted. You apparently agree so end of my question

I took out this last election to make it clearer what I was asking. I was way past the Trump discussion, which is not even relevant to me in understanding your stance, clearly because Hillary is pro choice. If Hillary was clearly pro life, it still would have been Trump for you because he strikes you as conservative much more than Hillary.

[Spurtacular]

She can learn the canned answers just like Hillary did, with help from CNN.

Perhaps so.

[pgardn]

I am Christian - evangelical Christian - just like Cruz and Pence. I just don't want to open myself up to the inevitable attacks on this board that will come in any discussion on that subject.

Well that in itself put you in a bind on this board.
I personally have zero problems with it.

And Pence was an ardent Catholic, not into evangelism.
Even further, an analysis from a more liberal magazine. I see it as basically accurate having you tubed some of his church speeches and listened to his language concerning their relationship.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/01/gods-plan-for-mike-pence/546569/

[rmt]

Well that in itself put you in a bind on this board.
I personally have zero problems with it.

And Pence was an ardent Catholic, not into evangelism.
Even further, an analysis from a more liberal magazine. I see it as basically accurate having you tubed some of his church speeches and listened to his language concerning their relationship.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/01/gods-plan-for-mike-pence/546569/

Pence was raised in a Catholic family and a Democrat growing up - born again, evangelical Christian and Republican in college.

[baseline bum]

Both parties have done a bad job addressing income inequality over the last 40 years and I think the rise of Bernie is due to that. Hopefully he doesn't win in 2020 but I don't think its so far fetched. Remember most of us liberals were ecstatic when Trump got the Republican nom thinking he could never win.

If Bernie wins he'd never get any of his agenda through other than judicial picks. Obama barely got his healthcare plan through while swinging significantly right for the votes of Lieberman and Nelson, and Bernie getting dealt a better hand on the senate and house than Obama did is extremely unlikely.

[pgardn]

Pence was raised in a Catholic family and a Democrat growing up - born again, evangelical Christian and Republican in college.

And IMO he wants to be president and have the country reflect a much more Christian model.

[rmt]

And IMO he wants to be president and have the country reflect a much more Christian model.

Agreed. People who want Trump impeached should be careful of what they wish for - Pence would try to bring his religious beliefs/convictions into policy. Trump won't - religion probably isn't important to him. Question is what do the Dems want more: a soft-spoken, well-mannered, smooth religious politician or a brash, bad-mannered secular businessman?

[vy65]

I am Christian - evangelical Christian - just like Cruz and Pence. I just don't want to open myself up to the inevitable attacks on this board that will come in any discussion on that subject.

No attack, but I’m curious what you think about that First Amendment thingy?

[Blake]

What's your definition of a globalist, Chris?

Will never get answered. Never

[Blake]

Agreed. People who want Trump impeached should be careful of what they wish for - Pence would try to bring his religious beliefs/convictions into policy. Trump won't - religion probably isn't important to him. Question is what do the Dems want more: a soft-spoken, well-mannered, smooth religious politician or a brash, bad-mannered secular businessman?

Trump is already pandering to the evangelicals. What exactly would Pence do extra that Trump wouldn't?

[pgardn]

Agreed. People who want Trump impeached should be careful of what they wish for - Pence would try to bring his religious beliefs/convictions into policy. Trump won't - religion probably isn't important to him. Question is what do the Dems want more: a soft-spoken, well-mannered, smooth religious politician or a brash, bad-mannered secular narcissistic, unstable, entertainer ?

I fixed it.

I don't know.

[vy65]

Trump is already pandering to the evangelicals. What exactly would Pence do extra that Trump wouldn't?

It’s hard to imagine Pence getting whatever agenda he’d want to push considering the massive rebuke impeachment would be.

[rmt]

No attack, but I’m curious what you think about that First Amendment thingy?

I don't agree with the way it is used in regard to education currently. I think that the dollars should follow the student. If the student/parent wants to go to a Catholic school, Jewish school, Japanese school, public school, charter school, magnet school, homeschool, virtual school, whatever school, they should be allowed to - that's the way it is in Canada. Almost all my cousins' kids go to Catholic schools K-8 and transfer to public schools (I guess because they have more resources?) in high school. And if you're an atheist and choose to go to a religious school, don't expect them to make accommodations for you - transfer to another school that doesn't offend you or don't go to that school in the first place.

And I don't like how these neighborhoods force people to take down signs like a Jesus sign at Christmas - same thing applies to what devilish/satanic sign anybody wants to put up at Halloween - because someone finds a sign offensive. Seems to me that there are a bunch of snowflakes out there who are offended at everything.

[Blake]

It’s hard to imagine Pence getting whatever agenda he’d want to push considering the massive rebuke impeachment would be.

Maybe he'll want to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem

[Blake]

And I don't like how these neighborhoods force people to take down signs like a Jesus sign at Christmas - same thing applies to what devilish/satanic sign anybody wants to put up at Halloween - because someone finds a sign offensive. Seems to me that there are a bunch of snowflakes out there who are offended at everything.

Honestly, I hate that too.

Mandatory HOA's are the devil.

[pgardn]

It’s hard to imagine Pence getting whatever agenda he’d want to push considering the massive rebuke impeachment would be.

I was thinking more along the lines of Trump going all 4 and quitting.
Or Trump stroking out.
But impeachment is certainly on the list of him going away, especially with an earthquake in 2018 changing congress.

[rmt]

Trump is already pandering to the evangelicals. What exactly would Pence do extra that Trump wouldn't?

Trump is not pursuing any religious policy - only Gorsuch would be considered conservative.

[Blake]

Trump is not pursuing any religious policy - only Gorsuch would be considered conservative.

Trump is pursuing evangelical votes for 2020 just like he did in 2016.

Iow, he's been pushing evangelical agenda and will continue to do so.

[rmt]

I was thinking more along the lines of Trump going all 4 and quitting.
Or Trump stroking out.
But impeachment is certainly on the list of him going away, especially with an earthquake in 2018 changing congress.

With his ego, do you really think Trump wouldn't run again? No way. His aim is to emblazon his name in the history books - to be spoken of like Ronald Reagan (by conservatives). Stroking out - I don't think so - still pretty far away from average age of death (men) and no alcohol/drugs - but he does eat a lot of junk.

He hasn't done anything yet to be impeached with. And we shall see about 2018 changing congress.

[rmt]

Trump is pursuing evangelical votes for 2020 just like he did in 2016.

Iow, he's been pushing evangelical agenda and will continue to do so.

What evangelical agenda?

[Pavlov]

I disagree with you about Pence. If you see his hemming and hawing, when he endorsed Cruz at the same time sucking up to Trump (iirc Trump was leading) - iow, angling to be VP - hitching on to Trump's coat tails - it's the only way he'd ever get close to the WH (saying all this, I do admire the man personally regarding his policy to never be alone with another non-family female other than his wife [following in the steps of Billy Graham] - that's one lucky wife to be honored like that). :lol honored.

Is he alone with men a lot?

[rmt]

:lol honored.

Is he alone with men a lot?

Yes - honored, it means he values his marriage and does everything he can to combat temptation and preserve his marriage.

If all these Congressmen committing suicide or resigning had followed Pence's example, they wouldn't be dead or out of Congress now.

[vy65]

I don't agree with the way it is used in regard to education currently. I think that the dollars should follow the student. If the student/parent wants to go to a Catholic school, Jewish school, Japanese school, public school, charter school, magnet school, homeschool, virtual school, whatever school, they should be allowed to - that's the way it is in Canada. Almost all my cousins' kids go to Catholic schools K-8 and transfer to public schools (I guess because they have more resources?) in high school. And if you're an atheist and choose to go to a religious school, don't expect them to make accommodations for you - transfer to another school that doesn't offend you or don't go to that school in the first place.

And I don't like how these neighborhoods force people to take down signs like a Jesus sign at Christmas - same thing applies to what devilish/satanic sign anybody wants to put up at Halloween - because someone finds a sign offensive. Seems to me that there are a bunch of snowflakes out there who are offended at everything.

So your beef with the First Amendment is that it precludes States from funding voucher programs to send kids to religious schools? Because the Court had ruled in several cases over the past 20 or so years that there are fewer and fewer restrictions on the states’ ability to fund sectarian applications of religious schools.

But my bigger question is: this is the extent of being an evangelical Christian? Religious school funding and “keeping Christ in Christmas?”

[Pavlov]

Yes - honored, it means he values his marriage and does everything he can to combat temptation and preserve his marriage.

If all these Congressmen committing suicide or resigning had followed Pence's example, they wouldn't be dead or out of Congress now.Is he alone with men a lot?

And how many Congressmen committed suicide?

[pgardn]

With his ego, do you really think Trump wouldn't run again? No way. His aim is to emblazon his name in the history books - to be spoken of like Ronald Reagan (by conservatives). Stroking out - I don't think so - still pretty far away from average age of death (men) and no alcohol/drugs - but he does eat a lot of junk.

He hasn't done anything yet to be impeached with. And we shall see about 2018 changing congress.

His name is already in. The goal is accomplished. And he will quit initiatives.
And like I said, IMO no way he wins again. I'd bet on it.
The presidency is even rough on megalomaniacs. The golfing is probably really good for him. He needs to walk it though. The man abhors physical activity.

[pgardn]

Yes - honored, it means he values his marriage and does everything he can to combat temptation and preserve his marriage.

If all these Congressmen committing suicide or resigning had followed Pence's example, they wouldn't be dead or out of Congress now.

Temptation?

No, it's just safe so there are absolutely no she said he said situations. His wife trusts him?
Why is it that women think men can't keep their Johnson in its seatbelt?
Seriously all this crap is really getting out of hand.

My penis does not rule, I am a mammal with a big cortex. I make decisions and they WILL NOT be forgiven if they are so blantantly wrong. Good gosh...

[Pavlov]

Temptation?

No, it's just safe so there are absolutely no she said he said situations. His wife trusts him?
Why is it that women think men can't keep their Johnson in its seatbelt?
Seriously all this crap is really getting out of hand.

My penis does not rule, I am a mammal with a big cortex. I make decisions and they WILL NOT be forgiven if they are so blantantly wrong. Good gosh...I totally believe he's not tempted by other women though.

[pgardn]

I totally believe he's not tempted by other women though.


:lol
^

Ok that's a rarity for me (Fkn emoticons) but that is really funny.
Abdominal muscles are cramping...

[rmt]

So your beef with the First Amendment is that it precludes States from funding voucher programs to send kids to religious schools? Because the Court had ruled in several cases over the past 20 or so years that there are fewer and fewer restrictions on the states’ ability to fund sectarian applications of religious schools.

But my bigger question is: this is the extent of being an evangelical Christian? Religious school funding and “keeping Christ in Christmas?”

I don't have a "beef" with the First Amendment. You asked. My response was more in terms of education than religion. I think that the dollars should follow the kids - not for religious purposes but say for homeschooling (to buy books/supplies) or virtual school (to buy the computer). Don't think of it as a voucher program - just as a right to go to any school you choose. Or a religious school as equal to a public school as equal to any school whether at home or online for the purpose of a child's education.

You asked a specific question with regard to the First Amendment - my answer was not meant to encompass what being an evangelical Christian is. A Christian simply means FAITH in Jesus Christ as one's Lord and Savior - having a personal relationship with God (which affects all areas of life - not just school/Christmas). For example, some posters have called me very nasty names - as a Christian, I have to forgive these names just as Christ forgives my sins.

Many religious people don't send their kids to religious schools and some people who don't believe send their kids to religious school (someone on this board does - can't recall who) - maybe because of the quality of the school? And I probably would still have homeschooled (even if free Christian school was available) - that was more of a lifestyle that encompassed not just education but training, discipline, religion, family life, etc. Easter (Jesus dying and rising) is much more important to the Christian faith than Christmas (which is more a celebration/tradition).

[rmt]

Is he alone with men a lot?

And how many Congressmen committed suicide?

Two have committed suicide.

[Pavlov]

Two have committed suicide.Which ones? I think you're confusing state legislatures with Congress and child molesters with adulterers.

[rmt]

Temptation?

No, it's just safe so there are absolutely no she said he said situations. His wife trusts him?
Why is it that women think men can't keep their Johnson in its seatbelt?
Seriously all this crap is really getting out of hand.

My penis does not rule, I am a mammal with a big cortex. I make decisions and they WILL NOT be forgiven if they are so blantantly wrong. Good gosh...

You never know what will happen - the flesh is weak and people make mistakes. Pence is wise to not put himself in that position.

[Blake]

What evangelical agenda?

Why are you asking me to answer your question first?

Pro-life agenda for starters.

Now what agenda what Pence push that Trump won't?

[rmt]

Which ones? I think you're confusing state legislatures with Congress and child molesters with adulterers.

Whatever. Suicide is too far for whatever sin has been committed.

[rmt]

Why are you asking me to answer your question first?

Pro-life agenda for starters.

Now what agenda what Pence push that Trump won't?

Sorry, I must have missed your question. I think Pence would try to put limits (number of weeks) on abortion. Don't think that Trump would do that.

[Pavlov]

Whatever.These are huge differences.
Suicide is too far for whatever sin has been committed.What's the appropriate penance for sexually abusing multiple children?

[rmt]

What's the appropriate penance for sexually abusing multiple children?

From a Christian perspective - all sins are equal, require true repentance and are covered by (shedding of) Christ's blood. From a criminal perspective, I guess whatever the judge says?

[Blake]

Sorry, I must have missed your question. I think Pence would try to put limits (number of weeks) on abortion. Don't think that Trump would do that.

"The House on Tuesday approved a bill banning most abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, advancing a key GOP priority for the third time in the past four years — this time, with a supportive Republican in the White House.

The bill, known as the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, is not expected to emerge from the Senate, where most Democrats and a handful of moderate Republicans can block its consideration. But antiabortion activists are calling President Trump's endorsement of the bill a significant advance for their movement.

The White House said in a statement released Monday that the administration "strongly supports" the legislation "and applauds the House of Representatives for continuing its efforts to secure critical pro-life protections."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/with-trumps-backing-house-approves-ban-on-abortion-after-20-weeks-of-pregnancy/2017/10/03/95c64786-a86c-11e7-b3aa-c0e2e1d41e38_story.html

[Pavlov]

From a Christian perspective - all sins are equal, require true repentance and are covered by (shedding of) Christ's blood.Equal? I thought there were discounted sins if you like a certain flavor of Christianity.

[Blake]

From a Christian perspective - all sins are equal, require true repentance and are covered by (shedding of) Christ's blood. From a criminal perspective, I guess whatever the judge says?

You'll be in heaven with murderers, rapists and child abusers. Neat.

[rmt]

Well, this has devolved into just what I strived to avoid.

[pgardn]

You never know what will happen - the flesh is weak and people make mistakes. Pence is wise to not put himself in that position.

Flesh is weak... Honest to God...

So when he looks at his wife, "the flesh is weak" is good enough for the hurt done.
Nope. Don't work that way.

[Pavlov]

You'll be in heaven with murderers, rapists and child abusers. Neat.They said they're sorry tho, so God's cool with it.

[baseline bum]

From a Christian perspective - all sins are equal, require true repentance and are covered by (shedding of) Christ's blood.

So if I either say god damn it or rape your granddaughter, it's the same either way?

[Trainwreck2100]

So if I either say god damn it or rape your granddaughter, it's the same either way?

forgiveness is forgiveness

[pgardn]

They said they're sorry tho, so God's cool with it.

Actually he's sad I think.

But iloving and forgiving in the New Testament.

[pgardn]

Equal? I thought there were discounted sins if you like a certain flavor of Christianity.

Catholics.

And they have levels of sins.

[pgardn]

Well, this has devolved into just what I strived to avoid.

Yeah.
Sorry.

But if Pence says he's weak in the flesh after he hurts his wife...
True repentance should scare him enough from ever even worrying about being weak.
Thats like Old Testament of me...

[Spurtacular]

You'll be in heaven with murderers, rapists and child abusers. Neat.

And a no cucks allowed doormat :lol

[rmt]

"The House on Tuesday approved a bill banning most abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, advancing a key GOP priority for the third time in the past four years — this time, with a supportive Republican in the White House.

The bill, known as the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, is not expected to emerge from the Senate, where most Democrats and a handful of moderate Republicans can block its consideration. But antiabortion activists are calling President Trump's endorsement of the bill a significant advance for their movement.

The White House said in a statement released Monday that the administration "strongly supports" the legislation "and applauds the House of Representatives for continuing its efforts to secure critical pro-life protections."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/with-trumps-backing-house-approves-ban-on-abortion-after-20-weeks-of-pregnancy/2017/10/03/95c64786-a86c-11e7-b3aa-c0e2e1d41e38_story.html

Everybody KNOWS that is DOA in the Senate.

[rmt]

Yeah.
Sorry.

But if Pence says he's weak in the flesh after he hurts his wife...
True repentance should scare him enough from ever even worrying about being weak.
Thats like Old Testament of me...

Pence didn't say that. I said that. Some couples don't make it through that thing called "mid life crisis" - some of you are young and can't conceive of a time when you'll get bored, distracted, when the kids are grown ... People don't go into affairs thinking, "Oh, well, I can just repent after" A major point of the Christian faith is that we are all sinners and need redemption.

[Blake]

Everybody KNOWS that is DOA in the Senate.

How would Pence do better?

[boutons_deux]

Demon is saying that no Dem he sees now has his mouth planted on BigFinance's dick.

And if a Dem doesn't fellate BigFinance, the Dem has no chance.

BigFinance, aka CAPITAL, is a top King Maker of the oligarchy, spending its Citizens-United $10Bs to buy, to corrupt candidates, politicians, judges, obtaining immunity from from investigation (never mind prosecution) and enabling vampire-squid sucking, fleecing, looting of $100Bs from across the planet.

[RandomGuy]

"Dimon, who serves as the chairman of the Business Roundtable, said in November that Trump would likely be a one-term president."

ROFL two months ago he said that

He is trying to get the Democrats to back the kind of business friendly sellout that would add to his bottom line.

Fuck him and the horse he rode in on.

[rmt]

How would Pence do better?

Maybe personally work among congressmen to get votes? I don't think changing abortion rights is high on Trump's list - he'll say he supports this bill that came out of the House, but he's not going out of his way to try to get it passed.

[Blake]

Maybe personally work among congressmen to get votes? I don't think changing abortion rights is high on Trump's list - he'll say he supports this bill that came out of the House, but he's not going out of his way to try to get it passed.

Yeah I'm not good with maybes.

Your "careful what you wish for" line falls flat

[pgardn]

Pence didn't say that. I said that. Some couples don't make it through that thing called "mid life crisis" - some of you are young and can't conceive of a time when you'll get bored, distracted, when the kids are grown ... People don't go into affairs thinking, "Oh, well, I can just repent after" A major point of the Christian faith is that we are all sinners and need redemption.

Did Pence say he did not go any room with another women alone because sex was possible from his perspective?

Or, he did not get himself in the situation above because it could evolve into a woman claiming he did something he had no intention of doing (sex) and did NOT do?

Imo, the LATER is the legitimate answer. If it's the former, he sinned.

If not, you are saying he premeditated sinning thru sex was a real possibility, so he kept clear. I say you don't NEED to PREMEDITATE this act because you know it WILL NOT HAPPEN WILLFULLY. Because you know that this act would hurt someone. And your answer is we all sin.... Sorry, in my book that is beyond weak. This basically says I know I'm a sinner (we all are) and since I know I must sin... What? You know ahead of time what will happen? You have already sinned. You have sinned through an excuse that you must sin at some time, but you know what that sin will be. That takes zero responsibility. Free will does not exist. Seriously, this is a "holy cow" for me!

Damn the world just got very simple, extraordinarly simple.

Yep.
Best not discuss religion. I thought it was a profound topic. But apparently the recipe is very easy. Just leave it at Jesus Christ is my savior and my Lord and I will attempt to follow his teachings. That's difficult enough. If a really sticky situation is presented as a thought experiment , say, I don't know. 3 simple words. I will attempt a search for this answer, but, I don't know. Amazing how weak we are. Like not knowing something difficult is a sin.

I assumed Christian Apologetics said its ok to say I don't know.

[RandomGuy]

From a Christian perspective - all sins are equal, require true repentance and are covered by (shedding of) Christ's blood. From a criminal perspective, I guess whatever the judge says?

Sort of removes any consequences donnit?

Do anything you want, then ask forgiveness. BAM. Hitler could be in Heaven in that regard, or any given torturer, murderer, etc.

[boutons_deux]

Sort of removes any consequences donnit?

Do anything you want, then ask forgiveness. BAM. Hitler could be in Heaven in that regard, or any given torturer, murderer, etc.

Recently, some pastor confessed to his congregation, I guess in the wake of #MeToo and to preempt any accusers, that he screwed some under-age girl. He got a long, standing ovation.

The only thing Christians are bigger and better on than forgiveness is sinning.

[pgardn]

Recently, some pastor confessed to his congregation, I guess in the wake of #MeToo and to preempt any accusers, that he screwed some under-age girl. He got a long, standing ovation.

The only thing Christians are bigger and better on than forgiveness is sinning.

Is he still pastor?

Because if he is, Christians have completely shirked the difficulty of actions have consequences.

Or is this a we don't judge moment but bravo for the admission?

[Blake]

Recently, some pastor confessed to his congregation, I guess in the wake of #MeToo and to preempt any accusers, that he screwed some under-age girl. He got a long, standing ovation.

The only thing Christians are bigger and better on than forgiveness is sinning.

What pastor?

[Blake]

Is he still pastor?

I'm wondering if he's out on bond

[boutons_deux]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-tennessee-pastor-sexual-incident-20180113-story.html

[pgardn]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-tennessee-pastor-sexual-incident-20180113-story.html

Comes clean after it becomes public.
Convenient admission of guilt. Check that sin box.

[boutons_deux]

Christian white sinner "morale exemplar" pastor ok, standing ovation, tithing probably going up

Muslim brown guy, comedian/actor, career probably ruined, or at least seriously hobbled.

[pgardn]

Comes clean after it becomes public.
Convenient admission of guilt. Check that sin box.

If sincere repentance is part of the process, he went backwards with the above.