Schultz in 2020

[CosmicCowboy]

Dude is dropping truth bombs left and right. This is gonna be a fun election.

[Spurtacular]

Soy boy beta cucks don't like him. Just ask Chump. :lol

[Spurs Homer]

meh -

he will disappear in less than 6 months...

[boutons_deux]

As we saw with Bernie, the political establishment aborts non-party candidates.

Very typical that HS's $Bs convince him he that he is omni-powerful, all-knowing, a fucking Wunderkind

And of course, his lead "concern" is fearing AOC's 70% and Warren's wealth taxes. iow, just another money-obsessed, self-obsessed asshole billionaire.

[phxspurfan]

2020s throw away vote. Another token rich guy venting and stealing votes from the 2 parties

[Will Hunting]

The last time any 3rd party candidate played spoiler was 2000, since then most people considering 3rd party can’t bring themselves to waste a vote once they get to the ballot box.

I don’t think a billionaire oligarch campaigning on how we need to be nicer to rich people changes that phenomenon.

[florige]

This dude would def help Trump get re-elected being as though Dem's seem to usually lean more 3rd party than Republicans.

[Spurminator]

Soy boy beta cucks don't like him. Just ask Chump. :lol

So you're going to vote for him?

[Pavlov]

Soy boy beta cucks don't like him. Just ask Chump. :lolDo you like him?

Yes or no.

[Trill Clinton]

https://twitter.com/franklinleonard/status/1090657606375362560?s=19

[CosmicCowboy]

Bullshit. Nobody ever paid 91%. There were so many deductions and tax shelters then the effective rate was about where it is now. Most of those went away in 86 so jacking the tax rate now without the same deductions and shelters is not equivalent.

[spurraider21]

Bullshit. Nobody ever paid 91%. There were so many deductions and tax shelters then the effective rate was about where it is now. Most of those went away in 86 so jacking the tax rate now without the same deductions and shelters is not equivalent.
the tweet outright said "top marginal tax rate" and not "effective tax rate"

[spurraider21]

taxing people making north of 10 mil of personal income isn't going to hamper their standard of living. its just going to decrease their kid's inheritance. raising taxes by 5% on somebody earning 20 mil doesn't have the same weight/effect as raising taxes by 5% on somebody living paycheck to paycheck

[CosmicCowboy]

the tweet outright said "top marginal tax rate" and not "effective tax rate"

Why keep comparing apples and oranges then?

[CosmicCowboy]

taxing people making north of 10 mil of personal income isn't going to hamper their standard of living. its just going to decrease their kid's inheritance. raising taxes by 5% on somebody earning 20 mil doesn't have the same weight/effect as raising taxes by 5% on somebody living paycheck to paycheck

You are a gullible fuck if you actually think only taxing people over 10 million will pay for single payer.

[spurraider21]

Why keep comparing apples and oranges then?
i should be asking you that. you're the one who changed the topic from the marginal rates to effective rates.

[CosmicCowboy]

i should be asking you that. you're the one who changed the topic from the marginal rates to effective rates.

The only stat that matters is effective tax rate.

[Pavlov]

Bullshit. Nobody ever paid 91%. There were so many deductions and tax shelters then the effective rate was about where it is now. Most of those went away in 86 so jacking the tax rate now without the same deductions and shelters is not equivalent.Do you have the marginal rates that were paid back then?

[FrostKing]

free healthcare OR open borders

Choose one

[Pavlov]

free healthcare OR open borders

Choose oneWho here has ever demanded open borders?

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/chuckwoolery/status/1090708819699732481

[Pavlov]

https://twitter.com/chuckwoolery/status/1090708819699732481Class warfare.

[spurraider21]

https://twitter.com/chuckwoolery/status/1090708819699732481
elitism good now, working class bad now

also she's not wrong

[Chris]

elitism good now, working class bad now

also she's not wrong

How much experience did Trump have?

[Pavlov]

How much experience did Trump have?:lmao

[spurraider21]

How much experience did Trump have?
trump is another great example of somebody who lacked experience to hold his position. and the results are showing.

[Chris]

trump is another great example of somebody who lacked experience to hold his position. and the results are showing.

i like to type in small caps. and run-ons. the results show that there is a deep state resistance embedded in media, intelligence agencies. and all branches of government. thank you trump for exposing the swamp creatures. aoc is dumb as a rock. and you agree with her.

[spurraider21]

i like to type in small caps. and run-ons. the results show that there is a deep state resistance embedded in media, intelligence agencies. and all branches of government. thank you trump for exposing the swamp creatures. aoc is dumb as a rock. and you agree with her.
:lmao punctuation smack

she's correct that shultz lacks the experience to be president. doesn't matter how smart she is or isn't. if she said 5+5 = 10 are you going to disagree with her just because you think she's generally stupid?

[Spurtacular]

Do you like him?

Yes or no.

He's doing a great job of triggering snowflakes like you.

[Pavlov]

He's doing a great job of triggering snowflakes like you.Do you like him?

Yes or no.

[Pavlov]

trump is another great example of somebody who lacked experience to hold his position. and the results are showing.Pre-emptive ding: Obama lacked extensive governmental experience but at the very least had knowledge of constitutional law. Nonetheless we're pretty lucky he turned out to be a middling president.

People known mainly as businessmen as POTUS without elected government experience?

Trump and Hoover?

Yikes tbh.

[Spurtacular]

:cry Muh pigeonhole though :cry

[Pavlov]

You declared I didn't like the guy but you're too terrified to speak for yourself.

lol derp

[Spurtacular]

You declared I didn't like the guy


And you haven't disputed that.

[Pavlov]

And you haven't disputed that.I'm laughing at you.

Do you like the guy?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

I'm laughing at you.


Is that supposed to bother me?

:lol Sociopath Chump

[spurraider21]

Pre-emptive ding: Obama lacked extensive governmental experience but at the very least had knowledge of constitutional law. Nonetheless we're pretty lucky he turned out to be a middling president.

People known mainly as businessmen as POTUS without elected government experience?

Trump and Hoover?

Yikes tbh.
to his credit barry had also been a state senator for 6 years prior to his 4 year stint as a US senator. a decade of legislative experience is at least something, in addition to his legal career

[Pavlov]

Is that supposed to bother me?

:lol Sociopath ChumpTriggered you into replying.

lol derp

[Spurtacular]

Pre-emptive ding: Obama lacked extensive governmental experience but at the very least had knowledge of constitutional law. Nonetheless we're pretty lucky he turned out to be a middling president.

People known mainly as businessmen as POTUS without elected government experience?

Trump and Hoover?

Yikes tbh.

:lmao Drama Queen Chump

[Spurtacular]

Triggered you into replying.

lol derp

So, you were attention whoring :tu

[Pavlov]

to his credit barry had also been a state senator for 6 years prior to his 4 year stint as a US senator. a decade of legislative experience is at least something, in addition to his legal careerHence the "extensive" qualifier. That's close to a bare minimum IMO. Good point about legislative experience. People tend to make a bigger deal of executive experience but it's been a pretty mixed bag for presidents with only that.

[Pavlov]

So, you were attention whoring :tuTriggering you is easier than falling off a log. You should make it more difficult.:tu

[Pavlov]

:lmao Drama Queen ChumpDerp, you notice you're only talking about me here?

lol obsessed

[Spurtacular]

Derp, you notice you're only talking about me here?

lol obsessed

I noticed you being a drama queen. :lmao

[Pavlov]

I noticed you being a drama queen. :lmaoHoover was and Trump is a terrible president.

Would you like to post about the discussion or would you only like to post about me?

State your choice.

[FrostKing]

Who here has ever demanded open borders?
Expanding asylum seeker/refugee applications and overall immigration numbers is a form of this

[Pavlov]

Expanding asylum seeker/refugee applications and overall immigration numbers is a form of thisNo.

Open borders are open borders.

No one here has advocated open borders.

Period.

[CosmicCowboy]

No.

Open borders are open borders.

No one here has advocated open borders.

Period.

You apparently consider 60,000 a month flowing over our southern border to be acceptable since it used to be more. That's pretty much accepting open borders.

[Pavlov]

You apparently consider 60,000 a month flowing over our southern border to be acceptable since it used to be more. That's pretty much accepting open borders.No.

Sorry.

Do you consider this a crisis, CC?

Yes or no.

[CosmicCowboy]

Crisis is an intentionally loaded word. I consider it totally unacceptable.

[Pavlov]

Crisis is an intentionally loaded word. I consider it totally unacceptable.A wall isn't going to solve it.

Do you consider it a national emergency?

[Spurtacular]

Crisis is an intentionally loaded word. I consider it totally unacceptable.

He needs his pigeonhole. Just call it a crisis so we can move on. :lmao

[Spurtacular]

A wall isn't going to solve it.

It's going to help security. Who cares about your false pretense of a zero sum solution.

[Pavlov]

He needs his pigeonhole. Just call it a crisis so we can move on. :lmaodo you consider it a crisis?

A national emergency?

[Chris]

I love the 'loaded' words they use. "Immoral";"Medieval".

[Chris]

"A wall isn't going to solve it....they will still use tunnels and ports of entry." (coastline, etc..)

If you can funnel them to specific areas I think that would be a step in the right direction, but the Democrats are acting like this is supposed to be the "be all end all" solution. No, this is a step in the right direction and will save countless lives even those who dare to trek through the desert. Border agents not having to worry about getting carved up by cartel and policing the border without it feeling like the Wild West. These are good logical things that Democrats spit on to despite Trump.

[CosmicCowboy]

A wall isn't going to solve it.

Do you consider it a national emergency?

The border patrol has requested a barrier from the valley to Falcon lake in Texas. I trust their professional judgement more than yours.

[CosmicCowboy]

For the record I don't support a 2000 mile wall sea to sea and no one is advocating that so don't bother using that strawman.

[Chris]

This thread is getting off topic but one last thing that strangely echos my sentiments:

https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1090734556737617920
https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1090734558499225601

[Pavlov]

The border patrol has requested a barrier from the valley to Falcon lake in Texas. I trust their professional judgement more than yours.When did they request this?

What kind of barrier?

[Spurtacular]

https://twitter.com/franklinleonard/status/1090657606375362560?s=19

Butt fucking the rich is not likely to get you free shit care.

[Millennial_Messiah]

The last time any 3rd party candidate played spoiler was 2000, since then most people considering 3rd party can’t bring themselves to waste a vote once they get to the ballot box.

I don’t think a billionaire oligarch campaigning on how we need to be nicer to rich people changes that phenomenon.
I don't think Gore wins if there's no Nader

Bush I definitely wins if there's no Perot.

[DarrinS]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeRAXht5LSI

[Pavlov]

Today's Darrin Google search

[AntiChrist]

Today's Darrin Google search


Search history should be bundled with each post. Good call

[Pavlov]

Search history should be bundled with each post. Good call:lol you're the one who is afraid to say where you get your news and videos.

[midnightpulp]

"A wall isn't going to solve it....they will still use tunnels and ports of entry." (coastline, etc..)

If you can funnel them to specific areas I think that would be a step in the right direction, but the Democrats are acting like this is supposed to be the "be all end all" solution. No, this is a step in the right direction and will save countless lives even those who dare to trek through the desert. Border agents not having to worry about getting carved up by cartel and policing the border without it feeling like the Wild West. These are good logical things that Democrats spit on to despite Trump.

Here's how you solve it. Model our needlessly convoluted modern immigration system after the one we had for, I don't know, a century and a half that seemed to work fine. I'm talking of the Ellis Island model.


...with a whopping 1,004,756 entering the United States in 1907 alone. And yet, even during these days of peak immigration, for most passengers hoping to establish new lives in the United States, the process of entering the country was over and done relatively quickly—in a matter of a few hours.

https://www.history.com/news/immigrants-ellis-island-short-processing-time

Give potential immigrants a safe port(s) they know they can go to if they want to become US citizens. Process them quickly and painlessly and issue five year work visas to those that qualify (i.e. you got some gang tattoo on you, nope). Issue them the same probationary conditions as the DACA kids. Your work visa is valid only if you are employed and have no criminal record. If you've proven yourself to be a good citizen after the five year work visa has expired, you're granted full citizenship. One of the drivers of illegal immigration is because some poor Central American doesn't have the time nor money (hiring of immigration lawyers) to go through the "legal" process when he has a family to feed.

Nearly every American is the child, grandchild, great-grandchild, etc of an immigrant. So I ask, why was it okay for our ancestors escaping famine, war, persecution to be basically "let in," but it's not okay for these people? "Well, cartels, crime, assimilation..." The nativists said the exact same things about the Irish, Italian, and Slavic immigrants back then. CosmicCowboy brought up the fact they get on social services. I agree. No social services during that five year probationary period.

[Will Hunting]

I don't think Gore wins if there's no Nader

Bush I definitely wins if there's no Perot.
The math says you’re wrong. Look at how much Gore lost by in Florida vs. the amount of votes Nader got in the state.

[Millennial_Messiah]

The math says you’re wrong. Look at how much Gore lost by in Florida vs. the amount of votes Nader got in the state.
That's assuming Gore gets all of Nader's vodes, which is also wrong.

[Will Hunting]

That's assuming Gore gets all of Nader's vodes, which is also wrong.
Nader got nearly 100,000 votes in the state, Gore lost the state by just over 500 votes. Are you claiming that Gore wouldn’t have been able to make up a less than 600 vote gap with 100,000 Green Party voters :lmao

You might be clinically retarded.

[boutons_deux]

Presidential Run After Finding No Initial Support Among Any Voter Groups (https://politics.theonion.com/howard-schultz-considering-independent-presidential-run-1832126653)

https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--UDu65zYI--/c_scale,f_auto,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/z9vytctiknhz7rfo6ri5.jpg

SEATTLE—Expressing concerns that Democratic and Republican parties no longer represented people like him,

former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz revealed Monday that he was considering an independent presidential run after finding no initial support among any American voter groups.

“The complete lack of support for my candidacy among narrow interest groups like liberals, conservatives, and moderates tells me that America is hungry for an independent voice,”

said Schultz, after

preliminary polling found little to no support for his presidential bid among

Democrats,
African-Americans,
evangelicals,
working-class whites,
suburbanites,
Republicans,
millennials,
Hispanics,
men, or
women.

“Our political system has been overrun by people with opinions and ideas.

This country should not be beholden to someone who constantly fights for American values.

Our nation clearly wants an independent voice who does not speak for any of them.

I know that I can win by rising above partisan squabbles

by bringing together a large coalition of nobody whatsoever.”

At press time,

the announcement that Schultz was considering a presidential bid had

received a highly positive reaction from Howard Schultz.

https://politics.theonion.com/howard-schultz-considering-independent-presidential-run-1832126653 (https://politics.theonion.com/howard-schultz-considering-independent-presidential-run-1832126653)

[CosmicCowboy]

:lmao

Democrats are terrified of Howard Schultz.

[spurraider21]

Search history should be bundled with each post. Good call
the point is you go out of your way to look up stories about crazy libs so that you can pretend that its a constant oppression you face

complain about msnbc/cnn... but consistently visit those sites and look up stories about them.

its like chris whining about celebrities in politics and constantly posting their tweets here

[Spurminator]

:lmao

Democrats are terrified of Howard Schultz.

Objectively he seems like more of a moderate conservative candidate, the kind of President that might appeal to the more socially progressive Republicans who insist they don't approve of Trump's divisiveness on social issues. But who are we kidding, you'll all rally around the Donald anyway.

[CosmicCowboy]

Objectively he seems like more of a moderate conservative candidate, the kind of President that might appeal to the more socially progressive Republicans who insist they don't approve of Trump's divisiveness on social issues. But who are we kidding, you'll all rally around the Donald anyway.

I would vote for just about anyone that ran against Trump in the primary.

[Will Hunting]

Presidential Run After Finding No Initial Support Among Any Voter Groups (https://politics.theonion.com/howard-schultz-considering-independent-presidential-run-1832126653)

https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--UDu65zYI--/c_scale,f_auto,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/z9vytctiknhz7rfo6ri5.jpg

SEATTLE—Expressing concerns that Democratic and Republican parties no longer represented people like him,

former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz revealed Monday that he was considering an independent presidential run after finding no initial support among any American voter groups.

“The complete lack of support for my candidacy among narrow interest groups like liberals, conservatives, and moderates tells me that America is hungry for an independent voice,”

said Schultz, after

preliminary polling found little to no support for his presidential bid among

Democrats,
African-Americans,
evangelicals,
working-class whites,
suburbanites,
Republicans,
millennials,
Hispanics,
men, or
women.

“Our political system has been overrun by people with opinions and ideas.

This country should not be beholden to someone who constantly fights for American values.

Our nation clearly wants an independent voice who does not speak for any of them.

I know that I can win by rising above partisan squabbles

by bringing together a large coalition of nobody whatsoever.”

At press time,

the announcement that Schultz was considering a presidential bid had

received a highly positive reaction from Howard Schultz.

https://politics.theonion.com/howard-schultz-considering-independent-presidential-run-1832126653 (https://politics.theonion.com/howard-schultz-considering-independent-presidential-run-1832126653)
Just FYI, even when you link the onion by trying to make it white text in really small font, it's still obvious that this is from the onion.

[boutons_deux]

Objectively he seems like more of a moderate conservative candidate

moderate? :lol

Howard Schultz’s 2020 policies:

Reduce the debt,

cut entitlements,

oppose:

Medicare for all and

taxes on wealthy

https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2019/01/30/howard-schultzs-policies-reduce-debt-cut-entitlements-oppose-medicare-all-taxes-wealthy/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.28f19bac80af

:lol

He won't be getting many Dem votes with those policies. Howie would split votes away from Trash.

[Spurminator]

I would vote for just about anyone that ran against Trump in the primary.

Good luck, hope you get the opportunity.

The South Carolina Republican Party could cancel its marquee presidential nominating contest in 2020 in a move to protect President Trump from any primary challengers.

Drew McKissick, chairman of the South Carolina GOP, said he doesn’t anticipate Trump would face a primary challenge and emphasized that the state party executive committee hasn’t held any formal discussions about the contest, dubbed “first in the South” and usually third on the presidential nominating calendar. But McKissick would pointedly not rule out canceling the primary, indicating that that would be his preference.


“We have complete autonomy and flexibility in either direction,” McKissick told the Washington Examiner on Tuesday. “Considering the fact that the entire party supports the president, we’ll end up doing what’s in the president’s best interest.”

...
To minimize potential political hurdles for Trump, some state parties could move to scrap their 2020 presidential primaries. Already a long shot, the unavailability of one or more high-profile primary contests could further hamstring the odds of any Republican who dares to run against Trump in 2020. There is precedent for this strategy, even when less uncertainty has swirled around the incumbent president.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/campaigns/south-carolina-gop-could-scrap-2020-primary-to-protect-trump

[Spurminator]

moderate? :lol

Howard Schultz’s 2020 policies:

Reduce the debt,

cut entitlements,

oppose:

Medicare for all and

taxes on wealthy

https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2019/01/30/howard-schultzs-policies-reduce-debt-cut-entitlements-oppose-medicare-all-taxes-wealthy/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.28f19bac80af

:lol

He won't be getting many Dem votes with those policies. Howie would split votes away from Trash.





That's why I said moderate conservative, dummy.

[Will Hunting]

Pretty funny article though :lol, the only people who seem to actually like Schultz running are conservatives who won't ever vote for him but like him for "triggering the libruhls"

[Spurminator]

I assumed it was Borowitz but the headline was actually funny so I knew it had to be The Onion.

[boutons_deux]

That's why I said moderate conservative, dummy.

there's NOTHING moderate there, dummy. It's straight oligarchy shit

[Spurminator]

there's NOTHING moderate there, dummy. It's straight oligarchy shit

Please describe, in detail, what you consider to be moderate conservative positions.

[spurraider21]

Please describe, in detail, what you consider to be moderate conservative positions.
i remember when i asked koriwhat to explain to me what he thought a true liberal was and he basically gave a bunch of conservative positions

i expect booboo's answer to be that no such thing exists

[boutons_deux]

CosmicCowboy

I would vote for just about anyone that ran against Trump in the primary."

========

RNC Members Want To Block A Primary Challenge To Trump, But The Rules May Stop Them

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/04/681987077/rnc-members-want-to-block-a-primary-challenge-to-trump-but-the-rules-may-stop-th

There may be a pretender or two, but they will be buried under lies, slander, shit from the Repug establishment,

will make DNC screwing Bernie seem like child's play

[Spurminator]

i remember when i asked koriwhat to explain to me what he thought a true liberal was and he basically gave a bunch of conservative positions

i expect booboo's answer to be that no such thing exists

Like, I hesitate to call Medicare for All a "radical" position since a majority of the country supports it, but I certainly wouldn't call opposition to it radical either.

[Chris]

Here's how you solve it. Model our needlessly convoluted modern immigration system after the one we had for, I don't know, a century and a half that seemed to work fine. I'm talking of the Ellis Island model.



https://www.history.com/news/immigrants-ellis-island-short-processing-time

Give potential immigrants a safe port(s) they know they can go to if they want to become US citizens. Process them quickly and painlessly and issue five year work visas to those that qualify (i.e. you got some gang tattoo on you, nope). Issue them the same probationary conditions as the DACA kids. Your work visa is valid only if you are employed and have no criminal record. If you've proven yourself to be a good citizen after the five year work visa has expired, you're granted full citizenship. One of the drivers of illegal immigration is because some poor Central American doesn't have the time nor money (hiring of immigration lawyers) to go through the "legal" process when he has a family to feed.

Nearly every American is the child, grandchild, great-grandchild, etc of an immigrant. So I ask, why was it okay for our ancestors escaping famine, war, persecution to be basically "let in," but it's not okay for these people? "Well, cartels, crime, assimilation..." The nativists said the exact same things about the Irish, Italian, and Slavic immigrants back then. CosmicCowboy brought up the fact they get on social services. I agree. No social services during that five year probationary period.

You can overhaul and tinker with the immigration system all you like but until you put up a physical barrier there will always be incentive to cut the corners. You say process them quickly and painlessly but the reality is a lot of the economic migrants come here without any kind of documentation and can create a new identity, so your backround check/criminal record is now obsolete. Let's say we issue work visas to 5,000 immigrants and only 1,000 show up to to renew their visas. What are you going to do about the other 4,000 that gamed the system and set up a new identity? That's quite the burden you are giving to ICE to clean up your mess because of some silly poem at the base of the Statue of Liberty at Ellis Island.


If you really wanted to solve the problem you would send the United States military into Mexico and eliminate the cartels. What's Mexico going to do about it?

[CosmicCowboy]

You can overhaul and tinker with the immigration system all you like but until you put up a physical barrier there will always be incentive to cut the corners. You say process them quickly and painlessly but the reality is a lot of the economic migrants come here without any kind of documentation and can create a new identity, so your backround check/criminal record is now obsolete. Let's say we issue work visas to 5,000 immigrants and only 1,000 show up to to renew their visas. What are you going to do about the other 4,000 that gamed the system and set up a new identity? That's quite the burden you are giving to ICE to clean up your mess because of some silly poem at the base of the Statue of Liberty at Ellis Island.


If you really wanted to solve the problem you would send the United States military into Mexico and eliminate the cartels. What's Mexico going to do about it?

da fuck?

US isn't sending the military into Mexico. Most of this recent wave of illegals isn't from Mexico anyway.

[Isitjustme?]

This thread is getting off topic but one last thing that strangely echos my sentiments:

https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1090734556737617920
https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1090734558499225601

Chris cares about these immigrant women and children deeply

Until they want asylum then he would shoot them like rats as they try to cross the border most likely

[Chris]

da fuck?

US isn't sending the military into Mexico. Most of this recent wave of illegals isn't from Mexico anyway.

"You have a bunch of bad hombres down there," Trump told Pena Nieto, according to the excerpt seen by the AP. "You aren't doing enough to stop them. I think your military is scared. Our military isn't, so I just might send them down to take care of it."

[CosmicCowboy]

"You have a bunch of bad hombres down there," Trump told Pena Nieto, according to the excerpt seen by the AP. "You aren't doing enough to stop them. I think your military is scared. Our military isn't, so I just might send them down to take care of it."

So Trump says stupid shit. What else is new?

[Chris]

So Trump says stupid shit. What else is new?

You said the US isn't sending the military in to Mexico. I'm showing you proof that there is a strong possibility. Your opinion of Trump is irrelevant.

[Pavlov]

"You have a bunch of bad hombres down there," Trump told Pena Nieto, according to the excerpt seen by the AP. "You aren't doing enough to stop them. I think your military is scared. Our military isn't, so I just might send them down to take care of it.":lol he won't.

He might invade Venezuela though. Would you approve of that?

[spurraider21]

i mean if trump is just going to disregard mexico's autonomy and sovereignty then there's really no justification to stop any immigration from mexico tbh

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1089881244312178688

Damn :lol

[Spurminator]

Two years into his Presidency, if you think something Trump said at a campaign rally about military action is evidence of any "strong possibility" of anything, you're a hopeless fool.

[Trainwreck2100]

Schultz would take the anti trump white person vote the Dems think they need. Which is kinda funny because they'll probably once again nominate someone white people see as worse than trump again, anyway

[CosmicCowboy]

Schultz would take the anti trump white person vote the Dems think they need. Which is kinda funny because they'll probably once again nominate someone white people see as worse than trump again, anyway

This is highly likely.

[baseline bum]

Pretty funny article though :lol, the only people who seem to actually like Schultz running are conservatives who won't ever vote for him but like him for "triggering the libruhls"

:lol

[SpursforSix]

Pretty funny article though :lol, the only people who seem to actually like Schultz running are conservatives who won't ever vote for him but like him for "triggering the libruhls"

idk...I know a lot of people that voted for Trump that are ready for this shitstorm to be over. They'd probably vote Dem if it wasn't someone from the far left.

[SpursforSix]

^ by a lot, I mean 4 or 5

[CosmicCowboy]

idk...I know a lot of people that voted for Trump that are ready for this shitstorm to be over. They'd probably vote Dem if it wasn't someone from the far left.

Being far left seems to be the Democratic litmus test for 2020.

[spurraider21]

Being far left seems to be the Democratic litmus test for 2020.
i was told obama was a far left socialist tbh

[boutons_deux]

Never Trump Grifter Leaves MSNBC Gig to Advise Howard Schultz (https://splinternews.com/never-trump-grifter-leaves-msnbc-gig-to-advise-howard-s-1832233164)

Steve Schmidt, the Republican strategist turned Never Trumper TV pundit, has broken ties with MSNBC while he works on Dumb Starbucks Man Howard Schultz (https://splinternews.com/introducing-dumb-starbucks-man-1832211260) possible 2020 presidential bid (https://splinternews.com/howard-schultzs-hostage-negotiation-1832154498).

Schmidt—whose whose vocal opposition to the current president will never erase the fact that

he foisted (https://www.politico.com/story/2010/01/steve-schmidts-war-against-palin-031420) Sarah Fucking Palin onto an unsuspecting nation

—joins former Democratic consultant and former Obama White House official Bill Burton (https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/28/politics/bill-burton-howard-schultz/index.html) as advisers to Schultz,

who has spent the past few days getting brutally ratioed on Twitter

for his endless stream of soporific platitudes (https://twitter.com/HowardSchultz/status/1089679860329578497)

in the place of any actual policy stances beyond

his assertion that having an ungodly amount of money is good, actually. (https://twitter.com/HowardSchultz/status/1090736937365721090)

https://splinternews.com/never-trump-grifter-leaves-msnbc-gig-to-advise-howard-s-1832233164?utm_source=splinter_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2019-01-31

[benefactor]

If you really wanted to solve the problem you would send the United States military into Mexico and eliminate the cartels. What's Mexico going to do about it?
:lol

[Th'Pusher]

I would vote for just about anyone that ran against Trump in the primary.

iow i’m Voting for trump in 2020.

[spurraider21]

iow i’m Voting for trump in 2020.
:lol

[boutons_deux]

i mean if trump is just going to disregard mexico's autonomy and sovereignty then there's really no justification to stop any immigration from mexico tbh

America respects no country's sovereign autonomy, if that country doesn't align with USA interests ($$$$)

[CosmicCowboy]

iow i’m Voting for trump in 2020.

If my choice is one of the far left or trump I will do the same thing I did in 2016 and not vote for president.

[midnightpulp]

You can overhaul and tinker with the immigration system all you like but until you put up a physical barrier there will always be incentive to cut the corners. You say process them quickly and painlessly but the reality is a lot of the economic migrants come here without any kind of documentation and can create a new identity, so your backround check/criminal record is now obsolete. Let's say we issue work visas to 5,000 immigrants and only 1,000 show up to to renew their visas. What are you going to do about the other 4,000 that gamed the system and set up a new identity? That's quite the burden you are giving to ICE to clean up your mess because of some silly poem at the base of the Statue of Liberty at Ellis Island.


If you really wanted to solve the problem you would send the United States military into Mexico and eliminate the cartels. What's Mexico going to do about it?

And a needlessly complex immigration system also incentivizes a need to cut corners since the immigrants coming from shitty situations can't afford to wait for the red tape to clear, which can take years. A barrier is only a stop gap that might cut illegal crossings down in that specific area, but the illegals will just find another soft spot through which to enter. Trump's retarded idea of some pseudo-Great Wall of China that spans the complete southern border is impossible. https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/why-wall-wont-work

Furthermore, many immigrants and contraband are actually getting smuggled through legal ports of entry (I'm sure the cartels have many border agents on the payroll). Border Patrol just seized the largest shipment of Fentanyl in history at an official checkpoint.

Immigrants in the early 1900s also came without any sort of documentation. The Ellis Island model has nothing to do with the ideals in the Lazarus poem. We processed over 1 million immigrants in 1907 alone, with wait times only lasting a couple of hours on average. Why was it okay then but not now? I anticipate the crime, cartel, etc response, but Americans then feared the Irish and Italians just the same.

[midnightpulp]

If my choice is one of the far left or trump I will do the same thing I did in 2016 and not vote for president.

I have to ask why modern conservatives consider the likes of Warren, Sanders, and Cortez far-left and socialism personified when it comes to their economic ideas at least? I get the recoiling at the silly identity politics the modern left has built much of their platform on, but their economic ideas aren't far out of line with what was happening in post-New Deal and pre-Reagan America. Yes, I get the rich of the day skirted those high marginal rates through loopholes, but that wasn't the intention of law makers. Eisenhower proposed a universal health care system. Union influence was arguably at its strongest. All that translated into the most robust middle-class in US history.

[spurraider21]

I have to ask why modern conservatives consider the likes of Warren, Sanders, and Cortez far-left and socialism personified when it comes to their economic ideas at least? I get the recoiling at the silly identity politics the modern left has built much of their platform on, but their economic ideas aren't far out of line with what was happening in post-New Deal and pre-Reagan America. Yes, I get the rich of the day skirted those high marginal rates through loopholes, but that wasn't the intention of law makers. Eisenhower proposed a universal health care system. Union influence was arguably at its strongest. All that translated into the most robust middle-class in US history.
because votingrepublican.jpeg

just use scary buzzwords like "radical" and "socialist" to keep people from implementing policy so you can hold onto a little more money

[Th'Pusher]

If my choice is one of the far left or trump I will do the same thing I did in 2016 and not vote for president.

You seem to be on board with Shultz and his “truth bombs”. Why not vote for him?

[DarrinS]

I have to ask why modern conservatives consider the likes of Warren, Sanders, and Cortez far-left and socialism personified when it comes to their economic ideas at least? I get the recoiling at the silly identity politics the modern left has built much of their platform on, but their economic ideas aren't far out of line with what was happening in post-New Deal and pre-Reagan America. Yes, I get the rich of the day skirted those high marginal rates through loopholes, but that wasn't the intention of law makers. Eisenhower proposed a universal health care system. Union influence was arguably at its strongest. All that translated into the most robust middle-class in US history.


You've just elevated a freshman rep. to the level of Bernie and Fauxcahauntas. :lol

I'm not calling them socialists -- they can themselves that.

[midnightpulp]

You've just elevated a freshman rep. to the level of Bernie and Fauxcahauntas. :lol

I'm not calling them socialists -- they can themselves that.

What's her inexperience have to do with anything? I'm asking why the likes of Hannity, Ingraham, and their legions of followers go apeshit at that trio's economic ideas when they're proposing what is essentially a return to a post-New Deal/pre-Reagan economic environment? Hell, Cortez's 70% on income over 10 million is comparatively soft to the 70-90% on >250K we had back then (yes, I know "loopholes," but they still had efficacy in closing the wealth gap and strengthening the middle class to levels never before seen).

[Will Hunting]

What's her inexperience have to do with anything? I'm asking why the likes of Hannity, Ingraham, and their legions of followers go apeshit at that trio's economic ideas when they're proposing what is essentially a return to a post-New Deal/pre-Reagan economic environment? Hell, Cortez's 70% on income over 10 million is comparatively soft to the 70-90% on >250K we had back then (yes, I know "loopholes," but they still had efficacy in closing the wealth gap and strengthening the middle class to levels never before seen).
The biggest “loophole” the rich used to avoid taxes in the 50s was making less money and paying employees more :lol

[boutons_deux]

http://www.nationalmemo.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/danzcolorplus9022-668x501.jpeg

[FrostKing]

http://www.nationalmemo.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/danzcolorplus9022-668x501.jpeg
"The party of inclusion" ladies and gentlemen

But Oprah is qualified


Anyway, he put out that whole blacks wanna loiter in coffee shops fire successfully. You made an entire thread bout it

[midnightpulp]

The biggest “loophole” the rich used to avoid taxes in the 50s was making less money and paying employees more :lol

I guess the only logical counterargument to not raising taxes on the rich to those levels is that perhaps labor in the US lost a great deal of leverage due to the rise of developing countries and their dirt cheap labor costs. But still, Amazon, Walmart etc can't outsource their fulfillment centers and "sales associates" to China. I also think we need to call out the automation bluff (i.e. every time something like min. wage rise is proposed, you have McDonalds execs and the like fear-mongering that they'll just automate more to offset the rising labor costs).

The lower-middle classes in those menial jobs are a huge consumer base, probably the biggest in the US, and if you replace their service jobs with automation, who the fuck is going to buy the shit said automation produces? The Upper-Middle classes tend to be older and/or save more than spend. I think wholesale automation is a dead-end unless something like a universal basic income is implemented.

[baseline bum]

idk...I know a lot of people that voted for Trump that are ready for this shitstorm to be over. They'd probably vote Dem if it wasn't someone from the far left.

Wow really? Every person I know who voted for Trump thinks he's amazing.

[Will Hunting]

I guess the only logical counterargument to not raising taxes on the rich to those levels is that perhaps labor in the US lost a great deal of leverage due to the rise of developing countries and their dirt cheap labor costs. But still, Amazon, Walmart etc can't outsource their fulfillment centers and "sales associates" to China. I also think we need to call out the automation bluff (i.e. every time something like min. wage rise is proposed, you have McDonalds execs and the like fear-mongering that they'll just automate more to offset the rising labor costs).

The lower-middle classes in those menial jobs are a huge consumer base, probably the biggest in the US, and if you replace their service jobs with automation, who the fuck is going to buy the shit said automation produces? The Upper-Middle classes tend to be older and/or save more than spend. I think wholesale automation is a dead-end unless something like a universal basic income is implemented.
I think the answer to automation is shortening the work week. There’s no reason the standard work week needs to be 40 hours, if technology is advanced enough to where that much income is produced with automation then everyone can benefit from it by having more free time and the economy would be at full employment if the work week is shortened.

[baseline bum]

I have to ask why modern conservatives consider the likes of Warren, Sanders, and Cortez far-left and socialism personified when it comes to their economic ideas at least? I get the recoiling at the silly identity politics the modern left has built much of their platform on, but their economic ideas aren't far out of line with what was happening in post-New Deal and pre-Reagan America. Yes, I get the rich of the day skirted those high marginal rates through loopholes, but that wasn't the intention of law makers. Eisenhower proposed a universal health care system. Union influence was arguably at its strongest. All that translated into the most robust middle-class in US history.

Honestly, all this American exceptionalism stuff about how great this country was postwar ignores the fact that every other manufacturing power was bombed into the stone age while no one could do anything to us thanks to having two huge oceans protecting our homeland. We had good manufacturing jobs because no one else did.

[midnightpulp]

I think the answer to automation is shortening the work week. There’s no reason the standard work week needs to be 40 hours, if technology is advanced enough to where that much income is produced with automation then everyone can benefit from it by having more free time and the economy would be at full employment if the work week is shortened.

Yeah, that's what happened during the first wave of automation/machine aided labor in the 1900s. Work days would be 12-16 hours long.

[midnightpulp]

Honestly, all this American exceptionalism stuff about how great this country was postwar ignores the fact that every other manufacturing power was bombed into the stone age while no one could do anything to us thanks to having two huge oceans protecting our homeland. We had good manufacturing jobs because no one else did.

I've considered that, as well. Nixon opening trade with China obviously didn't help the cause, either.

[DarrinS]

Honestly, all this American exceptionalism stuff about how great this country was postwar ignores the fact that every other manufacturing power was bombed into the stone age while no one could do anything to us thanks to having two huge oceans protecting our homeland. We had good manufacturing jobs because no one else did.


History fail

[baseline bum]

History fail

You heard about that WWII thing right?

[boutons_deux]

Please describe, in detail, what you consider to be moderate conservative positions.

why don't you tell us what they are, and I'll bitch slap them, huh?

[FrostKing]

^

USSR reached space first but after a few decades were technologically surpassed. How? Those weren't American scientist....

[midnightpulp]

Anyhow, I think the American masses hold more cards here vis a vis the proposed tax increases on the rich since we, collectively, are by far the biggest consumer market in the world. I don't think the threat of, "Well, if you excessively tax Bezos et al, they'll just close up shop and move to Hong Kong" has a realistic chance of happening because no way would they want to lose access to this market. We're talking a consumer market almost the size of China and the EU combined. Americans aren't going to wait 2 weeks for a delivery from Amazon fulfillment centers in Hong Kong. "Well, maybe Bezos cuts a deal with Mexico or Canada?" Still a comparatively long shipping time. Some competitor will just take the 70% or whatever marginal tax hit and replicate Amazon's business model domestically, undercutting Bezos. This basically means while Amazon corporate HQ might be located off-shore to avoid paying taxes, Amazon would have no choice but to have a US headquarters (which would be the biggest Amazon arm) that would have to pay taxes regardless.

Same logic applies to Walmart, McDonalds, Apple, Microsoft, etc. You can say, "Well, every time a corporation sees a drop in revenue, which a 70% tax rate would definitely cause, they counter by cutting labor costs through layoffs and outsourcing." There will come a point where that tactic backfires since if you strangle the average American's purchasing power to that extent, it translates into reduced consumerism, meaning reduced profits. You can look at the data and see that the rising tide that truly lifts all boats is when the average American has more disposable income.

[SpursforSix]

Wow really? Every person I know who voted for Trump thinks he's amazing.

I’ve had the opposite experience. Like I followed up with, there’s only a handful of people that I even talk politics with. For the most part, they all disliked Hillary and assumed that Trump would be smart enough to 1) surround himself with smart people and 2) actually listen to them. I know at least two of them voted for Beto because they recognize Cruz as an idiot. If there is a reasonable Dem or Ind, I believe they won’t give Trump their votes.

[Spurminator]

I’ve had the opposite experience. Like I followed up with, there’s only a handful of people that I even talk politics with. For the most part, they all disliked Hillary and assumed that Trump would be smart enough to 1) surround himself with smart people and 2) actually listen to them. I know at least two of them voted for Beto because they recognize Cruz as an idiot. If there is a reasonable Dem or Ind, I believe they won’t give Trump their votes.

The people I know who voted for Trump don't like to talk about it. They're quick to change the subject or whine about how politics is so divisive these days.

[Spurminator]

Dp

[SpursforSix]

The people I know who voted for Trump don't like to talk about it. They're quick to change the subject or whine about how politics is so divisive these days.

I don’t think anyone reasonable is proud they voted for Trump. Politics is divisive today. I don’t know that complaining about it is whining. Imo, it’s one of the biggest factors propelling this seeming hate train from both sides. People digging in on shit they really don’t care about just because the other side has the opposing view. And the media very rarely gives air time to anyone in the middle. It’s always a CNN report about racist rednecks or a Fox report about the communist left.

[midnightpulp]

I’ve had the opposite experience. Like I followed up with, there’s only a handful of people that I even talk politics with. For the most part, they all disliked Hillary and assumed that Trump would be smart enough to 1) surround himself with smart people and 2) actually listen to them. I know at least two of them voted for Beto because they recognize Cruz as an idiot. If there is a reasonable Dem or Ind, I believe they won’t give Trump their votes.

:lol They don't know his history.

This guy has a cult of personality the likes of which I've never in US politics. It's incredible how his supporters take the shit he spews at face value and believe that Trump is or was ever a competent businessman. Daddy floated his little boy a little over 400 million (adjusted for inflation) over the years to rescue Trump's failures. He's probably made more money from that asinine reality show than from his business "empire." Trump is a celebrity, not much more. I'm convinced Trump supporters like Chris only like him because he's their way of countering the leftist identity politic nonsense, which I admit is highly fucking annoying. As a politician, Trump is totally bankrupt.

[Spurminator]

I don’t think anyone reasonable is proud they voted for Trump. Politics is divisive today. I don’t know that complaining about it is whining. Imo, it’s one of the biggest factors propelling this seeming hate train from both sides. People digging in on shit they really don’t care about just because the other side has the opposing view. And the media very rarely gives air time to anyone in the middle. It’s always a CNN report about racist rednecks or a Fox report about the communist left.

I agree politics is too divisive. I don't think anyone who voted for Donald Trump should be complaining about it, especially when they're usually hesitant to mention him as an example of the divisiveness.

[baseline bum]

The people I know who voted for Trump don't like to talk about it. They're quick to change the subject or whine about how politics is so divisive these days.

Everyone I know who voted for Trump whines about how divisive politics is because of the Democrats.

[midnightpulp]

Everyone I know who voted for Trump whines about how divisive politics is because of the Democrats.

The have a valid point, unfortunately. The Democrats banking on identity politics over the last five or so years has been nothing but a clusterfuck for them in terms of image. Every time twitter, Trevor Noah, Samatha Bee flips its collective shit when Brokaw suggests immigrants should learn English or accuses dumbass smiling teenagers of racism, a new Trump voter is born. He's the proverbial "Cletus's" way of returning politically uncorrect fire.

[baseline bum]

The have a valid point, unfortunately. The Democrats banking on identity politics over the last five or so years has been nothing but a clusterfuck for them in terms of image. Every time twitter, Trevor Noah, Samatha Bee flips its collective shit when Brokaw suggests immigrants should learn English or accuses dumbass smiling teenagers of racism, a new Trump voter is born. He's the proverbial "Cletus's" way of returning politically uncorrect fire.

Meh McConnell's shit started ten years ago. He completely broke Washington.

[ElNono]

"You have a bunch of bad hombres down there," Trump told Pena Nieto, according to the excerpt seen by the AP. "You aren't doing enough to stop them. I think your military is scared. Our military isn't, so I just might send them down to take care of it."

You don’t actually truly believe this to be true, right? I mean, it takes a really special kind of dumb or gullible not to realize that’s just bluff and bluster...

[boutons_deux]

"politics is too divisive"

people are divided, politics just plays, inflames, divides the game to win votes, esp the Repugs whose strategy of divisiveness, polarizaton, inflammation got into full swing in the early 90s, even GHWB and his Willie Horton fear-mongering, but esp with obstructive, destructive Noot Gingrich his 2 govt shutdowns vs Clinton.

The huge tax cuts of Repug 80s for the wealthy also got the billionaires deeply, divisively ino politics, eg, Mellon-Scaife financing witch hunts of both Clintons, supported by the Wealthy Class' rightwing hate media and rightwing stink tanks.

America is deeply divided, self-segregated, by religion, by locale, by race, by ethnicity, by wealth, by education, where being against out-groups overrides unity behind by America.

Even a large percentage of Trash's supporter poll as wanting or at least being ok with a dictatorship, since they think "democracy" and "Capitalism" have failed them, left them in poverty, near-poverty, precarity, too poor to get extractive medical care, killing themselves with drugs, alcohol, guns in records numbers

Then the politicized so-called Christian dominionists want America to be fucking theocracy, which would also be authoritarian.

I have no doubt that no politician can be a unifying force.

iow, the myth of America as chosen, preferred by God, where everybody can be a millionaire, America as a Shining Light on a Hill, has proven to be a bullshit myth, is now, always was.

[Winehole23]

Dude is dropping truth bombs left and right. This is gonna be a fun election.lol falling for a ditzy billionaire with zero ideas.

What are his policies, CC?

[CosmicCowboy]

lol falling for a ditzy billionaire with zero ideas.

What are his policies, CC?

*yawn*

I am not pimping for Schultz since he has zero chance of being elected but I do find it humorous that Democrats are losing their minds over him running as an independent advocating fiscal responsibility.

[Will Hunting]

*yawn*

I am not pimping for Schultz since he has zero chance of being elected but I do find it humorous that Democrats are losing their minds over him running as an independent advocating fiscal responsibility.
His fiscal responsibility is sanctimonious horeshit, if he was that concerned with fiscal responsibility he wouldn’t be advocating that he pay less taxes.

[boutons_deux]

"The Democrats banking on identity politics"

Repugs absolutely depend on White Male identity politics, always grabbing a significant majority of the White Male vote.

And they and White Males flip out, always seeing any attempt at equality for the non-White non-Male people as attack on, persecution of White Male

[Winehole23]

*yawn*

I am not pimping for Schultz since he has zero chance of being elected but I do find it humorous that Democrats are losing their minds over him running as an independent advocating fiscal responsibility.what policy has he proposed?

[Winehole23]

or do you just like his sweet talk?

[CosmicCowboy]

His fiscal responsibility is sanctimonious horeshit, if he was that concerned with fiscal responsibility he wouldn’t be advocating that he pay less taxes.

Fiscal responsibility is accomplished by revenue matching expenses. Both components are required.

[boutons_deux]

I caught a brief interview of Shultz on NPR a few years ago.

He sounded weirdly robotic, drugged, monotone.

What I've of him talking recently proves that he's fucking stupid.

Don't really understand why Dems think he would take Dem votes. Everything he says is pro-oligarchy, anti-non-oligarchy, he's 100% Repug. He's stupid enough to say he's independent, while being hard-core Repug.

[Will Hunting]

Fiscal responsibility is accomplished by revenue matching expenses. Both components are required.
I don’t disagree. He seems extremely focused on the expense side but not on the revenue side.

Maybe I’ve missed it, but I also haven’t heard him say anything about how much wasteful military spending there is, he seems completely focused on cutting entitlements that primarily benefit poor people. He’s a Rockefeller Republican who puts a D next to his name because he’s pro abortion and pro immigration (and he’s only pro immigration because he benefits from suppressed wages).

FTR, I think taxes are too low across the board given where the national debt currently is.

[Winehole23]

Fiscal responsibility is accomplished by revenue matching expenses. Both components are required.I wasn't aware Schultz has said anything about balancing the budget. Can you point me to where he did?

[CosmicCowboy]

Fiscal responsibility is accomplished by revenue matching expenses. Both components are required.

Anyone that thinks we can have free health care, free college and universal basic income just by raising taxes on the "rich" is fucking stupid.

[boutons_deux]

Anyone that thinks we can have free health care, free college and universal basic income just by raising taxes on the "rich" is fucking stupid.

That's the rightwing Repug straw man of Oprah-style "free everything for you and you and you", which isn't being proposed by anybody. But it's believed by the stupid, ignorant fucking Repug base.

[Winehole23]

Anyone that thinks we can have free health care, free college and universal basic income just by raising taxes on the "rich" is fucking stupid.I agree, in addition to raising marginal taxes let's bring back the estate tax, treat capital gains as regular income, tax pass though income, crack down on tax avoidance, get rid of the mortgage exception -- and raise payroll taxes to the extent necessary.

[Will Hunting]

I agree, in addition to raising marginal taxes let's bring back the estate tax, treat capital gains as regular income, tax pass though income, crack down on tax avoidance, get rid of the mortgage exception -- and raise payroll taxes to the extent necessary.
:tu remove the cap on social security taxes while we’re at it

[CosmicCowboy]

That's the rightwing Repug straw man of Oprah-style "free everything for you and you and you", which isn't being proposed by anybody. But it's believed by the stupid, ignorant fucking Repug base.

Boo, you don't support free health care, free college and universal basic income?

[boutons_deux]

:tu remove the cap on social security taxes while we’re at it

close all the loopholes passed by Repugs to allow the wealth and BigCorp to avoid paying their share.

eg, "inversion" and "carried interest"

iow, the rigged economy.

But because only the rigged/owned politicians, who wonderfully benefit from the rigging, can unrig the economy, the rigging will not be touched. America is fucked and unfuckable.

People talking about "balanced budget" while promoting, making HUGE tax cuts for the oligarchy who STILL evade/avoid the remaining taxes, are hiding that the balancing will be on the poor, retired, vets, sick, young, non-whites, by privatizing everything so everything costs more and is shittier.

[DarrinS]

I agree, in addition to raising marginal taxes let's bring back the estate tax, treat capital gains as regular income, tax pass though income, crack down on tax avoidance, get rid of the mortgage exception -- and raise payroll taxes to the extent necessary.

You want to raise taxes across the board? Why?

And, because of new tax law, you either pick standard deduction, which is almost double what is was, or, you itemize, which includes things like mortgage interest deduction.

Btw, what is mortgage exception?

[Winehole23]

You want to raise taxes across the board? Why?To pay for free shit, duh.

[Winehole23]

Btw, what is mortgage exception?There's at least two, one state and one federal:

https://www.bankrate.com/calculators/mortgages/loan-tax-deduction-calculator.aspx
http://www.houseloanblog.net/homestead-exemption/

[Spurminator]

The have a valid point, unfortunately. The Democrats banking on identity politics over the last five or so years has been nothing but a clusterfuck for them in terms of image. Every time twitter, Trevor Noah, Samatha Bee flips its collective shit when Brokaw suggests immigrants should learn English or accuses dumbass smiling teenagers of racism, a new Trump voter is born. He's the proverbial "Cletus's" way of returning politically uncorrect fire.

You're talking about liberal pundits and media, though, not Democrats in office. That's the important difference. The conservative standard for divisiveness is celebrities giving preachy speeches at an awards show. Meanwhile the current Vice President is staging walkouts of football games to keep people talking about anthem protests. Electing politically incorrect shock jocks isn't the answer to pushing back on PC on social media and in culture.

[midnightpulp]

I don’t disagree. He seems extremely focused on the expense side but not on the revenue side.

Maybe I’ve missed it, but I also haven’t heard him say anything about how much wasteful military spending there is, he seems completely focused on cutting entitlements that primarily benefit poor people. He’s a Rockefeller Republican who puts a D next to his name because he’s pro abortion and pro immigration (and he’s only pro immigration because he benefits from suppressed wages).

FTR, I think taxes are too low across the board given where the national debt currently is.

Can self-proclaimed "small government and fiscally responsible" conservatives explain why cuts to military spending are never on the table? We have some 600 bases around the world (and yes, an unknown number of those "bases" are small parcels of land with radio towers or something weird like a 144sqft empty space in Canada), but many of the big European bases are holdovers from the post-World War 2 where US military might was the only line of defense a rebuilding Europe had against a feared Soviet Union. The EU has a capable military, so I don't see the point in having European bases any longer.

"But China/Russia are building these super weapons! Oh no! If we cut military spending, we won't keep up with them in the arms race!" Total bullshit. MAD was proven during the Cold War. As long as nukes exist, no country possessing nuclear weapons will dare attack one another. North Korea is the biggest violator of human rights in the world, and we haven't lifted a finger against that regime because of their "Samson Option" artillery strategy. If they get any hint of an impending invasion, they're basically going "nuclear" on Seoul without nuclear weapons. Example of how effective such a tactic is. This is basically why we restrict our military involvement toward nukeless countries with ragged militaries comprised of goat farmers. And our multi-trillion dollar expenditure has done a lot of good in trying to nation build in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But yeah, expect a multi-trillion price tag for the "Space Force" or whatever, and middle America will sign off on it with Red, White, and Blue pride. But healthcare for all? Socialism!

[CosmicCowboy]

Can self-proclaimed "small government and fiscally responsible" conservatives explain why cuts to military spending are never on the table? We have some 600 bases around the world (and yes, an unknown number of those "bases" are small parcels of land with radio towers or something weird like a 144sqft empty space in Canada), but many of the big European bases are holdovers from the post-World War 2 where US military might was the only line of defense a rebuilding Europe had against a feared Soviet Union. The EU has a capable military, so I don't see the point in having European bases any longer.

"But China/Russia are building these super weapons! Oh no! If we cut military spending, we won't keep up with them in the arms race!" Total bullshit. MAD was proven during the Cold War. As long as nukes exist, no country possessing nuclear weapons will dare attack one another. North Korea is the biggest violator of human rights in the world, and we haven't lifted a finger against that regime because of their "Samson Option" artillery strategy. If they get any hint of an impending invasion, they're basically going "nuclear" on Seoul without nuclear weapons. Example of how effective such a tactic is. This is basically why we restrict our military involvement toward nukeless countries with ragged militaries comprised of goat farmers. And our multi-trillion dollar expenditure has done a lot of good in trying to nation build in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But yeah, expect a multi-trillion price tag for the "Space Force" or whatever, and middle America will sign off on it with Red, White, and Blue pride. But healthcare for all? Socialism!

I agree about the military part. We spend way too much.

[boutons_deux]

"MAD was proven during the Cold War."

the "intermediate" bullshit is that USA and Russia would nuke "intermediate" Europe, but not each other mutually.

fuck to hell nation-state dick measuring

[Will Hunting]

Can self-proclaimed "small government and fiscally responsible" conservatives explain why cuts to military spending are never on the table? We have some 600 bases around the world (and yes, an unknown number of those "bases" are small parcels of land with radio towers or something weird like a 144sqft empty space in Canada), but many of the big European bases are holdovers from the post-World War 2 where US military might was the only line of defense a rebuilding Europe had against a feared Soviet Union. The EU has a capable military, so I don't see the point in having European bases any longer.

"But China/Russia are building these super weapons! Oh no! If we cut military spending, we won't keep up with them in the arms race!" Total bullshit. MAD was proven during the Cold War. As long as nukes exist, no country possessing nuclear weapons will dare attack one another. North Korea is the biggest violator of human rights in the world, and we haven't lifted a finger against that regime because of their "Samson Option" artillery strategy. If they get any hint of an impending invasion, they're basically going "nuclear" on Seoul without nuclear weapons. Example of how effective such a tactic is. This is basically why we restrict our military involvement toward nukeless countries with ragged militaries comprised of goat farmers. And our multi-trillion dollar expenditure has done a lot of good in trying to nation build in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But yeah, expect a multi-trillion price tag for the "Space Force" or whatever, and middle America will sign off on it with Red, White, and Blue pride. But healthcare for all? Socialism!

It also doesn't make sense that we're supposedly countering Russian and Chinese "super weapons" by continuing to waste billions on antiquated military technology that hasn't been used since WWII (tanks, submarines, aircraft carriers, fighter planes, etc.). By far the biggest Russian and Chinese threat we face is with cyber security, if we want to spend money on defense, it should be to bolster our cyber infrastructure. Otherwise, if Russia and China want to go bankrupt building "super weapons" that don't really matter in the nuclear age, we shouldn't try to beat them in a race to the bottom. This is even before considering how much other useful shit the troops we have stationed all over the world could be doing (fixing roads and bridges, improving our energy grid (which is laughably shitty compared to countries like Germany)) or how much money we spend on the additional healthcare needs of veterans after we send them to fight stupid wars.

A lot of stuff like bloated military spending has essentially become a job program masquerading as something else in order to put a band-aide on the giant gap that exists between the supply of low or no skill labor in this country vs. the demand for it, and that's a part of why it sticks around imo. Lockheed Martin alone has 100,000 employees and the overwhelming majority of them would be out of a job overnight if our military spending was at the level of EU countries. I'd also put the War on Drugs in that bucket too. We'd have god knows how many prison guards, drug enforcement police, prosecutors, etc. who would all be on their ass without the drug policy we've had since Nixon. The amount of jobs that get created by government programs Conservatives want even though the free market has no demand for those jobs is about as socialist as it gets.

[spurraider21]

if there really was an entitlement to cut back, it would be pensions for many government employees.

[CosmicCowboy]

if there really was an entitlement to cut back, it would be pensions for many government employees.

No shit. They are just about the only ones left with defined benefit retirement plans, and they can retire in their 50s.

[boutons_deux]

yep, govt employees have it good, so we MUST pull them down to the shitshow precarity of private employees.

Private Labor knows it is fucked by Capital,

and that there's no way they, gradually disempowered, marginalized, instantly frog-marched disposable over 45 years, can get back to 1945-1970 happy boat floating.

SA just did the same by insulting and pulling down Sheryl Sculley, who by every measure had done and was doing an excellent job, but the losers said she was making too much money, doing excellent work for too many years, so she had to go.

[Will Hunting]

if there really was an entitlement to cut back, it would be pensions for many government employees.
How much money is that though? I'm fine with doing it but I don't think it moves the needle very much.

[spurraider21]

How much money is that though? I'm fine with doing it but I don't think it moves the needle very much.
federally i'm actually not sure. its a big drain in CA, so im probably just thinking from a local perspective.

edit:

https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/breakdown

according to this, more than military spending

[Will Hunting]

federally i'm actually not sure. its a big drain in CA, so im probably just thinking from a local perspective.

edit:

https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/breakdown

according to this, more than military spending
Holy shit, that’s a lot, yeah I agree we definitely need to change that.

[spurraider21]

Holy shit, that’s a lot, yeah I agree we definitely need to change that.
i'm all for carving exceptions for certain professions... law enforcement, first responders, that sort of thing. on the state level i'm fine with giving it to teachers too given the atrocious state of their pay levels.

but everybody pays into and receives social security, why the extra benefits here?

the problem is good luck getting elected on that platform

[Winehole23]

You want to raise taxes across the board? Why?The pendulum swung too far; redistribution has gone to the upper range of incomes for fifty years, wages and buying power at the bottom have stagnated and fallen, respectively.

Health care and college cost too much. If something isn't done to mitigate that, we're de facto underinvesting in our future productivity; continuing to cut taxes would be penny wise for pound foolish.

America first ain't cheap.

[Will Hunting]

i'm all for carving exceptions for certain professions... law enforcement, first responders, that sort of thing. on the state level i'm fine with giving it to teachers too given the atrocious state of their pay levels.

but everybody pays into and receives social security, why the extra benefits here?

the problem is good luck getting elected on that platform
Similar to social security, im guessing a lot of these pension plans are using actuarial projections that haven’t been updated in decades, so they’re still using life expectancy assumptions that are falling way short. At the very least that needs to be updated.

[baseline bum]

The pendulum swung too far; redistribution has gone to the upper range of incomes for fifty years, wages and buying power at the bottom have stagnated and fallen, respectively.

Health care and college cost too much. If something isn't done to mitigate that, we're de facto underinvesting in our future productivity; continuing to cut taxes would be penny wise for pound foolish.

America first ain't cheap.

Good luck selling that to a bunch of older people with 20-30 years left to live.

[Winehole23]

1091192400003952640

[Winehole23]

Good luck selling that to a bunch of older people with 20-30 years left to live.The conversation has to start somewhere. If policies aren't even discussed, they don't get on the agenda.

[boutons_deux]

Howard Schultz is reportedly 'freaking out' about the Democratic backlash to his presidential plans (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/2/1/1831461/-Howard-Schultz-is-reportedly-freaking-out-about-the-Democratic-backlash-to-his-presidential-plans)

Apparently the predictability of that backlash was only understood by people without billions of dollars.

With popular support for things like Medicare for all and increasing taxes on the wealthiest Americans and their corporations,

it wasn’t surprising that a billionaire telling everyone that

he didn’t really want to do those things didn’t get a joyous reception.

According to outlets including Fox Business and Bloomberg,

Schultz has put breaks on his soft rollout.

Fox Business says Schultz is “freaking out” about the Democratic blowback he’s received (https://www.heraldextra.com/news/national/schultz-faces-hometown-protests-as-he-eyes-bid/article_19e28f74-7420-50f8-9920-d3ddae45204f.html),

while Bloomberg reports that Schultz is saying he will only run “if he sees a plausible way to win the White House.” (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-29/starbucks-schultz-may-not-decide-on-2020-until-at-least-midyear)

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/1831461

[midnightpulp]

It also doesn't make sense that we're supposedly countering Russian and Chinese "super weapons" by continuing to waste billions on antiquated military technology that hasn't been used since WWII (tanks, submarines, aircraft carriers, fighter planes, etc.). By far the biggest Russian and Chinese threat we face is with cyber security, if we want to spend money on defense, it should be to bolster our cyber infrastructure. Otherwise, if Russia and China want to go bankrupt building "super weapons" that don't really matter in the nuclear age, we shouldn't try to beat them in a race to the bottom. This is even before considering how much other useful shit the troops we have stationed all over the world could be doing (fixing roads and bridges, improving our energy grid (which is laughably shitty compared to countries like Germany)) or how much money we spend on the additional healthcare needs of veterans after we send them to fight stupid wars.

A lot of stuff like bloated military spending has essentially become a job program masquerading as something else in order to put a band-aide on the giant gap that exists between the supply of low or no skill labor in this country vs. the demand for it, and that's a part of why it sticks around imo. Lockheed Martin alone has 100,000 employees and the overwhelming majority of them would be out of a job overnight if our military spending was at the level of EU countries. I'd also put the War on Drugs in that bucket too. We'd have god knows how many prison guards, drug enforcement police, prosecutors, etc. who would all be on their ass without the drug policy we've had since Nixon. The amount of jobs that get created by government programs Conservatives want even though the free market has no demand for those jobs is about as socialist as it gets.

Yeah, I was on the same wavelength and was about to type the only sensible defensive spending in the modern age would be toward cyber security. Also, if we cut defense spending and funnel it toward healthcare, many of those same low-skilled jobs would still exist. Where you once went into the Army to become a soldier, you now go into the health care industry to be a medical aide, janitor, cafeteria worker, etc.

[Winehole23]

https://medium.com/@ChngRsrch/presidential-polling-on-howard-schultz-for-president-db970ad2b42d

[FrostKing]

Howard Schultz is reportedly 'freaking out' about the Democratic backlash to his presidential plans (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/2/1/1831461/-Howard-Schultz-is-reportedly-freaking-out-about-the-Democratic-backlash-to-his-presidential-plans)

Apparently the predictability of that backlash was only understood by people without billions of dollars.

With popular support for things like Medicare for all and increasing taxes on the wealthiest Americans and their corporations,

it wasn’t surprising that a billionaire telling everyone that

he didn’t really want to do those things didn’t get a joyous reception.

According to outlets including Fox Business and Bloomberg,

Schultz has put breaks on his soft rollout.

Fox Business says Schultz is “freaking out” about the Democratic blowback he’s received (https://www.heraldextra.com/news/national/schultz-faces-hometown-protests-as-he-eyes-bid/article_19e28f74-7420-50f8-9920-d3ddae45204f.html),

while Bloomberg reports that Schultz is saying he will only run “if he sees a plausible way to win the White House.” (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-29/starbucks-schultz-may-not-decide-on-2020-until-at-least-midyear)

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/1831461
Hence why he ran as Independent...

[ducks]

If everyone paid taxes instead of half
More money would come in

You want it to be fair
You do a flat tax at 2 percent
Nothing is unfair about it
It does not care if you are white,black, female, male, transfergender or a illegal, rich or poor

[CosmicCowboy]

If everyone paid taxes instead of half
More money would come in

You want it to be fair
You do a flat tax at 2 percent
Nothing is unfair about it
It does not care if you are white,black, female, male, transfer or a illegal, rich or poor

Ducks, just stop now. That's just embarrassing.

[koriwhat]

SCHULTZ: The Candidate for Refugees

he's going to sink faster than a rat with concrete boots on in the hudson river.

[Will Hunting]

SCHULTZ: The Candidate for Refugees

he's going to sink faster than a rat with concrete boots on in the hudson river.
Schultz doesn’t give a shit about refugees either...he’s an oligarch who disguises wanting more low skilled workers in the country to suppress wages as a “love for immigrants”

[koriwhat]

Schultz doesn’t give a shit about refugees either...he’s an oligarch who disguises wanting more low skilled workers in the country to suppress wages as a “love for immigrants”

well duh... but he fucked up with his "we're going to hire more" because of djt. fuck him and all the dems too; they're all 2 face.

[Splits]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DyXCkeIXgAA1Adc.jpg (https://medium.com/@ChngRsrch/presidential-polling-on-howard-schultz-for-president-db970ad2b42d)

[Will Hunting]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DyXCkeIXgAA1Adc.jpg (https://medium.com/@ChngRsrch/presidential-polling-on-howard-schultz-for-president-db970ad2b42d)
There’s absolutely no reason to think he would take a noticeable amount of votes away from the Dem any more than he would Trump.

Republicans are just saying he would play spoiler to “trigger muh libruhls”

[CosmicCowboy]

There’s absolutely no reason to think he would take a noticeable amount of votes away from the Dem any more than he would Trump.

Republicans are just saying he would play spoiler to “trigger muh libruhls”

That's just dumb. Why are Democrats losing their minds over schultz then?

[Will Hunting]

That's just dumb. Why are Democrats losing their minds over schultz then?
Because they’re easily triggered by the thought of Trump winning re-election to the point where they can’t think coherently about it, same reason they lose their mind about other stupid crap.

[benefactor]

If everyone paid taxes instead of half
More money would come in

You want it to be fair
You do a flat tax at 2 percent
Nothing is unfair about it
It does not care if you are white,black, female, male, transfergender or a illegal, rich or poor
And if you would quit posting the collective IQ of this forum would go up by 50...but neither of those things is going to happen, obviously.

[boutons_deux]

Because they’re easily triggered by the thought of Trump winning re-election to the point where they can’t think coherently about it, same reason they lose their mind about other stupid crap.

HS is hard right, pro-wealthy, independent centrist in dishonest self-anointed name only, he would take more votes from Trash than from the Dems

He wouldn't be another Nader/Stein vote-splitting Dem-killer

[boutons_deux]

Howard Schultz Says Billionaires Should Be Called ‘People of Means’ (Video)"All I am trying to do is one thing: walk in the shoes of the American people,"
https://www.sfgate.com/entertainment/the-wrap/article/Howard-Schultz-Says-Billionaires-Should-Be-Called-13590401.php

Howie has a LOT money than brains