• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: 2024 Election Thread part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
[qimg]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GV_XfkJWoAAxYqb?format=jpg&name=small[/qimg]

It seems you will never learn to do any research away from right-wing sources before posting nonsense like this.

Harris supports the Bipartisan Border Agreement that Trump shot down in order to use it as a campaign talking point. It's a COMPROMISE bill between the Dems and GOP:
That bill, negotiated by senators such as James Lankford (R-Okla.) and Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), requires hundreds of millions of dollars of unspent funds to be used to continue building a wall on the border.
"It requires the Trump border wall," Lankford told Axios. "It is in the bill itself that it sets the standards that were set during the Trump administration: Here's where it will be built. Here's how it has to be built, the height, the type, everything during the Trump construction."

Harris' campaign says the border deal is a whole lot more than continuation of wall funding — and a tiny fraction of what Trump has proposed.

Harris advisers note that the bipartisan border proposal didn't include any new money to continue building the wall.
It just extended the timeline to spend funds that had been appropriated during Trump's last year as president, they say, although the legislation has new restrictions to ensure the money is spent on barriers.

'Compromise' is a dirty word to some, but when two sides refuse to give an inch and want everything their way, nothing gets done. We don't have have a supermajority where one side controls everything.
 
I'm not inviting him over for dinner. I'll likely never meet him or any other president. But I know if he's in office my taxes won't go up. I know if he's in office the regulatory state will be reduced. "Joy" is not a policy.

But you might be required to carry a fetus to term whether you intended to or not. You might suffer the consequences of pollution. You might be paid less. You might have to pay more for medications and medical costs. You might face a judge in a courtroom who sides with a corporate entity instead of following the law.

I can fully understand someone who is filthy rich voting Republican. But I don't understand anyone who cares for justice, equality, freedom and democracy voting for Trump. Integrity matters. And if Trump is elected, that will be the end of democracy in the US.

This isn't that Trump isn't a suitable dinner guest. He's not suitable to remain in a civilized society. He belongs in prison. He is a criminal. He's a racist. He's a rapist. He's a convicted con man. Convicted of 32 counts of criminal fraud. He's a thief. He stole thousands of classified documents and refused to return them. He committed perjury. He committed criminal obstruction of justice. He engineered an attempted violent coup against the United States.

But I guess the tiny amount you might save in taxes is worth all that.
 
I'm not inviting him over for dinner. I'll likely never meet him or any other president. But I know if he's in office my taxes won't go up. I know if he's in office the regulatory state will be reduced. "Joy" is not a policy.

They will regulate the **** out of women, like ban abortions, track menstrual cycles and track the travel of women.
 
The alternative to Harris/Walz is becoming stark, and very dark.

Trump's proposed transition team now includes RFK Jr (who is now on the chemtrails conspiracy), Tucker Carlson and Tulsi Gabbard.

Alex Jones must be looking forward to his appointment.

Yeah. Who would be on the Harris/Walz transition team? No one you've heard of.

But this is what Trump has to do, because he doesn't actually know anyone who could do it. All he knows are the names in the media. He doesn't have an actual staff to consult with.
 
Get that she'll just keep flipflopping and taking Trump's ideas because she doesn't know what she's doing? Or has she actually sat for an interview and explained her views? Why is she so scared to do that?

"Trump's ideas"? He HAS no ideas. He just opens his mouth and spews whatever pops into his pea brain at the time that he thinks his audience will like. But let's look at 'his' plan vs Harris':

Since Trump hasn’t given any details, we have to use the Cruz/Donalds No Tax on Tips Act as a signpost for the GOP approach. The measure exempts tips from federal income tax, but not from the payroll tax that funds Social Security and part of Medicare. It applies only to households that pay federal income taxes — it’s not refundable, meaning that it doesn’t provide any benefit to households whose income is so low they don’t owe federal taxes.
That leaves out all but “a small sliver” of American workers, according to economist Ernie Tedeschi of the Yale Budget Lab. He counts the number of workers in traditional tipped occupations, including wait staff, barbers and hairdressers, at about 4 million, or just 2.5% of all workers.

“A meaningful share of tipped workers already pay zero federal income tax,” Tedeschi notes.

U.S. census data drive home his point: More than a third of tipped workers earned so little in 2022 that they owed no federal income tax. In other words, they’d receive zero benefit from the Republican act.
Another flaw of the bill is its lack of guardrails to ensure that only low-income tipped workers receive its benefits. Nowhere in the three-page measure are tips defined, nor is there a phase-out of the tax break based on income. This raises the possibility that higher-income households could game the system by defining some of their earnings as tips and pocketing the deduction.

How about Harris’ proposal?
What she said in Las Vegas was this: “We will continue our fight for working families of America, including to raise the minimum wage and eliminate taxes on tips for service and hospitality workers.” Nestled within that statement are two very important distinctions from the Trump or Republican proposal. First is a raise in the federal minimum wage, which has been frozen at $7.25 an hour since 2009. Had the minimum kept pace with inflation, it would be $10.79 today. In seven states, the federal wage applies — five that have not enacted a minimum wage of their own (Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee) and two (Georgia and Wyoming) where the state minimum is lower than $7.25, meaning that the federal wage is the law.

Harris also specified service and hospitality workers, which obviously means she would exclude professionals gaming the law. Whether she would do so by phasing out the benefit by income or specifically identifying eligible occupations isn’t clear.

Despite her careful phrasing, conservative commentators and not a few actual journalistic organizations fell into the trap of treating Harris’ proposal as a copycat of Trump’s.

And you are one of those who fell into that trap because you fail to do any research outside your own echo chamber.
 
If I'm with the Harris campaign, I'm making it a point to hit those states that recently banned abortions and any with abortion on the ballot. It's a winner issue for Dems everywhere it has been made the issue.
 
I'm not inviting him over for dinner. I'll likely never meet him or any other president. But I know if he's in office my taxes won't go up. I know if he's in office the regulatory state will be reduced. "Joy" is not a policy.

So you think your taxes won't go up, but what do you think inflation and tariffs will do to that tax savings?

Anyone doubting that under another Trump presidency globalization will be trashed has not been paying attention to Trump’s specific trade policy proposals. He has indicated that, if elected, he will impose a 60 percent tariff on all Chinese imports. At the same time, he will impose a ten percent across-the-board tariff on imports from all other countries. Judging by the manner in which he imposed tariffs during his presidency, Trump must be assumed to be planning to hike tariffs unilaterally without bothering to justify his actions to the World Trade Organization or to negotiate with our trade partners.

One obvious disadvantage of aggressive import tariff increases is that they will add to inflation by increasing the cost of imports. Another is that a large part of the burden of those tariffs will fall unduly on those in society least able to bear them. Worse yet, those tariffs are all too likely to take us back to the economically disastrous beggar-my-neighbor policies of the 1930s.

If there is one thing on which most economists can agree, it is that the beggar-my-neighbor economic policies of the 1930s contributed importantly to the Great Economic Depression. In today’s highly interconnected global economy, there is every reason to believe that a world trade war will once again be destructive of domestic and international prosperity.

Trump seems keen to make further tax cuts that could cause our budget deficit to widen. In particular, he would make permanent the corporate and individual tax cuts that are due to expire next year. According to the Congressional Budget Office, such an extension would add $5 trillion to the budget deficit over the next decade. All of this does not bode well for the country’s long-term economic outlook should Trump get a second term. Repeating the misguided trade policies of the 1930s is once again likely to end in tears. Meanwhile, as historian Niall Ferguson reminds us, excessively high public debt levels have in the past led to economic weakness and the collapse of great powers.

But, what the hell...as long as your taxes don't go up...right?
 
It's a strong argument indeed, but can president do something about it ?

Yes he/she can. For example he/she can continue to make mifepristone available by mail in every state. He/she can veto any federal abortion ban Republicans might introduce. He/she can sign a bill guaranteeing reproductive rights. He/she can appoint SCOTUS judges that would reinstate Roe as opposed to appointing judges that wouldn't.
 
Republicans won't be asking Trump "Are you allowed to do that?" if he's elected. He'll just do it and they'll cheer him on.
 
Get that she'll just keep flipflopping and taking Trump's ideas because she doesn't know what she's doing? Or has she actually sat for an interview and explained her views? Why is she so scared to do that?

You're trying just so hard. The problem is, right-wingers can't be intentionally funny.
 
This is bizarre. Less than a week ago trump was praising Obama as a 'nice gentleman', saying how he respected both Obama and his wife.

I had figured that that's what he was referring to when he said in the quoted that he had been sorta nice to him. Yeah, though, of course that little bit of half-assed praise didn't change Obama's stance on Trump.
 
But I know if he's in office my taxes won't go up.

At last check, Project 2025 proposes to effectively raise taxes. Probably even your taxes.


Project 2025’s Tax Plan Would Raise Taxes on the Middle Class and Cut Taxes for the Wealthy

The far-right extremist playbook would immediately raise taxes for the middle class by thousands of dollars while also pushing for long-term changes that could raise taxes by $5,900.


That's before anything to do with Trumpflation comes into play, of course, and how that'll screw us all over again.

I know if he's in office the regulatory state will be reduced.

Because the rich and powerful NEED to be more rich and powerful even when that means screwing over the "little guys," eh?

"Joy" is not a policy.

"Screw everyone over, but try to screw the other people more" isn't much of a policy, either, yet Trump supporters seem to like it, evidently. Too long for a slogan? Would "Hate" or "Anger" be more appealing for you? "Joy" is a hell of a lot better as an aim, in my opinion, before getting to the part where Harris' actual policy proposals tend to be overwhelmingly better for the US than anything to do with Trump.
 
Last edited:
Former Michigan GOP co-chair Meshawn Maddock, who is an indicted co-conspirator 2020 "fake elector", shows yet again her true MAGA colors in a social media post directed at MI Michigan state Rep. Jason Morgan who is gay and the vice-chair of the state's Dem. Party. Morgan posted a photo of people attending the Dem convention to which Maddock responded, “F*gs and hags.” The first slur was modified by X for breaking its Hateful Conduct policy.

Maddock isn't just some random ignorant bigot; she was the vice-chair of a state GOP party who is known for having spewed anti-LGBTQ+ remarks before such as calling Pete Buttigieg a “weak little girl”. Thus is the party of Trump.
 
Tax Proposals:

Harris: 44% tax rate for top 1% earners
Trump: 37% tax rate for top 1% earners

Harris: 28% corporate tax rate (increase of 7%)
Trump: 20% corporate tax rate (decrease of 1%)

Harris: 25% minimum tax rate for richest households (ensures
richest pay at least 25% in taxes)
Trump: NO minimum rate (enables little to no taxes paid due to loopholes
by the richest)

This is why the rich vote for Trump. As billionaire Leona Helmsley once said, "We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom