2024 President Candidate Discussion

[Offthemat]

2 hours ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Thank goodness. I thought you were going to say Dogecoin.

A gold-backed, currency by committee has zero chance at becoming a reserve currency.

I feel so much better now. 

[BerniePragle]

18 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

All the data shows that blue collar wages were increasing faster than white collar wages under Trump.  But yes, everyone was better off than under Biden policies.  

"Blue collar wages...White collar wages"

Lol.  That's meaningless for so many reasons.  Probably even a lot more than I could think of off the top of my head.

[BerniePragle]

57 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

 

 

Edited July 10, 2023 by BerniePragle

[WrestlingRasta]

That 

2 hours ago, Husker_Du said:

i just don't get this at all.

beyond all the theatrics and rhetoric, the ONLY thing that truly affects citizens is POLICY. it's quite frankly the only thing you should care about.

saying 'it can change every four years' is flippant. tell that to the parents of dead kids of fentanyl. or an entire generation of kids whose development was retarded by absolutely ridiculous covid policy. or the permanent ramifications of both our funds and reputation for being in a grift of a war supporting a crooked govt in Ukraine.

Your examples are all very sad, and sincerely heartfelt, but they are not examples of something that is new to humanity beginning January 21,2021. There are examples of war, drug epidemic, harmful substances pushed onto our public through government intervention, etc etc throughout history (and throughout political parties). None of those examples however change the fact, yes fact, that policies can and do change with the stroke of a pen, in a new term.   There are two things that affect me and my family significantly, SIGNIFICANTLY, more than who is president. 

But at the end of the day, I clearly stated that I am no big fan of Biden and some of his policies. But I feel like Maga is the most dangerous thing going right now to what this country was written up to be, which….I like how it was written up to be….so that’s going to be my voter issue this time around. 

[Offthemat]

2 hours ago, BerniePragle said:

"Blue collar wages...White collar wages"

Lol.  That's meaningless for so many reasons.  Probably even a lot more than I could think of off the top of my head.

You’ve got to be kidding. 

[Wrestleknownothing]

5 hours ago, Husker_Du said:

a grift of a war

What do you mean by this?

[Le duke]

What do you mean by this?

He doesn’t know.

He thinks we’re handing over pallets of cash and “cluster bombs”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Le duke]

3) Gay Marriage - i just don't see this as an issue. i don't know that i would even consider it a Big 3, actually. perhaps i'm naive here, but is there any credible threat to gay marriages being banned (for the love of god, please don't point out rhetoric from far right slapnuts. them saying it doesn't it make a likely to happen)

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/24/clarence-thomas-roe-gay-marriage-contraception-lgbtq


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Offthemat]

12 minutes ago, Le duke said:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/24/clarence-thomas-roe-gay-marriage-contraception-lgbtq


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I read this as Thomas’ opinion is that the other decisions may have been based on faulty reasoning or application of the law, not that they should necessarily be overturned.  Just as Dobbs did not outlaw abortion, it left it to the states to determine how they would handle it. 

[Offthemat]

3 hours ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

What do you mean by this?

I’m not speaking for Husker-Du, but what it brings to my mind are the reports that much of the arms shipped to Ukraine are being sold on the black market and the cash is being disbursed here and there, while Ukrainian oligarchs are showing up in Switzerland in their Rolls Royces to buy high end real estate.  

[DJT]

44 minutes ago, Le duke said:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/24/clarence-thomas-roe-gay-marriage-contraception-lgbtq


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I thought the slippery slope argument was a fallacy? But, somehow, letting states decide on abortion is going to lead to gay marriages and birth control being banned, and allowing some guns to be banned won’t result in more guns being banned. Even the gay marriage issue was sent back to the states, I don’t think we’d see a single state with an outright ban. I concede we might see a few only have gay civil unions, not gay marriage, but I’m a proponent of taking the government out of the marriage business and only recognizing civil unions, gay or straight. After all, the government’s only concern in the matter is the legal contract between two people, not their promise to God or Allah or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

[DJT]

40 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

I’m not speaking for Husker-Du, but what it brings to my mind are the reports that much of the arms shipped to Ukraine are being sold on the black market and the cash is being disbursed here and there, while Ukrainian oligarchs are showing up in Switzerland in their Rolls Royces to buy high end real estate.  

There is also the matter of $400 million meant to purchase diesel embezzled by Zelenskyy and co. Before attacking the source (no idea what GVS is), this was just the first article that popped up in a search. The investigative journalist who broke this story, Seymour Hersh, is a Pulitzer Prize winner for exposing the My Lai Massacre, amongst winning dozens of other awards, so he’s not just some 4chan kook.

https://www.globalvillagespace.com/zelensky-and-team-stole-at-least-400-million-of-us-aid-seymour-hersh/

Found the sub stack:

https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/trading-with-the-enemy

Aside from that, we were coming down hard on Zelenskyy for not doing anything about the corruption in Ukraine right up until Russia invaded. Then everyone pretty much forgot about it and started putting Ukrainian flag emojis on their Twitter profiles.

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-zelenskyy-government-and-politics-494af1bc0145fb2d16c76b0abf3f5cda

Edited July 11, 2023 by DJT

[Le duke]

There is also the matter of $400 million meant to purchase diesel embezzled by Zelenskyy and co. Before attacking the source (no idea what GVS is), this was just the first article that popped up in a search. The investigative journalist who broke this story, Seymour Hersh, is a Pulitzer Prize winner for exposing the My Lai Massacre, amongst winning dozens of other awards, so he’s not just some 4chan kook.
https://www.globalvillagespace.com/zelensky-and-team-stole-at-least-400-million-of-us-aid-seymour-hersh/
Aside from that, we were coming down hard on Zelenskyy for not doing anything about the corruption in Ukraine right up until Russia invaded. Then everyone pretty much forgot about it and started putting Ukrainian flag emojis on their Twitter profiles.
https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-zelenskyy-government-and-politics-494af1bc0145fb2d16c76b0abf3f5cda

So, is corruption your bar for determining who does and doesn’t deserve to get invaded by Russia?

It really sounds like you’re trying to justify kids being stolen from Ukraine because some politicians in their country may have embezzled some money.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Le duke]

35 minutes ago, DJT said:

I thought the slippery slope argument was a fallacy? But, somehow, letting states decide on abortion is going to lead to gay marriages and birth control being banned, and allowing some guns to be banned won’t result in more guns being banned. Even the gay marriage issue was sent back to the states, I don’t think we’d see a single state with an outright ban. I concede we might see a few only have gay civil unions, not gay marriage, but I’m a proponent of taking the government out of the marriage business and only recognizing civil unions, gay or straight. After all, the government’s only concern in the matter is the legal contract between two people, not their promise to God or Allah or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Slippery slope? It's not a logical fallacy: he very clearly said that they should reconsider the case. 

This is what Clarence Thomas wrote: In future cases, we should reconsider all of this court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.

You don't think Florida and Texas would ban gay marriage, right now, given their current political climate? Really? Are you that naive?

[Le duke]

Also, here's the problem with making gay marriage a state's rights issue:

What happens when you move from a state that allows gay marriage to one that forbids it? Does your marriage become invalidated?

What happens if you or your spouse are accused of a crime in a state in which gay marriage is illegal? Do you not have spousal privilege anymore? Will you be forced to testify against your spouse, where a straight couple would not have to do so? Seems that would be a massive violation of the 14th Amendment, no? A straight couple would literally have different privileges under the law than a gay couple. 

[DJT]

10 minutes ago, Le duke said:

 

So, is corruption your bar for determining who does and doesn’t deserve to get invaded by Russia?

It really sounds like you’re trying to justify kids being stolen from Ukraine because some politicians in their country may have embezzled some money.

 

That’s quite a leap.. My questioning of the unchecked spending of tens of billions of US taxpayers’ dollars on a proxy war between two corrupt countries means I’m justifying the fact that kids may have been “stolen” in Ukraine? 
 

Just wait until we start sending “our portion” of the $2 trillion-plus for the rebuilding of Ukraine when this is done. That’s when the real grift will happen… hundreds of billions will be given, and, in 20 years, it won’t look much different than it does today.

[DJT]

1 minute ago, Le duke said:

Also, here's the problem with making gay marriage a state's rights issue:

What happens when you move from a state that allows gay marriage to one that forbids it? Does your marriage become invalidated?

What happens if you or your spouse are accused of a crime in a state in which gay marriage is illegal? Do you not have spousal privilege anymore? Will you be forced to testify against your spouse, where a straight couple would not have to do so? Seems that would be a massive violation of the 14th Amendment, no? A straight couple would literally have different privileges under the law than a gay couple. 

Same can be said with states having varying gun laws and 2nd Amendment rights. I have a concealed carry permit, but if I carry 1/2 mile down the street from my house, I’m committing a felony.

Again, I think there should only be a federally-recognized civil union. It’s simply a contract between two people which affords certain privileges (taxes, power of attorney, etc.). Completely erase marriage from the government’s books. Marriage has an inherent religious component to it, so it should be separated. If people want to marry their dog or sister or favorite golf club, whatever. That’s their issue.

[Le duke]

That’s quite a leap.. My questioning of the unchecked spending of tens of billions of US taxpayers’ dollars on a proxy war between two corrupt countries means I’m justifying the fact that kids may have been “stolen” in Ukraine? 
 
Just wait until we start sending “our portion” of the $2 trillion-plus for the rebuilding of Ukraine when this is done. That’s when the real grift will happen… hundreds of billions will be given, and, in 20 years, it won’t look much different than it does today.

The vast majority of the weapons we’re sending them have already been paid for, are beyond their shelf life, and are contractually required to be destroyed. They are being destroyed, but instead of that being done in the US, they are being used against Russian forces. Their replacement costs were allocated before the war in Ukraine began.

We’re also getting priceless research and data from/on Russian weapons systems. Data we could not get without our systems being used in Ukraine.

So, “unchecked spending” is a bit of a misnomer. Obama and Trump’s budgets paid for these weapons.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DJT]

37 minutes ago, Le duke said:

Slippery slope? It's not a logical fallacy: he very clearly said that they should reconsider the case. 

This is what Clarence Thomas wrote: In future cases, we should reconsider all of this court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.

You don't think Florida and Texas would ban gay marriage, right now, given their current political climate? Really? Are you that naive?

I don’t think it would be politically prudent to make legislation banning gay marriage. It would put vulnerable politicians who could usually skirt around the issue in the “bad” position of actually going on record one way or the other with their votes.

More likely, there would be referenda to amend the states’ constitutions, and I’m not convinced there would be the support to do so… I feel most people who were against gay marriage 10 years ago, consider it a settled issue and have moved on. It’s not like with Roe, where the abortion debate raged continuously.

[Le duke]

I don’t think it would be politically prudent to make legislation banning gay marriage. It would put vulnerable politicians who could usually skirt around the issue in the “bad” position of actually going on record one way or the other with their votes.
More likely, there would be referenda to amend the states’ constitutions, and I’m not convinced there would be the support to do so… I feel most people who were against gay marriage 10 years ago, consider it a settled issue and have moved on. It’s not like with Roe, where the abortion debate raged continuously.

Support for gay marriage has dropped 15% among Republicans in the last year.
Turns out, stirring up hatred against the trans community may have affected how people feel about gay marriage.

https://www.newsweek.com/americans-less-accepting-same-sex-relationships-poll-shows-1807422?amp=1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DJT]

8 minutes ago, Le duke said:

 

The vast majority of the weapons we’re sending them have already been paid for, are beyond their shelf life, and are contractually required to be destroyed. They are being destroyed, but instead of that being done in the US, they are being used against Russian forces. Their replacement costs were allocated before the war in Ukraine began.

We’re also getting priceless research and data from/on Russian weapons systems. Data we could not get without our systems being used in Ukraine.

So, “unchecked spending” is a bit of a misnomer. Obama and Trump’s budgets paid for these weapons.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

They aren’t using the “replacement cost” of arms being ascent to Ukraine when coming up with their allocations. They are using a depreciated cost. That’s how they “found” another $20 billion or whatever a little while back due to an accounting “error” that did use the replacement cost. Every $10 billion in arms we send Ukraine will cost us $25 billion or more to replace, given full value of replacement, inflation, expedited production and current high labor costs.

It sounds like you’re justifying children getting stolen from Ukraine so we can “priceless research and data from/on Russian weapons systems”.

[Le duke]

They aren’t using the “replacement cost” of arms being ascent to Ukraine when coming up with their allocations. They are using a depreciated cost. That’s how they “found” another $20 billion or whatever a little while back due to an accounting “error” that did use the replacement cost. Every $10 billion in arms we send Ukraine will cost us $25 billion or more to replace, given full value of replacement, inflation, expedited production and current high labor costs.
It sounds like you’re justifying children getting stolen from Ukraine so we can “priceless research and data from/on Russian weapons systems”.

We were already replacing them whether we used them or not. That’s the point. They have to be used or destroyed; they have a shelf life. Again, their replacements were paid for years ago.

Also, it’s weird how you seem to be so against the US DOD taking advantage of the situation to improve its ability to protect America.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DJT]

1 minute ago, Le duke said:

 

 

Support for gay marriage has dropped 15% among Republicans in the last year.
Turns out, stirring up hatred against the trans community may have affected how people feel about gay marriage.

https://www.newsweek.com/americans-less-accepting-same-sex-relationships-poll-shows-1807422?amp=1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

That 49% of republican support and 78% of independent support is why you wouldn’t see any legislation. Anyone in a slightly purple district would get toasted, and their colleagues likely wouldn’t put them in that position.

I’m not going to argue about the trans topic. It was discussed ad nauseam, and ended with a two week ban hammer courtesy of Uncle Bob.

[Le duke]

That 49% of republican support and 78% of independent support is why you wouldn’t see any legislation. Anyone in a slightly purple district would get toasted, and their colleagues likely wouldn’t put them in that position.
I’m not going to argue about the trans topic. It was discussed ad nauseam, and ended with a two week ban hammer courtesy of Uncle Bob.

The point is that was a national poll. Individual Republican congressman from purple districts? Probably not going for it. State legislatures are an entirely different story.

Deep red states like Florida would jump into action immediately if Meatball clicked his white-booted heels together three times, after a theoretical overturn of Obergefell.

Correction: Gay marriage is still banned by Florida law. It’s just superseded by a SCOTUS decision.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[VakAttack]

9 minutes ago, DJT said:

That 49% of republican support and 78% of independent support is why you wouldn’t see any legislation. Anyone in a slightly purple district would get toasted, and their colleagues likely wouldn’t put them in that position

This was literally the same argument about abortion rights and yet, here we sit.