Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
 
User avatar
PacificBeach88
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 9:42 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Mon Oct 03, 2016 12:40 am

LMP737 wrote:

For someone who didn't vote for 25 years you certainly vote a lot.



LOL! Busted! Thank you, I thought I was the only one perplexed by his/her/its nonsense.
 
LifelinerOne
Posts: 1677
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:30 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Mon Oct 03, 2016 11:54 am

So, what are you thinking about the upcoming WikiLeaks announcement on Hillary?

Roger Stone is tweeting that Hillary is "done" by Wednesday...

Very curious about this and I'm also interested in what you all find about this. Do you find it foreign intervention? Do you welcome it? For me, personally, WikiLeaks have been proven right often, but I don't like this timing and I'm not sure I'm always convinced Assange is in this for the greater good...

Cheers!
 
rfields5421
Posts: 6374
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Mon Oct 03, 2016 12:28 pm

As much fun as this discussion is, it is sad, and reflects the general public.

We aren't discussing the candidates stands on specific issues, it's all about personality and finding a big 'lie' to derail a campaign.
 
727LOVER
Posts: 8633
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 12:22 am

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Mon Oct 03, 2016 4:42 pm

A Trump official says Hillary's campaign will be DONE, come Wednesday

http://origin-nyi.thehill.com/blogs/bal ... of-clinton
 
LMP737
Posts: 6284
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Mon Oct 03, 2016 4:56 pm

LifelinerOne wrote:
So, what are you thinking about the upcoming WikiLeaks announcement on Hillary?

Roger Stone is tweeting that Hillary is "done" by Wednesday...

Very curious about this and I'm also interested in what you all find about this. Do you find it foreign intervention? Do you welcome it? For me, personally, WikiLeaks have been proven right often, but I don't like this timing and I'm not sure I'm always convinced Assange is in this for the greater good...

Cheers!


I think at this point for Julian Assange its about Julian Assange.
 
afcjets
Posts: 3879
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Mon Oct 03, 2016 5:07 pm

LifelinerOne wrote:
So, what are you thinking about the upcoming WikiLeaks announcement on Hillary?

Roger Stone is tweeting that Hillary is "done" by Wednesday...

Very curious about this and I'm also interested in what you all find about this. Do you find it foreign intervention? Do you welcome it? For me, personally, WikiLeaks have been proven right often, but I don't like this timing and I'm not sure I'm always convinced Assange is in this for the greater good...

Cheers!


I read it was cancelled due to security concerns and that his life had been threatened. I don't blame him after what happened to that guy involved in releasing emails that led to the resignation of the DNC chairwoman right before the convention who IMO was not even being subtle about promoting Hillary over Bernie.
 
User avatar
Kiwirob
Posts: 13755
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Mon Oct 03, 2016 5:20 pm

PacificBeach88 wrote:
No. OTC (over the counter) drugs are legal to advertise in many, many, countries. DTC (direct to the consumer) drugs are ones that require a doctor's prescription. Things like Viagra, Cialis, Lyrica, Celebrex, Chantrix, Avalox, Suboxone, Epi-Pen, etc..... Additionally, many of these drugs have proven no more effective at helping than the 30 to 75 year old drugs they are trying to replace. The new drug cost $1,200 per month (and no, I'm not joking) with the old one that works fine costs $4 per month. But, given the power of advertising patients walk into doctor's offices and specifically ask or demand these drugs. When you're a doctor, and a new drug works just as good or maybe a tiny bit better than the old one, and you have a patient demanding it....docs usually Rx it. Sad, but true.


I'm pretty sure I've seen adverts for viagra and they like in many countries.
 
User avatar
zckls04
Posts: 2785
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 6:55 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Mon Oct 03, 2016 5:27 pm

LifelinerOne wrote:
So, what are you thinking about the upcoming WikiLeaks announcement on Hillary?

Roger Stone is tweeting that Hillary is "done" by Wednesday...

Very curious about this and I'm also interested in what you all find about this. Do you find it foreign intervention? Do you welcome it? For me, personally, WikiLeaks have been proven right often, but I don't like this timing and I'm not sure I'm always convinced Assange is in this for the greater good...

Cheers!


Generally when things come straight from Wikileaks, they turn out to be substantial. If Assange announces them they tend to be a damp squib (or non-existent). But either way, I very much doubt Roger Stone has any idea what this information is, so I suspect that tweet is more in hope than expectation.
 
User avatar
zckls04
Posts: 2785
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 6:55 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Mon Oct 03, 2016 5:34 pm

afcjets wrote:
I read it was cancelled due to security concerns and that his life had been threatened. I don't blame him after what happened to that guy involved in releasing emails that led to the resignation of the DNC chairwoman right before the convention who IMO was not even being subtle about promoting Hillary over Bernie.


Indeed. The DNC's awesome multinational criminal network knows no bounds.

Either that or Assange isn't quite as honest as you think he is.
 
Hillis
Posts: 1307
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:19 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Mon Oct 03, 2016 7:42 pm

LifelinerOne wrote:
So, what are you thinking about the upcoming WikiLeaks announcement on Hillary?

Roger Stone is tweeting that Hillary is "done" by Wednesday...

Very curious about this and I'm also interested in what you all find about this. Do you find it foreign intervention? Do you welcome it? For me, personally, WikiLeaks have been proven right often, but I don't like this timing and I'm not sure I'm always convinced Assange is in this for the greater good...

Cheers!


No announcement, because Assange probably doesn't have anything.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10 ... cerns.html
 
afcjets
Posts: 3879
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Mon Oct 03, 2016 7:54 pm

zckls04 wrote:
afcjets wrote:
I read it was cancelled due to security concerns and that his life had been threatened. I don't blame him after what happened to that guy involved in releasing emails that led to the resignation of the DNC chairwoman right before the convention who IMO was not even being subtle about promoting Hillary over Bernie.


Indeed. The DNC's awesome multinational criminal network knows no bounds.

Either that or Assange isn't quite as honest as you think he is.


More likely just the Clinton Crime Family Foundation :lol: than the DNC, but most likely he might be lying as you say. I had actually never heard of him before.
 
luckyone
Posts: 4156
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Mon Oct 03, 2016 8:02 pm

afcjets wrote:
zckls04 wrote:
afcjets wrote:
I read it was cancelled due to security concerns and that his life had been threatened. I don't blame him after what happened to that guy involved in releasing emails that led to the resignation of the DNC chairwoman right before the convention who IMO was not even being subtle about promoting Hillary over Bernie.


Indeed. The DNC's awesome multinational criminal network knows no bounds.

Either that or Assange isn't quite as honest as you think he is.


More likely just the Clinton Crime Family Foundation :lol: than the DNC, but most likely he might be lying as you say. I had actually never heard of him before.

Have you been living under a rock for the last six or seven years?
 
User avatar
PacificBeach88
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 9:42 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Mon Oct 03, 2016 8:04 pm

Hillis wrote:
No announcement, because Assange probably doesn't have anything.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10 ... cerns.html


Given the Clinton's are bar none, the very best at oppo research. It wouldn't surprise me if they flooded the dark web with 14 metric tons of b.s. "October surprises" just hoping the Russians or turd monger Jullian would try to get the jump on them.

That said, in debate #2 Hillary has at least 2 or 3 new Ms. Universe / Tax issues to go after Trump with.

Also, the NYT has said their contact has more damning evidence about Trump forthcoming in the next 2 to 4 weeks.

Watch this space. LOL! As if Donald really thought he could run and not have every rock overturned.
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 18742
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Mon Oct 03, 2016 8:11 pm

afcjets wrote:
More likely just the Clinton Crime Family Foundation.

Do you have a list of the crimes the Clintons have been charged with?
Last edited by MaverickM11 on Mon Oct 03, 2016 8:36 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
afcjets
Posts: 3879
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Mon Oct 03, 2016 8:17 pm

luckyone wrote:
afcjets wrote:
zckls04 wrote:

Indeed. The DNC's awesome multinational criminal network knows no bounds.

Either that or Assange isn't quite as honest as you think he is.


More likely just the Clinton Crime Family Foundation :lol: than the DNC, but most likely he might be lying as you say. I had actually never heard of him before.

Have you been living under a rock for the last six or seven years?


More like a bubble ;)
 
Hillis
Posts: 1307
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:19 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Mon Oct 03, 2016 8:35 pm

Starting to get the polls after the first debate last week, and it seems Hillary is picking up steam. According to the CNN poll below, she's back up by 5 points.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/03/politics/ ... index.html

A few numbers mystify me. It says that she's cut Trump's lead among men from 22% to 5%, and that she now leads among independents by 7%, where before she was quite a bit behind Trump in that category. Maybe someone else knows better, but is this just some kind of lag in the trend towards Clinton? If she had made up that much ground with those groups, shouldn't she be up by like 15%?

Maybe someone can explain that to me.
 
User avatar
PacificBeach88
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 9:42 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 11:59 am

Ooops....Donald what happened to make America great again?

HOW DONALD TRUMP DITCHED U.S. STEEL WORKERS IN FAVOR OF CHINA


http://www.newsweek.com/how-donald-trum ... ina-505717
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 18742
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 1:47 pm

How 'bout that bombshell from Julian Assange this morning? That was....something.
 
afcjets
Posts: 3879
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 1:49 pm

MaverickM11 wrote:
afcjets wrote:
More likely just the Clinton Crime Family Foundation.

Do you have a list of the crimes the Clintons have been charged with?


I guess this means you don't think Cheney is a war criminal, which surprises me.
 
luckyone
Posts: 4156
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 2:01 pm

Hillis wrote:
A few numbers mystify me. It says that she's cut Trump's lead among men from 22% to 5%, and that she now leads among independents by 7%, where before she was quite a bit behind Trump in that category. Maybe someone else knows better, but is this just some kind of lag in the trend towards Clinton? If she had made up that much ground with those groups, shouldn't she be up by like 15%? Maybe someone can explain that to me.

Most likely that is reflective of how many (or few) men or independents there are compared to total prospective voters and how the rest of the general voting pool dilutes them.
 
User avatar
PacificBeach88
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 9:42 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 2:23 pm

MaverickM11 wrote:
How 'bout that bombshell from Julian Assange this morning? That was....something.


So much for the Breitbart claim that Assange's leak would end Hillary's bid for the White House.

Instead, we just found out Trump has used his foundation to fund his presidential run!!! WTF??!! And Trumpanzees have the gall to say Trump tells the truth? Up is down. Black is white. Trump is honest. Unreal.
 
Hillis
Posts: 1307
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:19 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 2:55 pm

PacificBeach88 wrote:
MaverickM11 wrote:
How 'bout that bombshell from Julian Assange this morning? That was....something.


So much for the Breitbart claim that Assange's leak would end Hillary's bid for the White House.

Instead, we just found out Trump has used his foundation to fund his presidential run!!! WTF??!! And Trumpanzees have the gall to say Trump tells the truth? Up is down. Black is white. Trump is honest. Unreal.


Trumpanzees"? I like that!
 
afcjets
Posts: 3879
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 4:54 pm

Hillis wrote:
PacificBeach88 wrote:
MaverickM11 wrote:
How 'bout that bombshell from Julian Assange this morning? That was....something.


So much for the Breitbart claim that Assange's leak would end Hillary's bid for the White House.

Instead, we just found out Trump has used his foundation to fund his presidential run!!! WTF??!! And Trumpanzees have the gall to say Trump tells the truth? Up is down. Black is white. Trump is honest. Unreal.


Trumpanzees"? I like that!


So do I, we should make it into a t-shirt: "I am a Trumpanze" It might sell as well as "I am one of Hillary's Deplorables"
 
Hillis
Posts: 1307
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:19 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 5:39 pm

Well well, the GOP is trying to back away again from Trump!!

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/04/politics/ ... index.html

Sorry, GOP, but you're intolerance, your ignorance, the despicable way you've treated Barack Obama, his wife and his kids, and the way you've turned from being the "loyal opposition" to something alien to decent Americans, says you're stuck with Trump. You created the Tsunami that gave rise to this Fascist. He's yours, and may you and your party get absolutely gutted in the upcoming election.

You can't create this menace and then say you had nothing to do with it.
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 18742
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 6:48 pm

afcjets wrote:
MaverickM11 wrote:
afcjets wrote:
More likely just the Clinton Crime Family Foundation.

Do you have a list of the crimes the Clintons have been charged with?


I guess this means you don't think Cheney is a war criminal, which surprises me.

Looks like you can't answer the question. What crimes have the Clintons been charged with?
 
afcjets
Posts: 3879
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 6:50 pm

Hillis wrote:
Well well, the GOP is trying to back away again from Trump!!

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/04/politics/ ... index.html

Sorry, GOP, but you're intolerance, your ignorance, the despicable way you've treated Barack Obama, his wife and his kids, and the way you've turned from being the "loyal opposition" to something alien to decent Americans, says you're stuck with Trump. You created the Tsunami that gave rise to this Fascist. He's yours, and may you and your party get absolutely gutted in the upcoming election.

You can't create this menace and then say you had nothing to do with it.


Perhaps the end of the do nothing GOP will mean the US can FINALLY be run like California, Baltimore, and Chicago.
 
afcjets
Posts: 3879
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 7:14 pm

MaverickM11 wrote:
afcjets wrote:
MaverickM11 wrote:
Do you have a list of the crimes the Clintons have been charged with?


I guess this means you don't think Cheney is a war criminal, which surprises me.

Looks like you can't answer the question. What crimes have the Clintons been charged with?


None, the laws don't apply to them.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 11577
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 7:28 pm

afcjets wrote:
None, the laws don't apply to them.

Why?

Tugg
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12832
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 7:42 pm

Endless entertainment the US election, on the other hand, it is really a shame that the US nation of 300m, can't put forward two candidates that are more intelligent and integer then these two. B. Sanders would have been a good candidate for the US. Unfortunately not really populair.

I like the comments of John Oliver, really spot on.
 
wingman
Posts: 4211
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 7:44 pm

afcjets wrote:
None, the laws don't apply to them.


After some 18 investigations and one impeachment trial over the past 20 years, I think what you mean to say is that the charges don't apply. Or if you actually meant what you wrote then you're just deplorably ignorant, otherwise there never would've been the 18 investigations or the impeachment attempt right? What I'd concede to you is that Republicans in Congress don't understand the law and auto excite themselves with endless investigations for political gain and by ignoring the needs of the country.

I'd like to help you if you're open to improving your mind.
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 18742
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 7:47 pm

afcjets wrote:

Perhaps the end of the do nothing GOP will mean the US can FINALLY be run like California, Baltimore, and Chicago.

Oh no not like the booming, world's sixth largest economy Californ-i-a! Better to be run like the republican entrenched inbred, uneducated, dirt poor, religion brain washed, racist, welfare queen states of duh bible belt!

afcjets wrote:
None, the laws don't apply to them.

What should they be charged with then? And if they haven't been charged by now after decades of republican investigations and kangaroo courts, what have they missed that you think will stick? Either the republicans are idiots and can't shoot a fish in a barrel, or there's nothing there. Which is it?
 
afcjets
Posts: 3879
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 8:31 pm

wingman wrote:
afcjets wrote:
None, the laws don't apply to them.


After some 18 investigations and one impeachment trial over the past 20 years, I think what you mean to say is that the charges don't apply. Or if you actually meant what you wrote then you're just deplorably ignorant, otherwise there never would've been the 18 investigations or the impeachment attempt right? What I'd concede to you is that Republicans in Congress don't understand the law and auto excite themselves with endless investigations for political gain and by ignoring the needs of the country.

I'd like to help you if you're open to improving your mind.


First of all I voted for Bill, was against his impeachment, and think Ken Starr indirectly yet unintentionally of course increased the likelihood of 9/11 for investigating whether or not someone lied about a consensual bj when Bill could have instead been focused on bin Laden in his final years as President. Where we disagree is you think some overseas Arab (have the word police determined Arab is now a racist term, it's hard to keep up) truly wanted to pay several hundred thousand dollars to just hear Bill or Hillary speak for an hour, whereas I believe they wanted to influence US policy to their advantage from either SOS Clinton or future president Clinton and I see that as a major threat to national security and precisely why Hillary flip flopped on fracking and sold methane gas around the world.

I should have stated the same laws don't apply to people as powerful as the Clintons as you and me and of course General Petraeus.
Last edited by afcjets on Tue Oct 04, 2016 9:08 pm, edited 3 times in total.
 
afcjets
Posts: 3879
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 8:32 pm

afcjets wrote:
wingman wrote:
afcjets wrote:
None, the laws don't apply to them.


After some 18 investigations and one impeachment trial over the past 20 years, I think what you mean to say is that the charges don't apply. Or if you actually meant what you wrote then you're just deplorably ignorant, otherwise there never would've been the 18 investigations or the impeachment attempt right? What I'd concede to you is that Republicans in Congress don't understand the law and auto excite themselves with endless investigations for political gain and by ignoring the needs of the country.

I'd like to help you if you're open to improving your mind.


First of all I voted for Bill, was against his impeachment, and think Ken Starr indirectly played a part in 9/11 for investigating whether or not someone lied about a consensual bj when Bill could have instead been focused on bin Laden in his final years as President. Where we disagree is you think some overseas Arab (have the word police determined Arab is now a racist term, it's hard to keep up) truly wanted to pay several hundred thousand dollars to just hear Bill or Hillary speak for an hour, whereas I believe they wanted to influence US policy to their advantage from either SOS Clinton or future president Clinton and I see that as a major threat to national security and precisely why Hillary flip flopped on fracking and sold methane gas around the world.

I should have stated the same laws don't apply to the people as powerful as the Clintons as you and me and of course General Petraeus.
Last edited by afcjets on Tue Oct 04, 2016 8:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
luckyone
Posts: 4156
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 8:33 pm

afcjets wrote:
Hillis wrote:
Well well, the GOP is trying to back away again from Trump!!

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/04/politics/ ... index.html

Sorry, GOP, but you're intolerance, your ignorance, the despicable way you've treated Barack Obama, his wife and his kids, and the way you've turned from being the "loyal opposition" to something alien to decent Americans, says you're stuck with Trump. You created the Tsunami that gave rise to this Fascist. He's yours, and may you and your party get absolutely gutted in the upcoming election.

You can't create this menace and then say you had nothing to do with it.


Perhaps the end of the do nothing GOP will mean the US can FINALLY be run like California, Baltimore, and Chicago.

Find me a major metropolitan area whose core city is run by the GOP. Go ahead. I'm waiting...(yes I already know the answer).
Now, find me the list of major cities who have non-GOP members running the show.

The cities you've mentioned have their problems like every other city out there. Being run by a Democrat isn't the cause.
 
Hillis
Posts: 1307
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:19 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 9:01 pm

I'd like to see the U.S run like California and Minnesota, to be honest. Economies there are humming.
 
User avatar
PacificBeach88
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 9:42 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Tue Oct 04, 2016 9:18 pm

Hillis wrote:
I'd like to see the U.S run like California and Minnesota, to be honest. Economies there are humming.


Yup. As a VP here in MN we are struggling to find qualified people to fill jobs that pay $55,000 to $115,000 per year. It's hard. Right now the unemployment rate here in Minneapolis is only 3.5% and has been that low for a couple of years now. I manage a team of 19 people and if I want to fill a position I need to plan on at least 2, if not 3, strong candidates to fill a position. I usually lose 1/2 because they have other offers. In the Twin Cities it's a worker's market.

http://www.newrichmond-news.com/news/re ... 35-percent
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3698
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:28 am

Hillis wrote:
I'd like to see the U.S run like California and Minnesota, to be honest. Economies there are humming.


It's anything but humming. The core structure of the economy - the long-term outlook - isn't encouraging. We're living off the booming past, and we're slowly being led into decline. One big reason is we're being taxed to death. Businesses and individuals are staying away.
 
Hillis
Posts: 1307
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:19 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Wed Oct 05, 2016 1:11 am

MSPNWA wrote:
Hillis wrote:
I'd like to see the U.S run like California and Minnesota, to be honest. Economies there are humming.


It's anything but humming. The core structure of the economy - the long-term outlook - isn't encouraging. We're living off the booming past, and we're slowly being led into decline. One big reason is we're being taxed to death. Businesses and individuals are staying away.


The past wasn't "booming" in either place I mentioned. Get your facts straight. Both Minesota and California's current governor's inherited a state in debt. Both now have surpluses. Both have raised taxes on the wealthy, lowered them on the poor and middle class, have invested in education and unlike states with Trickle-Down "experiments", like Kansas, Alabama, Louisiana, etc, they're in great shape.

You need to get out of your cocoon more often and into the real world.
 
LMP737
Posts: 6284
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Wed Oct 05, 2016 7:48 am

afcjets wrote:

Perhaps the end of the do nothing GOP will mean the US can FINALLY be run like California, Baltimore, and Chicago.


Or we could have the GOP win it all and the US can finally be run like Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas etc. See, two can play that game.
 
jpetekyxmd80
Posts: 4333
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2003 3:16 am

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:33 am

afcjets wrote:
Perhaps the end of the do nothing GOP will mean the US can FINALLY be run like California, Baltimore, and Chicago.


The whole mayor thing is just about the lamest and most useless political argument going around right now.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 11577
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Wed Oct 05, 2016 3:31 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
Hillis wrote:
I'd like to see the U.S run like California and Minnesota, to be honest. Economies there are humming.


It's anything but humming. The core structure of the economy - the long-term outlook - isn't encouraging. We're living off the booming past, and we're slowly being led into decline. One big reason is we're being taxed to death. Businesses and individuals are staying away.

The "booming past"? You mean when taxes were higher? Hint: They are lower now than anytime since the 1920's:
Image

Interesting read: http://www.businessinsider.com/history-of-tax-rates

And in the past, when the debt increased, we wisely increased taxes to attack it and address it. And the times we reduced taxes recently our debt increased. And to me as a Republican that is wrong and it is ridiculous to think doing the same thing again would improve the situation. (what is Einstein's definition of insanity?). And don't tell me we just need to reduce spending as that simply has not happened and it won't realistically happen so imaging, pretending it will as your justification to lower taxes is silly (again, insanity anyone?). And take a look at the debt during those "boom times" that Reagan brought us and that is what people using to say "lowering taxes will allow business to grow and taxes will increase due to more people working and paying more, it will be glorious!".
Image

Tugg
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3698
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Wed Oct 05, 2016 4:33 pm

Hillis wrote:
The past wasn't "booming" in either place I mentioned. Get your facts straight. Both Minesota and California's current governor's inherited a state in debt. Both now have surpluses. Both have raised taxes on the wealthy, lowered them on the poor and middle class, have invested in education and unlike states with Trickle-Down "experiments", like Kansas, Alabama, Louisiana, etc, they're in great shape.

You need to get out of your cocoon more often and into the real world.


Typical. Can't reply with facts, so you resort to personal attacks. I live in a cocoon known as Minnesota. And I've lived in areas of that cocoon that aren't glitz and glamour.

You brought up short-term economic issues. The long-term outlook among most factors is average to well below. One reason for that is high taxes hindering business investment and high-income residency in the state. We're still living off of previous booms and an affluent, hard-working populous. Those factors can't/won't stop a long-term decline due to poor policy. There's no meat left on the bones known as hours worked or relevant education, and now we're in a slow decline. Tax and spend isn't working. Forced income equality isn't working. And economic theory says it never will.

Tugger wrote:
The "booming past"? You mean when taxes were higher? Hint: They are lower now than anytime since the 1920's:


The discussion is about Minnesota, not the entire country....
 
afcjets
Posts: 3879
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Wed Oct 05, 2016 4:53 pm

jpetekyxmd80 wrote:
afcjets wrote:
Perhaps the end of the do nothing GOP will mean the US can FINALLY be run like California, Baltimore, and Chicago.

The whole mayor thing is just about the lamest and most useless political argument going around right now.


Who is the mayor of California?

It's not a mayor thing, it's about where Democrats have no opposition.
 
bmacleod
Posts: 2990
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 3:10 am

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Wed Oct 05, 2016 5:39 pm

How Trump is able to keep his support with these "bombshell" revelations is beyond me....

http://fortune.com/2016/10/03/donald-trump-apprentice-sexually-demeaning/
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 14949
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Wed Oct 05, 2016 5:51 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
Tax and spend isn't working. Forced income equality isn't working. And economic theory says it never will.


What economic theory ? There are plenty of those. Even proponents of the same ones disagree on many aspects.

Usually for a theory to be proven, it has to work.
 
Hillis
Posts: 1307
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:19 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Wed Oct 05, 2016 5:53 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
Typical. Can't reply with facts, so you resort to personal attacks. I live in a cocoon known as Minnesota. And I've lived in areas of that cocoon that aren't glitz and glamour.

You brought up short-term economic issues. The long-term outlook among most factors is average to well below. One reason for that is high taxes hindering business investment and high-income residency in the state. We're still living off of previous booms and an affluent, hard-working populous. Those factors can't/won't stop a long-term decline due to poor policy. There's no meat left on the bones known as hours worked or relevant education, and now we're in a slow decline. Tax and spend isn't working. Forced income equality isn't working. And economic theory says it never will.


Personal attacks? All I said is you're wrapped in a right-wing cocoon, which, from my view, is correct. But if you want "facts", take a look at this, comparing tax-and-invest Minnesota with Wisconsin, and the second one is the disaster that Trickle Down has been for Kansas. Now, you can deny these facts at your peril, but they're the truth.

http://lacrossetribune.com/news/opinion ... d634d.html

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opin ... olumn.html
 
User avatar
PacificBeach88
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 9:42 pm

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Wed Oct 05, 2016 7:22 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
Typical. Can't reply with facts, so you resort to personal attacks. I live in a cocoon known as Minnesota. And I've lived in areas of that cocoon that aren't glitz and glamour.


You didn't post any "facts", you posted your right wing fantasy theory. You didn't even provide any links or statistics. Minnesota has been adding about 10,000 jobs per month this year.

http://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/t ... c-snapshot
 
salttee
Posts: 3149
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:26 am

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Wed Oct 05, 2016 7:36 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
You brought up short-term economic issues.

He brought up economic fact (aka arithmetic.)
You bring up talk radio philosophy.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24175
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Fri Oct 07, 2016 4:19 am

ual777 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
ual777 wrote:

Case in point above. I don't mean anyone with a (D) next to their name. I mean the extremely vocal kind that I outlined above.


Right. That means anyone who does not tow the tea party "patriot" line to the letter. See: John McCain, Susan Collins, Arizona Republic just to name a few.


Where on earth did I say that? This is what I'm talking about.


We just drove 300 miles one way because the brosband wanted a new puppy. Long story. That is why the long delay.

There is this mind trick the right does. When anyone disagrees with the majority thinking, they are a RINO or a "liberal" America hater. The tea people tolerate John McCain because he has an (R) behind his name and he picked Sarah Palin for VP. The tea sector makes up the platform of the Republican party. There is no room for people like "Log Cabin Republicans" and atheists. As soon as someone questions the tea sector, they are shouted down and called all sorts of nasty names.

Remember Democrats were willing to welcome McCain with open arms and have worked with Susan Collins on many occasions. Hence, they are despised by the tea faction who controls the Republican party.

And, no, it is not "well Democrats do it too." It is not even close by a long shot. So don't even try.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3698
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Updates on the US election: Who is more likely to win?

Fri Oct 07, 2016 9:32 am

Aesma wrote:
What economic theory ? There are plenty of those. Even proponents of the same ones disagree on many aspects.

Usually for a theory to be proven, it has to work.


Forced income equality is a nice way of saying socialism. And we know that doesn't work due to economic theory and historical evidence. It goes against the very basis of human nature. And history has proven it never leads to prosperity. Sadly many "economists" let their political leanings cloud their thinking.

Hillis wrote:
Personal attacks? All I said is you're wrapped in a right-wing cocoon, which, from my view, is correct. But if you want "facts", take a look at this, comparing tax-and-invest Minnesota with Wisconsin, and the second one is the disaster that Trickle Down has been for Kansas. Now, you can deny these facts at your peril, but they're the truth.

http://lacrossetribune.com/news/opinion ... d634d.html

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opin ... olumn.html


"All I said" was ad hominem attack. That's strike one. And now you think biased opinion pieces that focus on a short-term snapshot and have no clue about economic theory or long-term factors are a good source for research? I'd have flunked out of economics school with that tactic. Strike two. You have one left.

Here's some real stats about the mediocre status of the MN economy--not opinion pieces with obvious agendas:

http://2lffqo2moysixpyb349z0bj6.wpengin ... conomy.pdf

salttee wrote:
He brought up economic fact (aka arithmetic.)
You bring up talk radio philosophy.


I brought up solid economic theory. Data without proper economic theory is useless research.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 23 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos