Monoxide

The Trump Presidency (take 2)

122,898 posts in this topic

31 minutes ago, ♒Sn4tteRBoxXeR♒ said:

What are your thoughts on him being a spoiler for either party?

He's wholly inconsequential. I could imagine him losing the Dem primary in New York against the right candidate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, GEORGIAfan said:

The baby wants to do it in front of Congress. Pelosi already offered him the ability to do it in the Oval Office and to just send a written SOTU to the house. 

 

5b88e5e82000007e0937af90.jpeg?cache=yell

He's right. This isn't over yet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Psychic Gibbon said:

lmao these ******* morons still think the GOP is anything but this

What the **** is she supposed to say? 

 

I'm not defending her in any way whatsoever but seriously..... What is she supposed to say? This seems dumb. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jpowers said:

What the **** is she supposed to say? 

 

I'm not defending her in any way whatsoever but seriously..... What is she supposed to say? This seems dumb. 

She could say nothing. Calls for the GOP to be better or for 'better elements' to take it back are just obnoxious at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, WhenFalconsWin said:

There will be a SOTU

It's too bad Donald already smeared the luster of an Oval Office speech with that word spew from a couple weeks ago. That's going to make the SOTU soooo very anticlimactic.

You will tell me all about it, though? Such a sweet lad!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jpowers said:

What the **** is she supposed to say? 

 

I'm not defending her in any way whatsoever but seriously..... What is she supposed to say? This seems dumb. 

It's not what she has to say, it's what they have to hear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Psychic Gibbon said:

She could say nothing. Calls for the GOP to be better or for 'better elements' to take it back are just obnoxious at this point.

Or in a conference of mayor's from around the country she could reach out and at least give the appearance of being non partisan.

 

My God the horror!!!! 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jpowers said:

Or in a conference of mayor's from around the country she could reach out and at least give the appearance of being non partisan.

 

My God the horror!!!! 

 

 

 

I'm sure they care as much as Democrats do when Republicans call for bipartisanship these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kicker said:

This argument is so disingenuous it’s maddening.  That the middle class being riddled with taxes while the rich skate free is a LIE.  

Post WWII tax code actually expanded and increased taxes on the middle and lower class.  Since 1986 the effective tax rate (federal) is lower than it was in 1958.  

The 91% tax rate mentioned by liberals is silly.  In 1958, less than 10,000 filers out of 45.8mm total filers fell into the 91% bracket.  That represents .02% of all filers.    

 

First of all, who will get hit by a 70% tax rate at $10MM in earned income?  The vast majority of people who make that much money control how they receive it.  It’s basically lotto winners and professional athletes.  The guy that owns a company and the company makes $10 million won’t take that money as earned income.  He’ll take it as an equity distribution and pay 25% capital gains.  In fact a few scenarios suggest tax revenues would fall as people made an effort to shelter their earnings...just like they did by in 1958...

But but but...this is how the left is going to pay for everything 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Psychic Gibbon said:

I'm sure they care as much as Democrats do when Republicans call for bipartisanship these days.

And it is never going to be about them. If she goes around sounding like you want her to she will never reach the voters you want her to. 

 

 

At a conference for mayor's from around the country she criticized the President while also displaying just a touch of bipartisanship and you criticize her for it. It's just stupid dude. It's a dumb thing to criticize her for. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jpowers said:

And it is never going to be about them. If she goes around sounding like you want her to she will never reach the voters you want her to. 

 

 

At a conference for mayor's from around the country she criticized the President while also displaying just a touch of bipartisanship and you criticize her for it. It's just stupid dude. It's a dumb thing to criticize her for. 

Indeed. It's a completely pointless endeavor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JayOzOne said:

It's too bad Donald already smeared the luster of an Oval Office speech with that word spew from a couple weeks ago. That's going to make the SOTU soooo very anticlimactic.

You will tell me all about it, though? Such a sweet lad!

Who gives a flying **** where the SOTU speech is given from? Most of them are anti-climatic before they even start.  I didn't think you were new to this thing called politics.  At least Trump and Pelosi are keeping politics less boring these days. The Dems putting Nancy back as speaker of House was akin to voting Marion Barry back as Mayor after he got caught on video, then arrested for smoking crack. Some people never learn from their mistakes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now