2266
Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration
« on: November 17, 2020, 06:47:21 PM »try toYawn.I can only give you facts.
I can’t make you think.
If only Ward would give us facts.
Pay attention to a conversation you butted in on.
Escape from Elba
- June 27, 2024, 09:20:42 PM
- Welcome, Guest
News:
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pay attention to a conversation you butted in on.
2267
Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration
« on: November 17, 2020, 06:22:01 PM »Yawn.I can only give you facts.
I can’t make you think.
2268
Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration
« on: November 17, 2020, 05:49:03 PM »To raise your taxes.LOL!
Only if any tax hike is agreeable to the GOP.
Maybe you missed some key takeaways from the election.
Democrats won the aggregate 2018 midterms in the House by 7 points. They lost half that margin this year. Instead of Pelosi’s promised double digit gain her party could LOSE 14 seats. Pelosi’s caucus lead is so fragile she is telling Biden not to tap democrat legislators for administration jobs. They owe their problems ,according to CNN exit polls, to associations with a range of unpopular issues from defunding the police to raising taxes, ending fracking and opening up borders.
And if the Georgia run-off elections don’t deliver two Senate seats to the Dems then Mitch McConnell will have a lot to say about any tax hike that will pass Senate muster.
2269
Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration
« on: November 17, 2020, 04:12:05 PM »What mandate is that?If Biden's lead expands 68348 votes from where CNN has it now, he'll have doubled Clinton's lead over Trump in popular vote.
79 million people have spoken.
Trump defeated AGAIN and by nearly double the votes.
This is Biden's country and he has his mandate to govern.
2270
Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration
« on: November 16, 2020, 07:50:23 PM »Nope.The precedent set by the Clinton Administration in the contested 2000 election is that to ascertain an apparent President-Elect there would need to be a concession—which has not yet occurred in 2020—or no more legitimate continuing legal challenges—which has not yet occurred in 2020.LOL!Every member of the Senate GOP caucus declined invitations to appear on "Meet the Press" this Sunday, according to the show's host Chuck Todd.
“We invited every single Republican senator to appear on Meet the Press this morning. They all declined," said Todd on Sunday's show.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5-q90QaV5Q
Pretty wild!
You would think they did not want to be put on the spot about the presidential succession and Trump's refusal to allow the transition to move forward.
Or about COVID-19 and the administrations refusal to even attempt to address the immediate situation.
Two vaccines possibly by summer is NO attempt?
And under the Constitution there is no President Elect, yet.
You can't read.
And the term is "apparent winner," Ward. Keep up. It's in the law as well as in the contract which I provided.
According to Congressional intent and past precedent set by President Clinton, as of today, there is no apparent President-Elect.
YOU might want to keep up.
You're out of date.
In 2000, there was no apparent winner. for a long time.
In 2010, they redid the law.
In 2020, there is an apparent winner, even according to Trump.
Ask Hillary.
Never mind , you already agreed with her
2271
Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration
« on: November 16, 2020, 07:00:35 PM »The precedent set by the Clinton Administration in the contested 2000 election is that to ascertain an apparent President-Elect there would need to be a concession—which has not yet occurred in 2020—or no more legitimate continuing legal challenges—which has not yet occurred in 2020.LOL!Every member of the Senate GOP caucus declined invitations to appear on "Meet the Press" this Sunday, according to the show's host Chuck Todd.
“We invited every single Republican senator to appear on Meet the Press this morning. They all declined," said Todd on Sunday's show.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5-q90QaV5Q
Pretty wild!
You would think they did not want to be put on the spot about the presidential succession and Trump's refusal to allow the transition to move forward.
Or about COVID-19 and the administrations refusal to even attempt to address the immediate situation.
Two vaccines possibly by summer is NO attempt?
And under the Constitution there is no President Elect, yet.
You can't read.
And the term is "apparent winner," Ward. Keep up. It's in the law as well as in the contract which I provided.
According to Congressional intent and past precedent set by President Clinton, as of today, there is no apparent President-Elect.
YOU might want to keep up.
2272
Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration
« on: November 16, 2020, 06:32:32 PM »LOL!Every member of the Senate GOP caucus declined invitations to appear on "Meet the Press" this Sunday, according to the show's host Chuck Todd.
“We invited every single Republican senator to appear on Meet the Press this morning. They all declined," said Todd on Sunday's show.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5-q90QaV5Q
Pretty wild!
You would think they did not want to be put on the spot about the presidential succession and Trump's refusal to allow the transition to move forward.
Or about COVID-19 and the administrations refusal to even attempt to address the immediate situation.
Two vaccines possibly by summer is NO attempt?
And under the Constitution there is no President Elect, yet.
2273
Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration
« on: November 16, 2020, 12:47:30 PM »LOL!LOL!LOL!
Far Right conspiracy nuts, tweeting madly, are not evidence. Except of The Cult of the Sore Loser.
Where oh where did they get that idea?
From Far Right conspiracy nuts, tweeting madly, would be one strong hypothesis. They don't call them "echo chambers" for nothing.
2274
Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration
« on: November 16, 2020, 11:22:53 AM »LOL!
Far Right conspiracy nuts, tweeting madly, are not evidence. Except of The Cult of the Sore Loser.
Where oh where did they get that idea?
2275
Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration
« on: November 15, 2020, 07:48:52 PM »LOL!Both parties do it, pal.
Dems had boatloads of cash available - spent it on shit candidates - and one big one that seems to have squeaked by.
Squeaked by? Closer to a blowout actually. 306 EV and 76.5Mil PV
2276
Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration
« on: November 14, 2020, 08:25:00 PM »
Looks like the mob of DC dem denizens ignored Joe and Kamala’s call for healing.
2277
Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration
« on: November 14, 2020, 12:34:05 AM »Vis-a-vis Mr Yang's unoriginal idea of moving en masse to Georgia and the article from last month, I think, about the bears of Grafton, NH...LOL!
I have espoused for years the notion of a couple hundred thousand liberals moving to Montana or some such place and changing the state.
It's based on the Free State Project New Hampshire:
https://www.fsp.org/
I think it was a couple years ago that I commented on the paucity of Libertarian Party and Green Party members occupying even state legislature seats anywhere in the country, but that FSP members had landed more seats in the last decade (then) alone than the Libertarians and Greens combined in their entire histories.
It is a far more powerful model.
With the involvement of Misters Bloomberg, Gates, and Soros, though, I am pretty sure I am dreaming small.
How hard would it be for each of them to basically acquire sufficient land in each of several "red" states and plop down a university with a high tech firm or two affiliated for the purpose of luring workers to a new place, ripe for shaping?!
A city of 100-150,000 would spring up around them, if they did it right, allowing, among other things, laboratory schools for educational experimentation (which Bill should eat up) and so much more! Want to try alternative governance in a controlled experiment?! Different policing models? Housing models?
And in the process, changing those red states for purple, if not blue, forever.
It might also return hope to some of the residents and reverse the declining lifespans of their despairing citizenry.
2278
Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration
« on: November 13, 2020, 10:52:16 PM »Might want to re-read my post.
It is illegal — a felony, in fact — to move to Georgia solely with the intention of voting, and not to establish a permanent residence.
It is also illegal to vote in a Georgia runoff if you have already voted in a Senate race in the general election in another state.
If Yang and his family move to Georgia for the sole purpose of voting in the runoff elections and have cast votes in previous Senate race then they are pretty stupid.
But then, Yang is a partisan politician.
You have no idea whether Yang would establish permanent residence there or not nor whether or for whom he voted in his prior Senate race this year.
Meaningless response illustrating my point.
Meaningless in the sense your response never acknowledged my post.
Pretty sad for a “ global moderator” LOL!
2279
Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration
« on: November 13, 2020, 10:49:12 PM »My, my. Such an educated vocabulary for a teacher.
Go ahead
Prove me wrong.
Nobody can prove anything to you, shithead.
2280
Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration
« on: November 13, 2020, 10:40:15 PM »Might want to re-read my post.
It is illegal — a felony, in fact — to move to Georgia solely with the intention of voting, and not to establish a permanent residence.
It is also illegal to vote in a Georgia runoff if you have already voted in a Senate race in the general election in another state.
If Yang and his family move to Georgia for the sole purpose of voting in the runoff elections and have cast votes in previous Senate race then they are pretty stupid.
But then, Yang is a partisan politician.
You have no idea whether Yang would establish permanent residence there or not nor whether or for whom he voted in his prior Senate race this year.