2 2
yobnoc

Impeach the MotherF%@KER!

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Wendy,

One great fix IMO would to eliminate the party(s) system.  But, it ain't gonna happen.

Jerry Baumchen

I have often thought thought collating the states into regions may be a fix.  I haven't spent a great amount of time with that idea, nor have I spent a lot of time trying to figure out actual districts, super counties, or Provinces - whatever they would be called.

I think it would be worth creating a model of, though.

Yes - I get that this is a climate map - but it would be interesting to see what an election cycle, with an electoral college for each region would end up looking like.

Image result for regions of US

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Turtle, your map got me to wondering. Is the US just plain too big, diverse, and populous to effectively be governed by a single government? I realize that some folks want to return to an era when diversity wasn't really allowed, but that's not going to happen. 

With the platforms of social media and other internet-based broadcasting, all these differing opinions can be made known. Reducing the size of the governmental entities tries to bring some commonality back to them. When you look at the EU, it recognizes far more diversity among its member states than the US does; there's a lot of history and Supreme Court decisions that got us here, but maybe "here" isn't ideal for actual people.

Wendy P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, headoverheels said:

I don't totally agree with "none."  Certainly Trump was handed a good and growing economy, but his deficit spending did and does provide some stimulus. 

And he has also been doing his damnedest to torpedo the economy with his tariff idiocy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wmw999 said:

 

With the platforms of social media and other internet-based broadcasting, all these differing opinions can be made known. Reducing the size of the governmental entities tries to bring some commonality back to them. When you look at the EU, it recognizes far more diversity among its member states than the US does; there's a lot of history and Supreme Court decisions that got us here, but maybe "here" isn't ideal for actual people.

Wendy P.

they gave up that possibility when the civil war ended the era of states rights.  the electoral system is what needs to go first.  i have heard the argument that it stops a few cities from deciding the elections, but that is bullshit.  at least the ACTUAL CITIZENS get to decide if they scrap it, the way it is now, it moves the decision to a few states and puts it in the hands of PEOPLE WHO AREN'T EVEN PICKED BY US!!.  where is the outrage there?  mostly nullified by good propaganda put out by the republicans.  pro tip:  if major corporations want something bad enough to give money to politicians, you probably don't want to let it happen if you are protecting the interests of the PEOPLE, as they should be.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wmw999 said:

Turtle, your map got me to wondering. Is the US just plain too big, diverse, and populous to effectively be governed by a single government?

 

 . . . . but maybe "here" isn't ideal for actual people.

Wendy P.

That was my general interrogative, or wonderment, or curiosity; Whatever you want to call it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, ryoder said:

And he has also been doing his damnedest to torpedo the economy with his tariff idiocy.

Don't forget his pressure on the Fed to lower interest rates. 

Great way for him to pay less on all the money he owes. 
But it is also a great way to create inflation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, normiss said:

Sure was nice of Obama to hand him such a well running economy machine.

 

Well That Sir is BS.  Obama came into office with some serious financial issues, Housing Market crashing, Dot Com companies going to shit.  He didn't do much to pull US out of that...he did some stupid shit like the ACA and the Billion plus dollars spent on a WEB Site that didn't work.  Obama was the only President in History to never see economic growth above 3%...how did he put it to the American people...Hey, dudes, get use to the "NEW NORMAL".  Yea 2% was the new normal.  Trump is seeing 3% and on occasion a bit higher than 3%. 

Obama's spent more of his time curing perceived social injustices rather than promoting economic growth.  Trump at the end of 2017 convinced Congress to cut income taxes for all Americans...which I'm sure helped you and yours.  Trump has spent a great deal of time reversing many of Obama's counterproductive regulations.  Doing so is a BIG REASON little fellas like myself are seeing the benefits in our pockets.  Yes sir...in 2019 my wife and I combined made more in interest on our life savings than I made in 2019.  That there is WINNING.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
15 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Don't worry a recession is coming. I am sure you will find a way to blame it on Democrats.

Ahhhh NOOOO!!  Unlike most people I live in Real Vel...however you wish to spell it.  Financial Markets operate much like a Clock.  There are periods of Growth and their are periods of Down Turns.  Dollar Cost Averaging is where the magic happens.  There is no escaping down turns in any economy...like any life cycle there is New Birth and there is Death...well more like slowing down.  But I will say when it comes to DEMs they seem to have issues with Pronouns???

OHH...recessions only truly happen to individuals who wish to participate in one....but they do happen.

Edited by Channman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Channman said:

Obama was the only President in History to never see economic growth above 3%...

How about doing a little research before making a statement like that?

- Nixon (1969-74), 2.8%

- Ford (1975-76), 2.6%

- G. H. W. Bush (1989-92), 2.3%

- G. W. Bush (2001-08), 2.1%

- Truman (1946-52), 1.7%

And that is just post-WWII!

Source: https://www.hudson.org/research/12714-economic-growth-by-president

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Channman said:

.recessions only truly happen to individuals who wish to participate in one

Sound financial advice. Don't want a recession just post on facebook that you do not wish to participate!

 

45 minutes ago, Channman said:

Unlike most people I live in Real Vel.

right.....whatever that means.

Share this post


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

Obama's spent more of his time curing perceived social injustices rather than promoting economic growth.  Trump at the end of 2017 convinced Congress to cut income taxes for all Americans...which I'm sure helped you and yours.  Trump has spent a great deal of time reversing many of Obama's counterproductive regulations.  Doing so is a BIG REASON little fellas like myself are seeing the benefits in our pockets. 

Trump's economy is marginally better than the path it was on.  A path overseen by a President who worked to make sure those who were on the brink of losing it all in a terrible economy didn't entirely capsize.  Please take a closer look at the example you're making of one President who you say only did things to negatively affect the economy and one who you say has done all these tremendous things to improve the economy and relate it to economic and job growth.

Share this post


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

Well That Sir is BS.  Obama came into office with some serious financial issues, Housing Market crashing, Dot Com companies going to shit.  He didn't do much to pull US out of that..

?? He, in fact, did pull the US out of that.  For proof of that, look at the country's GDP.  For the first year we saw the fallout of the Bush recession, with negative GDP numbers.  After that we saw it go positive and average around 2%.  So is Trump - he's averaging around 2% as well.   Meanwhile, yes, Trump did have a 3.2% quarter.  Obama had a 4% quarter.  So, if you believe that the president has a direct effect on the economy, Obama did far better (at his best) than Trump has ever done.  Trump can't hold a candle to Obama in terms of GDP growth.

Quote

Obama's spent more of his time curing perceived social injustices rather than promoting economic growth.  Trump at the end of 2017 convinced Congress to cut income taxes for all Americans...which I'm sure helped you and yours.

Any president who spends all his time cutting taxes and racking up record levels of debt while ignoring issues of justice, foreign affairs, environmental protection, education and fiscal responsibility is a shortsighted fool.  Period.

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi folks,

I'm wondering if the knives are coming out.

Re:  'Mitt makes his move'

 

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/27/romney-trial-impeachment-senate-trump-107171

It will be interesting to see how far it goes.

Jerry Baumchen

PBS is reporting there are 51 votes for witnesses.

Doesn't mean the republicans will do anything with that, but it might be an opening or a foot in the door.

It appears the evidence is more than there, up to the republicans and what legacy they choose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, normiss said:

It appears the evidence is more than there

More than there?  What does that mean?  I always thought that something is either there or it isn't.  Is this a four-dimensional concept like a tesseract?  Where is this 4th dimension to find such evidence - it sounds complex, would we be able to experience it, to understand it?

 

8-cell-simple.gif

220px-8-cell.gif

 

(sorry, I just couldn't help myself)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

It will be interesting to see how far it goes.

What is so interesting to me, is how so few are paying proper credit to Pelosi's manipulation of the candidates and their availability to make it to what is considered the most important venue in election politics.

Why is that do you think?

Why is it that someone can abuse their power with something like an impeachment, and it's just given a pass with so few raising concerns?

I think its going about as well as it can for the democrats.

The distractions are working to get Biden a larger margin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

2 2