Jump to content

Featured Replies

2 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

Because politics requires leverage and compromise.  Dems were desperate to help our ally not get steamrolled by a fascist dictator so they dropped the whole citizenship for dreamers stuff and let the Republicans get literally everything they had been asking for.  In a different circumstance (especially if there were a Republican president), the Dems would have absolutely no reason to compromise with Republicans.  Pretending like politics happen in a vacuum and circumstances don't change based on power structures is fantasyland kids stuff, which is why it's not surprising that the right embraces that line of thinking every time.

You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. Dude, people posted what was in the bill pages ago. Go read it, midwit. :lol: 

Jesus Christ, conversing with a brick wall is more productive. :roll: 

  • Replies 6.1k
  • Views 119.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • It's not that complicated to figure out what needs to be done, but neither side is willing to do them. 1. End all benefits for Illegals -- no more drivers licenses, no welfare, no Obamacare, etc.

  • The border has been a catastrophe for 20+ years now, and seemingly no one in Washington is willing to actually address the problems. Republicans talk tough and use 7th century solutions (and still som

  • LOL. You idiots let your wives have political opinions. 

Posted Images

Also hilarious how van just said it's not possible for an EO to help the border when Biden repealed successful EOs Trump used to keep numbers down. I mean, there isn't anything so stupid and easily disprovable that he won't say it? 

Narrator: No.

5 minutes ago, Kz! said:

You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. Dude, people posted what was in the bill pages ago. Go read it, midwit. :lol: 

Jesus Christ, conversing with a brick wall is more productive. :roll: 

I've read it, dumb-a**.  I suggest you actually read the words in the bills instead of reading it through Benny and Catturd's filter.

Again, it's exactly what Republicans wanted.  It completely left out everything the Dems had been asking for and replaced with foreign aid to help our ally push a fascist invader out of their country.  The trade off was worth it to the Dems and Republicans still shot it down despite the protests from their own party.

Hey guys, EO's can be repealed! Who knew?

1 minute ago, VanHammersly said:

I've read it, dumb-a**.  I suggest you actually read the words in the bills instead of reading it through Benny and Catturd's filter.

Again, it's exactly what Republicans wanted.  It completely left out everything the Dems had been asking for and replaced with foreign aid to help our ally push a fascist invader out of their country.  The trade off was worth it to the Dems and Republicans still shot it down despite the protests from their own party.

Nope, you didn't read it and republicans didn't want it. You're a moron. :lol: 

Just now, Kz! said:

Nope, you didn't read it and republicans didn't want it. You're a moron. :lol: 

Yeah, I did.  Seriously, read the actual text instead what this total alpha said about it

FsLcWXgWAAAUYkW.png

Just now, VanHammersly said:

Yeah, I did.  Seriously, read the actual text instead what this total alpha said about it

FsLcWXgWAAAUYkW.png

I'm getting van to claim that he read a 370 page "border" bill on here. :lol: 

4 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

Yeah, I did.  Seriously, read the actual text instead what this total alpha said about it

FsLcWXgWAAAUYkW.png

So yesterday he was upset about tariffs he admitted he didn't understand or know if he actualy wanted, and today he seems upset you can read? He must really be going through something.

13 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

So yesterday he was upset about tariffs he admitted he didn't understand or know if he actualy wanted, and today he seems upset you can read? He must really be going through something.

Haha, you're going to pretend van read a 370 page piece of legislation because you're both male liberals. Betas gotta stick together. :lol: 

Speaking of the tariffs, and since you're very well-versed on the impact, did Trump's "trade war" tariffs have a negative impact?

7 minutes ago, Kz! said:

Haha, you're going to pretend van read a 370 page piece of legislation because you're both male liberals. Betas gotta stick together. :lol: 

Speaking of the tariffs, and since you're very well-versed on the impact, did Trump's "trade war" tariffs have a negative impact?

Do your own research.

Just now, Boogyman said:

Do your own research.

:lol: 

"He doesn't know anything about tariffs herrderr"

OK, what is your opinion on them? 

"Do your own research."

Male liberals really are something. I have to stop taking the bait. The estrogen levels in this one are just too high. :lol: 

1 minute ago, Kz! said:

:lol: 

"He doesn't know anything about tariffs herrderr"

OK, what is your opinion on them? 

"Do your own research."

Male liberals really are something. I have to stop taking the bait. The estrogen levels in this one are just too high. :lol: 

You still haven't answered that same question from yesterday even though you have been going nonstop about it for days now lmao. 

14 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

You still haven't answered that same question from yesterday even though you have been going nonstop about it for days now lmao. 

What, my opinion of tariffs? I've already said I'm fine with them. Now your turn, do you support Trump's "trade war" tariffs with China from his time in office?

1 minute ago, Kz! said:

What, my opinion of tariffs? I've already said I'm fine with them. Now your turn, do you support Trump's "trade war" tariffs from his time in office?

 

You support the thing you said you didn't fully understand? Why, because a fat orange guy told you to? Seems legit. 

 

I don't support any new tariffs, no. I don't want to pay any more more things than I need to. And subsidizing farmers to not grow things seems idiotic. 

Just now, Boogyman said:

 

You support the thing you said you didn't fully understand? Why, because a fat orange guy told you to? Seems legit. 

 

I don't support any new tariffs, no. I don't want to pay any more more things than I need to. And subsidizing farmers to not grow things seems idiotic. 

I said yesterday that I generally support Trump's efforts at bolstering US manufacturing and leveling the playing field for US businesses. No, I don't fully understand the economic consequences of complex issues like placing a new 10% tariff on imported goods. Neither do you. These are things that are studied by economists who devote their professional lives to researching the subject and making projections about potential consequences and a lot of times they're still wrong.

I know you said that you don't want new tariffs, but, again, were you supportive of Trump's trade war tariffs against China during his term?

Just now, Kz! said:

I said yesterday that I generally support Trump's efforts at bolstering US manufacturing and leveling the playing field for US businesses. No, I don't fully understand the economic consequences of complex issues like placing a new 10% tariff on imported goods. Neither do you. These are things that are studied by economists who devote their professional lives to researching the subject and making projections about potential consequences and a lot of times they're still wrong.

I know you said that you don't want new tariffs, but, again, were you supportive of Trump's trade war tariffs against China during his term?

No.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2020/01/21/trump-tariff-aid-to-farmers-cost-more-than-us-nuclear-forces/?sh=415231186c50

 

The Trump administration gave more taxpayer dollars to farmers harmed by the administration’s trade policies than the federal government spends each year building ships for the Navy or maintaining America’s nuclear arsenal, according to a new report. A National Foundation for American Policy analysis concluded the spending on farmers was also higher than the annual budgets of several government agencies. "The amount of money raises questions about the strategy of imposing tariffs and permitting the use of taxpayer money to shield policymakers from the consequences of their actions,” according to the analysis.

4 minutes ago, Kz! said:

One word answer and then a link to an article. Nice.

Do you understand that those tariffs remain in place today? Biden did not repeal them. Do you know why?

He is staying the course set by Trump, hoping China hits its 200 billion commitment to import US goods, which is doubtful any time soon. I think it's a mistake.

21 hours ago, Boogyman said:

I'm sure you are very used to these responses.

From you it's what I expect, I believe it is your max capacity.

1 minute ago, GreenReaper said:

From you it's what I expect, I believe it is your max capacity.

It's the only type of reply you have earned up till now.

 

Are you a clone of seventy yard Fg?  I think you are.

4 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

It's the only type of reply you have earned up till now.

 

Are you a clone of seventy yard Fg?  I think you are.

I could be if he was a member before 2003 but I doubt it.

Just now, GreenReaper said:

I could be if he was a member before 2003 but I doubt it.

So he's your clone? I just find it hard to believe two of you exist. 

Just now, Boogyman said:

So he's your clone? I just find it hard to believe two of you exist. 

I understand, it's really hard to believe that one of you exist.

3 minutes ago, GreenReaper said:

I understand, it's really hard to believe that one of you exist.

There's a first. Maybe you will get on a roll now.

20 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

He is staying the course set by Trump, hoping China hits its 200 billion commitment to import US goods, which is doubtful any time soon. I think it's a mistake.

Right, so obviously there is some strategic benefit to the tariffs. Biden's also stated he has plans to increase tariffs, because it turns out, a lot the electorate like the idea of leveling the playing field for domestic companies. 

Create an account or sign in to comment