Trump Administration Predictions (4 Viewers)

I fail to see a cause of action here,
Attempting to make Harris sound intelligent is the equivalent of a campaign contribution (notice that moke agreed on this point). What if 60 Minutes did a puff piece but billed it as such? They didn't though. Instead, it is billed as "news" and that is a lie. It is not news. It is 60 Minutes making Harris look intelligent and that makes it an undeclared campaign contribution. Same as the the people who came and performed at her rallies. They were all paid. Even Oprah's interview was a campaign contribution - undeclared. What do you think Harris spend that half billion dollars on in 6 weeks?
Am I glad he pointed it out to the world, to show what an idiot Harris was? Sure, of course, and that's about where it should have ended.
If Trump hadn't sued 60 Minutes, do you think the story would have garnered a single second of air time? Don't kid yourself. The lawsuit was absolutely necessary just to make the point. I believe that for this one, the proceeds go to charity if Trump wins the suit. Trump will not personally pocket the money.
 
I've heard Trump speak. He is boring and repetitive and vague as are most politicians. Fox should have warned Trump up front to be succinct or he would spend his allotted 15 minutes on 2 questions. Then they wouldn't feel forced to edit him (although he sure needs an editor). Without comparing the tape with the transcript, I can't say anything else regarding the edits.
 
Someone needs to make a complaint OR your former "Fixer" testifies someone committed a crime, OR a news source reports that someone committed a crime. There are many ways a case gets started.
That was your comment.
 
That was your comment.
How does a snark comment on how a case may get started translate into I agree with you that "Attempting to make Harris sound intelligent is the equivalent of a campaign contribution "?

It's no wonder you're so misinformed.
 
If we can't question science then it's not really science is it?
defunding is not questioning, firing scientist that don't bow down to the White house is not questioning. surely you see that. I know you think that the climate is unefected by human activity, and you would have us stop all research, you've said that before.
 
I agree, but I would’ve settled for the truth. For example, COVID had a high survival rate without vaccines for almost everyone, except for a small group of immunocompromised people. The other 90% didn’t need to do anything.
Still, losing 10% is a pretty steep price.

The beginning of Covid gave rise to the level of panic. It spread through Italy in weeks and left many dead. that was before anyone knew how vulnerable the old folks were, or how vulnerable the general population would be.

That set the stage. And then there is the normal level of political culture in America, where the opposite side are all children killing monsters or else they are gun toting monsters.

It was a recipe for disaster.
 
"
I don't disagree with the problems in dealing with Covid. I disagree with extrapolating that out until we have people in this country that don't think we need science.

You said it yourself, science in allied with the left. That is pure brainwashing."

The problem with your extrapolation, is that you made an incorrect assumption. No one thinks we don't need real science but some of us do believe we do not need pseudo and politically guided fake science. Maybe you should review the whole COVID fiasco yet again so you can see who was making stuff up and who wasn't. Oh, that's right. Every time you do, your TDS blinds you so you never see how flawed the original model was. You know, the one that said there would be a 10% mortality rate which sent the whole world into a tailspin, ruined countless lives, put people out of work and bankrupted families and many small businesses. Kept small children out of school which not only retarded their learning but also their social skills. Kept high school seniors from their proms. Forced our elderly to die hopelessly alone in nursing homes. etc. etc. etc. The death rate turned out to be approximately that of a bad flu season so the whole 3 year fiasco was for NOTHING. NOTHING. NOTHING. And no one has apologized. You bought the whole thing. Hook, line, and sinker. YOU were a sucker because of your TDS disease. COVID was bad for Trump so it must be real. Now, where did I leave that useless mask?

Looks like Trump has put a science bulldog in charge of the FDA and so we are FINALLY removing petroleum based food dies from our children's diets. True, Froot Loops won't be as enticing without the bright colors, but at least we won't be ingesting daily doses of petroleum. Hopefully, RFK, Jr. can also get them to reduce the sugar content as well.

And we are FINALLY going to go back to actual testing for vaccines rather than the FDA just waving their hand to approve them.
your savior is running the scientist out of the country, and in an earlier post you praised him and said it would raise the collective IQ of America.
He is on the offensive against higher education, one of the hallmarks our great nation, because they all see him for what he is, a bullying, New York conman that has 60 million people bamboozled . And he must have his revenge no matter the cost.
 
Courts don't just look around for cases to prosecute. Someone needs to make a complaint. Duh! AG's don't just look around for cases to prosecute either unless their campaign platform is to "get" someone. Someone needs to make a complaint. If no one reports that a crime has been committed, the justice department doesn't get involved.
Don't talk to me like I'm stupid. We are discussing Trump forcing CBS to bow to his whims by having control over the merger.
 
Not true. you are doing the Conservative Extrapolation Dance, it's very similar the the Monster Mash.
Misdirection to avoid answering: "In common we need affordable health care." How to you propose solving that concern?
 
Attempting to make Harris sound intelligent is the equivalent of a campaign contribution (notice that moke agreed on this point). What if 60 Minutes did a puff piece but billed it as such? They didn't though. Instead, it is billed as "news" and that is a lie. It is not news. It is 60 Minutes making Harris look intelligent and that makes it an undeclared campaign contribution. Same as the the people who came and performed at her rallies. They were all paid. Even Oprah's interview was a campaign contribution - undeclared. What do you think Harris spend that half billion dollars on in 6 weeks?

If Trump hadn't sued 60 Minutes, do you think the story would have garnered a single second of air time? Don't kid yourself. The lawsuit was absolutely necessary just to make the point. I believe that for this one, the proceeds go to charity if Trump wins the suit. Trump will not personally pocket the money.

All the people on all sides who are claiming that random acts of helpfulness to a campaign must be considered a campaign contribution, I'd challenge them to 1) stop doing that, and 2) show me where the law states that's the case.

Does every restaurant manager who gives Trump a comfortable seat and the best hostess and an especially tasty ice cream dish they are making a campaign contribution? shouldn't they report it? Why stop there? Why not include the birds who didn't poop on his head?

It was ridiculous in the Stormy case and it is ridiculous on the other side too.
 
He is on the offensive against higher education
Now this I am glad for. Many if not most universities have become breeding grounds for the stupidest kind of nonsense imaginable and are thus turning out people who ... well, I think we've all met them, I don't need to go into it. They are grinding out sausage all of one kind and destroying the common sense the country used to have.

In a worst case scenario (I'm not saying this is what I prefer, I'm just saying if this was the worst case that did occur), our American universities lose some of their prestige (which at LEAST half the country already viewed them in this lower manner, or at least viewed their results) - but we turn young people back to earning technical degrees and working, rather than studying gibberish that has nothing to do with real life - that'll be a boon IMO
 
How does a snark comment on how a case may get started translate into I agree with you that "Attempting to make Harris sound intelligent is the equivalent of a campaign contribution "?
Because, that would have been your first comment if the civil case had no merit. Seems that Trump recently upped the dollar value of the damages. You may not think what 60 Minutes did constituted a campaign violation but you do seem to think that what Fox did does constitute a campaign finance violation. So be clear please. Which is it? Also scuttlebutt is the DOJ is looking at criminal charges.

Thales thinks that judges or AG's are the only people who get to file lawsuits. You didn't correct him though, did you? At the moment, the case is civil, not criminal but that could change.
 
Misdirection to avoid answering: "In common we need affordable health care." How to you propose solving that concern?
You wont like it and you will call me an idiot once again. So why bother?

Ultimately though, as robots and Ai take over every income producing activity in the world, other than return on investment. Either we will have a massive die off, or investors will pay all of the taxes. it's coming one way or the other. work now to preserve the middle class or wake up dead. because they wont need slaves, actual or indentured.
That part is certain.
You say increase taxes causes inflation. it certainly can, but it also drives down demand, which tends to balance out. the same way high gas prices tend to balance. Too high and people stop going places. that causes downward pressure on pricing.

The current health care bill in the US is 4.9 trillion per year.

In 2023, the United States spent $4.9 trillion on healthcare, which is about $14,570 per person. This represents 17.6% of the nation's Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

In Fiscal Year 2022 (FY22), the U.S. federal government collected $4.9 trillion in revenue and spent $6.3 trillion, resulting in a deficit of $1.4 trillion. This deficit represented 5.5% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Total revenues were 19.6% of GDP, while total expenditures were 25.1% of GDP.

these are interesting figures. What do they tell us? Think about that first part.

Part 2
Larger health insurance pools, where more people are included, generally lead to lower premiums. This is because a larger pool allows for the costs of high-risk individuals to be spread over a wider group, including those who are younger and healthier, who generally incur fewer medical expenses. This sharing of risk helps to stabilize premiums and make them more affordable for everyone.

Add to that standardizing of cost across the country (allowances made for local cost of living in different regions) makes it simpler and and less expansive.

if we move to a Universal Health Care we will gain efficiencies and reduce the burden of being poor . including the working poor, which even conservatives should have empathy for. if we did this, it would improve the lives of the working poor without creating wage competition based inflation, which is the biggest cause if real circular inflation. Not government borrowing. like trickle down folks have been preaching for decades.

At least it wasn't as long as the dollar remains the global reserve currency backed by oil.

Final answer, all indicators point to massive savings by switching to Universal health Care including a reduction in inflationary pressures.
obviously there is a lot more. but that is a start.
 
Still, losing 10% is a pretty steep price.
Yet again, you have no concept of the actual mortality rate. it was something like .0019 (bad flu season) NOT .1 which was predicted and this comes out to be 50 times LESS deadly than was estimated. We don't shut down the world every fall when flu season rolls around and we never should have shut down the world for COVID. Very early on it was clear what population was in jeopardy and those people could have been isolated as best as possible. That would have caused a crisis in the nursing homes and assisted living facilities around the country which already have a problem keeping sufficient staff to care for the patients. Our national guard helps out in many different disaster situations, they could have helped with this. They are young and healthy and in very little danger of COVID. Keeping sick people out of the homes would have been the optimal solution and isolating those patients who became ill or moving them to a different facility could have reduced the mortality rate but no one even thought of it. Instead Faucci lied about the efficacy of masks and didn't make clear that the young and healthy (children) were in almost no danger at all. Then they made up truly stupid rules. You can't even make this stuff up. Apparently you are in deadly danger in a restaurant while standing and so MUST wear your mask at all times. However, if you are sitting, it's OK to take it off. Only an actual idiot would think this makes any sense at all.
We are discussing Trump forcing CBS to bow to his whims by having control over the merger.
No, we are talking about Trump seeing an act that was intended to interfere with his election campaign and prevent him from being elected President. His only recourse was making a civil claim for damages. It had nothing to do with the merger and Trump is donating the money and so will not benefit from the settlement. If Harris is lucky she and her campaign won't end up facing criminal charges.
Does every restaurant manager who gives Trump a comfortable seat and the best hostess and an especially tasty ice cream dish they are making a campaign contribution?
No. Giving him preferential seating has nothing to do with other people's opinion of him or his opponent so it would not interfere with the election. Making Harris look less dumb on TV is equivalent to running an ad recommending her for President. Third parties make campaign ads supporting "their" candidate all the time but everyone KNOWS they are campaign ads. The 60 Minutes piece was masquerading as actual news. That is very different. If they had labeled the piece "paid for by 60 Minutes for Harris", then there would have been no issue at all. No hidden agenda. No crime.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

  • Back
    Top Bottom