Has Donald Trump Killed the So-Called Republican Party?

Jump to Last Post 1-2 of 2 discussions (169 posts)
  1. My Esoteric profile image88
    My Esotericposted 12 months ago

    In my opinion, yes - the Republican Party no-longer exists today even though Trump followers incorrectly refer to themselves as Republicans.

    Let me open this discussion with a short tutorial of the Republican Party (now keep in mind, the Party title has no bearing on the Party philosophy and any given point in history).

    The first time Republican was used to refer to a political party at the national level was in the 1790s when Jefferson and Madison formed the Democratic-Republican Party (it was aka Jeffersonian Republicans along with a few other names). 

    Around 1820, this party split into the Democratic Party (the one we know today but with a very conservative philosophy) and the much more liberal Whig Party.

    Around 1860,  the anti-slavery factions of the Whig and Democratic parties joined forces and created the Republican Party in order to elect Abraham Lincoln.  The more conservative pro-slavery elements of the Whigs joined their like-minded brothers in the Democratic Party.  By and large, the Republicans took liberal positions while the Democratic Party championed conservative pro-slavery sentiments.

    For the most part, this is the way things stood until the election of FDR in 1934.  At this point, Democrats became more liberal while the Republicans became more conservative.  This migration continued until the reversal was complete by 1994 when conservatives dominated the Republican Party and liberals dominated the Democratic Party. 

    This lasted until 2016 with the advent of Trump and Trumpism.  From 2016 until today, the Republican Party quickly forgot what it stood for as it rapidly became the party of Trump, which brings us to today and this question.

    What are called Republicans today do not hold conservative values anymore and certainly do not hold liberal values - instead, they hold Trump values such as the Big Lie, destabilizing democracy, and fomenting discontent and revolution.

    On Saturday, Sept 18, the Republicans are going to hold a rally (which police and DHS think will turn violent) to comfort and succor to the 600+ people arrested for violently assaulting police, invading the Capitol, making our elected representatives go into hiding to save their lives, and stopping the function of government.  By definition, that is called insurrection.

    In my opinion, what we knew as the Republican Party died on Jan 6, 2021.

    1. wilderness profile image94
      wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      It is so fascinating seeing people assigning values and beliefs to people they know nothing about.  Claiming that the Republican Party, and Republicans in general,  hold values such as "Big Lie, destabilizing democracy, and fomenting discontent and revolution" is about as true as Democrats and the Democrat party hold values such as "abortion until the fetus is outside the womb", "no American should own a firearm", and "any illegal aliens that can get across the border should become American citizens". 

      Both are taking the radical fringe and apply their values to the rest of the party, and both statements are foolish in the extreme.  Neither is anywhere near reality, any more than the statement that "Republicans" are holding the rally today and implying it is backed and supported by the Republican Party or even Republicans in general.

      (By the way, if "stopping the function of government" is an "insurrection" then those Democrats leaving the state from local legislatures are also an "insurrection", for that is exactly what they were intended to do.)

      1. My Esoteric profile image88
        My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        "  Claiming that the Republican Party, and Republicans in general,  hold values such as "Big Lie, destabilizing democracy, and fomenting discontent and revolution"" - Then I guess you have been ignoring all the polls where the VAST majority of Republicans think Trump, lol, won the election and believe his Big Lie.  Since they do, it follows directly that they "destabilizing democracy, and fomenting discontent and revolution"" since that is the logical conclusion from Trump's activities. See how simple that is to understand?

        "Both are taking the radical fringe and apply their values to the rest of the party," - So, are you saying that the vast majority of House and Senate Republicans are extremists and don't represent today's so-called Republican Party?  Interesting theory

        "stopping the function of government" is an "insurrection"..." - I can understand how you might think that if you don't know the elements of the crime of insurrection.  So, to edjumacate you, Insurrection is to incite, assist in or engage in a full-on rebellion against the government: a step beyond just conspiring against it, and requiring that significant violence be involved..  Now show me how the Democrats who didn't go to work in Texas satisfy those elements of proof.

        1. wilderness profile image94
          wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          I cannot consider a few rioters, even accompanied with some adrenaline junkies, armed only with clubs and pepper spray, as a "full-on rebellion against the government".  No reasonable person could.

          As far as those Democrats in Texas, I used your definition of people "stopping the function of government".  Was that definition then completely false?

          1. My Esoteric profile image88
            My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            There you go with that ridiculous "few" again.  Given there were more than a 1,000 there whose very violent actions led to the death of several policemen from their assault on them tells everybody your sense of perspective does not exist.  I think it is a good thing the insurrectionists weren't black instead of white racists - there would have been dozens of dead bodies laying around instead of one white women climbing through a window attempting to harm or kill congress people.

            Bottom line, no reasonable person would not consider that an insurrection and the polls back me up on this. 

            "It definitely qualifies as a riot although there is a big partisan split over whether you can call it an insurrection. But few say what happened at the U.S. Capitol on January 6th was a legitimate protest, according to the Monmouth (“Mon-muth”) University Poll.

            "Just 33%, though, say calling it a “legitimate protest” is appropriate." - that would be you and the rest of the Trumpers.

            "87% of Democrats, 67% of independents, and 62% of Republicans say the word ("riot") is an apt description

            "but there is a wide gap for applying “insurrection” to the event – ranging from 85% of Democrats to 48% of independents and just 33% of Republicans who feel the term is appropriate. "  - That is a whole lot of "unreasonable" people who think what happened on Jan 6th was an insurrection. 

            You don't need to say it (because you won't) but you stand corrected. LOL.

            Also, this is another reason why I think my opinion that the Republican Party is defunct - "When they’re asked who “the true President is right now,” most Republicans say it’s Trump. And more than 30 percent of Republicans reject a basic premise of democracy: that “the loser in an election must concede defeat.” - How can you have a legitimate American political party where that many reject democracy?+=

            https://slate.com/news-and-politics/202 … polls.html

            1. Sharlee01 profile image82
              Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

              "There you go with that ridiculous "few" again.  Given there were more than 1,000 there whose very violent actions led to the death of several policemen from their assault on them tells everybody your sense of perspective does not exist."

              There you go again making claims that more than one police officer died due to being at the Jan 6th, 2021 Protest

              List of those that died due to participating in the protest.

              Call what happened at the Capitolanything you please, but keep your facts clear when it comes to those that died on that day.

              "• Ashli Babbitt, 35, died by homicide from a gunshot to the left shoulder. She was shot by a Capitol police officer while trying to climb through a door near the House chamber.

              • Kevin Greeson, 55, died of natural causes from cardiovascular disease. Greeson, of Athens, Alabama, had a Twitter account in which he supported former President Donald Trump and profanely denounced his opponents.

              • Benjamin Phillips, 50, died of natural causes from cardiovascular disease. According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, Phillips of Ringtown, Pennsylvania, was a computer programmer who founded a social media website for Trump supporters. He had organized a trip of several dozen people to the district.

              • Roseanne Boyland, 34, died by accident from acute amphetamine intoxication. Boyland, of Georgia, wanted to be a sobriety counselor and followed QAnon conspiracies, her family said.
              https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol … 128040002/

              Brian Sicknick, a United States Capitol Police officer, died on January 7, 2021, the day after he responded to the storming of the Capitol. He was pepper-sprayed during the riot, and had two thromboembolic strokes the next day,[1][2] after which he was placed on life support,[3] and soon died.[4][5] The District of Columbia chief medical examiner found that Sicknick had died from stroke, classifying his death as natural, whereby a death is "not hastened by an injury",[6] and additionally commented that "all that transpired played a role in his condition."[7][8] His body lay in honor in the Capitol Rotunda, before his cremated remains were buried with full honors at Arlington National Cemetery.[9]   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Brian_Sicknick

              I would think you are referring to the four officers that unfortunately committed in the last few months. This although sad,  there is no evidence that these officer's deaths resulted from being on duty that day.

              "It is not clear if the events of Jan. 6 contributed to the officers' suicides, and research shows that law enforcement officers experience stressors as a regular part of the job and can struggle with mental health issues."
              https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/officer … d=79238300

              https://www.policechiefmagazine.org/the … ollection/

              1. My Esoteric profile image88
                My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                "There you go again making claims that more than one police officer died due to being at the Jan 6th, 2021 Protest" - I think the count is five, so far.  One as a result of the physical assault on him, and four others from PTSD they suffered from the extreme violence at the hands of Republican rioters.
                https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/02/3rd-pol … p-mob.html

                Claiming that the police suicides are not related to Jan 6 is like claiming the soldier suicides from PTSD are not related to their service in Iraq or Afghanistan.

                1. Sharlee01 profile image82
                  Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  You have absolutely no way of knowing what caused these police officers to commit suicide.  We have no information on the physical health or phycological health of these men. I love how you just assume you know why these men committed suicide.

                  Let's stick to facts... Did any of the police that had to put up with true violence last summer kill themselves?  They were battered nightly with violent rioters.  Can I assume if any killed themselves it was the fault of the Democrats that were out there nightly physically fighting with the officers, throwing all kinds of projectiles at them? For months, not hours...

                  Get real!

                  1. My Esoteric profile image88
                    My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    Unlike you, I can connect the obvious dots.  Most thinking Americans can and have come to the same conclusion.

                    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/pu … story.html

                    And it seems to me it was the police doing most of the battering of peaceful protestors during the summer.

                    From Fake Fox News, during the summer of protests over the police murder of George Floyd and many other unarmed black people, there were -

                    8,700 protests nationwide

                    547 were declared riots (note, none were declared insurrections)

                    Only 7% of protests were considered violent

                    Unlike the Jan 6 insurrection, "In most cases, the criminal acts were the work of individuals or small groups that infiltrated larger demonstrations,"  While the 1000+ insurrectionists were part of a much larger protest, many of them acted in coordination and with pre-planning.

                    Now, the article does say over 2,000 police officers were injured over the summer, but it didn't say how many were hurt by rioters and how many were hurt while beating peaceful protesters.  But let's say, for the sake of argument, all 2,000 were at the hands of rioters that would mean, on average, .2 officers were hurt per protest and not the 140+ on Jan 6.  Or, if you want to limit the denominator to just riots, then a whopping 3.6 officers were hurt per riot.

                    Also, how many times at these riots were police under violent attack by actual rioters bigger in number than they were for 5 hours straight?  NONE.

                    Further, not one of the protestors or rioters were there at the behest of any Democrat - they were protesting the murders of black people by police.  On the other hand, the people at the Capitol were there for only one reason, to overturn a free and fair election.
                    So, I am sticking to the FACTS while you draw false equivalencies.


                    A whopping big difference between the false equivalency you are failing to draw.

                    https://www.policemag.com/585160/more-t … -and-riots

                2. Valeant profile image88
                  Valeantposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  'Claiming that the police suicides are not related to Jan 6 is like claiming the soldier suicides from PTSD are not related to their service in Iraq or Afghanistan.'

                  Exactly.  To see it in any other way is to deny reality.

                  1. Sharlee01 profile image82
                    Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    Are you aware of how many police officers commit suicide in the US?
                    I am not aware why these officers committed suicide, and I would venture to say -- neither are you. There are studies that show the profession does have a high risk of suicide.

                    https://www.addictioncenter.com/news/20 … rofession/

                  2. My Esoteric profile image88
                    My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    Denying reality is what Trump and his defenders/supporters are masters at.

                    Consider that interviewee from the rally in support of the insurrection yesterday where the interviewee denied there was any violence on Jan 6 and asked for proof.  When the reporter showed videos of the violence, the interviewee denied what they were seeing was violence.  Sounds like a few of the commenters on this and other forums.

                    https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2021/09/1 … nr-vpx.cnn

                    That is exactly why the Republican Party is dying.  The Democrats ought to wise up and take former Republicans like Liz Cheney into the party to form the conservative wing.  Or, since that probably won't happen, people like her and Sen Murkowski and Sen Collins, and Sen Flake ought to form a new party that holds to real principals rather than fealty to Trump.

    2. Sharlee01 profile image82
      Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

      'What are called Republicans today do not hold conservative values anymore and certainly do not hold liberal values - instead, they hold Trump values such as the Big Lie, destabilizing democracy, and fomenting discontent and revolution."

      That statement in my view is your opinion... The Republican party is alive and well. Yes, the party is evolving to a more progressive demanding party. Partly because over the past 5 years we have witnessed such foolishness, we are no longer willing or stomach the crap Democrats dish up daily. 

      The American's that will march tomorrow have the right to protest. Are they willing to fight for their cause?-- maybe.  . But, when a crowd marches on our Capitol, t would be smart to take note. This country is divided. I personally blame the Democratic party for much of what is occurring. 

      " (which police and DHS think will turn violent)"  You totally listen and believe anything the left media report. After all the crazy things they claimed and said about Trump, and all were proven to be untrue--- you still buy into this crap. Amazing. One would think you would at some
      point see how destructive all this media BS is.

      Move on --- we have lots of news today ---  More unnecessary deaths in Afghanistan, due to a drone strike that Biden ordered -- which killed at least a dozen innocent people 7 of which were children. Biden has blood on his hands, and he needs to be removed immediately.  Once again he proved he is unintelligent and dangerous. And I am being kind...

      Forget Trump you got a very problematic president that is presently in the White House. Like I said the other day --- what next?

      1. My Esoteric profile image88
        My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        "That statement in my view is your opinion... " - Yes, it is my opinion - but it is based on observable, undeniable fact.

        Saying that the Republican Party is alive and well is simply your opinion not based on observable, undeniable facts.

        I would talk about Biden having "blood on his hands" until you go through the long litany of examples of where Trump (and by association, the Trump Party) is drenched in it.

        "You totally listen and believe anything the left media report." - No, I believe what DHS reports.  But yes, I also believe what mainstream media reports as well because they have a long, well established history of telling the truth.

        I am not going to listen to your admonishes about Biden and unnecessary deaths in Afghanistan until you admit Trump is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths in America.  Until then, you are just being unfairly partisan.

        I am sorry, what MSM source do you have that Biden personally ordered that drone strike?  You know as well as I do that that is simply a lie.

        Overall, Biden is doing a great job - Trump hardly ever did.

        "After all the crazy things they claimed and said about Trump, and all were proven to be untrue" - [i]That, obviously, is a figment of your imagination.  What crazy and untrue things did they make up themselves about Trump? Now, I am talking about real journalists.  Not those fake opinion-makers on OAN, Brietbart, FakeFox, New Day, NewsMax, etc.


        "And I am being kind..." - I am sorry, but you actually appear to be delusional and living in Trump's fantasy world of make-believe where he won the election.

        1. Ken Burgess profile image84
          Ken Burgessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          I fail to see how Biden is doing a great job.

          Nor do I see the Democratic Majority in Congress getting anything done.

          The country needs leadership, fresh ideas, a positive outlook to the future... conviction not the compromise to corporate corruption like we have today.

          We were supposed to have a Green New Deal... that helped propel America into a New Age of Renewable Energy and Zero Carbon vehicles.

          We are supposed to have an Infrastructure Bill that “Would make the largest investment in clean energy transmission in American history, modernizing our power grid to accelerate the build-out of zero-carbon, renewable energy. It would replace thousands of gas-guzzling buses with clean, electric ones, including 35,000 electric school buses. It would cap abandoned wells leaking methane gas,” Biden bragged in an op-ed published a couple weeks back.

          The House legislation made room for more than 500,000 electric vehicle charging stations to put towards Biden’s wish that “rural and disadvantaged communities” could “get passenger vehicles off the road and reduce fossil fuel consumption.”

          The proposal calls for $160 billion to fund subsidies and purchase incentives, and incentives to electrify heavy-duty commercial fleets.

          I am waiting to see if they are going to accomplish it... or if it will be just another political show of finger pointing and blame game, where none of the promises get done... and what is passed only feeds the rich, at the expense of the poor, much like the ACA preyed on the Working Class, making them pay through the nose for insurance that covered next to nothing, while enriching the Insurance Companies and Pharmaceutical giants.

          1. My Esoteric profile image88
            My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            "I fail to see how Biden is doing a great job." - Of course you don't, you have BDS and are quite myopic as demonstrated by your frequent comments in defense of Trump and the terrible job he did.

            "We were supposed to have a Green New Deal... " - No we weren't. Why? Because most Democrats don't buy into it, Biden certainly doesn't

            "We are supposed to have an Infrastructure Bill " - Why didn't you write, at this point in Trump's presidency that "We are supposed to have a Tax Cut for the wealthy Bill".  You didn't, now why are you now?  Could it be BDS?  BTW, to be precise like a few other commenters here love to do, we DO have the infrastructure bill, two of them.  They just haven't passed.

            " much like the ACA preyed on the Working Class," - BTW, that "working class" you mention - they love ACA today now that they see how it really works and have gotten past the Republican propaganda campaign against it.

        2. Sharlee01 profile image82
          Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

          "I would talk about Biden having "blood on his hands" until you go through the long litany of examples of where Trump (and by association, the Trump Party) is drenched in it."

          Trump is not president... Biden is. this obsession of yours is very much noted.  Biden is piling up one disaster after another. One of the worst being people dying due to his inability to make sound decisions. Not sure how anyone could defend this man.

          "I am sorry, what MSM source do you have that Biden personally ordered that drone strike?  You know as well as I do that that is simply a lie."

          Really A LIE?  You frequently refer to me as promoting lies... It would more appear that when you dislike a fact, you write it off as a lie...

          The Commander and Cheif are responsible for the Military it has been reported that Biden ordered the strike. by the AP... Not sure who you feel ordered the drone attack? Perhaps Rough Milley?

          "WASHINGTON (AP) — Acting swiftly on President Joe Biden’s promise to retaliate for the deadly suicide bombing at Kabul airport, the U.S. military said it used a drone strike to kill a member of the Islamic State group’s Afghanistan affiliate Saturday.

          The strike came amid what the White House called indications that IS planned to strike again as the U.S.-led evacuation from Kabul airport moved into its final days. Biden has set Tuesday as his deadline for completing the exit.

          BIDEN AUTHORIZED THE DRONE STRIKE and it was ordered by Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, a defense official said, speaking on condition of anonymity to provide details not yet publicly announced.

          Source AP ---  https://apnews.com/article/asia-pacific … 527e421226

          We will disagree on Biden's job performance. He daily has new problems occurring, most of his own making.  And in regard to being delusional --- it would seem once again you dispute a fact due to just not wanting to accept the truth. Biden ordered a drone attack that killed 7 children. And I shudder to think where Milley got his tip that terrorists were in the car they blew up. Did that man take information from his newfound friends in the Taliban?  I see he will be questioned in the coming weeks. It will be interesting to hear what he has to share.  I will venture he was very much involved in the flawed session making that has caused such a disaster in Afghanistan.  Biden left so many behind, and now, reports are leaking out of so many being systematically killed by the Taliban.

          Biden has disgraced America...  HE GAVE THE ORDER. The bottom line is his blame game is over in my book.  He is the guy that has made one bad decision after another.

          While he continues to ignore all of the messes he made ---
          American's have taken notices. He refuses to take responsibility for the border, Afghanistan, the failing economy,  COVID raging, and his poor Foreign policies, his infrastructure bill being held hostage by Pelosi.  His poor ability to problem solve is evident.  Like I said it's hard to keep up with all the problems Biden is causing. 

          Then there is this... Another lie out of the Biden Ad.
          "White House accused of scrubbing Macron criticism of Biden from the official transcript of Afghanistan call"  "The White House has been accused of omitting French president Emmanuel Macron’s scathing remarks from an official press communication on US president Joe Biden’s handling of the humanitarian crisis unfolding in Afghanistan.

          The document, carrying a statement from a call between the presidents on 19 August, was released by both the governments,"

          "The statement released by the French government, however, said Mr Macron reminded Mr Biden of the “collective moral responsibility” towards Afghan men and women.

          It added that Mr Macron “underscored the absolute need for swift, concrete coordination between the allies to ensure the evacuation of our citizens, Afghan men and women who worked for the allies, and those who are in danger.”

          “We cannot abandon them,” it added."

          https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl … 07078.html
          https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl … Biden.html

          Then there is this --- https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/09/17 … tical-news
          Furious Over Sub Deal, France Recalls Ambassadors to the U.S. ...

          Then there is this bit of ugly --- A liberal judge bit Old Joe in the butt. LOL

          Judge orders Biden administration to stop expelling migrant families using Trump-era Title 42 policy

          "WASHINGTON – A judge on Thursday ordered the Biden administration to stop expelling migrant families with children under a public health policy that allows migrants to be turned away from the United States to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in holding facilities.

          The order was issued by District Judge Emmet Sullivan of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Sullivan's ruling will take effect in 14 days."

          And it all just gets worse at the border daily...

          1. My Esoteric profile image88
            My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            "Trump is not president... " - What difference does that make?  Trump was president when he was responsible for all those deaths yet I didn't see you complaining then.  Why are you complaining now?

            "Not sure how anyone could defend this man." - In the same way you defend Trump with the difference being Biden is very defensible

            "it has been reported that Biden ordered the strike." - Probably FakeFox News lying again.  If you would read REAL news then you would have known "“As the combatant commander, I am fully responsible for this strike and its tragic outcome,” U.S. Marine Corps Gen. Kenneth McKenzie, commander of U.S. Central Command, told reporters.". Off course this doesn't say exactly who ordered the strike, but it certainly wasn't Biden (although being the kind of good president he is, he would probably (if he hasn't already) take the same responsibility as the general did - something your cowardly hero Trump would never do.

            "BIDEN AUTHORIZED THE DRONE STRIKE " - Do you even read your own sources beyond the headline?  This article is talking about the first strike, not the second one in Kabul.

            "Biden ordered a drone attack that killed 7 children. " - Is STILL a lie no matter how many times you repeat it.

            The ONLY person and people who have and is disgracing America is Trump and most Republicans.

            1. Sharlee01 profile image82
              Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

              Biden is at the beach this weekend... As usual, leaving others to pick up his disasters. I am very confident the Republicans will ask Milley --- "Who ordered the drone strike that killed these innocent civilians." I am also sure of what his answer will be.

              7 children were killed. This president needs to be held accountable for such a horrendous mistake. The Commander and Chief is responsible for drone strikes.     https://nypost.com/2021/09/17/pentagon- … ne-strike/

              " After Joe Biden took office, he halted counterterrorism drone strikes without White House approval and initiated a broad review of U.S. policy on drone use."

              https://hubstatic.com/15721439.jpg

              https://hubstatic.com/15721440_f1024.jpg

              https://hubstatic.com/15721441.jpg

              https://hubstatic.com/15721442.jpg

              https://hubstatic.com/15721448.jpg

              1. My Esoteric profile image88
                My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                200,000 Americans killed by Trump.  That man needs to be held accountable.

                He also needs to be held accountable for the insurrection, illegally trying to change votes in GA, grifting the American public, and a host of other things.

                Let's start with him first.

                1. Sharlee01 profile image82
                  Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  As I said Trump is not president, and I could care less about the past. I am at this point concerned about what is happening new. It's more than apparent you are stuck on Trump.  I can see you have deflected, it is obvious you can't face the present, what is happening now. You deflect and don't address the problems of this administration. I need not compare Trump to Biden. And refuse to subject me to all your conspiracy theories about Trump.  We both know none of your past theories gave proven to be factual.

                  Lets' start with the failures of Biden, the failures that are visible, and can be proven. Like those kids, they were alive now they are dead... Due to the Biden administration.  Our border is overrun this weekend with migrants living in squalor while Bidens are at the beach. COVID is running rapid, inflation is eating away at American households,  And need I mention how pissed off Macronis is? --- He recalls ambassador from Washington 'without delay'. France is one of our trusted allies.
                  Furious Over Sub Deal, France Recalls Ambassadors to U.S. and Australia  It is the first time in the long history of the French-U.S. alliance that a top diplomat has been recalled, illustrating the depth of France’s anger.

                  Biden is a failure of epic proportions. Hopefully, he will step down.

                  1. My Esoteric profile image88
                    My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    If you "I could care less about the past." - then why are you fixated on Afghanistan?  Isn't that in the past now?  Also, by "I could care less about the past." you minimize 200,000 thousand excess deaths caused by the failed, disgraced, one-term, twice impeached former president.

                    "As I said Trump is not president, " - And I say again, what difference does that make, he was president when he was responsible for over 200,000 needless American deaths.

                    "Our border is overrun this weekend" - There you go misleading us again with a false statement.  Our border was NOT overrun - they were on the Mexican side of the border living in squalor, exactly where you want them. 

                    Instead of following Trump's inhumane policy, America should be welcoming these people (after vetting them, of course, for health and criminality (just like at Ellis Island) into American society to help grow our economy. 

                    I think one of the reasons Biden isn't doing this is because he doesn't have the resources yet to process all of these people.  My solution to that is quickly get more resources.  Maybe he could declare a fake national emergency and divert needed funds away from our defense like Trump did. (before y'all get riled up, spoiler alert, that was sarcasm)

                    Biden has a long way to go to catch up with Trump who really did fail in epic proportions.

                  2. My Esoteric profile image88
                    My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    "And need I mention how pissed off Macron is? " - Yep, that is true - but then you probably have inside knowledge of the details.  Me, I am willing to wait until the FULL story comes out.  Already Australia is saying they weren't happy with the French deal because it doesn't meet Australia's national interests as well as a nuclear powered sub does.

    3. MizBejabbers profile image87
      MizBejabbersposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Can we not be fair and say that there are two factions in the Republican Party, the Trumplicans and a few who still hold to the party's pre-Trump values? But the problem here is that the real Republicans, with the exception of Liz Cheney and her few supporters, are too chicken to stand up for the party. Party members like Jim Jordan, Mitch McConnell and Marjorie Taylor Greene are the squeaky wheels who are getting the grease. But Trump and others who are claiming that the Jan. 6 rioters are being persecuted and that this so-called march Saturday is in support of them are putting out more bull and lies. The Jan. 6 rioters are not being persecuted, they are being prosecuted for breaking the law. Little things like damaging the capitol, stealing documents and items from congressional offices, threatening the lives of the Vice President and Speaker of the House, contributing to the death of a capitol police officer...and "they're being persecuted?" Gimme a break.

      1. wilderness profile image94
        wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        Are the rioters at the capital being treated differently than the summer's riots all over the country, even though there were far fewer people hurt or killed at the capital?

        Undeniably, the answer is a resounding "Yes!"; no other riot has had the full force of the FBI thrown against it to find those that rioted/burned/killed.  No other riot has had hundreds of people accused of wrongdoing merely for being there.  No other riot has had people accused of criminal activity merely for trespassing, and the large majority of the Capital rioters are guilty of nothing more than that.

        Does that make a case that the Capital rioters are being "persecuted"?  That would be an opinion, but mine is again a "Yes" vote.  When one group is treated differently (worse) than another for identical/similar actions then we have persecution.

        Not unexpected when those feeling threatened are rich and powerful, though.  And that goes up exponentially when those same rich and powerful feel they can pinch Trump at the same time they persecute rioters.

        1. My Esoteric profile image88
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          "no other riot has had the full force of the FBI thrown against it " - No other riot attacked the Capitol and caused an insurrection.  Besides, there weren't that many actual rioters to find for any given summer riot.  For those riots, your "few" actually does apply.

          LOL - "No other riot has had hundreds of people accused of wrongdoing merely for being there. " - Name me one person who has been charged with anything for "just being there".

          The longer the Republicans think the insurrection was simply a walk in the park, as some (even here) have characterized it, the irrelevant the Republican Party becomes in the eyes of unbrainwashed Americans.

      2. My Esoteric profile image88
        My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        Nailed it!!!

    4. My Esoteric profile image88
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Another nail in the Republican coffin is their support of or attendance at a rally designed to support those arrested for being part of an insurrection where police officers were violently assaulted, the Capitol invaded, elected officials threatened with harm or death, and the function of gov't brought to a halt.  Acts definitely worthy of Republican support - NOT.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/15/politics … index.html

      1. Sharlee01 profile image82
        Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

        CNN -- Come on man..

    5. Sharlee01 profile image82
      Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

      "On Saturday, Sept 18, the Republicans are going to hold a rally (which police and DHS think will turn violent) to comfort and succor to the 600+ people arrested for violently assaulting police, invading the Capitol, making our elected representatives go into hiding to save their lives, and stopping the function of government.  By definition, that is called insurrection."

      "Washington law enforcement bracing for Capitol demonstrations as sparse crowd gathers early"
      https://www.aol.com/news/capitol-police … 00063.html


      https://hubstatic.com/15721375_f1024.jpg
      “We came back for their insurrection 2.0,” Irwin said. “We need to have dissenting voices.”

      Guess the left did show up to represent...

    6. My Esoteric profile image88
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      This revelation won't help the Republicans much.  GOP donors indicted for funneling Russian money into Trump's 2016 campaign.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/20/politics … index.html

      1. Sharlee01 profile image82
        Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

        It's surprising you would feel this outweighs the current indictment SC John Durham just announced.   I just put together a thread on the indictment or should I say the Durham indictments.  Most of America knew Russia Russia Russia was a Clinton hit job, but it's wonderful to see the truth coming out.

        1. My Esoteric profile image88
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          Now he has a whole TWO, and the second indictment has a lot of problems.  Yet you downplay the dozens of indictments and convictions Mueller obtained.

          And no, "MOST" of America doesn't know that.  MOST of America thinks the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians.  The 30 - 35% of rabid Trump supporters does not qualify as 60+% of Americans.

      2. profile image60
        sockratusposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        You can't imagine how funny it sounds here in Russia ) And a bit discouraging. Is it really that easy to buy elections in States?

        1. My Esoteric profile image88
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          Discouraging it is. In Russia, such things are the norm, but, until Trump, in America they were not.  He has hurt America in SO many ways and done very little good for us.

          1. profile image60
            sockratusposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            no way to do so here. At 2021 actually there are two semi-alive "parties" - United Russia and bad old communists with neuro-wire from each brain to the central committee. Commies lose support for years. All the others look like a show of galvanized frogs. What if someone bring a bag with money to galvanized frog? It will be a dead frog with money.

            however, not sure it's better than you have.

            to me the story with money granting Trump a victory looks really strange. Political system in States lives for centuries. If there was such a straightforward way to trick election - why didn't some other person use it before? If someone did it - why no one talks about this? Too much questions. So seems reality is more complex.

            1. My Esoteric profile image88
              My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              It is not that the foreign money led to Trump winning, it didn't.  It is a long standing principal, originally articulated by George Washington, that foreign influence of any kind needs to stay out of American politics.  That is why foreign contributions are illegal. 

              It is had to compare our systems because you live in a dictatorship, albeit the kind of dictatorship that Trump wished to emulate.  But it can be said with truth, Trump made (and is making) American politics much more like what Russia experiences.

              1. profile image60
                sockratusposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                "dictatorship" in Russia is a bit ... overestimated. Today i read article about woman, jailed due to try to bribe police officer. She wanted him to rise pursuit against her husband on political reason. They supposed become refugees in States due to this. Not that easy )

                laws against foreign money had been written here for not so long, a few years ago. Looks like copy-n-paste from those on your side. A few politicians ran into real troubles after that.

              2. profile image60
                sockratusposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                if so it becomes even stranger. If Russian money couldn't help Trump to won, could only make troubles - why would he get them?

        2. Sharlee01 profile image82
          Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

          It is very well proven that foreign money makes its way into Candidates' campaign coffers. However, as a rule, those that perpetuate that kind of crime are caught, and much of the time the candidate they poured cash into loses anyway.   

          Exsample

          "Washington CNN — 
          Eight people, including a longtime political networker and a CEO, have been indicted on charges of funneling money illegally into Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and other political groups.

          George Nader, who has for decades hobnobbed with political elites and became a key Mueller cooperator, and Allied Wallet CEO Ahmad “Andy” Khawaja are accused of sending millions to political committees and hiding Nader as its source, with Nader allegedly reporting to a Middle Eastern government on the effort.

          According to Federal Election Commission records and details in the indictment, the money primarily went toward backing Clinton’s 2016 campaign efforts. Though Clinton and her affiliated campaign finance groups are unnamed in the indictment, the money primarily went to her campaign, according to a source familiar with the investigation and campaign finance records. Attorneys for the Clinton campaign, the Democratic Party, and Bill and Hillary Clinton did not respond to requests for comment on Wednesday.

          The other conspirators are alleged to have been part of Khawaja’s donations scheme, which allowed him to exceed campaign finance limits, according to the indictment.

          Nader, specifically, is accused of sending more than $3.5 million through Khawaja to political committees so they could gain access to then-candidate Hillary Clinton in 2016. “It was a purpose of the conspiracy for Nader and Khawaja to use their access to Candidate 1 to gain favor with, and potential financial support from, the government of Foreign Country A,” prosecutors wrote in the indictment. The contributions were disguised so Nader’s involvement was hidden, the Justice Department said.

          At one point, Khawaja hosted a Clinton campaign fundraiser at his home featuring Bill Clinton because Khawaja had contributed almost $1 million in contributions to the campaign. He hosted other political events, too, according to the indictment."
          CNN ---   https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/04/politics … index.html

          https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/13/politics … index.html

          1. MizBejabbers profile image87
            MizBejabbersposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            I noticed that you conveniently left out foreign contributions to Donald Trump's 2016 campaign. Apparently two "Republican operatives", who  accepted $100,000 to get a Russian a meeting with Tump kept $75,000 and "funneled $25,000 into Trump's fundraising committee...."



            https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2021/0 … or-scheme/

            Giuliani associates "were arrested on Thursday and charged with trying to aid Ukrainian and Russian foreign nationals by secretly directing $325,000 to a pro-Trump super PAC."

            https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/1 … ani-044244

            There are more examples of this, but I think that two are enough to get the picture. Let's be honest and present both sides.

            1. My Esoteric profile image88
              My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              It also shows that CNN reports negative things about Democrats, which some on here claim they don't.  It would be nice if Fox did the same regarding Republicans and Trumplicans.  And if they did happen to mention such things, did they whitewash it?

            2. Sharlee01 profile image82
              Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

              Both my links provide the same information. It was my point to show even if a candidate has money funded from foreign countries does not sure about a win, and as a rule, those that perpetuate the crime are caught.  I was responding to a specific comment.

              One can see my opinion covered the two thoughts I hoped to share.

              " It is very well proven that foreign money makes its way into Candidates' campaign coffers. However, as a rule, those that perpetuate that kind of crime are caught, and much of the time the candidate they poured cash into loses anyway."

              (please note I said It is very well proven that foreign money makes its way into Candidates coffers) I meant no bias at all.

              Simply pointing out this crime is prevalent in the US, not new, and the crime does not guaranty a win. As in the 2016 election.

              My article does provide the fact both candidates had foreign money illegally funneled into their coffers. Hillery receives much more cash   ( $3.5 million)  than Trump in this particular case.

              My point --- She did not win due to having so much more cash funneled into her coffees.

              I guess one would have needed to check the origin of the comment I was referring to, to understand my reply fully.

              This was the comment that I responded to.  ---   SOCKRATUS WROTE:
              You can't imagine how funny it sounds here in Russia ) And a bit discouraging. Is it really that easy to buy elections in States?

              My example just was meant to prove the illegal funds don't always work to produce a winner. To be honest when researching Trump and possibly illegal campaign funds I came up with the couple of accusations you listed, and the Mueller report, that did three years of investigations and found no problems in regards to illegal funds from Foreign nations being fueled into Trump's campaign. I did find the references you offered. But they were small amounts, and would in no way proven my point.  Hillary just got a huge amount of funded cash and did not win. That was my point --- a large number of illegal funds just does not always produce a winner.


              Hopefully, this clears up why I used the Nader crimes to prove my point.

              1. MizBejabbers profile image87
                MizBejabbersposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                "My point --- She did not win due to having so much more cash funneled into her coffees."

                Hillary won the popular vote. It was Russian interference that helped Trump into the White House. In think in this case your Nader point is irrelevant. But I agree that the question was about whether it was easy for foreign money to infiltrate U.S. political campaigns.

                1. Sharlee01 profile image82
                  Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  Yes, she did win the popular vote. So maybe all that extra cash did help her win the popular vote. Who knows...

                  I guess  SOCKRATUS could be correct. Our US elections can be won by money.

                  1. wilderness profile image94
                    wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    Our elections have been won, mostly, by money for a long, long time.

                  2. My Esoteric profile image88
                    My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    The issue about either side getting foreign money isn't that it helped them win anything (or get votes).  Today, for presidential elections anyway, even the largest donation is a drop in the bucket and, I believe, doesn't help one way or the other.  The issue about foreign donations goes back to why they were made illegal in the Constitution in the first place - foreign influence. 

                    I think, large donations, from anywhere, is, in most cases, an attempt to buy influence in case the recipient is the winner and not to throw the election in their favor.  In that since, I don't think Sockratus is right.

                    Where Sochratus is right, in my opinion, is just the massive amounts of money allowed in the first place, although in some cases even huge cash advantages don't help in the end.

                    Where foreign influence is a factor since 2016, and wasn't before, is in the realm of foreign propaganda through social media.  Mueller made it clear how invasive the Russians were win trying to 1) switch how people were intending to vote or 2) stop them from voting at all.  I firmly believe that if the Russians had kept their nose out of our 2016 election, Clinton would have one, it was that close - less than 100,000 votes in three critical states (states which Manafort pointed out to them by the way).

                    I am not so sure they had as much influence in 2020 because China had come out against Trump, as did the Iranians.  Both of those nations had much bigger influence operations in 2020 than they did in 2016.

    7. My Esoteric profile image88
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Recently, I relied to Sharlee saying that the refugees under the bridge were on the Mexico side.  I was wrong, they are in the US and Biden is deporting them as fast as he can.

      Apparently, the border patrol was was riding them down on horseback - not a good look which the head of DHS is now addressing.  (Firing those agents, I hope.)

      1. wilderness profile image94
        wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        What is this horseback thing?  Are agents literally riding over illegals, smashing them to the ground with broken limbs, or are they simply chasing them on horseback?

        If the latter, would you prefer cars or ATV's?  Helicopters?  Or is your concept to simply let the go and continue their illegal activities?

        1. My Esoteric profile image88
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          Hey, I saw the video.  The head of DHS saw the videos.  Both he and I thought it was terrible.  But you are a conservative so I can understand why you don't think the same.

      2. Sharlee01 profile image82
        Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

        OMG, this old fool is shipping untested, unvaccinated to a city near you. Your logic escapes common sense. It has been reported over and over, that these migrants are being slipped in without vetting or tested, or vaccinated.  It is true he is deporting some, but it is inexcusable for him to be sending unvetted unvaccinated untested migrants into our cities. Cities where we have been fighting a pandemic for almost two years. We have lived under mitigation to make every attempt to curb COVID -- and this feeble man is ignoring these facts.  And the science!   He needs to go the sooner the better. He is so dangerous, and this is just one more incident that proves that. Not sure how anyone could find his handling of the outrageous border crisis defendable.  This horrific problem has been going on for 7 months now, he has ignored it, as it will just go away.

        Fire Those agents  ---  FIRE TGHIS PRESIDENT --

        These people are breaking our laws, are warned, and ignore warnings.  We have laws, the President should be supporting these laws, and sending in more help to control the problem. What he is doing has now put Americans in danger of increasing cases of COVID, and possibly more closures, more overflowing hospitals that are already having problems finding beds.   This may be fine with you ... I don't think the majority of Americans who have been busting ass to get rid of COVID would come close to agreeing with you. Glad I can say I did not vote for this flawed president.

        I Mitigated, I took a vaccine to follow the best science could offer us. Biden has dismissed all common sense as well as science and made the decision (once again another lawed decision)  to put migrants over ME, and all Americans.  This is not acceptable.  It is being reported by the majority of the media, he is not testing or vaccinating migrants.  And he has the audacity to give a speech at the UN, and claim how he is working to stop the spread of COVID. IMO, This man is a liar, and a none caring human being, that does not have a fully functioning brain.

        However, you have a right to your opinion.

        Biden orders most US workers get vaxxed — but not illegal border crossers
        https://nypost.com/2021/09/10/biden-won … d-vaccine/

        CDC---The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced Monday it would continue to prohibit the entry of migrants through Mexico or Canada under Title 42 due to “a serious danger of the introduction of COVID-19 into the United States.” Unaccompanied children are exempted from the order, and the CDC will review the health risks every 60 days to determine if it is still necessary.  https://abcnews4.com/news/nation-world/ … sions-rise

        No, migrants in immigrant detention facilities are not required to get the COVID-19 vaccine

        1. MizBejabbers profile image87
          MizBejabbersposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          OMG Sharlee, I see that you are quoting sources for your covid post, but the statement about immigrants being turned loose without covid testing is just false. I wouldn't want to submit a source either if it was Tucker Carlson. This is a reliable source FactCheck that tells that the original source was disseminating false information:

          https://www.factcheck.org/2021/02/biden … he-border/

          1. My Esoteric profile image88
            My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            And now families are blaming Calrson for their father's Covid death.  Hopefully, they will sue him.

            https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/was … 26821.html

            I have to wonder how many people are dead because they believed Carlson's misinformation campaign?

          2. Sharlee01 profile image82
            Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

            The conversation was about the latest Haitians that were under the bridge. They were not being tested or receiving vaccines.

            Q  The congregation under the bridge — the congregating there — just mentioning COVID — what is the situation there? I know that the crowd has been dispersed. Do we know who has tested positive? If people got sick, any kind of symptoms among this group of 15,000, you said?

            SECRETARY MAYORKAS: Yeah, so, we did not — we do not te- — we did not test that population of individuals. We do not know — I do not know, I should say, if I may be perfectly accurate — I do not know whether anyone was sick with COVID.

            We certainly had some individuals get sick, not specifically with COVID, to my knowledge, and we addressed their illnesses. In fact, we set up medical tents that had a certain standard of ability to address medical needs.

            It is — it was ho- — it’s hot in Del Rio, Texas. We had cases of dehydration. We had other situations. And that is precisely why we surged one hundred — approximately 150 medical professionals to address the medical needs of that population. That is why we set up medical facilities with the appropriate equipment to address their medical needs.

            And I must say, what I saw of the Border Patrol and other personnel was, quite frankly, heroic. They took — this is not their customary obligations, and yet they took great pride in addressing the needs of the people.

            https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-roo … r-24-2021/

            1. My Esoteric profile image88
              My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              "The conversation was about the latest Haitians that were under the bridge. They were not being tested or receiving vaccines." - I have to disagree., you previously said - SHARLEE01 WROTE:
              OMG, this old fool is shipping untested, unvaccinated to a city near you. - The conversation was about the 12,000 Haitians that were processed and released to relatives in the US not being tested or forced to be vaccinated (since that is the only way those who didn't want a vaccine would get one).  As MizBejabbers said, that claim is false.
                (BTW, did you ever call Trump and old fool?  He fits the bill to a 'T' while Biden doesn't fit the "fool" part at all.)

              1. Valeant profile image88
                Valeantposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                I believe Mayorkis was referring to the time while they were under the bridge and that they did not test them while they were there.  Once moved to be processed for asylum claims, they were tested before being released to relatives or other sponsors.

                The medical tents are being referred to at the site at the bridge.  The sources I provided note that at the processing centers, prior to being released, they did get tested.

                Not that some will feel any better that brown people get to be let in to our country to make legal asylum claims under current our, as well as international, laws.

              2. Sharlee01 profile image82
                Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                Actually, the conversation and my comment were bout the Haitians under the bridge that was being released into the country unvaccinated   Here is the very beginning of our conversation on Bidenville...   https://www.foxnews.com/politics/covid- … nts-border

                Actually, Biden not until Aug. even considered offering the Border migrants vaccines.
                https://www.foxnews.com/politics/covid- … nts-border

                Not sure where you got the idea migrants were being tested if not ill or vaccinated?

                "WASHINGTON — White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki on Friday confirmed that the government isn’t requiring COVID-19 vaccines for people who illegally cross the US-Mexico border — despite President Biden’s new vaccine mandates for about two-thirds of US workers."

                Migrants are not required to be vaccinated at the border and are tested if ill.   https://nypost.com/2021/09/10/biden-won … d-vaccine/

                https://www.yahoo.com/now/biden-doesnt- … 00814.html

                The migrants that were released were not tested or vaccinated. I offered SECRETARY MAYORKAS own words to prove my statement

                Q  The congregation under the bridge — the congregating there — just mentioning COVID — what is the situation there? I know that the crowd has been dispersed. Do we know who has tested positive? If people got sick, any kind of symptoms among this group of 15,000, you said?

                SECRETARY MAYORKAS: Yeah, so, we did not — we do not te- — we did not test that population of individuals. We do not know — I do not know, I should say, if I may be perfectly accurate — I do not know whether anyone was sick with COVID.
                https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press briefings/2021/09/24/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-jen-psaki-and-secretary-of-homeland-security-alejandro-mayorkas-september-24-2021/

                Could you offer a current source where you got the idea migrants are being vaccinated?

                1. My Esoteric profile image88
                  My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  "ctually, the conversation and my comment " - Sorry, Sharlee, your statement was very clear that you were talking about untested (which I noticed you omitted this time around) and unvaccinated being "released to a city near you".

                  "...migrants are being vaccinated?" - It depends on whether you mean forcibly "being vaccinated" against their will, in which case there is no source because I haven't claimed it.  If you mean being offered a vaccination, then both Valeant and I have provided you those sources at least twice.

                  "Actually, Biden not until Aug. even considered offering the Border migrants vaccines." - Yes, we have been over that, then after August the border patrol was offering vaccines.  What is your point? (and thanks for providing one of the sources that says Biden IS providing vaccines)

                  You forget.  YOUR point was that Biden was releasing untested and unvaccinated "into a city near you" (your words, not mine).and our point is that is FALSE.  They ARE tested before being released and they ARE OFFERED a vaccine before being released. What is it that you don't understand about that FACT?

                  1. Sharlee01 profile image82
                    Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    "They ARE tested before being released and they ARE OFFERED a vaccine before being released. What is it that you don't understand about that FACT?"

                    I have not been able to find any information on migrants being tested other than if they were ill showing symptoms. And the migrants are not being made to take the Vaccine as I pointed out. Many here in the US are being mandated to take the vaccine.

                    New
                    https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/alerts/c … aminations ---   COVID-19 Vaccination Required for Immigration Medical Examinations

                    Which will go into effect as of Oct 1, 2021.

        2. My Esoteric profile image88
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          "OMG, this old fool is shipping untested, unvaccinated to a city near you." - OMG, you are making things up again with no foundation what so ever

          1. Sharlee01 profile image82
            Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

            I offered several sources to back up my comment. I am not willing to keep repeating those links. It has been well-reported Migrants are not repeat not being vaccinated or tested.

            1. My Esoteric profile image88
              My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              No, you didn't sense this JUST happened.  As to your PREVIOUS claim that Biden was doing that, I clearly debunked t with reliable sources that says before any migrant gets out of border patrol custody, they have been tested and lately offered a vaccination Previously, they told the migrants where they could get a vaccine.  Bottom line - either your sources are lying to you or you are misinterpreting what they say - let me be clear " shipping untested, unvaccinated to a city near you" is a LIE

    8. My Esoteric profile image88
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Another reason the Republican Party is heading toward the trash bin of history.  During the Trump era, they are responsible for 27.5% (over a quarter) of the current national debt.  And now they are refusing to raise the debt limit to pay for their huge increases.

      1. wilderness profile image94
        wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        Perhaps they are looking towards the Democrat spending bill - I believe the biggest in the history of the world - and hoping to put it off?

      2. Sharlee01 profile image82
        Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

        And that 27.5% was due to a once in a 100-year pandemic. It was not to push socialist freebies.  The Republicans are the only ones that will keep the US solvent.  Thank God we have their sturdy resolute.

        Here is a great chart that gives the stats per year on the National debt and its growth per year. Trump was doing very well until COVID. Now Obama's stats from year to year he had a pretty sizable increase in spending.

        https://www.macrotrends.net/2496/nation … th-by-year

        https://hubstatic.com/15726444_f1024.jpg

        1. MizBejabbers profile image87
          MizBejabbersposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          Don't blame Clinton. He balanced the budget. Look who came after him with his 20 year war that everybody is bitchin' about Biden getting us out of.

          1. Sharlee01 profile image82
            Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

            Did not intend to blame anyone only point out information to ECO., in a way that just showed facts. He is very good with stats and I had hoped he would consider the chart as factual. A more polite way to pointed out Obama raised the debt by 50% in this time in office. This chart gave a good representation of the National debt from the 1980s on.

            Trump certainly raised the debt, however, it was "mainly" due to a huge crisis, just as Obama spent due to a crisis.   

            ECO frequently dwells on what he feels are mistakes Trump made. I took this opportunity to bring up show a chart that gave a good representation of how debt's actual growth. and compare the debt Obama left to that of Trump. Please note when ECO offered his comment in regard to the Trump debt, he did not give any account of why Trump's debt was accumulated.

            This is the comment that prompted me to post the chart. ---

            "MY ESOTERIC WROTE:
            Another reason the Republican Party is heading toward the trash bin of history.  During the Trump era, they are responsible for 27.5% (over a quarter) of the current national debt.  And now they are refusing to raise the debt limit to pay for their huge increases."

        2. wilderness profile image94
          wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          Comically, Obama raised the debt by 50% - given 8 years rather than 4 it is nearly identical to what Trump did.  Of course, in his first term Obama had the recession as an excuse (just as Trump did the pandemic), but in the second term the rise was even steeper for Obama. 

          But, oddly enough, that wasn't mentioned.  Just Trump's spending.

          1. Valeant profile image88
            Valeantposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            'Of course, in his first term Obama had the recession as an excuse (just as Trump did the pandemic), but in the second term the rise was even steeper for Obama.'

            Obama Deficits:
            First Term:
            2010 deficit:  just under $1.3 trillion
            2011 deficit:  $1.3 trillion
            2012 deficit:  $1.1 trillion
            2013 deficit:  $680 billion

            Second term:
            2014:  $483 billion
            2015:  $439 billion
            2016:  $587 billion
            2017:  $665 billion

            Trump
            2018: $779 billion
            2019:  $984 billion
            2020:  w/o Covid $1.08 trillion ($3.7 w/Covid)
            2021:  w/o Covid $966 trillion ($3.4 w/Covid)

            Trump had the third highest deficits in history behind Roosevelt and Bush's multiple wars.   His final year was the only year slated for reduction, but the disastrous response to Covid ruined that.  Trump was given a healthy economy and then ran huge deficits.  One could make the case that any economic success was due to putting the country into massive debt.

          2. Sharlee01 profile image82
            Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

            I am comical, I really don't know why ECO would even need to bring up the debt problem. It did really become a greater problem under Obama. I give Trump some slack due to being hit with a pandemic.

        3. My Esoteric profile image88
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          "And that 27.5% was due to a once in a 100-year pandemic." - Does this mean you are giving Obama a pass on the debt increase during his term due to the Great 2008 Recession?  Somehow, I don't think you will.  But, that said, sorry, at least a third of that 27.5% was due to Trump's tax scam while zero percent of Obama's increase was due to non-recession related policies.

          "The Republicans are the only ones that will keep the US solvent.  " - You really should read my book about Recessions.  If you did, you would learn conservative economic theory was absolutely terrible for America. 

          FACT 1: Between 1785 and 1933, 148 years, there was about 35 recessions, depressions, and panics.  That averages out to 1 downturn every 4.2 years!!.  It is true that a few of those downturns were not related to conservative economic theory but to other outside influences instead.  The point is, none of them were due to liberal economic theory.  Why?

          FACT 2: Liberal economic theory simply didn't exist during those 148 years, only conservative economic theory

          FACT 3: The only real examples of liberal ideas is the attempts to establish a central bank: that happened twice, each time conservatives (who were Democrats then, Republicans today) let their charters lapse.  (Each bank, when established, helped get America out of a major depression.)

          FACT 4: Liberal economics began with FDR pulling us out of the Great 1929 Depression.

          FACT 5: Between 1940 and 2007, 68 years, there were 11 recessions (1 every 6.2 years)

          FACT 6: Between 2008 and today, where conservative economic theory once again dominated, there have been 2 almost depressions

          FACT 7a:  Of the 35 economic downturns before 1940, 33 were Major and only 8 were NOT the result of conservative fiscal policy.

          FACT 7b: Of the 11 recessions between 1940 and 2007, one was Major (1945 after WW II) and 7 were not the result of liberal fiscal policy. 

          FACT 7c: Of the 2 recessions after 2007, both were Major and one was not caused by conservative fiscal policy.

          [i]Those are just some of the facts from my book to shine a bright light on how devastating conservative economic policy was to America,  It certainly doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand why that is so.

          1. Sharlee01 profile image82
            Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

            "And that 27.5% was due to a once in a 100-year pandemic." - Does this mean you are giving Obama a pass on the debt increase during his term due to the Great 2008 Recession? "

            This statement is clearly hypocritical....   your statement ---  MY ESOTERIC WROTE:
            "Another reason the Republican Party is heading toward the trash bin of history.  During the Trump era, they are responsible for 27.5% (over a quarter) of the current national debt.  And now they are refusing to raise the debt limit to pay for their huge increases."

            Did you  Does this mean you are giving Trump a pass on the debt increase during his term due to the Great PANDEMIC?  You did not now did you?

            Once again your bias has done you in.  I simply added a chart that shows the bottom line, without any explanation why Obama how Obama came to have such a large debt. Just as you did with your comment, I presented a bottom line, a chart.

            At this point, I feel if the Republicans don't stop the Democrats spending spree the country will ultimately fail. That's my opinion.

            My God, you may not realize it, but in my view, our past does not apply at this point. We have a bunch of heat I consider idiots in Congress as well as a president that does not have the ability to Governen due to his lack of cognitive skills. We at this point in history have a perfect storm to bring America to its knees.

            All your facts are fine, but they in no way pertain to what we are dealing with at this time. Biden has the country spinning out of control, and we have some that can't see that fact...
            So all your facts come to a deaf ear.

            (Most of the Obama debt was added in his last three years.)
            Correction Obama's debt was added in his first three years. --- as the chart posted indicated.

            1. Valeant profile image88
              Valeantposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              Most of the Obama debt was not added in his last three years.  That is a lie.  Most was added in his first three as I noted above with each year's deficit total.

              Second, the Democrats' spending bills have provisions for actual funding.  The reason Trump's tax cuts did not pay themselves was because they were grounded in the fantasy of trickle down economics - that some mystery future growth would happen due to a new change in the rich actually spending the money they accrue instead of hoarding it.

              Third, as noted above, Trump's deficit grew in each of his first three years from $779 billion to $984 billion to over a trillion - even before adding in any Covid money.  All while inheriting a very healthy economy that had seen record job growth.  It's serious hypocrisy to ignore so much spending during a Trump term, then find Financial Jesus when a democrat is in the White House.

              1. Sharlee01 profile image82
                Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                All your opinion... Ya can't grow if you become a risk to loan too... I don't support spending money when one is already way over their head.  I also don't support an abundance of social programs. For so many reasons. Poor begets poor.

                I applauded the rich, and if we did not have their ingenuity we would be far less a country. I am not one for treating the rich any differently than the poor. (Blunt but that's my truth).

                Typo --- I meant to indicate Obama accumulated the bulk of debt in the first three years as my chart indicated.

                1. Valeant profile image88
                  Valeantposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  Not my opinion, the official stats from the government sites, not some far-right organization like the Heritage Foundation.  So I will call out your misinformation such as 'the most debt was added in Obama's last three years.'  That's just not true according to official government data.

                  And again, the Democratic bills do not raise taxes beyond what the rich were already paying while being allowed to be prosperous previously.  Those taxes will pay for infrastructure, child care, and care of seniors.   The rich are getting rich because middle class wages have stagnated while the rich have increased their percentage of corporate profits - that is a fact.

                  1. Sharlee01 profile image82
                    Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    As I said I realize I had a typo. I presented a chart to show a non-bias approach. What I said in regard to Obama's debt was ---  "Trump was doing very well until COVID. Now Obama's stats from year to year he had a pretty sizable increase in spending."


                    I am a capitalist, due to witnessing that the system has made  America so successful financially, and it offers wonderful opportunities to our citizens to thrive financially.   Our economic and political system of trade and industry has done us well.  I prefer this trade and industry be controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by Government.

            2. My Esoteric profile image88
              My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              Since you didn't absolve Obama of the debt increase under his watch, I won't for Trump either.  Therefore my statement stands that "Another reason the Republican Party is heading toward the trash bin of history.  During the Trump era, they are responsible for 27.5% (over a quarter) of the current national debt.  And now they are refusing to raise the debt limit to pay for their huge increases"

              I have noticed that when historic facts work against you, you claim the past doesn't matter (which means you will always repeat your mistakes).  But when  history does support your point of view, you shout it to the rooftops.

              Nevertheless, your claim was that conservative economics work.  What I proved to you is that conservative economics have NEVER worked more than 6 years in a row.  Then it fails and we have a major recession, depression, or panic.  That is just a fact.

              As to the rest of your comments, that is just your BDS showing through - none of it is true.

    9. My Esoteric profile image88
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      The most effective tactic Trump is using to kill the Republican Party is the Big Lie.  Republican legislatures took the bait and passed (or still are trying to pass) laws designed to suppress the Democratic vote.  But like Wile E. Coyote, they are probably shooting themselves in the foot trying to capture the Roadrunner.

      As usual, Republicans don't think before they act to consider all possible outcomes of their actions.  In the case of voter suppression, in the ironic guise of making elections more fair, they didn't consider:

      * It is morally wrong, turning off voters who are legitimately on the fence.

      * They anger and mobilize Democrats to push through all of the obstacles.

      * They make it more difficult for rural white voters to vote

      * Like what with the two Senate elections in GA, the talk of voter fraud will discourage Republicans from voting in what they are told is a rigged election

      * They lead to the election of less competent leaders who do not respond to the needs of all of the constituents

      * They turn off young white voters

      * They suppress the political power of lower and middle class whites.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/25/politics … index.html

      1. MizBejabbers profile image87
        MizBejabbersposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        "The most effective tactic Trump is using to kill the Republican Party is the Big Lie."

        A new thought on this the media is now saying is that the Big Lie  may be killing the next election. People will no longer trust the election process no matter how fair and honest it is run. I don't like their doomsday predictions, but they may have a valid point. Trump is using German tactic of "if you repeat the lie long enough, people will believe it" to destroy our constitutional way of life. Why are we letting him get away with this? His supporters speak of all the "wonderful things" he's done for this country, but this big lie wipes out any little good he may have done.

        1. My Esoteric profile image88
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          "People will no longer trust the election process no matter how fair and honest it is run. " - And this is exactly why it is true when people say Trump  is destroying American democracy

          1. My Esoteric profile image88
            My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            And now crazy Trump is claiming he "won" the sham, fake AZ so-called "audit"  The dude is simply loony-tunes.  Yet the Trump supporters here will continue to believe and support him.  SAD.

        2. wilderness profile image94
          wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          Personally, I think that the Big Lie has been around for a long time.  We have always had election fraud, ranging from gerrymandering to illegal votes to aid from foreign countries to rules that allow a party candidate to be chosen not by vote but by the will of the party VIP's to actual intimidation at the polls.

          Trump (mostly; some actually believe he won the last election) brought that to the surface and a great many people have become a lot more concerned about it.  Unfortunately, it is mostly exhibited against everyone else, never against the party of choice, who would never (but always do) participate in the same wrong activity.

          1. My Esoteric profile image88
            My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            "Personally, I think that the Big Lie has been around for a long time.  " - Yes, since June 2020

            " We have always had election fraud, ranging from gerrymandering ..." - Yes, we have always had those things but they have never, with the possible exception of the 2016 election, even come close to changing the outcome of a national election.

            "some actually believe he won the last election" - - [i]That "some" is the majority of Republicans!!


            The rest just minimizes what Trump and his minions are actually doing.  They are calling the election "rigged". They are not saying there was a little inconsequential fraud.  NO, they are saying there was MASSIVE fraud that threw the election to Biden, the Big Lie, that is why he is pushing these Sham so-called "audits".

            I simply don't understand why you minimize and whitewash what Trump is doing.

            1. wilderness profile image94
              wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              ""some actually believe he won the last election" - - [i]That "some" is the majority of Republicans!!"

              I don't know a single person that believes that.  It is just another gross exaggeration from the Trump haters.  Which is why I said that the Big Lie (no voter fraud) has been around for a long time - liberals typically claim there is none even when shown it happening.

              The only "rigged" election I'm aware of was that of Hillary Clinton in the Democrat primaries.  The rest often have at least some fraud (although I will agree that some local elections are indeed rigged) but insufficient to affect the final results.

              The "they" that you refer to are a fringe element in the country, just as those that claim they are "the majority of Republicans" are.  Just another radical, fringe element, of which we have plenty.

              "I simply don't understand why you minimize and whitewash what Trump is doing."

              Fair enough - I don't understand why you are so engrossed with the actions of a past President and why you expend so much effort trying to divide the country with accusations few will believe.  We have far too much of that now, and certainly need no more.

              1. My Esoteric profile image88
                My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                "I don't know a single person that believes that.  " - Then you don't know very many people.  Poll after poll after poll show between 

                53% of Rs think Trump is the legitimate president.
                https://www.reuters.com/world/us/53-rep … 021-05-24/

                Here 66% of Republicans think the election was stolen and therefore Trump should be president.

                https://news.yahoo.com/poll-two-thirds- … 34695.html

                "I don't understand why you are so engrossed with t" - [i]Because this former president is trying very hard to overthrow the 2020 election - and America itself.  Because he and his supporters are attempting to, and almost have, destroyed American democracy. Since you aren't fighting Trump over this, you must be supporting his goals.

      2. My Esoteric profile image88
        My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        To make a point, I occasionally write that some conservatives would support a return to slavery.  Well, that apparently is true as evidenced by this story where White kids, of conservative parents, are circulating a slavery petition at one Missouri school.  This is what conservatism is doing to our children, disgusting.

        Another reason why the Republican Party (who originally came into being to get rid of slavery) has disappeared.

        https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/09/us/kansa … index.html

        https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/09/us/kansa … index.html

    10. Valeant profile image88
      Valeantposted 12 months ago

      Plenty of people get arrested for non-violent offenses.  To think that people at a social justice protest had to just be doing something that entailed violence speaks to some seriously dysfunctional thinking.

     
    working

    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

    Show Details
    Necessary
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Features
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Marketing
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Statistics
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
    ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)