Navigating the Election: Weighing the Pros and Cons On Candidates
Trump says that it's dangerous for Harris voters to identify themselves, they might get hurt.
Question, is this acceptable language for a candidate?
https://x.com/KamalaHQ/status/184302069 … s-rally%2FSo what?
It was a joke at a rally of Trump supporters.
The obsession to take things out of context from the left never ceases to amaze me.Me too... It seems some prefer the very rehearsed type of speech that one could lip-sync literally. "I came from a middle-class family, at 13 my mom bought our first home" "We are not going back!" Let's hope so!
Trump interacts with his supporters, he jokes, he even dances... Some can't take unfiltered, some can't even take a joke. Oh wellI've witnessed Trump's interaction with his audience, and I would describe it as "conversational" or "engaging," depending on the individual. He often uses a style that combines humor, anecdotes, and direct appeals to the crowd, creating a sense of familiarity and almost a one-on-one rapport.
I think his style could be labeled as "populist" or "rhetorical," as both apply to him. He frequently addresses the concerns and sentiments of everyday people, often using simplified language and a straightforward manner to connect with his audience. His approach emphasizes emotional resonance, employing slogans and catchphrases that really resonate with his supporters. One thing is clear: he does not mimic the status quo politician in any respect.
I felt he was joking; his demeanor indicated that to me. His address to the audience was filled with moments of humor. While he certainly went after his opponent, he also shared what he hoped to accomplish if re-elected. No two of his rallies are ever truly alike. He shares his agenda, which can be repetitive, but he always adds plenty about current events and shares his views on what's happening at the moment.
It seems strange to me that the media is still hanging on Trump's every word. His supporters are used to his communication style, and it feels like the media campaign should have ended long ago. He has made some real zingers, after all.
I'm getting tired of hearing the left talk about "words matter," especially when their dog whistles are just as provocative as Trump's straightforward statements. So far, it seems like only Trump is being targeted in this way, if you catch my drift. I find the situation hypocritical, and shows some not too bright not to realize there is two sides to this coin. One side attempts to make their side of the coin bright and shiny, but the ugliness gets through, to their audience. For me, I see their side for what it is --- dull and tarnished.
Did you watch the rally in question?
What is funny about violence or people getting hurt? That's an odd sense of humor. Does he really have no awareness about what is appropriate and what isn't? Actually. It doesn't seem that he does, I also remember him joking about Paul Pelosi after he was attacked with a hammer. Funny joke? I don't think the man has an empathetic gene in his body
Again...the dedication to taking things out of context and having them mean something they don't amazes me.
If you want to see empathy...watch how President Donald Trump gives a boy with a degenerative brain disease a birthday present. Watch until you see the boy cry as he opens the card from President Donald Trump.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNKN1bSY7OYWhat is funny is the thought that someone would stand up in the middle of thousands of screaming fans and say they are voting for Harris. Sorry if you don't get it - the gales of laughter at the rally says that everyone else did.
Why even ask the question then? Simply to make a joke alluding to violence? He "jokes" about violence a little too much for me.
What came after that sentence? I mean one must ask. However, his demeanor tells me he was joking. Only violence I have ever heard of at a Trump rally was when two nut jobs tried to kill him.
https://x.com/maddenifico/status/1844528186333315337
Does he have a point? What did Trump do immediately when he entered office and took effect that quickly, meaning before covid hit? Many economists see Trump's first few years in office as a continuation of Obama's steady trend.
"As NBC News reported during the 2020 presidential campaign, comparing Trump’s first the key economic indicators from Trump’s first three years in office to Barack Obama’s second term shows “a continuation of trends (that) suggests Trump didn’t build something new; rather he inherited a pretty good situation"
His only major piece of legislation? The independent, non-partisan Congressional Research Service released a report showing that the 2017 tax cuts for the richest Americans and corporations did not work.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/christianw … -prove-it/When Obama took office in January 2009, the U.S. economy was in freefall, experiencing severe contraction and high unemployment. His administration implemented the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which aimed to stimulate the economy through government spending and TAX cuts. By the time Trump assumed office in January 2017, the economy was showing recovery, with job growth and GDP increases indicating a positive trend.
While some argue that Donald Trump's economic success can be attributed to the groundwork laid during Barack Obama’s presidency, several factors illustrate that Trump's policies and decisions played a significant role in the economic growth observed during his tenure. One of the most notable actions taken by Trump was the implementation of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in December 2017, which significantly reduced corporate tax rates from 35% to 21%. This legislation aimed to stimulate investment and job creation, leading to increased capital expenditure and economic growth distinct from the policies of the Obama administration.
Additionally, Trump prioritized deregulation, rolling back numerous Obama regulations that he argued stifled business growth, with estimates suggesting that these cuts saved businesses billions in compliance costs, contributing to a more favorable environment for economic expansion.
The labor market dynamics also changed under Trump, with the unemployment rate falling to a historic low of 3.5% in late 2019, benefiting various demographic groups, including African Americans and Hispanics. This dramatic drop in unemployment can be linked to Trump’s specific policies, including tax cuts and deregulation, which spurred job creation. Furthermore, Trump’s economic policies bolstered consumer confidence and business investment, as surveys indicated a surge in consumer confidence during his presidency, contributing to increased spending and economic growth that was not based on Obama’s previous policies.
The stock market experienced significant growth during Trump’s time in office, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average rising from about 19,800 at the start of his term to over 29,000 by early 2020. This surge was largely attributed to investor confidence in Trump’s pro-business policies rather than the legacy of the previous administration.
Moreover, Trump’s approach to trade, including the renegotiation of NAFTA into the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) and tariffs on China, marked a significant shift from Obama’s approach and sought to reshape trade relationships to favor U.S. interests.
Trump’s administration actively focused on job creation in specific sectors, such as manufacturing and energy, with policies promoting domestic energy production contributing to job growth in those industries. While it is true that Trump benefited from a stable economy in Obama's last year of his presidency, the specific policies and actions taken by Trump created a distinct economic environment that contributed to the growth of our Nation.According to several studies, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 did have a positive impact on the economy, particularly by boosting corporate investment in the short term, the majority of benefits went to high-income earners and did not significantly trickle down to average workers.
The Center on Budget Policy found that the policy failed to deliver promised economic benefits. "Trump Administration officials claimed their centerpiece corporate tax rate cut would “very conservatively” lead to a $4,000 boost in household income. New research shows that workers who earned less than about $114,000 on average in 2016 saw “no change in earnings” from the corporate tax rate cut, while top executive salaries increased sharply".
A lot of us have no interest in continuing this trend. No interest in funding tax cuts for the top brackets and corporations.
Government policy in recent decades has lifted many out of poverty and provided large tax cuts to the rich But the middle class has lost out. Tax cuts dressed up as help for the middle class should be labelled for what they are: welfare for the wealthy.
A strong middle class is the key to higher GDP and strong economy not giving more money to the wealthy and hoping it trickles down. The middle class grows the economy, not the rich.
https://equitablegrowth.org/six-years-l … h%2Dincome
https://www.americanprogress.org/articl … 0families.
https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-t … 20failure."The middle class grows the economy, not the rich. "
Who grows the actual output of our country? The laborer on the assembly line doing the same thing he did yesterday, or the rich man building a new factory and providing 500 new jobs for laborers working the assembly line?
Or perhaps it's the laborer vs the rich man owning the factory the laborer works in buying a new, faster piece of equipment to make more widgets?
Which one "grows the economy", which one maintains status quo?Let's remember that it's the middle class buying the widgets. There are more of us and data shows us that the rich don't necessarily buy more widgets than they need.
I'm with Trump, the economy does better under Democrats.
We had a very strong middle class under Trump's presidency.
During Trump's presidency from 2017 to 2021, the middle class experienced notable growth in certain economic indicators. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, median household income rose to a record high of approximately $68,700 in 2019, up from around $62,700 in 2016, reflecting a gain of nearly 10%. The unemployment rate also reached historically low levels, dropping to 3.5% by the end of 2019, which positively impacted job security for many middle-class families. Additionally, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 aimed to reduce taxes for individuals and businesses, which proponents argued would benefit the middle class through lower tax rates and increased take-home pay. Real wages also saw increases during this period, with the Bureau of Labor Statistics reporting a rise in average hourly earnings, contributing to the purchasing power of middle-class households. However, the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 severely disrupted this growth, leading to significant economic challenges, including job losses and increased inequality, which complicated the overall assessment of middle-class strength under Trump.
"A strong middle class is the key to higher GDP and strong economy not giving more money to the wealthy and hoping it trickles down. The middle class grows the economy, not the rich. "
A strong middle class is indeed vital for driving higher GDP, as it fosters consumer spending, which constitutes a significant portion of economic activity. During Trump's presidency, the U.S. saw impressive GDP growth, particularly in the years leading up to the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2019, the GDP growth rate reached approximately 2.9%, a figure that exceeded many analysts' expectations. The robust performance was fueled by factors such as tax cuts, deregulation, and a strong labor market that benefitted middle-class workers. With unemployment hitting a 50-year low and median household income rising, many families had more disposable income to spend, further stimulating demand for goods and services. Additionally, the administration's focus on revitalizing manufacturing and supporting small businesses aimed to create jobs and enhance economic opportunities for the middle class. This combination of policies not only contributed to higher GDP figures but also illustrated the interconnectedness of a thriving middle class and overall economic growth. However, the subsequent pandemic-related downturn in 2020 underscored the fragility of this progress and the importance of sustaining a strong middle class for long-term economic stability.
"A lot of us have no interest in continuing this trend. No interest in funding tax cuts for the top brackets and corporations. "
Yes, this is obvious, but it's important to recognize that many believe Trump's policies are sound for the current economic situation. We feel these strategies, while unprecedented in our history, are logical and could lead to significant growth and stability for our nation. The status quo is simply not acceptable to many.
It is very obvious and undeniable that there is a division among Americans regarding which candidate offers the best economic plan. However, one must consider the two candidates: Trump’s record on the economy demonstrates that he was successful in building a strong economy in a short time, while the Biden/Harris administration saw a rapid decline in economic conditions."Trump's presidency, the U.S. saw impressive GDP growth"
Under Trump's regime, the U.S. experienced it's highest GDP growth rate of about 4.2% in 2018. In contrast, under Joe Biden, GDP growth reaching approximately 5.7% in 2021.
Trump’s record on the economy demonstrates that he was successful in building a strong economy in a short time, while the Biden/Harris administration saw a rapid decline in economic conditions."
Should we include the covid period? Seems that Trump followers like to exclude the covid era when they talk about Trump's economy but always want to include Biden's time governing under covid. Let's compare apples to apples. Economists always omit trumps period after covid hit when evaluating his economy. The same needs to be done for Biden. Biden successfully guided this economy out of covid. Successfully avoided a recession.
Trump's tax plan in 2017?
It was skewed to the rich, it was also expensive and eroded our revenue.
https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-t … to-deliver
"The unemployment rate also reached historically low levels, dropping to 3.5% by the end of 2019,"
Until Biden broke the record in 2023.
We feel these strategies, while unprecedented in our history, are logical and could lead to significant growth and stability for our nation
Most economists don't feel the same. And there is nothing new about trickle down economics. The fact that he wants to sprinkle on unprecedented tariffs that consumers will ultimately end up paying for is the most ludicrous thing. Economists say Trump refuses to acknowledge that when tariffs are imposed, American consumers end up paying more.
No thanks.it is clear you are depending on predictions. As I pointed out way back on the thread. predictions are wrong much of the time. Economists are spinning at this point with no real facts. Neither candidate's economic plans have been written in stone... In regard to Trump's previous economy, that is just a hard one to dance around --- it was a good economy and one would be hard-pressed to call it anything else. Stats do not lie.
However, it's important to note that while the GDP grew at this rate, the average annual GDP growth under Biden so far is reported at around 2.2% One must take all stats into account.
During Donald Trump's presidency, the average GDP growth rate was approximately 2.3%. This figure includes the strong economic performance in the early years of his administration, although it was affected by the economic although it was affected by the economic downturn caused by the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.
Before the COVID-19 pandemic, Donald Trump's average annual GDP growth rate was approximately 2.3%. Specifically, in 2018, the economy experienced a growth peak of AROUND 3%, which was the highest growth rate since 2005
One needs to consider all variables."Economists are spinning at this point with no real facts".
Well, luckily there is enough data on his 2017 tax code he enacted.
Executive Summary: The 2017 Trump Tax Law Was Skewed to the Rich, Expensive, and Failed to Deliver on Its Promises...
https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-t … ailed-to-0
This is just one of the multitude of economists, agencies have looked at Trump's previous policy...the 2017 tax act.
He currently isn't offering anything new for the future besides even larger tariffs that consumers will bear the brunt of. I have no interest in paying more for goods so that the top bracket and corporations can enjoy additional tax breaks.It's interesting that when it comes time to PAY taxes, we demand that wealthy pay a percentage of their income rather than the same amount others pay (what is "fair").
And when it comes time to cut taxes, we want to give the wealthy the same cut others get rather than the same percentage of their payments.
How does that work? In our greed, soak the rich harder every time we get the chance? Never attempt actual fairness, just the maximum we can rationalize as "fair"?I am against using tariffs to fund tax breaks for corporations and those in the top tax bracket.
Kimberly Clausing and Mary E. Lovely, two of the world’s leading experts on tax issues, estimate that the tariffs Trump wants to enact would cost the average US household more than $2,600. (This estimate was published by the Peterson Institute for International Economics.
"While targeted tariffs can have a useful role in trade policy, economists agree that tariffs, particularly broad-based tariffs, raise the prices paid by consumers and businesses on the goods and services they buy,” wrote Steve Wamhoff, federal policy director at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, in a Monday report.
“The sweeping tariffs proposed by Trump, which are far larger than any on the books today, would raise the prices faced by American consumers across the income scale,” he added. “Because lower- and middle-income families must spend a larger share of their earnings to make ends meet, this would have a particularly noticeable impact on their household budgets.”
No thanks.
https://www.project-syndicate.org/comme … on-2024-10Nice sidestep. The topic was the size of tax breaks given people, and the greed of people wanting what others have.
Not tariffs.There is nothing greedy about the middle class not wanting to take up the slack because we lose revenue due to tax cuts for the individuals in the top brackets and corporations.
The middle class relies on big businesses because they create jobs, drive innovation, and provide opportunities for economic mobility. Large companies offer employment that allows middle-class individuals to earn stable incomes, receive benefits like health insurance, and build careers. Additionally, big businesses often support smaller companies through supply chains, generating more opportunities for the middle class to thrive. Without these opportunities, the ability to stay in or advance within the middle class becomes more challenging, as small businesses alone might not provide the same scale of economic growth or stability.
It's a mutual relationship, business doesn't exist without consumers, the majority of which are middle class.
I'm not in favor of paying additional tariffs so that the wealthy can have more tax breaks. Literally no one thinks that this is sound policy.Trump’s plan to bring manufacturing back to the U.S. involves more than just tariffs. While tariffs are a key part of his strategy to make imported goods more expensive and American-made products more competitive, there are other important factors in his broader economic plan. For example, Trump has advocated for cutting corporate taxes to make it more attractive for businesses to operate in the U.S. By lowering the tax burden, companies might find it financially beneficial to move their operations here or expand domestically. Additionally, he’s focused on reducing regulations that some businesses see as overly burdensome, making it easier for them to start or grow their operations in the U.S. Trump also emphasizes trade deals that favor American businesses, hoping to create a more balanced and fair global trade environment. Together, these variables—tariffs, tax cuts, deregulation, and trade deals—are designed to encourage companies to invest in American workers and bring manufacturing jobs back home.
He’s taking a bold stand, but I believe it’s better to focus on bringing jobs back from overseas and creating more opportunities and security for future generations. Simply adopting the socialist approach of penalizing the wealthy isn’t the answer, in my view. If we go down that path, many would likely leave for more business-friendly countries, taking jobs with them. I’d think we would have learned from the economic fallout that followed NAFTA.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) is generally regarded as left-leaning due to its focus on policies that promote social welfare, economic equity, and government assistance programs. Founded in 1981, the organization often advocates for progressive policies, such as expanded social safety nets and increased funding for low-income families. Their positions have frequently aligned with Democratic administrations, having opposed Republican tax cuts and welfare reforms, citing concerns about their impact on vulnerable populations.
CBPP has received funding from several progressive foundations and organizations, including the Ford Foundation and the Democracy Alliance, which further underscores its alignment with left-leaning causes
I think you might want to check out their poor reputation regarding predicting --- While the organization provides insights regarding the economy, some critiques highlight that their projections can be overly optimistic, and biased, particularly regarding the impacts of specific policies, such as the American Rescue Plan. I mean we all know how that turned out.
The economy does better under the Democrats... Statement from a stable genius..
https://youtu.be/_k2og1ZmZhw?si=HSijmlUm9VSDxtTY
"We've had some pretty bad disasters under the Republicans". Lol
Why did he change his mind?"The middle class grows the economy, not the rich. "
Without the wealthy, who are the primary job creators, we would experience no growth at all. There would be fewer jobs and fewer people contributing to taxes. It's puzzling that more people don't recognize this connection. Social programs rely on tax dollars, and without jobs, our revenue decreases significantly. Many have tried to punish the rich with high taxes, but it never worked well...
1. The Great Depression (1929–1939)
President Herbert Hoover (Republican, 1929–1933)
The stock market crash in 1929 led to a massive economic downturn.
While it started under Hoover, the economy WORSENDED in the early years of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s administration (1933–1945), as the nation faced severe unemployment, bank failures, and poverty.
However, FDR's New Deal policies are often credited with stabilizing the economy in the long term, though critics argue that these policies may have prolonged the depression in some ways.
2. 1970s Stagflation (High Inflation and Unemployment)
President Jimmy Carter (Democrat, 1977–1981)
The late 1970s saw a combination of high inflation, slow economic growth, and high unemployment, often referred to as "stagflation."
Key factors included the oil embargo of 1973 and energy crisis, which led to soaring oil prices. While Carter did implement policies to curb inflation, such as appointing Paul Volcker as Federal Reserve Chair, these measures also led to high interest rates and a significant recession during Carter’s term.
3. 2008 Financial Crisis (Mortgage Crisis)
President George W. Bush (Republican, 2001–2009)
The financial crisis of 2008 technically began under Bush, due to a burst in the housing bubble, predatory lending, and a collapse in major financial institutions.
President Barack Obama (Democrat, 2009–2017) inherited the economic fallout, and while his administration passed the stimulus package to help the recovery, critics argue that the bailout policies did not do enough to help the middle class and exacerbated income inequality.
4. Post-Pandemic Economic Struggles (2020–Present)
President Joe Biden (Democrat, 2021–Present)
His administration passed several stimulus packages and infrastructure bills, but critics argue that these policies have contributed to inflation and could lead to long-term economic instability.I strongly agree with Trump's position that Democrats do better with the economy.
I believe in what history reveals, and factual stats. Not predicted stats, but what comes to fruition, good or bad. I saw a good economy under Trump and a very bad economy under Biden. The stats just show the facts.
Former Bush 1 & 2 aids along with Dick Cheney... these are the folks openly throwing their support behind Harris.
While the likes of Tulsi Gabbard, RFK Jr., Elon Musk, etc. are openly throwing their support behind Trump.
I would think, with everything we KNOW about Dick Cheney and WMDs and the never-ending Iraq war/occupation some people might have a question about why he supports Harris?
Is it because there is some truth to the Military Industrial Complex that Dwight Eisenhower warned about over 60 years ago?
Is it because America is an Oligarchy on the verge of becoming a nation that subordinates its needs to wants of the UN?
Hmmmm... strange that people who Liberals and Progressives despised a few years ago now work for Harris.... while people the Liberals and Progressives loved a few years ago, now support Trump.I tend to align my beliefs with individuals I've come to respect for their intelligence and innate common sense. It's not surprising to me to see support from former aides of Presidents Bush and Dick Cheney for Harris.
I find more credibility in endorsements from figures like Tulsi Gabbard, RFK Jr., and Elon Musk backing Trump. Their viewpoints resonate with my values and understanding of the current political landscape. For me, it boils down to trusting those whose judgment I admire, regardless of their past affiliations.
Interestingly, some people don't recognize that figures like Tulsi Gabbard, Elon Musk, and RFK Jr. were once firmly aligned with the Democratic Party but are now supporting Trump's America First agenda. Their shift gives me confidence that common sense is still alive and well in our political discourse. It shows that individuals can evolve and prioritize what they believe is best for the country, regardless of past affiliations.
Just my view, I find all three very unique, very intelligent, and all have the wonderful quality of great courage. I must smile.I believe Kennedy, Gabbard and Musk are far more informed and have a far better grasp of what is at stake than the typical American... unfortunately.
I don't really blame Americans, they are blasted with lies and propaganda 24/7 from American mainstream media sources that were bought out and are controlled by the same people who control our politicians in DC.
It will be a shocking revelation that I am wrong about the majority of my fellow Americans if there is a wave of support for Trump.
I don't believe it will happen... Americans are self-centered, short-sighted, ill-informed and poorly educated on what is going on in the world... they aren't likely to be well informed on any topic that doesn't directly impact them, or worse, they just regurgitate the nonsense the likes of Morning Joe puts out there for them to consume.I see where you're coming from, and I tend to agree. However, as you pointed out, people will focus on what impacts them most—like the economy and the border. It’s definitely a double punch. Things are tight, but I think this week we’ll see Trump pick up in the polls, and momentum might be shifting. It’s hard to say for sure, though. I mean, look at what the left has managed to sell to so many. I’ve never seen anything like it—it almost feels like mass brainwashing. And I don’t think some of the key players even realize they’re part of this phenomenon.
I think Morning Joe is a robot -- I mean his head is huge. Yes, a robot. Sorry, can't stand him.
How on Earth did he have the opinion that Democrats do better with the economy and then do a 180 on that opinion? I would think that the most logical reason would be that he has never truly understood economics or even how an economy works.
I have no idea when Trump offered that statement, or in the context he made it. I would assume this was a statement from when he was a card-carrying Democrat. Before he decided he was supporting the wrong party.
It was in 2004 in an interview with Wolf Blitzer. Honestly I don't think he understands anything about economics whatsoever.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MAGANAZI/s/NQPsdZbJTkI'm not quite sure what you're getting at. You know that Trump was a Democrat for much of his life, right? It wasn't until 2009 that he parted ways with the party, claiming that the Democratic Party had changed and that he no longer shared the same values or ideologies. I would assume in 2004 when he made the comment, he was being truthful. He likely respected some of the economic policies from previous Democratic administrations.
I've noted a few presidents whose policies he may have been referring to. In fact, in some respects, Trump's proposals in his new economic plan somewhat mirror parts of the three economic policies from the administrations I mention below. Just to clarify, I want to emphasize that I'm using the word "somewhat."
John F. Kennedy's presidency saw a moderate economic expansion, characterized by an increase in jobs and a focus on stimulating the economy through tax CUTS and public spending.
Lyndon Johnson presided over significant economic growth, largely due to his "Great Society" programs and the Vietnam War spending. However, this also led to inflationary pressures. Johnson did implement tax CUTS during his administration, primarily through the Revenue Act of 1964.
Clinton's administration is often cited for its strong economic performance. He benefited from a tech boom, resulting in low unemployment and budget surpluses. Under his leadership, the economy added millions of jobs and enjoyed significant growth. During Bill Clinton's presidency, he raised taxes for the wealthiest Americans slightly Specifically, the income tax rate for individuals in the top 1.2% of wage earners was increased from 31% to 36%.
Should I look into your gal’s past? Well, maybe just a few years ago will suffice. It seems like she still identifies as a Democrat, but her views have shifted in recent years to resemble someone I wouldn't recognize from just a couple of years back.
During her 2019 presidential campaign, she expressed a commitment to banning fracking,
Yes, Harris initially supported the "Medicare for All" proposal during her 2019 presidential campaign. She expressed a commitment to universal healthcare coverage and suggested a plan that would eliminate private insurance.
In 2019, Kamala Harris supported providing gender-affirming care, including surgeries, for transgender individuals in prison.
Kamala Harris expressed support for the "defund the police" movement in a June 2020 radio interview, emphasizing the need to examine police budgets and prioritize funding for community services like education and healthcare.
2020 Harris has consistently expressed support for gender-affirming care for transgender youth. She believes that these youths deserve the right to make decisions about their own bodies and health, emphasizing that access to such care is essential.
Seems she has really changed her tune in the past few years...
Are these kinds of lies helpful?
Trump speaking in Aurora Colorado...
"Kamala has imported an army of illegal alien gang members and migrant criminals from the dungeons of the third world,” said Trump. “And she has had them resettled, beautifully, into your community to prey upon innocent American citizens, that’s what they’re doing. And no place is it more evident than right here.”
But local officials in Aurora have forcefully pushed back against Trump’s claims — saying his remarks about international gangs in the city are an exaggeration.
Aurora Mayor Mike Coffman, a Republican said he hoped Trump would take the time to tour the city.
Coffman’s message to Trump? “I'm excited for you to come here so I could show you that the narrative that is being presented nationally about this city isn't true, that there are no apartment complexes under gang control, that the city's not under gang control, Venezuelan gang control.”
Why didn't Trump take him up on that offer? He was also offered to meet with the Chief of Police... Declined that offer also.
Didn't want to be confronted with the truth I suppose.
Gov. Jared Polis acknowledged at a press conference ahead of Trump’s rally that there are victims of crime in Aurora, but noted that statistics show the city has gotten safer over the last two years and said Trump is distorting the truth.
“It really just shows, as a matter of character, that very often when he speaks, former President Trump doesn’t seem to care who he hurts with his words and his rhetoric or the consequences of what he says,” said Polis.
So after his trash talking of Detroit he continued on in Aurora. Helpful?
https://www.npr.org/2024/10/11/nx-s1-51 … rado-rallyTrump is politicking...
There’s no question that Trump is campaigning on the challenges posed by migrants in American cities, and political tactics like this are common in elections. While it's tempting to criticize the opposing side, such tactics can often be seen as unproductive. He is coming out as very hyperbolic, due to it is an issue that is on many American's minds presently.Politicking with human lives, at least for me, is not ok. This is just straight up fear-mongering. There is literally no one that Trump will not throw under the bus...and then back up over them... repeatedly.
Character matters.Trump is highlighting the issue of migrant crime, and it's about time someone did. He’s exposing the brutal rapes and murders committed by migrants with alarming criminal histories from their home countries, now being repeated in America due to Biden’s failed border policies, including catch-and-release with minimal vetting. This administration has lost track of over 300,000 unaccompanied children, and Trump is one of the few bringing this to the public’s attention. I appreciate his unfiltered approach and his frustration over the consequences of Biden’s open borders. I hope he keeps alerting Americans to the dangerous realities these policies are bringing to our cities.
Yes just as Harris does with the many mistruths she tells. Comments about the COVID-19 vaccine – In a 2020 debate, Harris suggested she wouldn’t trust a COVID-19 vaccine if it was developed during the Trump administration, without scientific backing. Wonder how many listened to her?
At a Harris rally, she claimed that Donald Trump intends to cut Social Security and Medicare, I Wonder how that went over with seniors.
She lies constantly, her entire agenda is a lie in my view. And she well knows it. Yes, character does matter.
Kettle calling pot...Kamala Harris is definitely not grounded in reality insofar as she wouldn't know the truth if it were staring her in the face.
Jason, I agree, it's frustrating to see her making promises she knows she can't keep. She's offering all kinds of freebies, but we know they're empty. It’s not just about giving things away for free—it’s about being truthful and realistic with the public. I'm glad to see her polls fading, and hopefully, Trump will come out on top. It feels like she's fizzled out. But with things getting this bad, we know the Democrats can get desperate, and they might resort to some kind of cheap ploy. Not sure how they could outdo themselves from all they have done to Trump--- but I put nothing past them. One can almost bet they will come up with something.
But a mass deportation of 10 million people is truthful and realistic?
Trump has shared in his speeches and interviews his plans for deporting migrants, emphasizing a return to the stricter enforcement measures he implemented during his presidency. He has even mentioned that he would cancel Biden’s app Customs and Border Protection program, which offers migrants a fly-in option, on his first day in office. One of the key points he makes is about ending Catch and Release; he has stated that he would reinstate policies that allow for the immediate deportation of migrants caught crossing the border illegally instead of releasing them into the U.S. while they await hearings. He frequently refers to the need to complete the southern border wall, claiming that it would deter illegal crossings and facilitate the deportation of migrants. Additionally, Trump has promised to strengthen border security measures by deploying more border agents and utilizing technology to prevent illegal crossings. He has indicated that he would take legal action against cities and states that implement sanctuary policies, arguing that such policies hinder federal immigration enforcement. He also suggests that, under his administration, deportation proceedings would be expedited to ensure that migrants without legal status are removed from the U.S. more quickly. Regarding asylum policies, Trump has criticized Biden’s approach and stated that he would reinstate previous measures that limit asylum claims, particularly from migrants he argues do not qualify.
Overall, Trump's statements reflect a broader stance on immigration reform that focuses on enforcement and limiting immigration rather than providing pathways to citizenship or permanent residency for undocumented migrants.
I am just happy to see he is not on board with giving prisoner gender reassignment surgery. I mean, not up for my tax dollars being spent on illegal criminal sex changes who have ended up in our prisons. Not to mention a FEMA program that cares for all their needs. I hope he will cancel that incentive too.Are you referring to the parole program that many are saying has been successful at reducing migration and a humanitarian crisis on the southern border? The program that has provided a safe pathway to the U.S. for desperate migrants who would otherwise be amassing on the southern border, paying human smugglers and bogging down border agents.?
The program that requires migrants paroled in to have a sponsor who vouches for them financially?
Yes they can apply online, and wait in their own country (currently it's only applicable in four countries) while their application is considered and they are vetted. These people then purchase their own airfare. .
Advocates for the program have also stated that the policy helped greatly with the U.S. farm labor shortage.
So it's a good idea for Trump to get rid of this? Better for them to just to show up at the border again?
In terms of "catch and release". I don't see that anything he is proposing is actually legal. Our immigration law allows people awaiting adjudication of their asylum claims to wait in the country.... How is he going to change this without Congress?
A wall? If I'm a migrant what do I care if there's a wall that I can approach and claim asylum immediately?
Let's be real...
The decades-long flows of largely young Mexican males crossing illicitly and evading the Border Patrol have been replaced by Central Americans fleeing a mixture of violence and poverty. Increasing numbers of families and unaccompanied children who seek out Border Patrol agents so they can turn themselves in and apply for asylum.
What are the stats on "migrant" crime?
Again, there is no limit on the number that can come to our border and claim asylum. They're also allowed to wait in our country as their claim is processed. This is law. It is a fact that we have limited detention facility. So-called catch and release is nothing new. The Trump administration used it also. What is the alternative? The alternative that is allowed under our immigration law? The same laws that existed under Trump as are currently in place. Yes he was able to use the "wait in Mexico" policy. Mexico decided they no longer wanted to be a part of our immigration solutions. Go figure. What lawful solutions does Trump propose to deal with surges at the border? And I mean solutions that are lawful and won't be quickly struck down by the courts, as many of his attempts were during his administration.
Losing 300,000 children? That has been debunked so many times.I suggest you read this article we have over 300,000 UACs that have fallen into the cracks. https://www.homelandsecuritynewswire.co … g?page=0,0
In regard to the statistics on violent crimes committed by illegal migrants, even one incident is too many for me. I am certainly aware of the horrific cases that have been highlighted by Trump and others. These stories serve as a stark reminder of the serious issues surrounding immigration and public safety.This claim misrepresents information in an August report published by the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of the Inspector General, which faulted Immigration and Customs Enforcement for failing to consistently “monitor the location and status of unaccompanied migrant children” once they are released from federal government custody.
The report noted that more than 291,000 unaccompanied migrant children had not, as of May 2024, received a notice to appear in court. Additionally, more than 32,000 unaccompanied migrant children got a notice to appear but then failed to show up for immigration court hearings. Those figures came from ICE and covered a period from October 2018 to September 2023. During that period there were a total of 448,820 unaccompanied children released by ICE to the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Refugee Resettlement.
But experts say it is a stretch to refer to roughly 300,000 children as “lost” or “missing.”
Plus, President Joe Biden only entered the White House partway through this period. It includes approximately 15 months when Trump was president and does not specify how many children arrived in the U.S. under each president.
Experts say there are many reasons why the children might not have appeared for hearings or received a notice to appear in the first place. For example, they only get a notice to appear when removal proceedings against them have begun, and if ICE hasn’t started that removal process, they wouldn’t have gotten a notice in the first place.
A lack of communication between government agencies could mean a notice is sent to the wrong address if it has been updated with one agency and not another. A child’s guardian may be unable to take them to court, perhaps because they live on the other side of the state.
The report does not provide any explanations.
“All of these factors can explain some of the deficiencies and a conclusion that the children are missing could be very, very premature,” said Raul Pinto, deputy legal director for transparency at the American Immigration Council.
Carmen Hills, an ICE spokesperson, said the agency agreed with the inspector general’s recommendations to improve information sharing within ICE and externally with HHS, but disagreed with the suggestion that the children are missing.
“We are concerned that the report’s findings are misleading and may be misconstrued because they fail to acknowledge key facts,” she said.
Hills said ICE does not generally issue court notices to unaccompanied children “until after they have been placed with sponsors who have been vetted by HHS” so that they can get settled and seek legal help.
The report found the number of unaccompanied children who missed their court dates may have been higher than 32,000 had ICE issued notices or scheduled court dates for those children. But it does not say those children were “lost.”
https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-m … 9e952baa8bLOL -- no just can't find them. I have no faith in any of the Federal agencies under Biden. Zero.
Congress is investigating the situation regarding unaccompanied migrant children, particularly focusing on the significant number of children who have gone missing. Recently, over 40 Republican lawmakers, led by Rep. Dan Bishop and Sen. Charles Grassley, sent a letter (Sep 23, 2024) to President Biden and Vice President Harris expressing concerns about the handling of unaccompanied minors by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). They accuse the administration of a "cover-up" concerning the safety and welfare of these vulnerable children.
Reports indicate that more than 500,000 unaccompanied children have entered the U.S. during the Biden administration, with a concerning number—recent estimates suggest around 325,000—being unaccounted for
The lawmakers are particularly worried about the inadequately vetted sponsors to whom these children have been placed, leading to instances of exploitation and human trafficking. Grassley's office has been actively working to locate these missing children but claims to face obstacles in obtaining cooperation from the Biden administration.
The investigation and demands for accountability are escalating as lawmakers push for transparency and better oversight of the processes surrounding these unaccompanied minorsBut these media reports are misleading—ICE is the immigration enforcement agency whose mission is to remove individuals, including children, who do not have a legal basis to remain in the United States. It is not a child welfare agency, and it did not “lose” these children. The OIG report reflects paperwork gaps, not lost children.
A deeper understanding of the processes children endure when faced with removal proceedings and why they so often are ordered deported raises some doubts about the characterization of the Inspector General’s analysis.
The Inspector General’s report looked specifically at data from fiscal years 2019 to 2023. During such this period, immigration courts issued 32,000 orders of removal in absentia against unaccompanied minors for failure to show up to their scheduled hearings. The report claims that the number of minors that are unaccounted for could be higher because ICE had not served Notices to Appear – the document that begins individuals’ removal proceedings – to roughly 291,000 minors. The report suggests that the scheduled hearings provide ICE with the opportunity to observe the minors in court and screen them for signs of trafficking or other forms of danger.
The Inspector General’s analysis fails to explore any potential explanations for why the children were unaccounted for, recklessly suggesting that the children’s safety may be in question. The report blames the lack of coordination between the agencies as among the reasons for failure to track children after their release from government custody, but this ignores the reality that children are placed with sponsors (and should not be presumed “missing”), not guaranteed legal counsel, and may not know how to update their addresses with ICE ( which is a separate system from the immigration courts). In addition, ICE under the Trump administration targeted sponsors and those residing in the same household as unaccompanied children for arrest, detention, and deportation, creating an atmosphere of intimidation and mistrust between sponsor families and immigration enforcement agencies.
The report also fails to analyze the number of children who were initially processed by DHS and may have pending applications for relief with USCIS, as the benefits-granting agency is not mentioned in the report’s methodology.
The lack of a current address on file does not mean that the children have been trafficked, are lost, or that their parents or sponsors are purposely evading immigration proceedings. Quite the contrary, a majority of the children may be residing in loving homes, attending school, and acclimating to their new surroundings after being reunited with family members in the United States.
Certainly, the Inspector General’s estimates include some cases where children did not show up to court. But it is important to remember that children navigate this adversarial system routinely without the help of legal representatives to remind them of their court obligations and are often unable to travel to court without the direct assistance of their sponsor. In 2023, only 56% of unaccompanied children were represented by counsel. From 2005 through June 2019—the most recent available data—98% of children with lawyers appeared for their hearings.
If politicians truly cared about the welfare of immigrant children, they should advocate for measures that consider children’s special needs and take a holistic approach to protect against exploitation and trafficking.
Let's remember...While HHS "makes every effort to voluntarily check on children after we unite them with parents or sponsors and offer certain post-unification services, we no longer have legal oversight once they leave our custody," an HHS spokesperson told Axios, adding that many sponsors do not return phone calls or don't want to be reached out to.
So do we want to change the policies? Or do we just want to campaign on distorting the actual policies that have existed for a very long time.
https://immigrationimpact.com/2024/09/0 … n-missing/"The OIG report reflects paperwork gaps, not lost children."
Come on --- paperwork gaps... believe what you're told to believe. No problem here. There are hundreds of children unaccounted for... Guess there is paperwork on them. How comforting.
This is even better --- "HHS spokesperson told Axios, adding that many sponsors do not return phone calls or don't want to be reached out to."
So no problem.
"The lack of a current address on file does not mean that the children have been trafficked, are lost, or that their parents or sponsors are purposely evading immigration proceedings. Quite the contrary, a majority of the children may be residing in loving homes, attending school, and acclimating to their new surroundings after being reunited with family members in the United States."
And what does that mean? "They might be"—"does not mean"—"or maybe"? These kids could be in unimaginable danger; they might be victims of sex trafficking or even dead. The phrases like "maybe" and "could be" are just ways of evading the truth. The fact is, no one knows where these children are or what’s happening to them. Bottom line: they’re missing.Curiously, OIG notes that even when some in ICE leadership tried to improve the agency’s handling and tracking of UACs, there wasn’t much follow-up or improvement...
,"Despite its responsibilities for overseeing UACs through the immigration process, we found ICE cannot always monitor the location and status of UACS once they were released from DHS and HHS custody."
ICE’s “Limited Authority to Respond” to Abuses. Saving what’s the worst for last, OIG ends that report by noting ICE claims there’s not much the agency can do for those children “beyond managing UACs’ immigration cases”:
"Even if ICE were to identify UACS in unsafe conditions, the agency has limited authority to respond. ICE personnel at two field offices affirmed this and explained they had identified UACs in unsafe conditions but were unable to intervene. One ICE officer expressed concern with not being able to take action in a case involving a UAC whose sponsor claimed the UAC was in an inappropriate relationship with her husband."
I’m actually sympathetic to that ICE complaint, as well as to similar ORR claims that it has only limited responsibility for UACs after they are released from its care.
That’s because the sponsors of the HSA and TVPRA viewed INS (and then DHS) as not only the biggest threat to migrant children, but the only real threat those kids faced, at least on this side of the border.
Once those children were released into the United States, their implicit logic went, they’d go to parents and guardians who’d have their best interests at heart and would protect them at all costs. Even though that’s plainly not how it’s always worked out in practice, Congress has failed to fix the laws.
That’s despite the fact that in June 2014. President Barack Obama, no immigration hawk, asked congressional leadership to give DHS “additional authority to exercise discretion in processing the return and removal of unaccompanied minor children from non-contiguous countries like Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador” , that is, to close the non-contiguous UAC loophole, and end these abuses.
Congress never acted, which simply proves how hard it is to fix bad laws when demagogues can use children as props.
The rules surrounding the care of UACs are some of the most complex in immigration law, a subject with no lack of complexity, and few legislators are apparently willing to delve deeply enough into the subject to address the inevitable wrath that will follow from any amendments to section 235 of the TVPRA.
The laws that smugglers and adults exploit to smuggle unaccompanied alien children into the United States should be scrapped, if for no other reason than that the government lacks the resources and authority to ensure those children’s safety. That likely won’t happen, so expect this most recent OIG alert on missed ICE opportunities to protect UACs to be forgotten.
Congress never acted, which simply proves how hard it is to fix bad laws when demagogues can use children as props.
People need to let this sink in...
remember..."While HHS "makes every effort to voluntarily check on children after we unite them with parents or sponsors and offer certain post-unification services, we no longer have legal oversight once they leave our custody,"
There really is so little genuine effort to understand the policies, laws and the agency interaction that govern the manner in which this process is conducted. The issue of loss of contact with these children is not new. Is anyone actually interested in fixing it in congress? Nah.
Where are the bills to make changes in the process?
Anyone who reads the entire OIG report will clearly understand the system and see its flaws. But no, many aren't doing that they are just picking up on the "lost" rhetoric
Has anyone read all of the recommendations in the report? Who can act on these recommendations? Does anyone really even care? Besides making political points. Folks, read the report and then let me know what you think.
My summary of the report and what Republicans are twisting?
The key finding? The August 2024 report from the Department of Homeland Security’s inspector general.... It found Immigration and Customs Enforcement has been unable to keep track of all unaccompanied minors released from government custody.
https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/f … -aug24.pdf
Harris's doctor says.."She possesses the physical and mental resiliency required to successfully execute the duties of the Presidency,”
Will Trump be submitting a health, mental health record also?
I have a lot of concerns about his physical and mental health.He has consistently provided his medical records, and I won't make assumptions about his health. I haven't seen anything that would suggest he's ill or facing cognitive challenges. If asked, he might agree to a check-up. I find it hypocritical to express concern about Trump's health while not raising similar issues regarding Biden.
Trump is running to lead this country for the next 4 years. He is extremely overweight, always looks sweaty and out of breath. It seems as though he has increasing difficulty in putting together logical sentences. Yes I'd like to know if he's healthy both physically and mentally. The idea of a vance presidency is probably even more unappealing than a trump presidency.
Overweight? Have you taken a good look around? LOL. I’ve never really seen anything that would make me think he has any health problems. His schedule is nonstop, and he plays golf every chance he gets. I rarely notice any issues with his speech. His demeanor is calm, and he doesn’t put on airs—he seems comfortable in any situation. I feel Trump was a good president, and would be again. The man loves America and hopes to make it better. I don't think one could ask for more. I feel he has what it takes to keep his word.
I like this...
"Harris said she will create a bipartisan council of advisers if elected president...
“In order for us as America to maintain our status as the strongest democracy in the world, we need a healthy two-party system. It’s in the best interest of all of us,”
"I don’t want any ‘yes’ people. I want people to come in and kick the tires on ideas because the best ideas will survive those kinds of challenges, and the best ideas will then be most relevant to the American people, most effective to the American people,”
That's productive. That's trying to build a bridge rather than blowing it up.Harris says a lot of things... to try and win the election.
What the reality will most likely be, is a continuation of everything we have seen during the Biden-Harris 4 year run...
They try to clean up their act for the election, try to divert blame to Trump for things like the Border (you have to be one dumb SOB to believe that BS BTW)... and they will go right back to doing what worked so well their first 3 years after they win the election.Hey Ken, it seems like the tide might finally be shifting a bit. Harris has started to lose ground in the polls, and this week could indicate she’s on a downhill slide. So, what’s the next move for the Democrats? It’s not like they’re above pulling some wild stunt, right? Have you heard anything? Any brewing plots? Haven’t they already thrown the kitchen sink at him, or is there still a spare one lying around?
Harris doesn't need people to "kick the tires" of her ideas. All she needs is honesty and a working brain to show how virtually ALL of her great ideas are harmful to the country, Americans and even the world.
Yes, Harris has emphasized the importance of a healthy two-party system in her political messaging, similar to sentiments expressed by President Biden. In her remark, she highlighted the need for bipartisan cooperation to strengthen democracy. This is regurgitated Biden's BS --- He had the same themes of unity and bipartisanship, which he has often discussed during his presidency and campaign. Both leaders advocate for collaboration across party lines to address national challenges and maintain the integrity of American democracy. Connected at the hp. Maybe she could think of something that he did not come up with. I mean this bunch is full of really overused rhetoric.
I would think you would have realized that the bridge isn’t one that the other side wants to repair. The ideologies are so far apart that there’s no room for any kind of reconciliation when it comes to giving up ones values.
Migrant crime statistics?
"Undocumented Immigrants Offending Rate Lower Than U.S.-Born Citizen Rate"
The study (using data gathered from Texas because it is one of the only states that identifies migrant status) found that undocumented immigrants are arrested at less than half the rate of native-born U.S. citizens for violent and drug crimes and a quarter the rate of native-born citizens for property crimes.
The migrant crime wave is not supported by actual statistics. It's just fear-mongering.
My conclusion? When our native born fools commit crimes should we find a way to deport them?
https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/und … tizen-rateThe expectation that migrants awaiting asylum hearings should refrain from committing crimes stems from the principles of personal responsibility and respect for the legal system. When individuals seek asylum, they are often fleeing persecution, violence, or dire circumstances in their home countries. This act of seeking refuge is fundamentally about finding safety and stability, and engaging in criminal behavior undermines that very request.
Committing crimes while in the process of seeking asylum raises concerns about the individual's intentions and respect for the laws of the host country. It suggests a disregard for the legal process and the safety of the community, which is contrary to the purpose of seeking asylum. According to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), asylum seekers are expected to abide by the laws of the country they seek refuge in, which includes not engaging in criminal activities while their cases are pendingg the actions of asylum seekers with those of American citizens who commit crimes is misleading. Native-born citizens are subject to different legal frameworks and societal norms, having been born into a system that offers them certain rights and responsibilities. While criminal behavior by any individual should be addressed, the context of asylum seekers is different. The asylum process is intended for individuals genuinely in need of protection, and if someone commits crimes during this time, it raises questions about why they were not vetted properly, and not just let into our Nation.
A new report estimates middle-class families would pay an extra $3,370 per year for imported goods...
Cool? Anything to keep our top bracket happy?
"The former president and current Republican presidential nominee believes that taxing American importers of foreign goods will spark a manufacturing renaissance at home. But their ultimate effect is unknown, since no economy in modern history has instituted a 20% universal tariff, as Trump is proposing.".
While targeted tariffs can have a useful role in trade policy, economists agree that tariffs, particularly broad-based tariffs, raise the prices paid by consumers and businesses on the goods and services they buy,” wrote Steve Wamhoff, federal policy director at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, in a Monday report.
“The sweeping tariffs proposed by Trump, which are far larger than any on the books today, would raise the prices faced by American consumers across the income scale,” he added. “Because lower- and middle-income families must spend a larger share of their earnings to make ends meet, this would have a particularly noticeable impact on their household budgets.”
Wamhoff estimated that a 20% tariff on all imported goods, and a 60% tariff on imports from China, would cost a family among the poorest 20% of Americans $930 per year, while the middle 20% earning between $55,100 and $94,100 annually would pay an extra $3,370 per year.
The tariffs would cost a family in the richest 1% $42,050, but that figure would be more than compensated by the lower income and business taxes that Trump has proposed.... Oh thank goodness for that right?!
Again, who is interested in funding this tax break?
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-t … t-cb7ad9afThe Cons of Trump as candidate? He has shown us continually that he is willing to lie about anything...
His statement..
"It has just come out that Democrats in Washington and the Democrat Governor’s Office of North Carolina (Roy Cooper) were blocking people and money from coming into North Carolina to help people in desperate need,” Trump wrote.
“Biden knew about it, and so did Kamala! It’s all over the place — A HORRIBLE SITUATION. I will make it up to everyone when we take Office on January 20th. HOLD ON, I’M COMING!” he added in the post.
Trump and his allies, including Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and tech billionaire Elon Musk, have repeatedly attempted to spread misinformation in the wake of hurricanes Helene and Milton.".
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watc … aster-aid/As of Oct 11, 2024
As of now, North Carolina residents have not received more direct personal payments beyond the $750 that was previously distributed, at least not in the form of widespread, additional funds specifically meant to "tide them over." While various assistance programs like unemployment benefits, rental assistance, and food support may still be available for those in need, the state hasn't rolled out any new rounds of direct financial payments to citizens similar to that $750
Trump clearly was speaking about the $750.00 that was given immediately to tide them over. He clearly felt that amount was insufficient.
While there hasn't been specific evidence that Democrats or Governor Cooper intentionally blocked aid, there are often delays and political disagreements over how relief funds are distributed. In this case, Trump's remark could reflect his general frustration with Democratic leadership, implying that they were obstructing efforts to get assistance quickly to the people of North Carolina.
There have been mixed reports regarding the speed of FEMA's response to recent disasters, including in North Carolina. Some individuals and local leaders have expressed frustration with delays in receiving aid, citing the typical bureaucratic process that can slow things down. For example, it can take time for damage assessments to be completed, for relief funds to be distributed, and for logistical support to reach all affected areas."It has just come out that Democrats in Washington and the Democrat Governor’s Office of North Carolina (Roy Cooper) were blockingpeople and money from coming into North Carolina to help people in desperate need,” Trump wrote.
No, no one is blocking aid money from coming into North carolina. He needs to stop.
This is a flat out lie,” Cooper wrote in a post Friday on social platform X. “We’re working with all partners around the clock to get help to people. Trump’s lies and conspiracy theories have hurt the morale of first responders and people who lost everything, helped scam artists and put government and rescue workers in danger.”
Like I said, Trump will throw anyone under the bus if it suits his purpose. Does he really not understand how FEMA works and that the $750 is just for immediate needs? And that claims can be filed to cover well beyond that? Clueless or just lying?There have been multiple reports highlighting frustrations among North Carolina residents regarding the slow response and inadequate support after Hurricane Helene, despite the recent $273 million relief allocation from the state legislature. Many citizens feel that promised assistance has not materialized as quickly as needed, leaving them in a precarious situation.
In community meetings, residents have expressed their concerns. One remarked, “It’s been weeks since the storm, and we’re still waiting for basic supplies and support.” Another voiced frustration, saying, “They talk about the funding, but where is it? We need help now, not in a month.” This dissatisfaction reflects a broader sense of urgency among those affected, as they struggle to navigate significant damage and uncertainty regarding the timing and nature of the aid they require.
These sentiments have been echoed across various local media outlets, emphasizing the gap between government assurances and the reality faced by residents on the ground. For more details on this situation, you can check sources like WNCN and The News & Observer.
Trump's comments on the response to Hurricane Helene do seem to be politically motivated, as he uses the situation to criticize FEMA and the current administration. This tactic appears to align with a broader trend in politics where disasters or crises become opportunities for political posturing. Many observers note that Trump's rhetoric can often be a means to rally his base and highlight perceived failures of Democratic leadership.
Comparisons can indeed be drawn to past political strategies, such as Hillary Clinton's approach during the 2016 election, where she often criticized Trump and his policies, and Joe Biden's tactics in the 2020 campaign, which included highlighting the shortcomings of the Trump administration in handling crises like the COVID-19 pandemic.
This type of political maneuvering, particularly during times of crisis, raises questions about the effectiveness and ethics of using disasters as leverage for political gain. Various sources have documented these trends, emphasizing how both parties have engaged in similar strategies to advance their agendas. I think the Dems win this kind of cheap politicking hands down... I’m not willing to back my claim or make comparisons if others didn't see or realize what happened as it unfolded. I’m not interested in trying to discuss the Democratic tactics from the last two elections, especially when I believe those strategies were cheap. I can already anticipate that we’ll see more of this shortly. They are becoming more desperate by the day. Maybe they could just rid themselves of Harris, and stick in another candidate. Mimic what they did with Biden.
I hope Trump fights fire with fire.
Pro or con?
Mark Harvey, who was Trump’s senior director for resilience policy on the National Security Council staff, told E&E News on Wednesday that Trump initially refused to approve disaster aid for California after deadly wildfires in 2018 because of the state’s Democratic leanings.
But Harvey said Trump changed his mind after Harvey pulled voting results to show him that heavily damaged Orange County, California, had more Trump supporters than the entire state of Iowa.
I suppose many Trump followers think this is a pro.
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/0 … r-00182419First, I'm sorry, but I find this perspective confusing. Logically, Trump well knew he could never turn California red. So, in my view, he did not even consider any form of political ploy. It seems that Mark Harvey isn't considering the realities of the political landscape in California, which tends to lean heavily Democratic. Seem he is not too bright... But wanted a bit of limelight. Hopefully, he can pull off an egg on his face.
Generally, Republicans have very little chance of winning a presidential election there. Trump has expressed hesitations about providing funding for the wildfires in California for various reasons, which may have been seen as politically motivated or based on the state's voting patterns.
Could Trump’s decision to hold back relief funds during the California fires be seen as strategic? After some criticism, he eventually allocated the funds, which shows that there was a response to the situation. Trump highlighted a significant reason for his hesitance: California's management of its forests, specifically their failure to properly cull dead trees, which he argued contributed to the severity of the wildfires. I appreciate a president who is unafraid to address real problems, even if it might upset some citizens. It takes true grit to point out such issues, and I respect leaders who are willing to face backlash for speaking the truth.
Could this be looked at as a Pro? Yes, in my view. He considered more than just adding a bandaid... He considered telling the hard truth. And look what happened----
Yes, California has been making efforts to improve forest management and culling practices in response to the increasing severity of wildfires. In 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom announced an initiative to accelerate forest thinning and prescribed burns. This plan aims to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfires by removing dead trees and underbrush that can fuel personally, California has increased funding for forest management programs, focusing on collaboration with local communities and organizations to enhance the health of the state's forests. The state has also been exploring innovative approaches, such as using the wood from culled trees for sustainable products, which can help offset some costs associated with forest management.
Thank you, Trump... I for one hope to save tax dollars for more important things than spending FEMA cash yearly on California's wildfires. And thank you Gavin N. for taking Trump's admonishment seriously, and acting on his well-placed suggestion.
Today Trump suggested using the military to handle what he called “the enemy from within” on Election Day, saying that he isn’t worried about chaos from his supporters or foreign actors, but instead from “radical left lunatics.”
Radical left lunatics? Who is he talking about?
He stated...
I think the bigger problem are the people from within. We have some very bad people. We have some sick people. Radical left lunatics,”
“I think it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military, because they can’t let that happen,” he added.
So Trump is suggesting that his fellow Americans are worse ‘enemies’ than foreign adversaries, and he is saying he would use the military against them?
Who talks like this? This is incredibly divisive. Fascism anyone?
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-suggesti … in-1968345It would be my guess he is referring to the type of Radical left lunatics that provided our nation with the "Summer Of Love". Not sure what rocks they crawled out from under. However, I am very sure they could emerge once again.
Maybe under the same Rock the J6 "Patriots" emerged from!?
But really calling half of the country lunatics? And threatening to use the military on them? What type of leader does that?
Fascism is what we are currently experiencing with the Biden regime. He imprisoned hundreds of innocent people on January 6th after the capital police opened the door for them to enter. THIS IS FASCISM!
Lol you mean the people who were beating police officers with flagpoles? The patriots? Ok.
Trump on Sunday proposed hiring 10,000 additional Border Patrol agents and giving them a $10,000 retention and signing bonus, after he derailed a bipartisan bill earlier this year that included funding for more border personnel.....
Gosh where have we heard that idea before...
Oh that's right, THE BIPARTISAN BORDER BILL
Didn't he and his followers call this a terrible bill? Thought we didn't need anything in that bill?
So, if God forbid, he should win the election, should Democrats in Congress oppose this idea? You know, for all the reasons that Republicans opposed the bipartisan bill?
https://apnews.com/article/trump-border … 83709eecb5"Are you referring to the parole program that many are saying has been successful at reducing migration and a humanitarian crisis on the southern border? The program that has provided a safe pathway to the U.S. "
Trump’s plan is clearly aimed at slowing the influx of asylum seekers, rather than making it easier to enter the U.S., as he works to fix what he sees as the problems created under Biden’s policies. Biden's air travel program, which facilitates easier entry, will end under Trump. His vision involves stricter controls and a more secure process for handling asylum seekers. Specifically, he wants to reduce the overall numbers and address the backlog of over 10 million cases waiting for hearings, due to Biden's come-on-in policies. With some estimated 20 million already in the system, Trump may prioritize those who can prove their cases or are needed workers, while removing criminals who should not be in the country. We need strong policies at this time to fix the pressing problems we are seeing from the huge Biden influx of migrants.
Trump's proposal to hire 10,000 additional Border Patrol agents, along with a $10,000 retention and signing bonus, reflects his longstanding emphasis on strengthening border security as a core aspect of his immigration policy. From his first presidential campaign, Trump has consistently focused on securing the U.S.-Mexico border, primarily through the construction of a physical barrier and enhancing enforcement. While the wall was a significant element of his initial plan, Trump has also advocated for bolstering the resources and manpower of agencies like U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). In addition to hiring more agents, his broader approach includes increasing the use of surveillance technologies, deploying military personnel to assist with border operations, and tightening asylum and immigration policies to deter illegal crossings. Despite his opposition to a bipartisan bill that addressed some border security needs earlier this year, Trump remains committed to building a comprehensive system that, in his view, will reduce illegal immigration, combat drug trafficking, and secure America's borders effectively.Biden's air travel program, which facilitates easier entry,
They are waiting in their own country, applying in their own country, instead of gathering on the border... Better to have them on the border, overwhelming agents? And waiting here?
How does Trump's plan reduce asylum exactly??? Please let's remember the immigration laws. Trump has no magic wand at his disposal.Keep in mind laws can be changed if the right Congress is placed.
Under Trump's proposed immigration policies, the practice of migrants simply walking into the United States, often referred to as "crossing the border illegally," will be actively discouraged through several measures. One significant approach would involve increasing the presence and capabilities of border enforcement agencies. Trump has suggested hiring more Border Patrol agents and deploying advanced technology, including drones and surveillance systems, to monitor and secure the border more effectively.
Trump has indicated plans to reinstate stricter immigration policies that were in place during his previous administration. This could include reinforcing the "Remain in Mexico" policy, which requires asylum seekers to wait in Mexico while their claims are processed, rather than allowing them to enter the U.S. while awaiting hearings.
.Additionally, individuals who attempt to cross the border illegally. This could involve increasing prosecutions for illegal entry and enhancing cooperation with state and local law enforcement to ensure that illegal crossings are addressed promptly.
These measures aim to deter migrants from attempting to enter the U.S. without proper documentation and to promote a more structured and secure immigration process.Under no scenario would he have the votes to pass any immigration reform.
How do you reinstate a wait in Mexico policy when Mexico says they don't want any part of helping us solve our own immigration crisis?
Trump is saying a whole lot of nonsense about immigration that has absolutely no foundation in law. It seems to work though, because many of his followers don't really understand the law either. If Trump for some ungodly reason winds up back in the white house, he will have nothing more available to him to manage the border than Biden has. It really is just that simple."Under no scenario would he have the votes to pass any immigration reform." It is very possible that Congress could become a Republican majority. I don't think one can predict swings in Congress.
Again, not sure what Mexico would or will do. He certainly brought them on board to his wait in Mexico plan once before. He has the tool of tariffs, and would most definitely use them.
The polls have become very close. I feel we will see her falter more this weekend thereafter. She is a weak candidate, with nothing to offer. What she has offered is a far-left agenda, with rehearsed rally/interview speeches that have come to bore all who hear them. She is scaring many away just due to her odd rehearsed demeanor.
I feel people are searching for a strong leader, to fix all that she was part of ruining. Not rehashed "Flower Power". Just today I saw a report on 12 drones allowed to fly above military installations for over two weeks. No one could identify them, and nothing was done --- Nothing!
"A mysterious fleet of drones entered restricted airspace and swarmed a U.S. military base along the Virginia coast for 17 days late last year, stumping the Pentagon, according to a new report.
For several nights last December, U.S. military personnel reported witnessing a fleet of unknown unmanned aircraft breach restricted airspace over a stretch of land at Langley Air Force Base along Virginia's shore, the Wall Street Journal first reported.
The drones would start to arrive about 45 minutes to an hour after sunset each night, one official reportedly told U.S. Air Force Gen. Mark Kelly, who joined several other officers responsible for the country's most advanced jet fighters, including F-22 Raptors, on a squadron rooftop.
Kelly described the first drone he saw as roughly 20 feet long and flying at more than 100 miles an hour, at an altitude of roughly 3,000 to 4,000 feet. As many as a dozen or more drones followed, flying across Chesapeake Bay, and then traveling toward Norfolk, Virginia, and through a space overlooking the base for the Navy’s SEAL Team Six and Naval Station Norfolk, the world’s largest naval port, according to the Journal.
The report said officials could not determine if hobbyists or adversaries – such as China or Russia – were responsible for the drone fleet. Reports of the matter reached President Biden and resulted in two weeks of meetings at the White House in December 2023, the Journal reported. Those meetings included the Defense Department, the FBI and the Pentagon’s UFO office, as well as outside experts.
Fox News Digital reached out to the White House and Department of Defense for comment. The DoD referred Fox News Digital to Langley Air Force Base for more information, but they did not immediately respond to an inquiry. Neither did the White House.
Two months before the drone fleet emerged in Virginia, five mysterious drones reportedly breached restricted airspace over a government nuclear weapons experiment site in Nevada.
Four of the drones were detected by the Energy Department’s Nevada National Security Site outside Las Vegas, while the fifth was spotted by employees, according to the Journal. The facility has reportedly since upgraded its detection system, but officials have not determined who was behind the breach.What scares me away?
Former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair and retired Gen. Mark Milley has called former President Trump “a total fascist” and believes he is the most dangerous person to the U.S., according to excerpts from the forthcoming Bob Woodward book.
“He is the most dangerous person ever. I had suspicions when I talked to you about his mental decline and so forth, but now I realize he’s a total fascist. He is now the most dangerous person to this country,” Milley told Woodward for the book “War,”
I have no reason to question Milley's statements. He certainly had lots of opportunity to see Trump close up.
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4929 … -woodward/It is very well-known Trump was not well-liked or respected by many Washington folks. It would seem odd to me if he was not particularly liked --- he would blast anyone that he did not care for, and as a rule, he would give his reasoning in very blunt terms. I must say, if he did not like you, you were soon out of a job.
Let's address Harris's offerings ---- This list is stunning, and not one of her promises is feasible in any respect unless she had a full majority of Congress. She is making a stab at bringing in socialism in a speedy fashion.
Expanded Child Tax Credit (CTC): Harris aims to permanently increase the CTC to $3,600 per child under five and $3,000 for children older than five. She also proposes making it fully refundable and extending eligibility up to 17 years old
Expanded Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC): She plans to adjust the EITC to make it more generous for workers without children and expand the eligible age range for benefits
Enhanced Premium Tax Credits: Harris intends to make enhancements to the ACA's premium tax credits permanent, ensuring more affordable health insurance options
Down Payment Assistance for First-Time Homebuyers: Her proposal includes providing an average of $25,000 in down payment assistance to qualified first-time homebuyers
Raising the Minimum Wage: Harris supports increasing the federal minimum wage.
Paid Family and Medical Leave: She proposes establishing a national paid family and medical leave policy to guarantee compensation for workers taking time off
Ending Sub-Minimum Wages: Harris aims to eliminate the practice of paying tipped workers and individuals with disabilities below the minimum wage
National Health Equity Initiative: This initiative seeks to address health challenges affecting marginalized communities, particularly Black men
Tax Increases on the Wealthy: Harris supports raising taxes on individuals earning over $400,000 annually, intending to ensure that the rich pay their fair share. This proposal aligns with her goal to address income inequality and generate revenue for social programs
Student Loan Forgiveness: Harris advocates for the cancellation of a portion of federal student loan debt. She has proposed forgiving up to $20,000 in federal student loans for borrowers who attended public colleges and universities
Free Community College: She supports making community college tuition-free for all students, allowing more people access to higher education without financial burden
Universal Pre-K: Harris aims to provide universal access to pre-kindergarten programs, ensuring early childhood education is available to all families
Affordable Housing Initiatives: She proposes increasing investment in affordable housing projects and enhancing support for low-income renters.
Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Harris supports a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and reforms to create more equitable immigration.
(Many Americans want to provide a pathway back to where migrants came from.)
and ya think Congress will even entertain any of all this crazy?
Very simply put... don't all of those proposals, ideas or measures grow the economy? Add fuel to the economy? Increase lower and middle class participation in the economy? Yes, of course Congress will have to debate many of these ideas.
I won't inundate this thread with research that most don't care about but universal Pre-K? That's sets a child up for success. Free or reduced fee for community college? The benefits of that are huge in terms of filling skilled jobs we currently can't. There are benefits to the economy, to the country of many of these ideas.I believe taxpayer dollars should be spent on addressing our failing education system, especially since this is a problem that’s worsening every year. If we can't properly educate our children, the future of our nation is at risk. Simply offering social programs that throw money at citizens isn’t even a temporary fix—it’s more like admitting defeat. Instead of short-term solutions, we need to invest in real, sustainable improvements in education, because without it, our society will continue to decline.
The U.S. education system faces a lot of challenges, and the statistics make it clear. One of the most worrying trends is the declining test scores. When I look at the 2022 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), I see that students experienced the largest drop in math scores in 30 years. Fourth and eighth graders saw their scores fall by 5 and 8 points, respectively. Reading scores also dropped, with both grades losing 3 points compared to 2019. It's not just NAEP; the average SAT score in 2022 was 1050, which is lower than it’s been in previous years. This suggests that fewer students are reaching college-readiness levels.
I also can't ignore the low proficiency rates. In 2022, only 33% of 4th graders and 29% of 8th graders were proficient in reading. Math proficiency was even lower, with 36% of 4th graders and 26% of 8th graders reaching the proficient level. And when I think about the achievement gaps, it’s disheartening to see that racial and socioeconomic disparities are still so pronounced. Black and Hispanic students consistently score lower than their white and Asian peers, with Black students scoring, on average, 25-30 points lower in math and reading. Low-income students also face steep challenges; in 2019, only 23% of low-income 8th graders were proficient in reading, compared to 42% of students from higher-income families.
When I look at how U.S. students perform on the global stage, it’s clear that we’re falling behind. In the 2018 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), the U.S. ranked 13th in reading, 18th in science, and 37th in math, behind many other developed nations like Finland and Singapore. While the U.S. high school graduation rate was about 86% in 2019, I wonder if that number is misleading. Are students really graduating with the skills they need to succeed? Many aren’t. A lot of high school graduates, especially in underfunded districts, enter college unprepared. Around 40% of students in two-year colleges and 20% of those in four-year colleges end up needing remedial courses just to catch up.
College readiness is a big issue. According to the 2022 ACT report, only 36% of high school graduates were meeting benchmarks in at least three out of four core subjects. Then there’s the problem of underfunded schools. Many public schools, especially in low-income areas, are drastically underfunded. About 30% of U.S. public schools are consistently under-resourced, leading to larger class sizes, outdated facilities, and fewer learning materials. The reliance on local property taxes to fund schools only makes things worse, with wealthy districts often getting over 50% more funding per student than poorer districts.
Seeing all these issues together—declining test scores, persistent achievement gaps, lack of college readiness, and severe funding inequities—it’s clear that the U.S. education system is struggling. We need major reforms to make sure all students, no matter where they live or their background, can get the education they deserve.How does a child show up ready to learn when he's hungry? When he doesn't have clothes that are appropriate for the weather? When he hasn't had a good night's sleep because maybe he doesn't have a mattress? Or the child who is on their 4th or 5th elementary school because he doesn't have stable housing, the child who has never seen a book or other educational enrichment materials?
Something most don't know about..studies showing that inner-city children can be up to five times more likely to have elevated blood lead levels due to factors like older housing with lead paint and pipes, concentrated poverty, and environmental pollution in urban areas. Lead poisoning can cause learning disabilities, behavioral problems, and, at very high levels, seizures...and yes, black children in America are more likely to have seizures than other children..go figure!
I won't even burden you with the multitude of parental factors that put that same kid in the hole when he shows up to school...
In bringing out test scores without understanding what impacts the scores is not really helpful in my opinion.
Is it fair to compare our country and the very little that we do to set up a child for educational success to a country like Finland that is actually doing those things because they employ Democratic socialism.
Universal Pre-K is an absolute necessityNo, no, no. Our Government is designed to be limited! Their role is to protect the U.S. Constitution, our Liberty, our Homeland. The churches role, many organization's role --- is to be the arms and feet of Jesus Christ, to feed and clothe the hungry. To mentor the lost and the needy. When Government enters into every aspect of our lives, there is no longer liberty to protect, there is no longer sovereignty to protect. Socialism destroys, it has since the dawn of time, it does to this day. If we lose this Republic, we don't get it back, we will be no better off than Venezuela or Cuba. If Finland is dabbling in it..... add them to the list.
Are you saying that government should get out of the education business?
Good one--- That subject is an issue that has some closing their eyes, sticking fingers in their ears, and humming... Our entire education system needs a redo, from top to bottom. Our kids have and are being put last.
Biden was around even back then, making things worse for America...
I'm beginning to believe good ol' Kamala can be our Stalin... our Mao.
I mean... if you had told me the Pandemic was going to go down like it did, back in 2019, I wouldn't have believed it possible.
If you had told me that the Biden-Harris Administration would start WWIII with Russia and would be willing to risk nuclear war by directing attacks into Russia... I would have said these people are bad, but not THAT bad, not THAT insane.
So when dealing with a politician that was elected for the position, by no one, that got the nomination by shenanigans, a person who has no children (she has step kids) that she brought into this world... becoming a "parent" at age 50... sorry, as a parent I know the sacrifice it takes to raise kids and the hope and excitement one has for them when you start out holding them in the palm of your hand.
I can only imagine how strong the connection and sacrifice a woman feels who carries those children from conception to birth.
This woman definitely can be our Stalin... she has dodged all the tests that would weed out such a person from becoming President and she was handed a nomination and has allowed the machine to make her campaign what it is... showing up for very controlled, very short interviews.
When she becomes President ALL Americans will suffer for it... man or woman... black or white... Patriot or Progressive.
All of America will hurt... far worse than what has occurred under Biden.I am holding out for more of a Patrick Henry type.
Joe Biden has faced criticism over the years for seemingly flip-flopping on several key issues, leading some to question whether he has truly shifted his values or been willing to say whatever was politically convenient to maintain or gain power.
Throughout his long career as a U.S. senator, Joe Biden has shifted his stance on several key issues, leading critics to accuse him of flip-flopping. One of the most notable was his vote in favor of the Iraq War in 2002. At the time, he believed the invasion was necessary, but by 2005, Biden began distancing himself from the conflict, criticizing how the Bush administration handled it. He later called his vote a mistake and opposed the war during his 2020 presidential campaign.
On same-sex marriage, Biden initially supported the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in 1996, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman. However, in 2012, he publicly endorsed marriage equality, helping to shift the Obama administration’s stance in favor of same-sex marriage.
Biden was a key architect of the 1994 Crime Bill, which expanded incarceration and imposed tougher sentencing for drug-related offenses. In recent years, however, he has acknowledged the bill’s role in mass incarceration and now supports criminal justice reforms such as reducing sentences for nonviolent offenders and decriminalizing marijuana.
Biden’s views on abortion have also evolved. Early in his Senate career, he supported the Hyde Amendment, which barred federal funds from being used for abortions, except in cases of rape, incest, or danger to the mother’s life. By 2019, however, he reversed his stance, recognizing the financial burdens it placed on low-income women seeking abortions.
In the 1980s and 1990s, Biden was a strong supporter of the War on Drugs, advocating for tough-on-crime policies that resulted in strict sentencing for drug offenses. More recently, he has become a proponent of reform, pushing for changes to address racial disparities and advocating for the decriminalization of marijuana.
Similarly, in the early 2000s, Biden supported bankruptcy reform legislation that critics argued hurt middle- and lower-income families. During his 2020 campaign, he called for revisiting these laws to ease the debt burden on Americans.
One of Biden’s earlier controversial stances was his opposition to federally mandated busing as a means to desegregate schools. He did not support the use of busing to achieve racial integration, a position that has been widely criticized.
I believe that improving education is a crucial step in helping children escape poverty. In my opinion, while there are numerous programs designed to assist those in need, we often overlook the importance of providing a quality education as a means for individuals to work their way out of poverty. The various aid programs we currently have can be seen as temporary fixes or "band-aids" that don't address the underlying issues. Instead of allowing problems to fester, we should focus on investing in long-term solutions, particularly in education, to create meaningful change. I feel that approaching these issues with a purely emotional perspective can hinder our ability to find effective solutions. We need to tackle these challenges with a practical mindset, aiming for solid spending that genuinely resolves problems rather than merely managing their symptoms.
Your comment touches on various aspects of poverty that have persisted for many years. It's clear that it's time to address the root causes of these issues. Simply throwing money at poverty has proven ineffective in creating lasting change. We need to focus on developing comprehensive strategies that tackle the underlying factors contributing to poverty rather than relying solely on financial assistance. I feel education is a great place to start. The system offers few a way to thrive. So if money is to be spent, I prefer it to be spent on education. Offering the tool of education.You can spend top dollar for the most complete well tested intensive curriculum available but when that child shows up to that classroom with any of the multitude of factors I've already talked about, you may as well flush that curriculum down the toilet.
OR... Give a teacher a class of 10 to 15 in high needs schools rather than 40 to 50... And expecting miracles!
I'll give you that.
It is very interesting though that two of the countries that you previously mentioned is high performing are both employing elements of socialism... Finland and Singaporenot sure of when or in what context I made mention of Finland and Singapore. Regarding education population comes into play ---As of early 2024, Finland's population is approximately 5,608,218. This figure. In Finland, approximately 16% of the population is school-aged.
As of June 2024, Singapore's total population stands at approximately 6.04 million. In Singapore, approximately 12.4% of the population is school-aged children, which includes those aged between 5 to 19 years.
Note poverty levels As of 2023, the poverty level in the United States is approximately 11.1%
Finland Finland has one of the lowest poverty rates in the European Union. As of 2022, the at-risk-of-poverty rate was around 11.2%
the poverty level is more challenging to define due to the lack of a universally accepted poverty line. However, estimates suggest that around 10% to 14% of the population lives in relative poverty,
Makes one think about just how well socialism is working out for the two nations. good educations, yet the social nets seem to provide some incentive not to work.
As of early 2024, Finland's unemployment rate stands at approximately 6.6%,
Finland has indeed been increasing its reliance on foreign labor, especially as its working-age population shrinks. In 2023, the number of immigrants in the workforce has seen significant growth, with a record immigration of around 58,496 people contributing to the overall population increase
While specific percentages of the workforce that are immigrants aren't detailed, the trend indicates that Finland is actively importing workers to mitigate labor shortages in various sectors.
As of early 2024, Singapore's unemployment rate is approximately 2.0%, with the resident unemployment rate at 2.8% and the citizen unemployment rate at 3.0%---- In Singapore, a significant portion of the workforce is made up of foreign workers, reflecting the country's reliance on external talent to support its economic growth. As of 2024, approximately 40% of the workforce consists of foreign labor,
This is shocking... 40% of their workforce is imported. So does socialism work or does it promote people that would rather not work? Yes, it works out well for some that want work in their nations."not sure of when or in what context I made mention of Finland and Singapore."
"When I look at how U.S. students perform on the global stage, it’s clear that we’re falling behind. In the 2018 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), the U.S. ranked 13th in reading, 18th in science, and 37th in math, behind many other developed nations like Finland and Singapore. "
The context was education and test scores. That is what lead to my comment that these are countries that employ socialist/democratic socialist governance.
"Expanded Child Tax Credit (CTC): Harris aims to permanently increase the CTC to $3,600 per child under five and $3,000 for children older than five. She also proposes making it fully refundable and extending eligibility up to 17 years old..."
Is this not an investment in children? In our future, the future of our country?
in 2021, Congress significantly expanded the child tax credit through the American Rescue Plan. That temporary policy helped lift some 2.9 million children out of poverty and cut the child poverty rate nearly in half — the biggest single-year drop in at least 50 years.
Research indicates poverty hurts children academically and in other ways. People get very frustrated about education achievement in our country, don't they? and teachers get very frustrated that the solution is always...for them to do more!
When families don’t get the help they need, schools are expected to step in as the sole providers of basically every social program.
That’s why advocates, for a long time, have been thinking that one way to address the income education gap is by giving more supports to low-income families...the child tax credit.
Research recently released by Ananat and Irwin Garfinkel, a research scientist at Columbia University, comes to the conclusion that a permanent version of the 2021 pandemic-era child tax credit would likely shrink racial and socioeconomic gaps in educational attainment.
I can go on and on listing studies but I will refrain.
The program would more than pay for itself, because those kids would likely go on to earn more at work, pay more in taxes, be healthier, and require fewer social services.
This one is a no-brainer. An expanded child tax credit’s benefits for society.
A permanent expansion of the child tax credit could also have lasting effects on kids’ lives.When discussing the expansion of the child tax credit (CTC) as an investment in children and the future of the country, several counterarguments come to light. One major concern is fiscal responsibility; the substantial funding required for an expanded CTC could lead to increased national debt, burdening future generations with repayment responsibilities. Critics argue that relying on borrowed funds for such programs is unsustainable and may slow overall economic growth by necessitating cuts to essential areas like infrastructure, education, or healthcare.
There are concerns about encouraging dependency on government aid. Increasing the CTC may lead to long-term reliance on financial assistance, disincentivizing work and personal responsibility among families. Without sufficient conditions, critics contend that direct financial support can undermine the incentive for self-sufficiency. Some argue that this may also discourage individuals from seeking employment or improving their economic situation, further entrenching families in a cycle of poverty.
The effectiveness of the CTC in genuinely alleviating poverty is also questioned. While the expansion has lifted many out of poverty, critics argue that it may not address underlying issues such as lack of access to quality education, healthcare, and job opportunities. There is also the concern of potential misallocation of resources, as funds may not be directed effectively to reach the most vulnerable families, leading to inadequate support for those in need.
Inflation is another important consideration; expanding the CTC could contribute to inflationary pressures, particularly if the additional funds stimulate demand without a corresponding increase in supply. Higher inflation may erode the purchasing power of families, undermining the intended benefits of the tax credit. Furthermore, implementing an expanded CTC could lead to increased bureaucratic inefficiencies, complicating access to benefits and potentially resulting in delays or insufficient support for families navigating the system.
Finally, critics argue for alternative approaches, suggesting that investing in education, vocational training, and skills development would yield better long-term outcomes for children. By equipping them for the job market, such investments could effectively reduce poverty rates and foster greater self-sufficiency. While the expansion of the child tax credit has demonstrated positive short-term effects, these potential downsides warrant serious consideration, leading to a belief that a more holistic approach addressing the root causes of poverty may be more beneficial for the long-term future of children and the nation as a whole.
The welfare system in the United States, intended to assist those in need, has faced significant criticism for failing to help citizens thrive economically and socially. One major concern is that welfare programs can create dependency on government assistance. When individuals receive financial aid without sufficient requirements to seek employment, they may become reliant on these benefits, which discourages them from pursuing job opportunities. This dependency often traps families in a cycle of poverty, diminishing the incentive to work and leading to a lack of economic mobility.
Moreover, many welfare programs focus on providing only short-term relief rather than comprehensive support necessary for long-term stability. While they may alleviate immediate needs like food and shelter, they often do not address underlying issues such as education, job training, or mental health support. As a result, recipients may lack the tools needed to achieve lasting independence. The welfare system's complexity further exacerbates the problem; numerous programs with varying eligibility requirements can create barriers for individuals seeking help. Many people find it challenging to navigate this bureaucratic maze, which can lead to underutilization of available benefits and delays in receiving assistance, intensifying their hardships.
Additionally, welfare recipients frequently face social stigma and isolation, hindering their ability to thrive. The perception that those who rely on government assistance are somehow "less than" or lazy can lead to feelings of shame and marginalization, negatively impacting mental health and discouraging individuals from seeking help or pursuing opportunities for growth. Furthermore, the welfare system often fails to address the root causes of poverty, such as inadequate access to quality education, affordable healthcare, and stable employment opportunities. Without tackling these systemic issues, welfare programs may provide only temporary relief without fostering the conditions necessary for individuals to break the cycle of poverty.Seems as though you are opposed to the child tax credit.
How do you feel that Trump's campaign is proposing a $5,000 per child yearly tax credit. Harris is proposing a credit of up to $3,600 per child, with a bump to $6,000 for newborns.
Trump wants the credit to go to all families regardless of income, while Harris would restrict the credit to low and middle-income families only.
Preferable?
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/boosting-c … ris-trump/Regarding Trump's proposal for a $5,000 yearly tax credit per child, it represents a substantial financial incentive aimed at supporting families and stimulating economic growth. By providing this credit, Trump seeks to alleviate some of the financial burdens that families face, which can resonate with parents who feel overwhelmed by rising living costs.
In comparison, Harris's proposal of up to $3,600 per child, with a potential increase for newborns, offers a different approach to family support. While both proposals aim to enhance financial stability for families, Trump's larger credit may appeal more to voters looking for stronger direct financial support during challenging economic times. This contrast in policies can serve to differentiate their campaigns, with Trump positioning himself as more aggressive in his support for families.
Yes, Trump likely believes that his proposed $5,000 yearly tax credit per child will boost economic growth. By providing families with a substantial tax break, he aims to increase disposable income, allowing parents to spend more on goods and services, which can stimulate local economies. This increased consumer spending is often seen as a catalyst for job creation and overall economic expansion.
Economists generally warn that substantial fiscal measures aimed at increasing consumer spending can lead to inflation, as it did with Biden especially in an economy that faces supply chain constraints, as Biden did... At this point the supply chain is In 2024, the U.S. supply chain situation has improved significantly since the peak disruptions experienced during the pandemic. So that cash infusion could play well for the economy. Injecting money into the economy can have positive effects, however, it also carries risks.
As I have mentioned before Trump's economic plans have not been used in the combination he purposes. I prefer it over her large spending plan, feeling taxes on the rich will pay for all. Just makes little sense, unless she has a majority in Congress, taxes will most likely see little changes. I prefer Trump's bolder plan.Interesting because your previous post seemed to list primarily negatives.... I had the distinct impression you were opposed to the child tax credit.
"One major concern is fiscal responsibility; the substantial funding required for an expanded CTC could lead to increased national debt, burdening future generations with repayment responsibilities.".
"There are concerns about encouraging dependency on government aid. Increasing the CTC may lead to long-term reliance on financial assistance, disincentivizing work and personal responsibility"
"The effectiveness of the CTC in genuinely alleviating poverty is also questioned"
"Finally, critics argue for alternative approaches, suggesting that investing in education, vocational training, and skills development would yield better long-term outcomes for children."
"Additionally, welfare recipients frequently face social stigma and isolation, hindering their ability to thrive. The perception that those who rely on government assistance are somehow "less than" or lazy can lead to feelings of shame and marginalization,"
"Furthermore, the welfare system often fails to address the root causes of poverty, such as inadequate access to quality education, affordable healthcare, and stable employment opportunities. '
None of this seems like support to me. Do your criticisms stand? This is a part of Trump's program you are in disagreement with?
Or is there support for Trump's bigger "freebie".
I saw that in your original post, this was included in one of kamala's crazy March towards socialism proposals?
Folks don't realize that Trump is floating the same boat lol.
How does he propose to pay for this? And make up for lost revenue due to the tax break for the top bracket? I think that's why most economists say his plan increases our budget deficit by a lot...My comment was focused on weighing the pros and cons of welfare policies, and I felt my bias was evident when discussing welfare. I prefer Trump's approach, which ties into his broader economic plan aimed at revitalizing the economy, as opposed to Harris's ongoing program that offers new parents $6,000 in the first year of a child's life.
Harris’s agenda leans toward socialism; Harris did have an interview with Charlamagne tha God, which aired today. During the discussion, the topic of reparations came up again. Harris reiterated her support for reparations, stating that she would like to see a study conducted on the issue. This aligns with her previous statements during the 2020 presidential campaign, where she expressed a firm commitment to signing a reparations bill if elected.
While she seemed to offer something in return for votes. Trump is actively engaging with Black citizens. He will be in the very heart of Detroit city Friday, at a large venue. I am sure he will offer straightforward discussions without the political fluff. Showing he is about representing all Americans. No, he will have no giveaways, just offerings of a better America for all.How is Harris's child tax credit proposal socialism but Trump's isn't?
"I prefer Trump's approach, which ties into his broader economic plan aimed at revitalizing the economy, "
And Harris's plan doesn't impact the economy in the same manner? Why? How?
They're virtually the same. Harris's plan is called crazy but Trump's is wonderful? Her plan plan for a child tax credit has been labeled socialist but Trump doing basically the same thing isn't?
But again, how is he paying for this?Neither candidate has provided a solid plan detailing how they will finance their proposals. While Harris has claimed that the wealthy will foot the bill for her social programs, this seems more like a hopeful expectation than a concrete solution. I find it hard to believe that Congress would ever fully support her ambitious spending agenda. On the other hand, I believe Trump's proposal is different and could have a more positive impact on the economy. The $5,000 credit offers families greater spending power, which could stimulate economic growth—provided that factors like a strong supply chain are in place. However, I also acknowledged the potential downsides of his plan, emphasizing the need for a balanced perspective on its implementation.
Let's take a look at another area of "crazy"
Free college...
Trump and Kamala Harris Each Have Free College Proposals.
Trump laid out a vision for a free, online-only university program called the American Academy on Nov. 1, 2023. While details are sparse, he promised that any credentials awarded through the program would be recognized by the federal government and government contractors. Not totally sure if this is in his Agenda 47?
Harris’ proposal for free community college closely mirrors the America’s College Promise Act. This proposal would award grants to states that promise to waive two years of community college tuition at public, two-year colleges.
Polling data shows the issue is extremely popular among traditionally aged college students.
Is this not an investment in our country? Enabling more students to obtain the education needed to get good-paying skilled jobs, and our businesses can hire the workers they need?
Studies show that attending community college for two years significantly benefits the workforce and national economy by providing accessible, affordable education that directly addresses local job market needs, thereby producing a skilled workforce, boosting employment rates, and contributing to economic growth.
This is another no-brainer.In my view, supporting the idea of free or subsidized junior college can have significant positive impacts for both individuals and society. By providing affordable access to junior colleges, or community colleges, more people would have the opportunity to explore higher education and career training without the heavy financial burden of attending a four-year institution. For many students, junior college serves as a vital stepping stone, particularly for those who are unsure about their long-term educational goals or not yet prepared for the full university experience.
Free junior college would increase accessibility and open doors to higher education for low- and middle-income students who might otherwise be unable to afford college. This could reduce financial barriers and give students the chance to explore various fields and career paths before committing to the larger expenses of a four-year university. Additionally, many community colleges offer vocational training and certification programs that lead directly to employment, ensuring that students have access to career preparation in high-demand fields like healthcare, technology, and skilled trades.
Moreover, junior college provides students with the flexibility to earn credits that can later be transferred to a four-year institution, allowing them to save money while deciding on their educational and career paths. This also helps reduce student debt, as covering the cost of junior college enables students to complete the first two years of higher education with little or no debt, reducing the financial pressure that often forces students into loans early on.
Investing in junior college also promotes economic mobility. Education has long been a driver of economic advancement, and by making community college more accessible, individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds have better opportunities to acquire the skills needed for higher-paying jobs, improving their economic status over time. Overall, funding junior college is an investment in the workforce, individual opportunity, and the broader economy, fostering a more educated and skilled population.
"Affordable Housing Initiatives: She proposes increasing investment in affordable housing projects and enhancing support for low-income renters."
Aren't there are also clear economic benefits? I think the benefits include the stimulation of local economies, job creation and tax benefits.
Affordable housing not only benefits the families living in the homes but also boosts the surrounding economy. Job creation, neighborhood investment and bolstered local tax
bases are all associated with affordable housing development.
In fact, a study by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) found that building 100 affordable homes generates approximately $11.7 million in local income, $2.2 million in taxes and other revenue for local governments, and 161 local jobs in the first year alone .
https://www.community-catalysts.org/pos … -economies
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles … he-economy
This makes a statement.
"Border Patrol Union ends all doubt over Trump or Harris with unanimous endorsement"
National Border Patrol Council president says only Trump 'can fix' the problems at the border that 'put our country in peril'
The official union of the U.S. border patrol announced its full support of former President Trump during a rally in Prescott Valley, Arizona on Sunday.
During the rally, Trump told the crowd that he was "honored to receive…the endorsement" of the union of the entire union of the border patrol agents, the National Border Patrol Council.
"It’s a great honor," Trump said. "They said it was unanimous. Thousands of people."
Perez said he had a message for everyone in the crowd.
"If we allow border czar Harris to win this election, every city, every community in this great country is going to go to hell," Perez said. "The untold millions of people unvetted, who she has allowed into this country that are committing murders, rapes, robberies, burglaries and every other crime will continue to put our country in peril.
"Only one man can fix that. That is Donald J. Trump," he continued. "He has always stood with the men and women who protect this border, who put their lives on the line for the country."
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump- … trol-unionThey also backed the bipartisan border bill.
Odd --- However, they have fully endorsed Trump for the presidency.
" Brandon Judd, the president of the National Border Patrol Council (NBPC), has strongly endorsed Donald Trump for president in 2024. During a rally in Arizona, Judd emphasized the union's belief that Trump is the only candidate who can effectively address the border crisis. He stated that under the current administration, the U.S. is facing significant security risks due to unvetted individuals entering the country, and he praised Trump's commitment to border security measures, such as building the wall and increasing enforcement efforts. This endorsement marks the third time the union has backed Trump, reflecting their alignment with his tougher immigration policies over those of the Biden administration. Judd's support highlights the union's confidence in Trump as someone who has consistently stood by Border Patrol agents and worked to strengthen U.S. borders."Attempted border crossings dropped to the lowest level of the Biden presidency in September
At fewer than 54,000 apprehensions, the number is also the lowest since August 2020 during the Trump administration, and it is similar to September totals in 2018, 2019 and 2020....
https://www.nbcnews.com/investigations/ … rcna174574Wow, good to hear. Unfortunately, he did not promote the same actions 3.7 years ago. He certainly did nothing until the election. This is such an old old ploy with Democrats.
It shows such a lack of respect for "We The People".
Please quote how many he let walk in --- I think the number is historic. It seems you only see one variable at a time.How did "he" let them walk in? Taking into account that has not changed the asylum laws. For folks who don't know, our actual immigration law provides the right for anyone, in any number at any time to claim asylum.
And Biden's actions? They are currently making their way through the courts. If Trump somehow, God forbid, makes it into office I'm sure all of those measures will have already been struck down... Biden's action to limit asylum, is thought to be, by most legal scholars, stepping on a job that Congress is tasked... Not POTUS.Again why just now? Please address my question.
Why would any president enact an order on immigration that was most certainly going to be evacuated by the courts?. The last ditch effort? But Biden made immigration reform a priority on day one. No president, not even trump, can make sweeping changes to immigration law. When Congress finally gave him something to sign... Trump tanked it for his own political purposes. That's actually when Biden enacted the executive orders.... When congress, whose job it actually is, failed.
Well failed at the direct orders of trumpPresident Biden did take action to address the high number of migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border. In June 2024, he issued an executive order that temporarily suspends the processing of most asylum claims when unauthorized crossings exceed a seven-day average of 2,500. Under this order, migrants who cross without authorization—except in exceptional circumstances—would not qualify for asylum and could face expedited removal. Additionally, the threshold for granting an asylum hearing based on credible fear claims has been raised.
In my view, These measures were part of a broader strategy to gain control of the border amid ongoing criticisms regarding the administration's handling of immigration issues. Due to the upcoming election. The order reflects Biden's acknowledgment of a broken immigration system.
Yes, it would have been apparent lawsuits would insure. AS lawsuits have occurred due to his EO of June 2024. However, these cases as a rule take years to resolve. Biden would have come and gone, and America would have been millions fewer migrants in our country waiting for hearings that are backed up from 7-10 years.There is no possibility that it will take 7 to 10 years for the case against Biden's orders. It's highly likely that we'll have a decision before or shortly after the election. Court action on immigration executive orders are very Swift historically. His order would have been signed into law under the bipartisan bill but now it will be struck down because he took an action outside of his power. Oh well.
But again I would also respectfully ask, how did he let them walk in?
I completely agree! What are your thoughts --- It's concerning that we have twelve mystery drones flying over military installations for two weeks, and we still have no idea where they came from or what their purpose is. The lack of action is alarming—who knows what kind of threats we could be facing, even something as serious as germ warfare. It's frustrating to think about what could happen if we can't get these nut jobs out of the White House. What the hell!
"Border Patrol Union ends all doubt over Trump or Harris with unanimous endorsement"
National Border Patrol Council president says only Trump 'can fix' the problems at the border that 'put our country in peril'
I think that if any of these folks know who caused the many problems at the border, these folks do. Their endorsement says it all.
Did anyone catch Trump's bizarre Town Hall performance? Looked like he was more interested in a music fest than serious debate. It's concerning how he sidesteps real issues while dancing around the stage. Could you imagine if Harris did this?
Trump's family is really hanging him out to dry. He is in serious decline. They need to come and get Dad ASAP
As a side note, who is doing his makeup these days? He has turned so dark brown...He's in worse mental shape than Biden.
Btw
I guess he needs those black and brown votes.
Trump’s Pennsylvania town hall briefly turned into an impromptu concert after a couple of medical incidents, with music playing during those moments. Trump typically has music at his rallies or town halls while supporters wait. Once the event began, he remained off-the-cuff, funny, and visibly happy—dancing to the music. His demeanor was relaxed, and he openly answered questions without relying on teleprompters or flashcards. He maintained his usual straightforward style, with no rehearsed gestures or unnatural stiff smiles, as his opponent is well known for. He kept the atmosphere informal and genuine. "We ain't goin' back!"
Recently, Harris spoke at the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute's Leadership Conference and used what some observers described as a "Spanish twang" in her speech. Politicking 101...
Dark brown? Maybe tan? He’s been out in the sun a lot, campaigning almost every day in states known for their sunny weather. One positive aspect is that he didn't adopt the off-the-cuff, phony accent that Harris often uses with her audiences.Apparently some people fainted because it was very hot at his venue... Why would you encourage them to dance for almost 40 minutes? Would have been more productive to just continue taking questions.
He answered few questions at this event but managed to squeeze in a Hannibal Lecter reference... What is the fascination?
Trump said, "Let's not do any more questions. Let's just listen to music. Let’s make it into our music. Who the hell wants to hear questions? Right?"
Isn't the whole point of a town hall is to answer questions from voters?
To add insult to injury he continued to play music that artists explicitly barred him.I think this comment is a bit narrow-minded. First, focusing only on the people who fainted doesn't take into account the thousands of others who might have been energized by the music and the atmosphere Trump created. Yes, it was hot, and people fainted—that’s not ideal. But dismissing the dancing and the engagement misses the point of what rallies often are for Trump supporters: a space to unite and celebrate their shared beliefs, not just a dry Q&A session.
As for the Hannibal Lecter reference, Trump frequently makes cultural references to engage the crowd. Lecter, a notorious character, could be seen as a tongue-in-cheek way to evoke a strong response. But fixating on it as a "fascination" ignores that Trump uses these moments to keep the energy high. His goal isn't to adhere to conventional formats but to entertain and motivate, which resonates with his base.
The criticism about cutting off questions feels like it's more about traditional expectations of a town hall than about understanding the broader dynamic at play. Trump is known for his unscripted approach, and many who attend his events expect that unpredictability and enjoy the rally-like atmosphere. Instead of feeling insulted by the lack of more questions, his supporters often see this kind of shift as part of why they like him—he's different.
As for the music issue, while it's true that some artists have objected to him using their songs, legally speaking, public performance rights often allow for it in large venues. So while some might call it an "insult," it's more a reflection of Trump’s defiant stance, something his supporters value. This comment seems to focus too much on nitpicking rather than seeing the event as part of a broader strategy that, for better or worse, is working for Trump and his base.
Does it bother you that Trump isn't a typical politician, with not a phony bone in his body? He won’t dance to anyone's tune, and that's something I love about him. Clearly, I'm not the only one, judging by the size of the crowds he draws and the polls. It’s obvious many people are tired of the status quo."First, focusing only on the people who fainted doesn't take into account the thousands of others who might have been energized by the music and the atmosphere Trump created."
It was a town hall though, weren't they there to ask questions? Not come to a dance party? That nonsense went on for 39 minutes!! It was odd to say the least. He didn't want to continue taking questions.
He's obviously tired of campaigning at this point. He was supposed to do a CNBC interview this week and he just canceled that.
He seems worn down by his media schedule. a Tuesday appearance on yet-another podcast, even admitting to its hosts he “wasn’t in the mood to do this.”. That was the Barstool Sports podcast Bussin’ with the boys.
His handlers pulled the plug on him yesterday on a podcast as he went off into incoherence.
He's declining fast.
https://x.com/CalltoActivism/status/1845915382789353559Yet she is going backward in the polls. losing ground where in some cases was ahead by 4, and 5 now even. It's Harris who is fading fast, looking more foolish daily. He has a non-stop schedule
Today, October 15, 2024, Donald Trump is scheduled to speak in Atlanta, Georgia. His event will be held at the Cobb Energy Performing Arts Centre, starting at 7:30
On Tuesday, October 17, 2024, Donald Trump is scheduled to hold a campaign rally in Flint, Michigan.
Donald Trump will be campaigning on Wednesday, October 18, 2024, with a rally scheduled in Scranton, Pennsylvania.
Donald Trump will be campaigning in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on Friday, October 20, 2024. He is scheduled to hold a rally at The Liacouras Center
LATROBE, Pa. (KDKA) — Former President Donald Trump will return to the Pittsburgh area for another rally this weekend. Trump will deliver remarks at a campaign event at the Arnold Palmer Regional Airport on Saturday. Doors open at 2:00 p.m., and Trump will speak around 6 p.m.
On Sunday, October 22, 2024, Donald Trump is scheduled to hold a rally in Green Bay, Wisconsin.
and he will appear at Jets game
On Monday, October 23, 2024, Donald Trump is scheduled to hold a rally in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
On Tuesday, October 24, 2024, Donald Trump is scheduled to hold a campaign rally in Chicago, Illinois.
Got the picture... He goes on like this until election day.
And she is doing what?I'm not going to list her schedule because most here don't really care but she has a very full schedule of appearances. One or two events every day of the week usually except Sunday.
I was actually watching this with my hubby last night. There was one health issue after another. People were complaining that the venue was too hot.
So Trump wrapped it up early with a couple of music selections.
If it was all about him, he would have ignored those suffering with heat exhaustion or whatever the case, and kept on, but he didn't. I thought he handled it well, making the best of a bad situation, but you would see it differently!
I've just returned from a cruise. Between working in the sun and vacationing in the sun, I could easily pass for an island girl.....but,
I guess when you have nothing praiseworthy or worth noting about your Party/it's candidates, it makes sense that you would seek out every little thing to condemn the opposing party. Something must fill up that space.... that void.I watched too... It was a great Town Hall, and you could tell the crowd was really enjoying themselves. I think Democrats struggle to understand the MAGA movement because it's breaking all the old molds. What they don’t realize is that they’re the ones stuck in the past, still listening to vague, unrealistic, undoable policies. It must be tough for them to see Republicans gaining such momentum — we’re not the Republicans of the past anymore.
On medicare: "That includes securing the Medicare trust fund and making sure that big corporations and the wealthy pay their fair share in taxes, which, by the way, they can afford to pay."
On Social Security: "The way that we're going to deal with it to make sure that the resources and therefore the benefits in the Social Security program are there for seniors is by making billionaires and big corporations pay their fair share in taxes and use that money to protect and strengthen Social Security for the long haul.
Modern day socialism (actually closer to Marxism) in a nutshell. Hariis is Hell on the idea that "billionaires and big corporations pay their 'fair share'"...with 'fair share' meaning as much as she can squeeze from them. This is an ongoing theme for Harris: take what one person has earned and built to give it away to someone that has NOT earned it.
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs", straight from Karl Marx to Kamala Harris and the Democrat party.Hariis is Hell on the idea that "billionaires and big corporations pay their 'fair share'"...with 'fair share' meaning as much as she can squeeze from them.
She is proposing a 28% corporate tax rate, up from the current 21%.
Did you find that Ronald Reagan was a Marxist or socialist when his corporate tax rate was also 28%? Was he unfairly squeezing corporations?During Ronald Reagan's presidency, the corporate tax rate was reduced to 28% after the Tax Reform Act of 1986. This was a significant drop from the previous top rate of 46% not a raise in taxes. This is an entirely different picture. Reagan was not depending on the Rich, just the opposite. He dropped their taxes.
Here’s a brief timeline regarding the changes:
Prior to Reagan's Tax Reform Act: The top corporate tax rate was 46%.
Tax Reform Act of 1986: This act lowered the top corporate tax rate to 34%, effective in 1987.
Subsequent Changes: Later, the tax rate was further reduced to 28% in 1988, which remained in effect until further tax reforms in the 1990s.
Yes, Ronald Reagan's tax policies included significant reductions across all income tax brackets as part of his broader economic strategy, known as "Reaganomics." Here are some key points regarding the tax cuts implemented during his administration:
Ronald Reagan is often associated with reducing the scope and funding of social programs rather than promoting them. His administration focused on a philosophy of limited government and fiscal conservatism, which included the following key aspects:His corporate tax rate was still 28% though, bottom line. He could have cut it to 21% at that time... Did we suffer?
There are many variables to consider when comparing the economic conditions during Reagan's presidency to those we see today. The economy is never stagnant; it is constantly influenced by a multitude of factors that can significantly impact outcomes. For instance, during Reagan's time, he implemented substantial tax cuts, which aimed to stimulate economic growth. It's clear that changes in tax policy—whether lowering or raising taxes—can have a profound effect on the economy. In contrast, Harris is proposing increased taxes on the wealthy to fund social programs, including her child tax credit. While Reagan focused on tax reductions to spur growth, Harris's approach seeks to generate revenue for investments in education and social welfare. This difference highlights how each leader's strategies reflect the unique economic contexts and challenges of their respective eras.
Reagan's tax cuts worked, as did Trump's.
Yes, many argue that the economy performed well after Ronald Reagan's tax cuts were implemented, particularly in the latter half of his presidency. After the initial recession in the early 1980s, the U.S. economy rebounded significantly, with GDP increasing by an average of about 4.5% per year between 1983 and 1989. Job creation was another notable aspect, as approximately 16 million jobs were created during Reagan's tenure, leading to a decline in unemployment from a peak of 10.8% in 1982 to around 5.4% by 1989."Harris is proposing increased taxes on the wealthy to fund social programs, including her child tax credit.".
How will Trump fund his generous social programs /child tax credit? His plan per allows $5000 per child for families of ALL income levels not just lower income families as in Harris's plan.Already addressed that --- neither have viable plans on how to fund that give away. I feel Trump's would lead to a better economy. Although a gamble
https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/361 … ost4345754
This is something I've never truly understood. Corporate earnings are taxed twice, once when earned and again when distributed to owners.
No other income (that I'm aware of) suffers this kind of attrition into govt. pockets. You and I certainly don't, company owners don't. Only those that have lots of income, and lots of owners to share it all, are forced to pay income tax twice on their earnings. Why? And why in the world doe we, always and forever, want to increase that already double tax? Is it just greed? Is it jealousy (they do better than I can)? What is it that makes us decide that we own what others have earned?Are you saying that business owners shouldn't pay an individual tax on their earnings? That's an interesting thought. Something that could be helpful especially to small business owners or those just getting a business off the ground.
It appears what Dan said is are they not paying enough of their fair share.
You might say that: I would not.
But I do have to question double taxing every dollar earned by some of us (including me as I own some stock). Do you, or do you allow greed to rationalize getting more of what others have earned?
Indeed, it's important to recognize that every worker contributes to government revenues through various forms of taxation, including income, payroll, and sales taxes. These contributions are vital for funding public services and infrastructure. Additionally, big businesses play a crucial role in this system; they not only generate significant tax revenue but also provide employment opportunities that drive economic activity. Without the presence of large businesses, government coffers would face considerable strain, as fewer jobs would result in lower overall tax revenues. The symbiotic relationship between workers, businesses, and government highlights the necessity of a balanced approach to taxation and economic policy that supports both individual contributions and the growth of the business sector.
I understand that business, including corporations large and small, provide a great deal of income to the country.
I just question the ethics and morality of double taxation on some but not others. Never forget that a company is, at the bottom, just individual(s) that own it; is that a reason to tax those people twice?
I always wonder what makes highly intelligent individuals support ultimate evil... I guess I am going to be able to study this phenomenon during the Harris Administration, rather than reading about it in history books.
Kamala’s National Security Adviser Points to Continuation of Biden’s Russia Policy
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2024/08 … olicy.html
While escalating the war efforts against Russia and its allies North Korea and Iran are almost certain to continue, based on who Harris has surrounded herself with...
How Harris determines to deal with migration problems is harder to discern, as it is such a hot-topic issue in the election, her stance has shifted more than once, how much is just campaign noise to get elected remains to be seen.
I have to go back to Harris' mentor Obama and his take on it (which was full support of the UN Global Compact on Migration) and what I read from sources that likely mirror her true positions:
Harris could chart a new course for Immigration
https://www.aclu.org/news/immigrants-ri … ion-reform
"global migration is at an all time high, yet people fleeing violence and persecution are left with few options to seek safety in the U.S. as the government has sought to restrict the legal right to seek asylum. These anti-asylum policies leave many vulnerable people in danger and do nothing to improve border management, our immigration court system, or coordination to receive our new neighbors. "
At the heart of all the reform rhetoric, is the insistence from the United Nations and NGOs to take the "illegal" out of migration, which makes "citizen" rights all people's rights, the world over.
Its a beautiful idea, one that fits today's push to put feelings over facts, but is sure to put immense economic strain on America the nation, and its taxpayers, as the government pursues in conjunction with this effort, the continued war efforts in multiple parts of the world which also puts immense economic strain on the Nation, and its taxpayers.
It is important to consider how fast the devaluation of the dollar will impact our own lives, in the very near future, if these policies continue.
Why Nations Are Rushing to Join BRICS+
https://internationalbanker.com/finance … oin-brics/
It will be interesting to see how a nation that is already swimming in 36 Trillion dollars in debt, adding 1 Trillion dollars to it every 3 months, will be able to continue to fund these wars and these open-border open-society policies.
Hundreds of nations are now lining up to join BRICS+ ...along with the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), etc. to develop alternative economic frameworks to replace the existing "Western" international order.
The non-Western world is looking to free itself from the financial system led by institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), aka the US (Western) hegemony.
There is a lot going on in the world... the wisest people I know recognize this, that is why they are, to a person, supporting Trump.
When people like Elon Musk, Tulsi Gabbard, RFK Jr., Vivek Ramaswamy are shifting from the Democrats to support Trump, and raising the alarm that there is something seriously wrong with our current leadership...
You might want to take the blinders off and ask why.
It's understandable that many people feel strongly about their voting choices, and elections often reflect personal values and beliefs. However, statements like "Voting for Trump is a matter of character. Yours." Statements such as this can come across as glib and haughty. They simplify a complex decision into a judgment of personal morality, which doesn't acknowledge the diverse reasons people might have for their choices—be it policy preferences, economic concerns, or views on leadership.
Moreover, it's important to remember that it takes more than just character to effectively do the job of president; it also requires experience, knowledge, and the ability to navigate complex issues. Encouraging open dialogue and understanding the reasons behind people’s choices is more constructive than making sweeping judgments. Everyone’s decision-making process is nuanced, and it’s essential to recognize that complexity.
I am so pleased to have the freedom to share my view, a view that I put much thought into.Anyone watch harris interview by Bret Baier?
She could not have looked worse if she had intended to look bad.
She refused to answer questions, she pivoted, distracted, deflected, and everything was "Donald Trump did...."
harris refused to acknowledge she has been vice president for the past 3 3/4 years.
Her lack of knowledge of her policies was incredible.
Amazing!
What a train wreck for harris and her supporters!I haven't seen the interview, but I have read where her fan base is pouring it on a little thick with their praise. Figured it must have been seriously lacking!
I will try to watch it today.She was a train wreck. She did not answer one question, and her fake fury was a step too far. She can't answer hard questions. She is a superficial candidate with nothing to offer. She is tossing around the phrase, "I will be giving you something." She is just about done, the polls are indicating voters are turning to Trump. The electoral polls say it all.
One commentator said her response to all the problems in the country "Trump did it."
Reminded she has been in office as VP for 3 1/2 years she responds with..."Trump has been running for 10 years."
Does ANYONE on the left realize that was just a plain stupid answer?
When Bret starts to add context to what she's saying her response, she continues to interrupt him and constantly repeats, "Let me answer the question, let me answer the question, let me answer the question."
One of my favorite parts was when she said, You know what I'm talking about."
Bret responds, "No, I really don't know what you're talking about."
She looked awful.She did not answer one question, just fell back on Trump bashing... TDS. She can't handle any form of interview, she has nothing to share, in reality. And does not have the demeanor to share, if she has anything to say. Yes, I saw her dumbly say "You know what I am talking about". It was very obvious how she was well-cornered, and made no sense at that point.
What really got my attention ---- what really stood out to me was when she was asked about who she considers the U.S.'s most dangerous enemy. Her response was "Iran," but Bret Baier quickly jumped in with a strong counterpoint. He pulled up a chart showing how much money Iran had made during the Biden/Harris administration, pointing to the fact that their policies had eased off the tough sanctions imposed by Trump that had severely weakened Iran's economy. It was almost like a reality check, highlighting how the current administration’s approach might have backfired, allowing Iran to recover economically. Bret’s point was direct and powerful, reminding her and the viewers of the consequences of policy shifts, especially when dealing with a country that’s been a significant threat to U.S. interests.
Not only has Iran been able to recover financially, but they’ve also used those funds to support their proxies, escalate tensions, and even start a war with Israel. On top of that, Iran has been pushing forward its nuclear program, and there are alarming reports suggesting they are on the very threshold of developing their first nuclear bomb, possibly within weeks. That part really hit me, as it underscores the gravity of the situation. It made me think more critically about how foreign policy decisions can have long-term impacts, especially when it comes to a regime like Iran that has such far-reaching consequences for regional and global security.
Our Nation will not survive for 4 more years with someone as inept, and weak as her.
"
The 2024 presidential race is in a dead heat with just 19 days left until the election.
The election forecast by Five Thirty Eight's Nate Silver shows Kamala Harris having a 50 percent chance of winning in less than three weeks. Her edge on Donald Trump has almost completely been erased, says the forecaster."
Hopefully, many have woken up to see what has been smack in front of many from the moment she became VP to now... She has done nothing but hide from the public eye, and for a good reason--- she is not equipped to be VP or president.Its not just her, its the people around her... its the "team" and all those circling around it, from Hillary Clinton to Victoria Nuland.
Our nation... perhaps the world, civilization itself could end (what else do you think will happen when ANY number of nukes are launched)... if these diabolical characters continue to control the direction of America.I completely agree. If Trump wins—though that's still a big "if"—I feel confident we’ll witness an unprecedented number of people being fired. I think he’s learned from his first term when he was too trusting and kind. This time, I believe he’ll go on a major firing spree. If you drain the swamp, the bottom-dwellers will have no one left to feed on. As for the "Wicked Witch of the East," I don’t think she holds any power anymore.
But I do feel real fear about Iran potentially nuking Israel. Reports suggest they could be just weeks away from producing their first nuclear bomb. And it would be naive to think they won’t use it. This is more than a political conflict; it's a religious war, and Iran aims to be the dominant force. They’ve made it clear for decades that they want to destroy Israel, and sadly, they just might succeed. I understand where you're coming from because I’ve come to accept that Iran may very well follow through on what they’ve threatened for so long. Retaliation doesn’t seem to concern them."Reports suggest they could be just weeks away from producing their first nuclear bomb"
Interesting, I wonder what sped that up?
Oh no I remember, Trump killed the Iran nuclear deal.During Trump’s presidency, Iran's economy faced immense strain due to reimposed U.S. sanctions, leading to a sharp contraction, hyperinflation, currency depreciation, and rising unemployment. The "maximum pressure" campaign succeeded in crippling Iran’s oil exports and limiting its access to global markets, but it also resulted in increased poverty, social unrest,
Impact of Trump’s Sanctions on Iran’s Oil Exports
Drastic Decline in Oil Exports: Before the sanctions, Iran was exporting around 2.5 million barrels per day (bpd). After the re-imposition of sanctions, by the end of 2019, Iran’s oil exports had dropped to below 500,000 bpd, with some months seeing exports as low as 100,000 bpd.
Economic Collapse: Iran’s economy, heavily dependent on oil revenues, shrank sharply. Inflation soared, and the value of the Iranian rial plummeted.
Covert Sales: Despite the sanctions, Iran continued to sell oil, primarily to China, but at steeply discounted rates and often through covert methods, including ship-to-ship transfers and disguising the origin of oil shipments.
When Joe Biden took office in January 2021, his approach toward Iran marked a significant shift from Donald Trump’s "maximum pressure" campaign.
One of the most notable changes was the partial unfreezing of billions of dollars in Iranian assets held abroad, which had been frozen due to sanctions. Under Biden, some of these funds were made available, ostensibly for humanitarian purposes. In a major deal in 2023, $6 billion of Iran’s oil revenues, previously frozen in South Korea, were released as part of a prisoner exchange. This move gave Iran access to much-needed foreign currency.
At the same time, the global rise in oil prices provided a substantial financial boost to Iran. The post-pandemic economic recovery in 2021, followed by disruptions in global energy markets caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, drove oil prices to new highs. Despite sanctions, Iran continued selling oil, especially to China, at discounted rates. With oil prices occasionally exceeding $120 per barrel, Iran earned significant revenue, even though its exports were constrained. The surge in oil prices, combined with Iran’s ability to covertly export oil, helped stabilize its foreign currency reserves.
The Biden administration also took a more flexible stance, notably reducing the enforcement of sanctions compared to Trump. While the core sanctions officially remained, Biden’s approach allowed Iran to continue selling oil. This, along with increased trade with China and neighboring countries like Iraq and Turkey, resulted in a significant economic boost for Iran. Biden’s more lenient policy, coupled with favorable global oil market conditions, enabled Iran to amass wealth on an unprecedented scale.
Breakdown of Iran's Oil Revenues (2021-2024)
2021
Oil Price: The global recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic caused a sharp rise in oil prices, with Brent crude averaging around $70 per barrel.
Oil Exports: Iran managed to export 600,000–700,000 barrels per day (bpd), mainly to China and other countries using covert methods.
Estimated Revenue:
700,000 bpd × $70 × 365 days = $17.8 billion.
2022
Oil Price: The Russian invasion of Ukraine caused further spikes in oil prices, with Brent crude averaging around $100 per barrel, occasionally exceeding $120 per barrel.
Oil Exports: Iran’s exports reportedly increased to 800,000–1 million bpd, mostly to China and other buyers willing to take discounted oil.
Estimated Revenue:
900,000 bpd × $100 × 365 days = $32.9 billion.
2023
Oil Price: Oil prices remained high but slightly lower than in 2022, with Brent crude averaging around $80 per barrel due to global market adjustments.
Oil Exports: Iran's export levels stayed relatively steady at around 1 million bpd, primarily due to strong demand from China.
Estimated Revenue:
1 million bpd × $80 × 365 days = $29.2 billion.
2024 (First Half)
Oil Price: In the first half of 2024, oil prices fluctuated around $85 per barrel, with geopolitical factors and global supply concerns keeping prices relatively high.
Oil Exports: Iran continued to export about 1 million bpd, maintaining covert sales to China and other parts of Asia.
Estimated Revenue:
1 million bpd × $85 × 180 days = $15.3 billion.
Total Oil Revenue (Mid-2021 to Mid-2024)
2021: $17.8 billion
2022: $32.9 billion
2023: $29.2 billion
2024 (first half): $15.3 billion
Total (3.5 years): $95.2 billion.
This estimated total of around $95.2 billion over the past three and a half years highlights the significant financial recovery Iran has experienced. This newfound wealth has allowed Iran to support regional terrorism, finance groups involved in the current war in Israel, and accelerate its nuclear program.
Guess where the cash came from to attack Israel, and now they are weeks away from their first nuclear weapon. Biden was a wrecking ball, he took it to not only the US but the world.But we were talking about them being very close to a nuclear bomb? The Iran nuclear deal was working that is until Trump pulled us out of it.
Iran’s proximity to a nuclear weapon capability has increased due to the Trump Administration’s policies .Trump pulled the U.S. out of the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA) in 2018, citing concerns over Iran's regional behavior and the agreement's failure to address issues such as Iran's missile program and its support for militant groups. Iran was not following the deal. Yes, while Iran initially complied with the JCPOA, there were reports and concerns about its transparency and access to certain sites. The deal allowed for inspections, but Iran limited access to specific locations, raising suspicions about potential undeclared activities.
Trump argued that the deal was too lenient and provided Iran with economic benefits while not sufficiently curbing its nuclear ambitions.
If Biden was dissatisfied with Trump's foreign policy regarding Iran, he, as president, should have developed his own solutions. However, it appears he chose to overlook key issues, allowing Iran to become wealthy enough to fund terrorist activities and its nuclear program. This approach raises questions about the effectiveness of his strategy in addressing Iran's threats.Your original post stated that you were very concerned that Iran was close to a nuclear weapon. There is absolutely no doubt that Trump accelerated that process.
I’ve put in considerable effort to share my perspective and outline a timeline of events. Trump has not been president since 2020, so the situation under Biden is his responsibility. We didn't face the threat of Iran obtaining nuclear weapons or supporting two wars during Trump's term. While it's easy to blame Trump, I prioritize the facts, which you seem unwilling to accept. I respect our differing views, but it appears you’ve made excuses for the issues that have arisen under Biden, and I find little common sense in that perspective.
"We didn't face the threat of Iran obtaining nuclear weapons or supporting two wars during Trump's term."
This statement would be true up until the time he took us out of the Iran nuclear deal and they immediately began accelerating the process to a nuclear weapon. I don't think you'd find any source that supported the move and it's disastrous consequences.The deal was not being upheld, with a key issue emerging before Trump withdrew: Iran was refusing to allow inspectors into areas known for uranium production. This complex situation began under Obama, who had imposed strict sanctions on Iran, similar to those Trump later enforced. When Obama lifted sanctions as part of the nuclear deal, from 2016 to 2018, Iran gained over $100 billion. However, Trump reinstated sanctions, citing Iran's failure to comply with the most critical part of the agreement—allowing inspections.
Iran's compliance with inspections under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) became a contentious issue in 2017. Here are some key points regarding Iran's compliance with the inspection protocols:
Initial Compliance: In the early years of the JCPOA Iran complied with most of the terms of the agreement, allowing the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to conduct inspections of certain nuclear facilities.
Access to Sites: While Iran permitted inspections of many sites, there were instances where it restricted access to specific locations, particularly those suspected of having undeclared nuclear activities. This became in late 2017 and became a point of contention, as the IAEA sought access to these sites to verify Iran's compliance fully. They were unable to complete their inspections.
2018 IAEA Reports: The IAEA has consistently reported on Iran's activities, indicating instances of non-compliance, particularly concerning access to certain locations and the enrichment of uranium beyond JCPOA limits. The agency also highlighted concerns about Iran's activities at sites that it had previously restricted inspectors from accessing.
2018 Trump imposed sanctions on Iran which decreased Iran's means to sell oil, which quickly caused a deep recession in Iran.
Ongoing Negotiations: As of now, discussions about reviving the JCPOA have continued, with inspections remaining a central focus in negotiations. The IAEA's ability to monitor Iran's nuclear activities effectively is seen as crucial for any potential new agreement.
While the sanctions didn’t specifically target uranium production, they did limit Iran’s access to crucial technology and resources. This created a situation where Iran felt compelled to enhance its domestic capabilities in uranium production and enrichment.
So, what has Biden actually done to curb uranium production? Is he just content to do nothing and blame Trump while failing to enforce the sanctions that made Iran wealthy? During his administration, Iran has had all the funding it needs to expand its nuclear program. It seems like he’s thrown up his hands in frustration.
Both Trump and Obama took steps to address this challenging issue, each using strategies they felt were appropriate for the crisis. In contrast, it appears Biden hasn’t taken any significant action. Instead, he’s focused on increasing drilling to supply energy to the EU during their war against Russia—after all, we need to keep NATO nations warm. But this approach might come at a steep price for the entire world. It seems this administration didn’t think far enough ahead, allowing Iran to move closer to achieving its nuclear ambitions. I wonder which nation or nations will ultimately pay the price for Biden’s poor decision-making.“Iran is implementing its nuclear commitments,” said Yukiya Amano, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in March 4 remarks to the agency’s Board of Governors. Amano urged Tehran to continue adhering to the deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
The IAEA quarterly report on Iran’s nuclear program, released publicly just days after Amano’s statement, contains additional details demonstrating that Iran is abiding by the deal’s terms. It notes that Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium is below the 300-kilogram cap set by the JCPOA and that Iran has not enriched uranium above the limit of 3.67 percent uranium-235, far below the 90 percent level considered useful for weapons purposes.
The report notes that the agency has had access to “all the sites and locations in Iran which it needed to visit.”
Since then? The Biden administration has consistently attempted to bring the Iranians back into talks that would reinstate the deal.
Recently? The State Department spokesperson said the administration still saw a negotiated solution as the best way to contain Iran's nuclear program, but that Iran's failure to cooperate with the IAEA and its escalatory actions made diplomacy impossible.... And sometimes it's a tough road cleaning up or undoing what Trump left.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/biden-a … =113189046
"what really stood out to me was when she was asked about who she considers the U.S.'s most dangerous enemy. Her response was "Iran,"
Is the "enemy within" a better choice?In my view, absolutely. We have a White House filled with incompetence and enemies within, I agree with Trump—these kinds of leaders could be seen as enemies. Based on the definition, anyone who harms or weakens something or someone fits that description.
I can't understand how people fail to see what this administration has truly done. We've spent years fearing Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon, and Biden’s weak leadership and lack of resolve have allowed that threat to become a reality. This mess is all on Biden as well as his administration.I'd like a President who will strive for unity. Not call those of us who don't agree with him the enemy. The president must be so for the entire country, not just those he likes.
That may have been seen as inspiring in the past, but those times have changed. We currently have an administration that seems to be undermining the very foundations of our country. It's unfortunate that some in our government do not represent at least half the population. Do you think many people will remain passive and ignore what we are witnessing with our own eyes?
A president cannot ignore the realities of this administration. They pose a significant threat and can be seen as enemies from within. I support a president who is determined to take a stand and work to remove this group from Washington."I'd like a President who will strive for unity."
Yes, not Presidents, nor candidates who refer to us as "deplorable", "the dregs of society", "arrogant and dismissive", "domestic terrorists"........Shar, Dems try so hard to find flaws in Trump and Vance, which are prevalent in their Presidents and candidates.
The Democrats often turn the tables by claiming that Trump has done things he hasn't, while their candidate and her boss have actually engaged in the very actions they accuse Trump of. It's a complete inversion of reality, and I see this as a distinct phenomenon.
They engage in gaslighting, attempting to manipulate issues to make people question their own reality and perceptions. However, it often doesn’t work on those who rely on common sense. Up will always be up, and what is good will never be bad. Some people see it all completely backward.
Where or when has Harris called citizens those names?
I've been labeled the "enemy within" a "lunatic" and "leftist vermin" to be rooted out....
Cool with you?
Trump is campaigning on an explicit vow to treat the opposition and its voters as sub-American. He has threatened persecution of the “vermin” opposition. Said it would be acceptable to use the National guard and even the military on citizens.
Also floated sending the military into Democratic-run cities, and, now, made it all even more explicit with his latest “enemy within” rants. This is fascism.Okay, same boat. Who was it that called us all those names, her team mates, her Mentors, definitely the Godfather!
You are still confused about the enemy within, that is reserved for those who have described me and half this nation... as domestic terrorists.
I know that this will break your heart, but I was also referred to as sub-human and half-human (by a fellow writer, here at HP) She made it VERY personal, because I don't buy into the climate change hoax.
Do you want to keep a tally?Can you provide any quotes that Harris has labeled Americans in a derogatory manner?
It's a given that our fellow Americans call each other names but I expect a president and a presidential candidate to rise above such nonsense. To have better character.All words I have heard her use... Are these not derogatory?
Racists
Misogynists
Bigots
Hate-filled
Vigilantes
Radicalized
White supremacists
Domestic terrorists
Conspiracy theorists
Fascists
Obstructionists
Unpatriotic
Enemies of democracy
Ignorant
Cult-likeAre any of these words put into sentences that are directed toward the American people? I'd like to see some quotes specifically from Harris
Everyone was aimed at the American people ... Some of the criticisms were aimed at Trump, who is an American citizen.
I guess you should bring out your scale because there’s plenty of "well, Trump said this" to go around.No specific quotes?
Such as this...
"I think the bigger problem are the people from within. We have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical left lunatics,” he continued. “And I think it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard or, if really necessary, by the military, because they can’t let that happen.”
Has Harris threatened to revoke the licenses of particular news media? Like cbs? I also find that very fascist like
“It is the enemy from within. And they’re very dangerous. They’re marxists and they’re communists and they’re fascists and they’re sick.”
It's interesting in light of general Milley's comment that Trump is "fascist to the core"."On Fox’s Sunday Morning Futures, Trump was asked by host Maria Bartiromo if he was “expecting chaos” on Election Day. “No, I don’t think so, not from the side that votes for Trump,” the former president replied. “I think the bigger problem is the enemy from within.”
“We have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical left lunatics. And I think it should be very easily handled by — if necessary, by the National Guard or, if really necessary, by the military, because they can’t let that happen.”
He didn't hold back. Many of us believe that elements like the leftist radicals contributed to the deaths and millions of dollars in damage during the Summer of Love. I stand with Trump; I witnessed what I would call far-left lunatics engaging in violent protests for about 90 days. If this kind of unrest arises again after a Trump victory, I think the National Guard should be called in. Some may oppose this, but those same individuals were quick to question why Trump didn’t deploy the Guard on January 6th. I find that mindset quite odd and frankly hypocritical.
"It is the enemy from within. And they’re very dangerous. They’re marxists and they’re communists and they’re fascists and they’re sick.”
Not sure who he was talking about. Unable to speak on the issue. Who was he referring to?
Milley should perhaps stay out of the media, I mean he was responsible for getting 13 Americans killed -- He is a disgrace in my view.A whole different issue but Milley, in Congressional testimony, acknowledged that remaining in Afghanistan would likely have put American troops in harm's way, as the Taliban would have restarted its fight with the US for staying on beyond an agreed 31 August departure deadline, citing intelligence reports he had reviewed. I've stated this previously, Afghanistan became a matter of get out or dramatically increase our presence there as the Taliban was moving in quickly.
He saw Trump up close, worked with him closely so I find his characterization of Trump as fascist to the core quite interesting.
It says a lot that so many that worked closely with Trump have some very negative things to say about him personally.
Mitch McConnell has recently joined the chorus..
He says Trump is a “despicable human being,” “stupid” and “ill-tempered.". A "narcissist" and " unfit for the office"
Wow Mitch, tell us how you really feel.Mitch's description is nothing but name calling, name calling without substance or truth. Trump, for example, is NOT "stupid", of low intelligence, as Mitch says he is.
His characterization, therefore, is meaningless. If that's the best he can come up with - childish name calling from the sandbox - he has nothing to offer anyone. Except, perhaps, other name callers that will approve of his pathetic exhibition.That's comical. As I read the meme, just who has "brought dehumanizing language into American presidential politics"? Perhaps this Anne Applebaum, whoever she is?
Is it just coincidence or conspiracy that so many that worked so closely with Trump have nothing but criticism for him? It's hard to dismiss when so many have the same negative comments.
How about neither? Just maybe, could it be, that the Democrat Party is making the rounds and asking everyone he has touched to say something bad about him?
That, more than anything else, appears to be what Harris is running on - "We must not elect Donald Trump!". It seems that every time I turn on the TV that's what I see - Harris saying the same thing over and over. She can't seem to get his name out of her mouth.
But it's really easy to dismiss when there is nothing but name calling. They are no better than a pack of children in the school yard, whether we expect better from them or not. Personally, I do not - We've been hearing this for over 8 years now, just how terrible a person, a man and a President Trump is. In the face of absolute proof of the opposite, we still hear it.
And that's what you have built your opinion on - the screams of his opponents, with nothing but name calling and twisted, exaggerated and false claims about the man.But Democrats aren't going around soliciting these opinions. And when they start to add up in a similar fashion, it's not just a coincidence. These are the people who worked with him. The people that were closest to him. I have absolutely no reason to dismiss them out of hand. They have certainly seen more of him than you or I.
I don't know, if I'm hiring for my business and all of the candidates references are negative... I'm not hiring that candidate.
"Harris saying the same thing over and over. She can't seem to get his name out of her mouth."
She is a candidate in a presidential election and he is the opposition... It goes without saying that they are both going to talk about the other constantly."But Democrats aren't going around soliciting these opinions."
And you know this how? Because you want to believe they are not politicians, not running for office, and don't want others on their side?
Of course you have a reason to dismiss them out of hand - I gave you the best reason possible. When name calling is all they have they aren't worth listening to.
"I don't know, if I'm hiring for my business and all of the candidates references are negative... I'm not hiring that candidate. "
No, do not exaggerate like Harris and company is. You cannot say all the references are negative - at best you can say that Harris has carefully hand picked a selection of comments that she wants to promote. The other 3/4 of the comments did not fit, so she does not repeat them. Do not forget that an almost perfect half of the people want Trump as President.
But I'm not hearing Trump like that. He says it, yes, but I kid you not it is every time she is on the screen that "Donald Trump" comes out of her mouth. That's all she has to offer any more - at least she used to tell us she would steal from some to give to others, but now it is just "Donald Trump is bad!". If denigrating an opponent is the only thing she has to offer, I don't want her. What happens when she gets in and Trump fades away? She has nothing left! Nothing to offer the country after he is gone!"And you know this how?"
It's very simple to see where their comments have been made and to whom. Regardless of who these people have made comments to, I have no reason to believe they are all liars.
Who of former cabinet members or advisors praise Trump? Either personally or in his presidential role?"I have no reason to believe they are all liars."
No reason to believe they are liars; they are all giving opinions and, as such, are likely not lying. You might want to think about that a little, for you do seem to have a problem distinguishing between opinion and fact.
But that they are giving an honest opinion does not mean it is correct or that it is not extremely biased or exaggerated, for this is the way of opinions. On the other hand you do not seem to have collected opposing opinions to compare to - you might do that. You can start with Musk and move on from there.Do you realize how many of her staff walked out not only when she was AG, but VP?
Oh you... have... to watch this...
This woman goes deep... a journey... into why we must vote Trump
https://x.com/LauraBeckerReal/status/18 … 4294015168Powerful, and so well put. This woman woke up, we can hope more Americans will follow.
But look how far she took it before she came to her senses. How many can't make their way back from this madness?!
Mike Pompeo (Former Secretary of State) - Publicly supports Trump's 2024 candidacy.
Stephen Miller (Former Senior Advisor) - A strong supporter actively backing Trump.
Russell Vought (Former Director of the Office of Management and Budget) - Continues to support Trump’s fiscal policies.
Brian Hook (Former U.S. Special Representative for Iran) - Supports Trump’s foreign policy, particularly regarding Iran.
Michael Ellis (Former Deputy Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff) - Has expressed support for Trump’s agenda.
H.R. McMaster (Former National Security Advisor) - While he has been critical at times, he has acknowledged some of Trump's achievements and policies.
Chris Liddell (Former Deputy Chief of Staff) - Liddell has been supportive of Trump's business-related policies.
Robert Wilkie (Former Secretary of Veterans Affairs) - He has expressed support for Trump’s policies concerning veterans.
Mark Meadows (Former Chief of Staff) - Supportive of Trump’s campaign and involved in his efforts.
David Perdue (Former U.S. Senator and advisor) - Endorsed Trump and actively campaigns for him.
Sarah Sanders (Former Press Secretary) - Now Governor of Arkansas, she supports Trump’s candidacy.
Larry Kudlow (Former Director of the National Economic Council) - Voiced support for Trump’s economic policies and campaign.
Ben Carson (Former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development) - Endorsed Trump and publicly supports his campaign.
Rick Grenell (Former Acting Director of National Intelligence) - Vocal in his support for Trump’s 2024 run.
Peter Navarro (Former Trade Advisor) - Continues to support Trump and his policies.
Kellyanne Conway (Former Counselor to the President) - Expressed support for Trump’s candidacy.
Scott Pruitt (Former Administrator of the EPA) - Supports Trump’s policies and candidacy.
Mike Flynn (Former National Security Advisor) - Continues to support Trump and has been involved in his campaigns.
Jason Miller (Former Senior Advisor) - Actively involved in supporting Trump’s campaign.
Sebastian Gorka (Former Deputy Assistant to the President) - A strong advocate for Trump’s campaign.
Linda McMahon (Former Administrator of the Small Business Administration) - Has voiced support for Trump’s policies.
Tom Price (Former Secretary of Health and Human Services) - Price has been supportive of Trump’s policies and has expressed his alignment with Trump's agenda.
Elaine Chao (Former Secretary of Transportation) - While her public support has been more reserved, she has praised Trump's infrastructure initiatives.
Sonny Perdue (Former Secretary of Agriculture) - Perdue has expressed support for Trump’s agricultural policies and initiatives.
Andrew Wheeler (Former Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency) - He has voiced support for Trump’s environmental policies and initiatives.
Mark Esper (Former Secretary of Defense) - Although he has been critical at times, he has acknowledged Trump’s focus on defense issues.
Ricky Ellison (Former Assistant Secretary of Defense) - Ellison has been supportive of Trump’s defense policies.
David Bernhardt (Former Secretary of the Interior) - He has voiced support for Trump’s environmental and land management policies.
Troy A. Miller (Former Acting Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection) - Miller has expressed support for Trump’s border policies.
Michael Caputo (Former Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs at HHS) - Caputo has been a vocal supporter of Trump and his policies.
Jim Carroll (Former Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy) - Carroll has supported Trump’s approach to drug policy and enforcement.
Matt Whitaker (Former Acting Attorney General) - Whitaker has voiced support for Trump’s judicial appointments and policies.
Kirstjen Nielsen (Former Secretary of Homeland Security) - Nielsen has expressed support for Trump’s border security and immigration policies.
David Shulkin (Former Secretary of Veterans Affairs) - Shulkin has supported Trump’s efforts to reform veterans’ services, though he has been critical of some decisions.
Dan Scavino (Former Deputy Chief of Staff for Communications) - Scavino has been a loyal supporter of Trump and continues to advocate for his policies.
Michael Flynn (Former National Security Advisor) - Flynn has been a strong supporter of Trump, particularly regarding foreign policy and national security issues.
Ric Grenell (Former Acting Director of National Intelligence) - Grenell has consistently supported Trump’s policies and has been vocal about his endorsement.
John Ratcliffe (Former Director of National Intelligence) - Ratcliffe has supported Trump’s foreign policy initiatives and has been active in campaigning for him.
Scott Turner (Former Executive Director of the White House Opportunity and Revitalization Council) - Turner has supported Trump’s efforts on economic empowerment.
Kayleigh McEnany (Former Press Secretary) - McEnany has been a vocal supporter of Trump and continues to advocate for his candidacy.
Tom Homan (Former Acting Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement) - Homan has expressed support for Trump’s immigration enforcement policies.
Stephen Bannon (Former Chief Strategist) - Bannon has remained a vocal supporter of Trump and his policies.
Dan Bongino (Former Secret Service Agent and conservative commentator) - Bongino has been a strong advocate for Trump and his agenda.
Mick Mulvaney (Former Acting Chief of Staff and Director of the Office of Mulvaney has expressed support for Trump’s economic policies.
Kevin Hassett (Former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers) - Hassett has voiced support for Trump’s economic policies and tax reforms.
Mark Green (Former Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development) - Green has supported Trump’s foreign aid policies.
Tom Cotton (U.S. Senator who served in Trump's term) - Cotton has been a strong supporter of Trump’s policies, particularly on immigration and national security.
Nina D. V. J. C. C. (Nina) B. (Former Deputy Assistant to the President) - Has shown support for Trump's agenda.
Jeffrey Rosen (Former Acting Attorney General) - Rosen has expressed alignment with Trump’s policies, particularly in law enforcement.
George Graham (Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs) - He has voiced support for Trump’s foreign policy approach.
Robert O’Brien (Former National Security Advisor) - O’Brien has been supportive of Trump’s foreign policy initiatives.
Lisa Booth (Former Trump campaign advisor and conservative commentator) - Booth has continued to support Trump in various media appearances.
Richard V. Allen (Former U.S. Ambassador and advisor) - Allen has expressed support for Trump’s foreign policy decisions.
Mark T. Esper (Former Secretary of Defense) - Although he has been critical at times, he has supported certain aspects of Trump’s defense policies.
Alex Azar (Former Secretary of Health and Human Services) - While he has been more reserved, he has supported Trump’s approach to healthcare policy.
Alicia Keys (Former White House Director of Intergovernmental Affairs) - She has voiced support for Trump’s policies and his leadership style.
Daniel Coats (Former Director of National Intelligence) - While he has been critical, he has acknowledged Trump’s focus on national security issues.
Marc Short (Former Chief of Staff to Mike Pence) - Short has been supportive of Trump and his policies, particularly on economic matters.
Dr. Scott Atlas (Former COVID-19 advisor) - Atlas has been a strong supporter of Trump’s approach to the pandemic.
Chris Giancarlo (Former Chairman of the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission) - Giancarlo has supported Trump’s regulatory policies.
Stephen C. Miller (Former Senior Policy Advisor) - Continues to support Trump and his immigration policies.
Mark Hager (Former Assistant Secretary of State for International Organizations) - Hager has been supportive of Trump’s foreign policy initiatives.
Gary Cohn (Former Director of the National Economic Council) - While he has had a complicated relationship with Trump, he has voiced support for some of his economic policies.
Cassandra McDonald (Former White House Deputy Director of Strategic Communications) - She has expressed support for Trump and his agenda.
Kyle McGowan (Former Chief of Staff at HHS) - McGowan has publicly supported Trump’s policies.
Andrew Card (Former White House Chief of Staff under George W. Bush) - Card has shown alignment with some of Trump’s policies.
Molly Michael (Former Assistant to the President) - Supports Trump’s policies and his campaign efforts.
Troy Miller (Former Acting Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection) - Continues to support Trump’s border policies.
David Friedman (Former U.S. Ambassador to Israel) - Friedman has supported Trump’s foreign policy initiatives, particularly regarding Israel.
Marty Walsh (Former Secretary of Labor) - While he has a complicated relationship, he has recognized Trump’s focus on labor issues.
Russ Vought (Former Director of the Office of Management and Budget) - Continues to support Trump’s fiscal policies.
Robert Lighthizer (Former U.S. Trade Representative) - Supports Trump’s trade policies and has praised his approach to tariffs.
Steven Mnuchin (Former Secretary of the Treasury) - Has expressed support for Trump’s economic policies and initiatives.
Mick Mulvaney (Former Acting Chief of Staff) - Continues to support Trump’s economic and policy initiatives.
Rick Perry (Former Secretary of Energy) - Has voiced support for Trump’s energy policies and initiatives.
Tom Fitton (Former advisor and president of Judicial Watch) - A vocal supporter of Trump’s policies and agenda.
David Bossie (Former Deputy Campaign Manager) - Actively supports Trump’s policies and candidacy.
Harris has nothing else to share but Trump venom, it's yummy grub to the leftest.
I have just watched it, and the first thing that comes to mind is that anyone still on the fence, was not swayed her way. She has mastered... not answering the questions; evade, glare/stare, interrupt, blame Trump, blame Trump, blame Trump. But whatever you do, don't
directly answer a question. Even if you have some notion of an answer which will suffice, don't go there.
That's my takeaway.
It is sad, really. How did she get here again? Is she wondering the same?But your guy stood on stage for 39 minutes awkwardly swaying to music when he was supposed to be taking questions. He is canceling interviews and refusing others left and right these days. And the interviews that he does show up to? His "answers" to questions are largely incoherent and lacking in substance.
Do you watch football? Have you ever noticed players taking a knee, when another player is down? (down, as in injured on the field)
Trump took a knee, so to speak, while medical attention was given to more than one person, in a very hot venue (from what attendees were saying)
It was a classy move. But if I am explaining this to you, all while you remain impressed by Kamala, I suspect I am wasting my time.But he didn't take questions after the medical emergencies were quickly taken care of...he said this:
"Let's not do any more questions. Let's just listen to music," Trump said, offering as an explanation for the change in plans, "Who the hell wants to hear questions, right?"
There are certainly very different standards that are applied to Harris versus Trump
I need to find the interview and watch it, but just came across this, and I agree, she does look bad.
So what she is saying here is that she sides with China, Taiwan is theirs, but she also sides with Taiwan, they have the right to defend themselves!?!?!
Yikes, Ya'll!!!
https://youtu.be/237kGqCTa8A?si=7eekwugouUzPhksP"Interesting, I wonder what sped that up?"
The Biden-Harris Administration has freed up $16 billion in previously frozen Iranian funds.Do you remember Trump pulling out of the I ran nuclear deal? A deal that Iran was complying with.
Trump pulled out of another mainstream interview today, this time nixing a sit-down with NBC News.... Heads for the comfort of fox and friends instead.
He just canceled a gig with the NRA also. I think it's very clear that the campaign trail is taking a huge toll.It appears the polls don't reflect that sentiment. I recently shared some of his packed schedule leading up to the election. While Trump has historically received the NRA endorsement in all three elections, I don't think he needs to focus on that this time. On October 22, 2024, he will hold a rally in Wilmington, North Carolina, concentrating on swing states as he intensifies his campaign efforts. I would say he is wise to stay out of muddy interviews. Just can get more bang for his buck by taking it to the people. I mean interviews can really go bad, just ask Kamala. I think he is listening to his strategist.
Perhaps he was hot too. The back to back medical issues definitely sucked all the air out of the room.
Another reason to vote for Trump?
Make America Healthy Again: The Chemicals Poisoning Your Food
https://youtu.be/-mNpaKgepL0?t=2040Amen. Add it to the long list:
Make America Healthy Again!!Did you see Harris' Columbus Day speech???
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fu5OIdS8Kt8
What do you think best fits... WTF...OMG...SMH...or maybe all 3?Thanks, Ken --- Mamma Mia! Laugh of the day
OMG --- was she in front of first graders? Who in the hell writes her speeches? That was classic Harris, read the teleprompter, look scared to death, and present a word salad with slime chosen for the salad dressing.
Let me add---
Harris's Columbus Day speech was notably divisive, as it seemed more focused on deepening historical grievances than fostering unity. While addressing the complexities of Columbus's legacy is important, Harris’s remarks felt one-sided, emphasizing the negative aspects without acknowledging the broader context of the explorer's historical significance. Her speech glossed over key facts, presenting a narrative that was not entirely truthful or balanced. Instead of offering a message of reconciliation, Harris’s approach risked alienating those who value the holiday, further contributing to the growing divide in the country.
A big thank you, Kamala! A big thank you to Kamala Harris for delivering such a divisive Columbus Day speech—it’s likely to push even more of the Italian-American vote toward Trump. By dismissing the significance of the holiday to millions of Italian-Americans, Harris only deepened the divide with her skewed and incomplete version of history. It’s so blatantly obvious that she operates like a puppet in a political matrix, reciting rehearsed, agenda-driven lines without genuine understanding or connection to the broader picture. Her failure to grasp how this speech would alienate a key demographic speaks volumes about her detachment from reality.Would she be given a pass if she simply stood on stage for 40 minutes swaying to music or blankly staring? Like I've said before, the bar for her is infinitely high while his is on the ground... And he barely clears it.
Also, what year was this speech?She would have done herself a favor if she did. The video was 3 years ago
Speaking at the National Congress of American Indians 78th annual convention, vice-president Harris discussed the history of colonization in the Americas and its connection to present-day Indigenous communities. An oldie but goodie.
This is preferred? Acceptable? I can't imagine if she was doing this...
https://x.com/KamalaHQ/status/1847665146836951422
Apparently that speech was several years ago? But here's something more recent to consider...
https://x.com/KamalaHQ/status/1847449998646005874
His rally's are just jammed packed full of this type of nonsenseShe clearly... loves, honors respects, adores and cherishes the United States of America!
Why else would she want to be President?!?What did you find wrong with the content of this speech? That I believe was made in 2021
Everything! From the first lie out of her mouth, until the last where she is cut off....
It matters not when she spoke these words, the disdain is chilling.We can't acknowledge the reality of columbus? I mean he used violence and slavery to exploit the land and the people who were here at the time. We do have his journal entries. I don't think there's any reason we have to run from history.
Some people celebrate Indigenous Peoples' Day instead...which honors the cultures and histories of the people who were already living in the Americas before European contact.The reality is that Columbus was an accomplished explorer. He returned again and again. The reality is that Columbus' first introduction to the Natives left him intrigued.
He wrote:
“Of anything they have, if you ask them for it, they never say no; rather they invite the person to share it, and show as much love as if they were giving their hearts; and whether the things be of value or of small price, at once they are content with whatever little thing of whatever kind may be given to them. I gave them a thousand good, pleasing things which I had bought, in order that they might be fond of us, and furthermore might be made Christians and be inclined to the love and service of their Highnesses and of the whole Castillan nation, and try to help us and to give us of the things which they have in abundance and which are necessary to us."
The first European settlers left behind by Columbus in the New World, or as Columbus referred to it, "the Other World", were all murdered and the settlement was burnt down.
We weren't there. We weren't born for that time but rather for this time, which, incidentally, are worlds apart. I don't believe that Columbus was the monster that revisionists have made him out to be, but I don't believe him to have been perfect either.
Only Jesus Christ holds that title.
I believe that many good men sailed the seas, along with many flawed men. Just as today.There's no doubt that Columbus' voyages had an undeniable historical impact but Columbus wasn't the first to discover the New World.
Indigenous people had been living there for centuries by the time he arrived in 1492 and Leif Eriksson and the Vikings beat him to it five centuries earlier.
Columbus and his men enslaved many of these native people and treated them with extreme violence and brutality. Throughout his years in the Americas, he forced natives to work for the sake of profits. Later, he sent thousands of "Indians" to Spain to be sold
An excerpt from his journal..
"They ought to make good slaves for they are of quick intelligence since I notice that they are quick to repeat what is said to them, and I believe that they could very easily become Christians, for it seemed to me that they had no religion of their own."
Anyone for her, is against this Country. But then, she is, so, I guess it makes sense.
Oh, absolutely. I never thought I’d see the day when brainwashing would be so widespread in America. I’ve watched much of our media transform into a form of propaganda, weaponized by this group, which seems to have many consumed by nothing but hate. It’s a mindset that’s likely ruining their lives. I can't imagine what it would be like to be in a constant state of directing hate toward one human being. For lack of a better description, I liken this phenomenon to the movie Invasion of the Body Snatchers.
I never imagined it would take such deep root, but it has. The real question is how deep those roots go. I believe many people are starting to wake up—how long can one continue wearing blindfolds before finally taking a peek at what’s happening in the country?
Wait which one is it?
https://x.com/KamalaHQ/status/1847427116930859302One more... Answering the tough questions on The comfy couch lol the guy's face at the end is priceless
https://x.com/KamalaHQ/status/1847309424257323133I believe even someone not very bright would grasp what Trump was saying. This really highlights how the left's mindsets are even more concerning than I thought. It would be worthwhile to take a moment to watch the clip. His statement was clear, and it’s no surprise, considering he’s always emphasized his preference for negotiation to prevent wars. He’s been quite open about his views on the two wars Biden has the U.S. involved in, which he feels could have been avoided. Maybe whoever from her team posted the clip should take the time to seek out the context, and perhaps some others here will, too. I hesitate to say it, but this is a good example of how easily some people fall into the one-sentence syndrome.
Full interview -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKzo0hTJXB4Lol would the negotiations have let the south keep their slaves?
I hope we have the opportunity for Trump to step in and help end the two current wars that Biden has involved us in. I prefer a president who actively works toward resolving conflicts rather than just saying “Don’t, don’t, don’t.” Trump is a problem solver and someone who is not afraid of a challenge. Biden created the problem and then ignored the problem he created. While I can’t say for certain whether he could have prevented a civil war, I believe that, given his strengths, he would have certainly made a serious effort to try.
The whole Columbus thing is so stupid.
She's right, btw.All proper thinking indoctrinated Progressives will think so...
The rest of us, not so much.
You have to love RFK Jr... he exposes another great evil done by the Biden/Harris Administration
The Pipeline Deception
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llcvrKDJRo0Trump is just tearing it up on the campaign trail...
Trump was speaking in Latrobe, PA Arnold Palmer’s birthplace, on Saturday evening when the 12-minute tangent began. The former president began by praising Palmer’s career and describing his previous conversations with him. “There were a few golfers that you could say may be slightly better, a few, not many,” he said. “But there was nobody that had his magic.”
The magic? Well here it comes...
"This is a guy that was all man,” Trump said. “He took showers with the other pros, they came out of there, they said, ‘Oh my God, that’s unbelievable.’ I had to say it.”
"I had to tell you the shower part because it’s true,” he added.
It is literally like open mic night at the Senior center.
Social media users were quick to mock him for the anecdote.
“According to the most recent NYT/Siena poll, the top three issues for swing voters include: 1. Inflation 2. abortion 3. The size of Arnold Palmer’s schlong,” podcast host Dan Pfeiffer wrote on X.
This is real life folks. I don't want to hear anymore of the nonsense about how Harris isn't high-minded enough for y'all...
This man's ability to filter himself is shot. I think it's called dementia.
Most working families would like to hear about Jobs, Education, Healthcare and not Arnold Palmer’s junk.
Just Saying.He was just reminiscing and telling stories about his friend and sharing other's stories he had heard about him. A real man's man!! It was innocent enough. Then he got down to business, "Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?"
Followed by a resounding, Nooooo!Oh I know. It's quite the hypocrisy though that Trump can ramble on admiring another man's junk for 10 minutes but when Harris doesn't give a dissertation on quantum physics she's dumb as dirt...
If Biden would sway on stage for 39 minutes his family would be excruciated for not caring and his advisors vilified for "putting him out there". He would be called demented... But when it's Trump it's just all in good fun.Yup, when the alternative is 4 more years of what we have had... or worse...
More wars and threat of war than ever in my lifetime... WWIII is imminent.
I suppose we have room for another 10 or 20 million migrants... just fire some more American workers and hire them instead.
Inflation... I'm sure they'll find a way of spending a few more trillion we don't have and shooting inflation back up again.
Are you ready for Americans to start getting arrested for posting illegal misinformation? ... that is what Harris and Kerry and the rest of the crew in control today want to make happen... like the UK and Canada.
Transmen competing with women... kids being brainwashed and mutilated...
Yeah... there is a reason why "They do not care."
Pro? Con? You be the judge, I'd like a president who doesn't defame people with his lies..
Central Park Five sue Donald Trump for defamation...
Trump falsely claimed during presidential debate the five men had murdered and pleaded guilty to the notorious New York 1989 rape case.
Plaintiffs never pled guilty to any crime and were subsequently cleared of all wrongdoing thru DNA , their filing stated.
Doesn't he know any better? Can't he just keep his big mouth shut?
I hope they get a big beautiful settlement ... One that has never been seen before it's so big.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/central-park- … =114994231Seen the ad twice today about that phony project 2025 thing "belonging" to Trump. Signed off by Harris. Can she make a bigger lie? Stay tuned; we'll know within 2 weeks.
What does project 2025 have to do with him lying about these individuals who are exonerated of a crime by DNA that Trump called for their execution? And he continues to defame them?
Do you not remember that Trump spoke to the Heritage foundation and specifically said that they would lay out a plan...
"This is a great group, and they’re going to lay the groundwork and detail plans for exactly what our movement will do and what your movement will do when the American people give us a colossal mandate to save America.”I did not write the following, but I have written about every subject mentioned, over the past few years. I am motivated by my daughter, my daughters-in-law, and especially, my granddaughters! For every single person I love and care about, I want them to always know that I did all that I could do to "keep" this amazing "Republic" of ours. This unparalleled Country which has been so good to all of us. There is no room for Communism, not here in America. We have one or we have the other. We can’t have both.
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/oMqqL4T7fN7SH8ZZ/Nothing says actual Communism more than floating the idea of revoking broadcast licenses of media outlets...
I disagree--- nothing says communism more than a government that uses media as an arm to spread propaganda. I see incidents of pure propaganda daily from networks. I am hopeful this can be stopped, it's harmful to our Nation in so many ways. If it takes punitive actions so be it. many of us are willing to fight back against the current networks that spread propaganda. Factcheking goes a long way and is relatively easy to do.
I forgot.
Its too long to copy/paste. It also has photos and graphics. But, some excerpts.
The Many Links Between Project 2025 and Trump’s World
Former president Donald J. Trump has repeatedly claimed that he had nothing to do with Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation’s conservative policy initiative to reshape the federal government. Mr. Trump has said that he has not read its proposals and does not know who is behind it. But Project 2025 has numerous ties to Mr. Trump and his campaign, a New York Times analysis has found.
Large portions of the “Mandate for Leadership,” the driving document behind Project 2025, were written by longtime Trump loyalists who were advisers to Mr. Trump during his first term.
Eighteen of the 40 authors and editors who worked on the document served in the first Trump administration.
One worked on Mr. Trump’s first presidential transition team.
Twelve worked both in Mr. Trump’s first administration and on one of his transition or campaign teams.
Of the 267 additional contributors to the Project 2025 playbook, at least 144, also worked in Mr. Trump’s administration or on his campaign or transition teams.
The policy playbook, known as the “Mandate for Leadership,” is just one pillar of Project 2025. Another is the group’s efforts to compile a database of thousands of vetted conservatives to staff a new conservative administration. That team is led by John McEntee and James Bacon, who helped during Mr. Trump’s first term to purge the federal government of people deemed disloyal to him.
There's more, a lot. Sorry.Can you provide an example of how Trump’s agenda for running as our 47th president aligns with the proposals in Project 2025? Just one example will suffice.
All presidents hire and fire. So please offer another example.A big one is abolishing the department of education
"Do you not remember that Trump spoke to the Heritage foundation and specifically said that they would lay out a plan..."
Perhaps you have forgotten the plan has not even been written yet. It appears that when he was made aware of what the plan included, he called it "abysmal." I'm not sure why the Democrats even bring it up; it has no significance to Trump's agenda.
Politico "Donald Trump's team has distanced itself from Project 2025, a conservative policy blueprint created by the Heritage Foundation. Trump himself has emphasized that he had no involvement in drafting the plan and has not read it. His campaign has also reportedly compiled a list of people who would be barred from serving in a second Trump administration, and those connected to Project 2025 are said to be included on that list. One Trump official described the project as "radioactive," further highlighting that individuals associated with it may have no place in a future Trump White House"
The majority of Republicans would likely not back the provisions in Project 2025. Just as we oppose Kamala Harris' administration for government overreach, we similarly reject the excessive expansion of federal power outlined in this plan. For example, Project 2025 calls for sweeping changes to federal agencies, including proposals to eliminate the Department of Education. This would centralize education policy decisions at the federal level, imposing stricter regulations on schools, which many Republicans view as overstepping the government's role in local education.
Politico -- "Polling shows that Project 2025 is largely unpopular among Republicans. Only about 7% of Republican voters have a positive view of the plan"Yes, that's why he said they are going to lay out a plan.
I've personally read a good deal of project 2025.
While Trump has publicly disavowed (and lying is like breathing to him) Project 2025, there is significant overlap between the playbook and the plans he has articulated in campaign speeches and in his current campaign agenda, Agenda 47.
He can distance himself all he wants, the similarities are significant.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 … ation.htmlI don't read NYT they are so very biased, and I would consider it a waste of time.
You keep dwelling on Trump’s statements made before the plan was created, which strikes me as a bit ridiculous. My earlier comment points out the current facts. There's a list designed to ensure that no one involved in drafting the project will have access to the White House. It feels like you’re fixating on something that lacks substanceThere's no bias in taking the words of project 2025 and the words of trump and comparing them. The overlap and similarities are clear regardless of which media source prints them.
Oh my—"Yes, that's why he said they are going to lay out a plan."
What do you think the phrase "going to" means? Does it imply that I will use the plan? Does it suggest that I will review the plan? Don’t the other words lose context when you consider that "they are going to (not yet laid out) lay out a plan"? My understanding of English tells me that there is no plan in place yet; it hasn’t come to fruition.
To lay out a plan" means to present or explain a plan in a clear and detailed. The plan was not born yet, Trump's context clearly shared there was no plan, and at best could also indicate at some further date the plan would be laid out. Not even sure why anyone could misinstruct the statement. Sorry... But yeah really.
Nothing. Just wondering why only Trump gets called out for blatant lies, that's all. Guess maybe Democrats can say whatever they want without regards to truth, right?
Arnold Palmer's daughter, Peg Palmer Wears, reacted to former President Donald Trump's vulgar comments about her late father, calling them "disrespectful," "inappropriate," and "unacceptable."
Trump was talking. And my dad made a sound of disgust — like 'uck' or 'ugg' — like he couldn’t believe the arrogance and crudeness of this man who was the nominee of the political party that he believed in," she said of her father, who was previously friendly with President Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Then he said, 'He’s not as smart as we thought he was,' and walked out of the room. What would my dad think of Donald Trump today? I think he’d cringe," she continued.
Does he really not understand appropriate language, discourse? Can he just keep his big mouth shut? Ever show some restraint? Maybe his family should pull him in more often?There can be little worse in my opinion than a person that won't admit to making an error, that insists on doubling down on a lie out of sheer spite, stubbornness and ego. This is not the sort of person I want running things.
This man proves time and time again to be a racist, but conservatives say to me all of the time, "give him a chance" or "he's not so bad"
With Trump's election, America's days of greatness are over, prepare for the downward spiral.... America, if you put the equivalent of George Wallace in the White House, expect an eternally adversarial relationship amongst us, where there can be no healing.I’m curious—what specific actions has he taken that you believe justify labeling him as racist? I recognize that some of his statements have been interpreted as such, but I'm interested in understanding the actions that lead you to this conclusion. Words, after all, can be a matter of personal expression, but actions serve as concrete evidence. I recall instances where he initiated policies that appeared to positively impact the Black community. Did those efforts hold no weight for you? I'm genuinely interested in your perspective.
I have a hard time understanding how words can be valued more than actions. If someone genuinely dislikes people of another race, wouldn’t they ignore or punish them through their deeds? This seems more about interpreting a mindset rather than looking at tangible evidence. It feels as though actions, which are far more telling, are being dismissed. From my perspective, when someone dislikes others, their behavior reflects it in their treatment—by being punitive or neglectful of their needs. I find it puzzling to prioritize words over deeds.
These are not words, they are her deeds ----As Attorney General of California, Kamala Harris faced criticism for policies that disproportionately impacted Black communities. Some of the key concerns included her tough stance on crime, which resulted in higher incarceration rates for non-violent offenders, and her defense of convictions later overturned due to misconduct. Her support for anti-truancy laws also led to jail time for parents, many from disadvantaged communities. Critics argue that these actions harmed Black families rather than addressing systemic issues.
Should the Black community not take note of the above, due to her now pandering for votes--- with words? Again has Trump ever shown racism in his policies or deeds while in public office? I have found many of Trump's words offensive, but his deeds have always appeared to represent all Americans.A comprehensive look at his history
https://www.vox.com/2016/7/25/12270880/ … sm-historyPlease take the time to consider my comment and the context it provides. I’m not interested in discussing what Trump said or did decades ago. I hope Cred understands that I’m focusing on one key issue: Trump’s actions while in office. I don't have time to defend his freedom of speech. Maybe we should also discuss Harris’s actions as Attorney General, as her deeds speak volumes to me. Why do you keep ignoring your candidate's actions?
I can support Trump’s positive contributions all day long. As I mentioned, he has said things that have bothered me, but his actions reveal much more about him. To me, words are cheap, but deeds truly stand out.
But Harris now I can list her poor deeds all day long.
During her tenure as Attorney General of California, Kamala Harris faced significant criticism for several policies and decisions that many argue had detrimental effects on Black communities. One of the most notable issues was her support for the enforcement of California's "three strikes" law, which mandated life sentences for individuals convicted of three or more serious crimes. This law disproportionately affected Black individuals and contributed to the cycle of mass incarceration. Additionally, while Harris later advocated for marijuana legalization, her office prosecuted numerous marijuana-related offenses, often leading to harsh penalties for Black individuals. This inconsistency drew accusations of hypocrisy. Critics also highlight her failure to adequately support police reform, arguing that she did not do enough to address police misconduct or hold officers accountable, which has significantly impacted communities of color. Furthermore, Harris advocated for prosecuting minors as adults in certain cases, a decision that has harmful long-term effects on youth, particularly in marginalized communities. Lastly, she opposed measures aimed at reducing the prison population, such as Proposition 47, which sought to downgrade nonviolent offenses to misdemeanors. Critics contend that her opposition hindered efforts to address systemic issues within the criminal justice system, particularly those affecting Black Americans. These points illustrate the complexities and controversies surrounding Harris’s record as Attorney General, especially regarding her impact on Black communities.
....or that label him a liar? I am curious as to the specific lie Cred believes Trump has doubled down on!? I would love to hear it.
Well AB, in my world if you make a grave error you, "man up" and admit it. It was what Kennedy did after the BAy of Pigs fiasco in 1961. We all make mistakes, but don't continue to aggravate a mistake when such is acknowledged to you by continuing to not clarify, correct or apologize.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/netflix … d=63607696
That was the lie Trump doubled down on and would not apologize even though he was proven wrong.
Lol criticism for having a tough stance on crime.... I thought Democrats let crime run wild? The woman just can't win. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.
I think a black person might feel very different if they knew her record. Studies have indicated that Black men are disproportionately affected by the criminal justice system in California, and Harris's policies, like those that led to the prosecution of minor drug offenses, have been cited as contributing factors. However, exact statistics on the number of Black men jailed specifically under her policies may not be readily available. You certainly did not pick up the context of the discussion I was having with Cred. Nothing to do with Democrat's stance on crime, having to do with Harris's background, and racism. She was well known to be harder on Blacks while she was AG. Her records just show that very clearly.
I am not black, but if I was this would not sit well with me it does not sit well with me.What would make you believe that we are ill informed about Harris’ record as a prosecutor? Trump any Republican administration are considered by most of us as several magnitudes worse. Regardless, No, you are not black and not really in a position to understand. Oakland is a predominantly Black community known for high crimes rates. I have no evidence that outside of the requirements of her job as a prosecutor that she was discriminatory in doing her job. Black people are disproportionately affected by the criminal justice system everywhere in America and it did not begin or start with VP Harris. So, what else is new?
Sharlee, my thanks go to Willow for doing the research that I was about to do to support my accusation against Trump.
https://www.vox.com/2016/7/25/12270880/ … sm-history
Seems pretty comprehensive to me. And, words does matter, many of these programs are supposedly to address civil rights issues have been part of a check off the box for half a century, by both parties. The affirmation of the Voting Rights Act, until recently, for example.
Both words and actions matter, Sharlee. You cant really say one thing and sincerely do another and have credibility. Trump in his talk about good genes and bad genes and all the eugenics stuff does not help his case. The DEI Stuff and the Great Replacment stuff is part of the Trump brand. The Black community see the deceptive nature and current polls show 86 percent for Harris. From our standpoint, Trump and his proposed policies are a step backward. If they were not, wouldn't he be getting more support from the Black Community?
So, yes, Sharlee, he is a racist as much as can be revealed by anyone in 21st century America politics. But, I would rather be "pandered to" by someone who at the very least would not unravel whatever progress has been made up to this point.I am not sure you understood my comment ---- I was not in any way defending or dining what Trump said, as I added to my comment "I have found many of Trump's words offensive, but his deeds have always appeared to represent all Americans." You are running away from my main question.
Yes, the link you offered does answer my first question. But --- This was the essence of my inquiry --- I have a hard time understanding how words can be valued more than actions. If Trump genuinely dislikes people of another race, wouldn’t he have ignored or punished them through his deeds while in office? Did he punish black people with any adverse policies or take actions to make things worse for them?
Again you did not address this part of my comment ---- These are not words, they are her deeds ----As Attorney General of California, Kamala Harris faced criticism for policies that disproportionately impacted Black communities. Some of the key concerns included her tough stance on crime, which resulted in higher incarceration rates for non-violent offenders, and her defense of convictions later overturned due to misconduct. Her support for anti-truancy laws also led to jail time for parents, many from disadvantaged communities. Critics argue that these actions harmed Black families rather than addressing systemic issues.
Should the Black community not take note of the above, due to her now pandering for votes--- with words? Yet her actions tells us something very different than her words.
Again has Trump ever shown racism in his policies or deeds while in public office? I have found many of Trump's words offensive, but his deeds have always appeared to represent all Americans.
Why can't you even begin to address Harris's words and actions? You haven't acknowledged her deeds at all. I intentionally focused on her actions rather than her words, even though I believe she has lied excessively. I hoped you would recognize the deeper question I raised. Why do you find it so easy to overlook her actions? How can you turn a blind eye to what she has done? How do Black people justify supporting a politician whose actions have contributed to punitive measures that harm Black communities? A politician in power should be seeking social solutions rather than implementing punitive policies that hurt these communities, especially when she could have looked for root causes and effective solutions. If you can't answer this please ignore it, I am not up for further divertions. But no cop-outs, please.I am back, Sharlee. In response to your comment, I will not cop-out, but please do more than just hear but to listen and there is a difference.
I cannot hope to compete with your inexhaustible research on every thing that you discuss, so my attempt will be feeble at best.
So, lets talk about his deeds, I will start with this all important sentence.
“Black voters are looking for a comprehensive agenda that will get at the structural barriers blocking Black mobility in this country,” she said.”
If an administration or politicians are not working toward that, then I have no use for them.
Please read the articles carefully and see what “deeds” can actually be attributed to Donald Trump on behalf of the Black community
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/0 … ies-433744
https://www.vox.com/21524499/what-trump … ack-people
I say that Trump’s deeds are tepid at best and his racially inflamatory rhetoric just puts that much more suspicion as to his actual motives, as words and deeds should be linked and if one is inconsistent with the other, I am going to harbor attitudes of distrust.
For example:
The greatest president for Blacks since Lincoln, he says. I not only take offense as to what has to be a brazen lie that even a middle schooler could discern but in the fact that the flippant comment shows a fundamental disrespect for the actual Black experience in America.
I am not defending Kamala Harris as if I do not have issues with her. Like I said, Oakland is a “tough town”, I know because I have been there. Prosecutors in tough towns with high crime rates are not always the most popular people. Disparate police conduct and an unequal criminal justice is not just found in Oakland, but throughout America. Regardless, I am far more anti-Trump than I am pro-Harris. But, in my universe, I have to accept the lesser of two evils, and that certainly is not Donald Trump.
But, Trump’s past, present and future gives off a far greater stench than any behavior that characterized VP Harris, in my humble opinion, of course.
By not moving the needle forward and turning back the clock in other ways, he is not moving things consistently with the “prime directive” stated earlier in this comment. So, he cannot be given credit for representing “all of us”.
I am not ignoring her short comings, I am just saying that from my perspective Trump has a lot more, which have dire implications for me and my community. Democrats have simply always have done better. But, your questions regarding Black folks looking at Harris and her record are valid. But, as I said…….
I hope that this begin to answer your questions without a cop-out.
Does it count if she does it? No really does it count ---- I am sure i will get no response, but hopefully, it will hit home with some --- Yes, Kamala Harris and other Democrats have repeatedly claimed that Donald Trump intends to cut or eliminate Social Security, particularly during campaign speeches and debates due to his Project 2025 agenda. They argue that his previous proposals and budget plans suggested reducing funding for social safety nets, including Social Security. Trump has denied these claims, asserting that he supports protecting Social Security and has even stated he would not cut it during his presidency. The debate around this issue tends to be politically charged, due to her continuing to speak on this at most of her rallies. It was fact-checked back in July to not be factual, yet she continues to use this misinformation. She has a campaign ad on the subject.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/24/politics … index.htmlMagnitude and extent matter Sharlee. Who would say on national television that Haitians eat house hold pets?
Why should I believe anything Trump says? The Republican Party has tried to dismantle Social Security from its creation.
Trump has lied a lot more on every sort of topic.So has she--- I have always called out Trump's lies. Can you? I find it very telling how you can't. I will be polite and just say we have little in common, and I will step away from any further communications with you. I think it's time to call it a day.
While crude, it is also highly probable that such a thing did occur.
It highlighted that there are 20,000 Haitian migrants in a town that went from a population of 40k... to 60k... with their arrival.
It put emphasis on an issue that is affecting many places in America today, where thousands of people have been placed into communities with little regard to what the people in those communities want and little ability to handle such numbers.
What about all the lies this Administration has told... about Ukraine, about the Border... while at the same time trying to force vaccines or lose your job, force men into women's sports and locker-rooms, force parents to surrender to the insanity of allowing their children to being mutilated...
This Administration has been one lie after another... and one attack after another on America and Americans... the cost of a Harris Administration will make what we have suffered under Biden look mild in comparison.A whole lot of things are probable Ken...
Ken,
I’m absolutely furious that the Biden administration is completely ignoring the needs of Americans! They don’t seem to care at all about poor communities or how our hard-earned tax money is being spent. It’s infuriating to see them turn a blind eye to the enormous problems caused by their reckless open-border policies. This has resulted in a massive strain on local resources and the mounting costs associated with the influx of migrants are simply being brushed aside.
So glad Springfield has been brought up. True there is no evidence of pets being eaten. However, the light shed on this small city has brought to light the plight the city is living under due to the many thousands of migrants that were placed in the city.
The program under which many Haitian migrants in Springfield, Ohio, have been placed is called Temporary Protected Status (TPS). This designation allows eligible Haitians and individuals from several other countries to live and work in the U.S. legally for a specified period, which can be extended.
The influx of Haitian migrants into Springfield, Ohio, has created numerous challenges for the small city, significantly impacting local resources. A major issue is the housing shortage, with the local market overwhelmed, forcing many migrants into overcrowded conditions or temporary shelters. Local shelters and nonprofit organizations are providing housing, with funding support from various sources, including local, state, and federal levels. Notably, FEMA has allocated funds to assist with housing and sheltering, helping to cover costs associated with accommodating the sudden influx of migrants.
The strain on public services extends beyond housing. Springfield's schools are facing overcrowded classrooms and a lack of resources to adequately support the educational needs of the new students. The sudden increase in enrollment has stretched teachers and resources thin, particularly in bilingual education. Education funding primarily comes from local property taxes and state aid, raising concerns about whether these sources can effectively support the growing student population.
Healthcare services are also under severe pressure, with facilities like the Rocking Horse Community Health Center seeing increased patient loads and requiring additional staff and resources to provide care. The state has allocated funds to enhance healthcare access, but demand often surpasses the available services. Additionally, FEMA funding is aimed at bolstering healthcare infrastructure to accommodate the rising number of patients.
The program that FEMA utilizes to assist with migrant needs is called the Shelter and Services Program (SSP). This program provides federal funds to help local communities offset costs associated with shelter and other essential services for noncitizen migrants who have been processed and released from Department of Homeland Security (DHS) custody. In fiscal year 2023, the SSP was allocated approximately $363.8 million for this purpose, with specific funding rounds designed to assist both border and interior communities impacted by migrant arrivals.
Compounding challenges add increase in crime, Springfield has seen a rise in crime, with vehicle thefts increasing by over 50% and shoplifting incidents doubling between 2021 and 2023. In Springfield, Ohio, the murder rate has indeed seen an increase, rising from 5 homicides in 2021 to 9 in 2023, which amounts to an 81% increase. This rise in murders is part of a broader trend where the city has experienced a roughly 15% increase in overall index crimes during the same period.
https://www.wkyc.com/article/news/local … 96f228b52d
" The Trump-Vance campaign spokesperson pointed us to data showing that from 2021 to 2023, murders in Springfield rose from five to nine. That’s how Vance gets an 80% increase.
Case closed? No.
Looking further back, the number of homicides in Springfield fluctuated without a clear trend from 2013 to 2022. In 2018, for example, when there were fewer migrants and Trump was president, there were 13 homicides.
A criminal justice expert cautioned against relying on annual changes in Springfield to draw conclusions about crime.
"With less than one homicide per month, statistical tests on annual changes are not possible. Homicides are too much of a rare event to determine whether small changes are statistically meaningful," said John Roman, director of the Center on Public Safety and Justice at the nonpartisan research group NORC at the University of Chicago."
Another fact? the city’s immigration FAQ webpage said Haitian migrants are more likely to be the victims of crimes than perpetrators, citing Clark County jail data...uh oh.
https://www.wosu.org/politics-governmen … pringfieldAnother Midwestern Town Inundated With Haitian Migrants
Residents from another midwestern town, this time in Indiana, say city resources are being strained and their children put last due to a sudden influx of migrants from Haiti.
Thousands of new migrants, hailing mostly from Haiti, are now living in Logansport, Indiana, a town with a population of just 18,000. Though local officials say they have not been given any answers on just how many migrants have moved in, estimates range from 3,000 to 5,000 Haitians. The surrounding areas have seen an influx as well, with an estimated 11,000 new migrants county-wide.
Logansport Mayor Chris Martin has said that there are “assimilation issues” related to culture, according to a report from the New York Post.
In one instance, a resident named Nancy Baker told the Post that her 16-year-old daughter was chased by migrants after she rebuffed their calls to walk over to them while she was on her way to a nearby coffee shop.
Another resident, 32-year-old Candice Espinoza, said migrants routinely stare into her windows while she’s home, holding up their phones, potentially recording her.
“It’s not safe. They just stare at you and won’t talk to you,” she told the Post. “They stand there staring at my house with cameras on their phones. I don’t know if they’re recording, what they’re doing.”
“You don’t feel easy when someone is constantly watching you,” Espinoza added.
Additionally, resources are now significantly strained. The number of Haitian migrant students in Logansport schools has increased 15-fold since 2021. Teachers are having to spend increased time with these new students because of the language barrier. Baker says her daughter dropped out of public school to take the rest of her classes online.
“She quit. She’s in online school now,” Baker said. “Nobody was getting the attention that they needed. It’s way too many kids, and it seemed to her that because they didn’t speak the language and didn’t understand what was going on, they were getting more attention.”
Baker said she’s frustrated that her daughter’s school is spending most of its resources on “one group of children,” while “everybody else is falling behind.”
In January of 2023, the Biden-Harris administration launched a new program that allowed more than 200,000 Haitians to be paroled into the U.S. Additionally, over the summer, the administration granted Temporary Protected Status (TPS) to more than 300,000 Haitian migrants, who are now permitted to stay in the U.S. until at least February of 2026, even if they entered the country illegally.
It’s unclear how so many migrants are ending up in small towns in Ohio, Indiana, and Pennsylvania. However, there does seem to be a connection between nonprofits that are resettling migrants and businesses looking for labor.
A report from FOX59 and CBS4 connected Haitian migrants in Logansport to Tyson Foods, a meatpacking plant. The report noted that Tyson did not respond when they were asked about how many migrants, particularly young migrants, are working for them in the city. Notably, Haitian teens are reportedly working shifts to help their families while also attending school.
Tyson made headlines back in May when a conservative nonprofit called America First Legal asked the Department of Justice to investigate the company over its employment practices concerning migrants. AFL said Tyson employs 42,000 foreign workers — more than a third of its U.S. workforce — and is also involved in programs to recruit more migrants.
Tyson has strongly denied discriminating against American workers for migrants and said all their workers are legal.
In Springfield, Ohio, another town inundated with migrants from Haiti, manufacturing and packing plant jobs opened up and businesses welcomed and encouraged the flow of migrants to fill labor needs. Businesses and nonprofits also seem to be a key reason for a migrant influx in Charleroi, Pennsylvania.
It’s estimated that about 20,000 Haitian migrants over the past few years have moved into Springfield, which had a population of just 60,000 people. Charleroi has seen a 2,000% increase in its immigration population.
Residents and officials from the towns say there’s been an increase in traffic violations and car accidents, resources at schools and local law enforcement are strained, housing has become more scarce, and residents are struggling overall with the lack of assimilation from the newcomers.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/another- … Position=2No, 25,000 Haitian immigrants have not been bused into Logansport.
Mayor Chris Martin opened Wednesday’s board of works meeting with a statement addressing the many rumors swirling around the city on social media in regard to fast-spreading misinformation concerning immigrants.
“The rumors recently spread through social media are disappointing,” the mayor began. “It’s disappointing that we must address the rumors due to the belief of a social media ‘satire’ page. This is slowing down local government from solving concerns and challenges.”
https://www.pharostribune.com/news/loca … 261de.htmlLogansport Police chief Travis Yike also made a statement at the Board of Works meeting.
Yike said the police department had not been asked by himself or the mayor to change how they enforce criminal and traffic laws or city ordinances.
“We will continue to treat the residents of our community with dignity and respect on or off duty,” he said. “We do not use stereotypes, racial profiling or discrimination to do our jobs. Our officers will continue to do their jobs with integrity and professionalism.”
Before the meeting, Yike said that while there has been a population increase since 2021, there had been no increase in crime and many different types of criminal activity in Logansport had actually dropped.
Yup. The disinformartion continues, the xenophobia and racism continues. SMHWhy is it considered xenophobia when tens of thousands of foreigners are dumped onto a small-to-mid sized town and the residents there have no say in the matter?
Its their lives that are impacted... their schools... their community... its not the Federal Governments' town... its not right that this Administration decided on its own to shove these burdens onto unsuspecting Americans.
People should be outraged that they had no say in this... that millions have been brought in... that millions more will continue to be brought in... if Harris is elected.
You notice how quickly they were taken out of Martha's Vinyard when they got to Obama's neighborhood.
It is the poor and middle-class Americans that are forced to carry this burden that the rich elites ensure do not impact their neighborhoods and schools.
Ken, this is happening in many states. The media just does not report on it. One only needs to go to local news networks and online outlets to hear the issues. I mean one could write a book. Bigger fish to fry today.
Yup, the Main Stream Media is running cover for the criminal and un-Constitutional efforts of the Biden-Harris Administration.
You have to find alternate sources to MSM to get anything that will point to the truth. For example:
THESE Harris & Walz picks reveal how global elites are LYING to you
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj4dHXvgl7I
"... they are teaching your kids to be slaves..."
Its simple... its Freedom and America as we know it... vs Tyranny and an America that sacrifices its sovereignty and citizenship to the elites' NWO.
Half of them were Democrats not so long ago...
While the likes of Cheney and Gates are backing Harris...Thank you! This is directly where it all stands. I so hope we get to see all of the above in a Trump administration. I’m so excited to see the incredible team Trump is considering for his cabinet! I truly believe his administration will be filled with brilliant, common-sense Americans who genuinely respect democracy and the values we've all come to love. It’s refreshing to think that we'll have leaders who actually care about the country and will work to bring it back on track.
I think Cheney has caused herself enough embarrassment her own constituents booted her out Liz lost her seat to Harriet Hageman, a candidate backed by Donald Trump.
Who says that it is “probable” Ken? The mayor of
Springfield and the Governor of the State of Ohio says otherwise. Immigration is a complex issue, but making unvetted and unproven statements by supposedly responsible politicians that bring unwarranted threats and angst to a group of people is uncalled for, regardless of what Vance and Trump say. That is the issue and the point and diverting away from it does you no justice.
Ok, Sharlee, it does count.
trump denies that he would adversely change Social Security now, but that is not what he had said in an earlier comment. As I said for Republicans, Social Security is socialism and is a pain in their side, so it is not unreasonable to presume that Trump would go with the ideological principles of the Republican Party who fought Social Security since FDR. They only avoid going after it in full force because it is a political hot potato and would guarantee their loss. I do not trust them nor their “promises”.
Trump and Agenda 2025 wanted to alter the ACA and not eliminate it. Funny, that is just what Trump was trying to do during his term, eliminate it, promising a better replacement for which he never gave any details.
But, while screwing the little guy is what the GOP has been and is all about, Harris’ comments took liberty with the truth and accuracy.It's clear that Social Security (SS) is facing funding challenges, and exploring solutions is essential. Addressing the issue rather than ignoring it is crucial, and I agree that it's beneficial for a president to propose potential solutions. Unique problem-solving approaches may be needed to ensure the sustainability of the program for future generations. This proactive stance is preferable to simply overlooking the problem.
I can't say what Trump would do if anything regarding SS.
Odd, what does that personal response have to do with my comment pertaining to Communism?
It has everything to do with the way you responded to my comment.
If I have to spell it out, then I am obviously wasting my time in taking this any further.
ab: where is your heart when it comes to Harris?
*personal attack
Right? Or with Trump links to Project 2025?Yep, the temperature is really rising as we get closer to election day.
Yes, you better believe it!
Because, hopefully, the majority of us, want to "keep the Republic".
One candidate loves this country and one does not. That's enough for me, at this juncture.
Some folks say there is no room for communism here in our country or even go as far as to label Harris as a Stalin...
Yet...
In the past two years, Trump has called for every major American TV news network to be punished
He has repeatedly invoked the government’s licensing of broadcast TV airwaves and has said on at least 15 occasions that certain licenses should be revoked. His anti-broadcasting b
Criticisms against CBS, ABC, NBC, and even Fox are almost always in reaction to interview questions he dislikes.He has made that claim. Trump's statement stems from his long-standing grievances with the media, reflecting his belief that they are not only biased but also detrimental to his presidency and the American political discourse. He clearly wants to see actions taken to address this kind of biased reporting. Many people recognize that we have propaganda networks, and I would assume that many Americans share my view and would welcome an end to such reporting.
The context of his statement is rooted in Trump's conviction that mainstream media outlets misrepresent his actions, misinterpret his words, and contribute to a negative public perception.
By calling for punishment, he was likely advocating for consequences against networks that spread misinformation or damaging narratives, often using snippets of words out of context to misrepresent what individuals are actually saying. In my view, this type of reporting is harmful not only to the individuals being misrepresented but also to our society as a whole. It has become increasingly clear that this biased skewing of the news has left many people unable to discern truth from misinformation. I am hopeful that networks proven to be promoting propaganda will face punitive action."He clearly wants to see actions taken to address this kind of biased reporting. "
Government control of media is a principle of communism.
"By calling for punishment, he was likely advocating for consequences against networks that spread misinformation or damaging narratives, often using snippets of words out of context to misrepresent what individuals are actually saying..."
Are these not threats against free speech? LOL what would his biggest supporter musk say about this?
The context of his statement is rooted in Trump's conviction that mainstream media outlets misrepresent his actions, misinterpret his words, and contribute to a negative public perception.
Again, this is your interpretation, not his and not what he said. His threats against CBS didn't even have to do with their portrayal of him... It was a whole about their handling of Harris.
His (one of his many) statement(s)..
“A giant Fake News Scam by CBS & 60 Minutes,” he wrote. “Her REAL ANSWER WAS CRAZY, OR DUMB, so they actually REPLACED it with another answer in order to save her or, at least, make her look better. A FAKE NEWS SCAM, which is totally illegal. TAKE AWAY THE CBS LICENSE. Election Interference."
We're talking about CBS using a more succinct clip of Harris's answer to a question... We are not talking about anything that Trump said or that he was taken out of context.
So we think it's okay to take certain outlets off the air because we don't like their editing?
"60 Minutes gave an excerpt of our interview to Face the Nation that used a longer section of her answer than that on 60 Minutes. Same question. Same answer. But a different portion of the response," CBS said in a statement on Sunday.
During the 60 Minutes interview, Harris was asked why Israel does not appear to be listening to U.S. advice about the latest war between Israel and Hamas.
The Trump letter said that her answer broadcast on Face The Nation was nothing but meaningless "word salad."
In the Face The Nation clip, Harris replies: "Well, Bill, the work that we have done has resulted in a number of movements in that region by Israel that were very much prompted by, or a result of, many things, including our advocacy for what needs to happen in the region
In the 60 Minutes interview, she replies more succinctly: "We are not going to stop pursuing what is necessary for the United States to be clear about where we stand on the need for this war to end."
And this is the reason CBS needs to be taken off the air? Lol.
[b]I am hopeful that networks proven to be promoting propaganda will face punitive action.[b]
The success of the Dominion lawsuit against Fox was perfect.
What did you think of Bret Baier playing the clip during his interview of Harris that was edited in a deceptive manner? Should he and fox face punishment for that?I agree with Trump's thoughts on media. I find that it is necessary to have some sort of accountability for the media as a whole. They have been doing damage to our society as a whole. I want them held accountable for providing the truth. Through my research, I have witnessed this is not the case. I won't argue which networks are and are not truthful, I have not witnessed one thus far that is.
No conflict with the first Amendment then?
Do you find that we need the same accountability for the dumpster fire that is called X?
Trump's documented lies are what? In the thousands? And his followers turn a deaf ear.
"During and after his term as President of the United States, Donald Trump made tens of thousands of false or misleading claims. The Washington Post's fact-checkers documented 30,573 false or misleading claims during his presidential term, an average of about 21 per day.[1][5][6][7] The Toronto Star tallied 5,276 false claims from January 2017 to June 2019, an average of 6 per day.[2] Commentators and fact-checkers have described the scale of Trump's mendacity as "unprecedented" in American politics,[13] and the consistency of falsehoods a distinctive part of his business and political identities.[14] Scholarly analysis of Trump's tweets found "significant evidence" of an intent to deceive.[15]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_or_ … nald_TrumpIt is always interesting how MAGAs can ask for examples of bigotry, obscenity, and outright lies, when they so willingly ignore or excuse the multiple examples documented and fact checked every week/day/hour.
Google: Trump/lies, bigotry, and/or obscenities for yourselves.No doubt. It will be all that comes up with any search on Trump.
Where did Trump go to college? Trump is a lying, bigoted, racist pig. Oh okay, never heard of it.
When I was attempting to learn more about this radical California-style Amendment 4 that will be on the ballot in FL, all that came up was that DeSantis is a lying, bigoted racist pig. I didn't know that they went to the same school.Trump's longest-serving chief of staff: "He meets the definition of a fascist."
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-e … rcna176706The question is: What is wrong with those who will vote for him?
The question is, what is wrong with those that don't see the fascist regime being imposed upon them today...
The obvious lies and propaganda of our "Main Stream media" that are owned by the billionaires pulling the strings of the puppets they have installed...
How do people remain blind to the truths the 'Twitter Files' exposed, how the FBI/DOJ has been turned against its own people...
How do people ignore that this Administration has violated the Constitution and other various standing laws to authorize the Military to be used against the American people, just this past September.
I cannot answer this... propaganda and fear were used upon a highly educated German populace back in the 1930s... perhaps the most educated and enlightened culture in the world at that time... is it really any surprise that is happening now in America?
Is it really any surprise that despite the horrible last 4 years we have had, that has led us to the doorstep of WWIII as well as being on the verge of economic hardships no American has lived through... some people still believe that these people can lead us to a better world?
No... some people cannot... will not see the truth in front of them... even as Americans are rounded up and jailed for waiving an American flag... even as political opponents are attacked, silenced, and every effort is made to jail (or kill) them.
Yes... it is sad to see so many Americans fall sway to what can only be described as a looming evil set to befall the nation.Great points. Thanks for taking the time to leave such a common-sense comment.
"Yes... it is sad to see so many Americans fall sway to what can only be described as a looming evil set to befall the nation."
This is true, and I can't even believe anyone would ask such a question. "The question is: What is wrong with those who will vote for him?"
This comes across as a bit of undeserved bravado, especially given that it’s just a one-sentence remark. It also overlooks the fact that likely more than half the country supports this very candidate. There seems to be a sense of superiority being projected toward half of the nation. It is rather silly is it not?
Could it be they see their other choice as really, really, bad? Try your question another way: What could possibly push people to vote for him?
GA"What could possibly push people to vote for him?"
They prefer fascism?We have that already... if you like fascism vote Harris, she will ensure we get much more of it... or Marxism... its all the same when you start forcing people to do what they don't want to do, start silencing speech, jailing the political opposition, using the mechanisms of the government to destroy a nation of free people, while bringing about WWIII.
Jailing your enemy? Silencing speech? LOL you're speaking Trump's language. Have you listened to him lately? Have you heard John Kelly's interview?
It's time for Trump's followers to acknowledge that he is running on fascism. He is running to be an authoritarian leader. There's no longer any doubt about it. It's what he is telling us, plain and simple.He fired Kelly, enough said. It seems you are not listening to his words or taking them out of context. He is all about making America great again. Fixing the many issues we are now living with. Sad to see you can't face what your candidate is offering.
The fact that Trump fired him has no bearing on his observation. I've read and listened to the Kelly interview, I've taken nothing out of context. His language was very clear, very simple. I find him to be an intelligent man and one of honesty and integrity.
Kelly was a four-star general in the U.S. Marine Corps. So, I have to disagree. We have a man with a massive ego who has spent his entire career in the spotlight, and after getting fired, he clearly harbors a strong dislike for Trump. It seems like Kelly left the position with his tail between his legs.
How do you know he has a massive ego? I don't think the man has ever given any reason to doubt his honesty or integrity. But of course, whoever dares to speak their truth about Trump is negatively labeled. Never in the realm of possibility could Trump ever have any character flaw. It's always everyone else. Are you going as far as to say he is lying?
How do you know he does not have a massive ego or in reality why he has shared what he shared? I looked into Kelly's first story when it happened many years ago --- LOL
I was satisfied Trump did not say that soldiers were suckers and losers. I don't believe Trump would have said such a thing.
First It was confirmed that the Secret Service, along with the Marine Corps and the White House Military Office, played a role in the decision to cancel Trump's visit to the cemetery in France due to weather conditions. They determined that the overcast and rainy weather posed too much risk for Marine One, the presidential helicopter, to fly to the cemetery about 60 miles northeast of Paris. And that he was disappointed he could not attend.
Secondly --- Trump and several officials present during the trip, including former aides and John Bolton, have denied the allegations. Notably, Trump claimed he was willing to swear he never made those statements and other individuals present did not report hearing him say anything derogatory. So, who to believe, both were fired, and both have different stories. You do dwell in the past. Yet you care very little about Harris's
Past. I believe in Trump and also appreciate his past job experience. Can you say the same about Harris's performance in the White House?'How do you know he does not have a massive ego or in reality why he has shared what he shared?
From the interview...
When Mr. Kelly left the White House in 2019, he decided he would speak out on the record only if Mr. Trump said something that he found deeply troubling or involved him and was wildly inaccurate.
Mr. Trump’s recent comments about using the military against what he called the “enemy within” were so dangerous, he said, that he felt he had to speak out.
And I think this issue of using the military on — to go after — American citizens is one of those things I think is a very, very bad thing — even to say it for political purposes to get elected — I think it’s a very, very bad thing, let alone actually doing it,” Mr. Kelly said.
"I was satisfied Trump did not say that soldiers were suckers and losers. I don't believe Trump would have said such a thing."
From a well documented liar? And just because others weren't involved in the conversation means it didn't happen?
The interview is very damning. This man didn't have to come out and say a thing. I think he's probably done two interviews in the last 6 years. He is starting to get death threats now. Why would anybody make up a story to face that kind of backlash?
Kelly worked very closely with Trump. I absolutely believe what he has said.
Trump's fascist tendencies have been showing for quite a while.
As far as John Bolton's thoughts? He says he implicitly believes Kelly.So, let's believe John Bolton.
“I think it’s a mistake to get into a controversy over whether Trump meets the definition of fascist or not,” Bolton said Tuesday night in an interview on CNN’s “The Source.”
“I think his behavior alone is troubling enough,” he told host Kaitlan Collins. “To be a fascist, you have to have a philosophy. Trump’s not capable of that.”
“You know, Adolf Hitler wrote a profoundly troubling book called Mein Kampf, ‘My Struggle.’ Donald Trump couldn’t even read his way all the way through that book, let alone write something like it,” Bolton added.
He continued, “I’m not trying to understate the dangers of a Trump presidency. I think it’s important to focus on the dangers themselves.”Yes, and...
"Former national security adviser John Bolton defended his ex-colleague, former White House chief of staff John Kelly, after President Donald Trump belittled Kelly for comments backing an impeachment witness.
"John Kelly is an honorable man," Bolton tweeted on Thursday. "John and I have disagreed at times, as is commonplace at senior government levels, but he has always served his country faithfully. Conservatives especially have a responsibility to reject baseless attacks upon him."Another fired and failed DC NeoCon that Trump got rid of...
This election is not about crime being the lowest ever, or employment being the highest ever... we know these are lies by agencies within the government controlled by the same people who want Harris elected.
With Liz and Dick Cheney supporting Harris...
With Bill Gates giving 50 million more to Harris...
The people who feel entitled to run the country their way, to run the world their way, have put their full support behind Harris.
The people who chose War with Russia rather than compromise that the Minsk Agreement promised support Harris...
The people who allowed hundreds of billions to flow to Iran, so they could fund the Houthis, Hamas and Hezbollah and bring war to the entire Middle East support Harris...
The people who want to have our children questioning reality, and being placed on hormone blockers or sex change operations support Harris...
The people who like men beating up on women in Women's Sports support Harris...
The people who want to negate the Constitution, do away with Free Speech, and the Right to Own Property and Protect oneself and one's home support Harris...
The people who think it is OK to dump 20,000 migrants who can't speak the language and don't understand our laws or culture on a town of less than 40,000, in town after town, state after state support Harris...
There is no denying what this Administration has done in the past 4 years, I only touched on the highlights of the harm they have done...
Give them another 4 years, and they will ensure things are twice as bad in the future as they are now... a world at war... a nation besieged by millions more migrants flooding in... and your rights, that were enshrined in the Constitution, stripped away from you, by a government determined to ignore it.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/lAffQeBEKScI had to share. These Patriots are all about the best interest of this Country and of We the People...and it is so refreshing!
“We are very, very close to being able to ignore Trump most nights. I truly can’t wait... I hate him passionately. ... I can’t handle much more of this.”
- Patriot Carlson
“a terrible human being”... "the “worse [sic] president ever”... “barely human”...“He is probably a sociopath” ... Trump “promised to drain the swamp” before he “filled his administration with swamp creatures” and “promised to protect our rights and then torpedoed the Constitution"... Trump “ran up the biggest debt” in U.S. history during his presidency"
- Patriot RFK Jr
“corrupt,” “unqualified to serve,” and “Saudi Arabia’s bitch” “He’s essentially pimping out our men and women in uniform to a foreign power who’s the highest bidder and saying very blatantly and directly, ‘Hey, they’re paying us for them"“He is unfit to be our commander-in-chief.”
- Patriot GabbardAnd Patriot Gabbard..
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard struck back at President Donald Trump's remarks on Tuesday that four of her fellow members of congress should "go back" to where they came from...
"Stoking these racist feelings and stoking religious bigotry in this country, tearing apart and already divided country for his own political game is beneath the office of the presidency and undermines the very values and principles of our democracy," Gabbard said....
she tweeted that the remarks were "yet another example of Trump’s ignorance & disdain for the values that truly make America great."
Ouch.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/rep-tul … d=64371618Patriot RFK JR..
“It is not an ‘America First’ strategy, nor will it make America great,” Mr. Kennedy wrote, calling the former president’s policies “absurd and terrifying.”
"Donald Trump was a terrible president”
July 2024.
All of them hypocrites
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/28/us/p … cisms.htmlThey saw the light! Maybe there's even hope for the HP Lefty squad.
That's probably it. Liz Cheney didn't get the memo, apparently.
As it appears most of the country is seeing the light. The polls pretty much speak to that. It's getten ugly up in hear... LOL TDS at its very peak.
Instead of insulting your candidate, which would be easy to do, I’ll take the high road and explain why I believe Trump is a winner rather than a loser.
I appreciate Trump for his unwavering commitment to putting America first and his bold vision encapsulated in the "Make America Great Again" agenda. His focus on economic revitalization led to job growth, tax cuts, and deregulation that energized industries across the nation. Trump’s stance on border security and immigration reflects a dedication to safeguarding American values and safety, while his efforts to prioritize veterans and military funding demonstrate his respect for those who serve our country. I support his willingness to challenge the status quo and hold institutions accountable, which resonates with many who feel overlooked by traditional politics.
Kelly...
"He said that, in his opinion, Mr. Trump met the definition of a fascist, would govern like a dictator if allowed, and had no understanding of the Constitution or the concept of rule of law.
He discussed and confirmed previous reports that Mr. Trump had made admiring statements about Hitler, had expressed contempt for disabled veterans and had characterized those who died on the battlefield for the United States as “losers” and “suckers” — comments first reported in 2020 by The Atlantic.
We prefer making America great again... We prefer democracy.
It's interesting that Harris, throughout her career, has supported policies that some might see as a form of authoritarianism, yet that doesn’t seem to be up for discussion here. Personally, I view her as leaning more toward that direction throughout her time in politics. Trump, on the other hand, has never displayed or condoned anything resembling fascism—his record speaks for itself.
Maybe take a closer look at Harris's time as District Attorney and Attorney General. And while you're at it, consider what she backed during her 2020 campaign and what she promoted during her time in the Senate. She purely is a socialist. And in my view, I woman with little to offer society as a whole.I'm looking at what her 85 page plan is offering currently and it is far more palatable than the fascism of Trump . I refer you to Kelly's interview
I’ve seen it on her site, and it's clear that she borrowed from Biden’s website, which outlined his agenda. Does that qualify as plagiarism? I know she has faced criticism for this before. She just did not add anything new. Plus she or Joe did not keep any of these promises the first time around. Her policies all are Congress if comes. And she knows this. She lacks a mind of her own, she could just be called a copycat. Plus, in my view, I like democracy, not socialism.
A few highlights -- this is all a bunch of nothing...
Abortion Rights: Harris emphasizes her commitment to protecting and expanding access to reproductive health services, especially in light of recent Supreme Court rulings that have challenged abortion rights.
Gun Control: She advocates for stricter gun control measures, including universal background checks and bans on assault weapons, aiming to reduce gun violence in the U.S.
Economic Policy: Harris aims to address economic inequalities through initiatives like capping prescription drug prices, fighting price gouging, and investing in small businesses, particularly those owned by women and minorities.
Climate Change: She continues to push for aggressive climate policies, emphasizing the need for a Green New Deal and the transition to renewable energy.
Healthcare Access: Building on her previous work, Harris supports expanding healthcare access and protecting the Affordable Care Act.
Immigration Reform: Harris remains focused on comprehensive immigration reform, including pathways to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.
Social Justice: Her campaign highlights commitments to racial equity, criminal justice reform, and combating systemic racism.
So, ridiculous... And you feel this is an agenda, does she give any indication on how she could bring even one of what I have listed to fruition... She seems to have forgotten to add that part. I mean really, time to ask yourself why would you consider voting for her. Her agenda is as vacant as hers.I'd say I'm in agreement with about 90% of the agenda. Considering that the other candidate is running on a platform of fascism, I'm perfectly happy with Harris
I have no problem with your state of happiness. I am very sure you agree with Harris's agenda.
As for Biden and Kamala Harris having similar agendas, You can't argue with success. The markets at an all time High. Inflation is down. unemployment is at a 50 year low.. Interest rates are down. Groceries are high because of corporate greed, but in the long run, I think supply and demand will take care of that.
The reason people think the economy is bad is because Trump lies about it every chance he gets.. He doesn't just lie and move on, he continuedly repeats his lies until they become the truth with Trumpers. They ignore his bad stuff and just think they are voting for the lessor of two evils. To keep it simple Trump is dirty in so many ways Harris is squeaking clean compared to Trump.
He is now playing the actor. He did it with the wreaths he laid at Arlington Cemetery and now play acting at McDonalds. It drives him crazy that Harris actually worked at McDonalds. Just like it drove him crazy about Obama being born in the U.S. Then he talks about Arnold Palmers' man thing. The man knows no boundaries and is only concerned with constantly being in the news. He is not capable of shame, guilt or remorse..
He is supposed to be about law and order when in fact, he is an outlaw who creates chaos no matter where he goes and what he does. He also plays God to the Evangelical Christians and sells them his bible for $60.00 that was made in China. It even includes the Constitution which I'm sure he never read.
I'm so tired about Trumper's making excuses for him, interpreting what they think he said and rationalizing all his gaffs, He is a 78 year old man who is a pathologic liar, who suffers from acute narcissism, and cons all of his supporters into thinking he is someone who he really isn't.
He talks about the enemy within. Those are people he doesn't like and if he is president he will seek revenge on them and pardon all the Jan. 6 jailed people who in fact were tried as criminals..
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics … &ei=16Sorry don't ever lay eyes on MSN
First, It's quite hypocritical to focus solely on Trump’s supposed shortcomings while ignoring the many misstatements and challenges that Kamala Harris has faced. I’ve pointed out specific instances of misinformation she has spread, yet you choose to return with insults aimed at Trump instead of addressing those points. This selective criticism undermines the integrity of the argument.
While you tout Biden and Harris's agenda as successful, many Americans are grappling with rising inflation and costs of living. Even though stock markets may be at record highs, unemployment is reportedly on the rise
This means more families are struggling to make ends meet. To attribute grocery price increases solely to corporate greed is overly simplistic and overlooks broader economic factors, including the labor market and supply chain issues.
Moreover, while labeling Trump a "pathological liar," it's important to acknowledge that misstatements can occur on both sides of the aisle. I find it unfair to overlook Harris's record while fixating on Trump’s past comments. Many voters appreciate Trump’s straightforwardness and his willingness to tackle the issues that matter most to them, such as border security and job growth.
The way you characterize Trump’s connection with Evangelical Christians as merely selling them a Bible ignores the genuine support he has garnered through his policies and judicial appointments, which align with their values. They care for him, as he cares for them.
Lastly, the suggestion that Trump is out to seek "revenge" on his opponents reflects the current polarized political climate. It's a tactic often employed in political discourse and should not be used to dismiss his supporters' views. We are many, and growing daily.
In summary, it’s essential to engage in a fair evaluation of all political figures, recognizing both their successes and shortcomings. Dismissing Trump while glossing over Harris's record only reinforces a biased perspective that doesn’t contribute to constructive dialogue.Thank you. Your comments have just made my point and thank you for your condescending tone... I'm curious, what is Harris' record compared to Trump's?
Did she lie and misinform over 30,000 documented times while in office?. Did she try to stop the certification of a duly elected president and substitute a fake slate? Do you think if she lost the election to Trump, she would not accept it? Have you heard her say she would take care of the enemy from within with military power if necessary? Has she been charged as a criminal several times? Did she cause damage to the capitol and cause hundreds of rioters to go jail? Does she need to seek immunity for criminal charges?
Morality means nothing to Trumpers.. Where morality means everything to me. I'm 86 years old and I still hear my parents telling me it is not a good thing to lie. Trump uses lying as a way of creating an aura about himself.
He is right, he could shoot somebody in the middle of fifth Ave and would not lose any votes from his supporters, because morality is not important to them. Immigration and make America First is. However, we live in a global market place and 100% tariffs is not going to make America first. It will eat away the consumer who will have to pay more for goods and services as stated by many notable economist..Thank you that is very important. I was an a roll and forgot that one.
The MAGA cultists at this site don't care that Trump idolizes and praises Hitler. They have no shame.
Yeah they have no shame... no sense of humor either...
Trump Speed Dating
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTGDlljjgEc
I want to make it clear that I never intended to come across as condescending toward your view, even if my response felt that way to you. I approach debates straightforwardly and strive to be polite.
You’re curious about how Harris’ record compares to Trump's, especially considering what we’ve experienced under the current Biden/Harris administration. This raises significant concerns for me. We’ve been dealing with a prolonged period of inflation, which has driven up prices on nearly everything. Their policies—or lack of effective problem-solving—have led to over 10 million migrants entering the country, and we’ve been alerted to more than 13,000 individuals with serious criminal records, including murder and sex offenses. Alarmingly, some of these individuals are even on terrorist watch lists. Just this morning, it was reported that an illegal migrant from China brought a rare, deadly form of contagious tuberculosis into the country and exposed at least 200 others while he was in confinement.
Additionally, we’re financially supporting two wars while facing the real threat of Iran potentially using a nuclear weapon. It feels like our values are diminishing due to leftist ideologies, and many of us are uncomfortable with what appears to be the weaponization of federal agencies, whether that’s justified or not. My concerns often seem to be overlooked or glossed over in discussions.
Regarding your question regarding lies. I can only reflect on Harris's record from my research. During her time as VP, she was largely invisible. I’ve reviewed her past job records, her time in the Senate, and her agenda during the presidential primary in 2019, and I have no hesitation in stating that I’ve found many negatives associated with her. I noticed her lying profusely, especially during her debates with Trump, I offered those mistruths in a previous post to you. You ignored them... I didn’t feel the need to compile an extensive list of her previous lies. I have learned my list would fall on deaf ears.
Most of your questions are self-explanatory, but one that puzzles me is what Harris would do if she loses. I suspect the Democrats might fight to certify the election or at least challenge the certification if Trump wins. In my view, the Democratic party and many of its supporters often shift gears easily and display great hypocrisy, so I wouldn’t be surprised if they attempted to halt the certification.
I believe Trump is a moral man willing to put his life on hold to fight for America. He sees the same troubling issues in our country that I do.
It's clear that you have strong feelings against Trump, which I respect, but I’m equally passionate about my viewpoint. I haven’t arrived at my perspective lightly; I’ve invested time and effort into researching both candidates. I’ve observed how one candidate is comfortable interacting with the public, while the other appears nervous and rehearsed, often keeping herself away from the people, much like Biden. Our mindsets are indeed very far apart. At any point, I feel very comfortable with my choice."we’ve been alerted to more than 13,000 individuals with serious criminal records, including murder and sex offenses."
That has been thoroughly debunked over and over.
"the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees ICE, clarified that these figures span several years and include migrants who entered the U.S. during the Trump administration and previous ones.
This data goes back 40 years; it doesn't specify that those 13,099 people entered the U.S. during the Biden-Harris administration.
Furthermore, it noted that individuals on this list may not be in ICE custody but could be detained or incarcerated under the jurisdiction of other agencies."Note that DHS has not released stats. I hope to see the stats. I will add that this morning. I am very sure the majority has come in over the Biden administration due to the numbers that have come in being historic over 10 million.
I noted that you ignored this --- Alarmingly, some of these individuals are even on terrorist watch lists. Just this morning, it was reported that an illegal migrant from China brought a rare, deadly form of contagious tuberculosis into the country and exposed at least 200 others while he was in confinement.
Illegal Chinese immigrant exposed hundreds in Louisiana to rare TB strain, state sues Mayorkas, ICE
Louisiana officials blamed the Biden administration's border policies for letting in illegal immigrants with diseases into the United States
Louis Casiano By Louis Casiano Fox News
This form of TB is very serious and spreads very easily.
Parents outraged as migrant kids attend NYC schools without vaccinations
Louisiana is suing Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and various agencies after an illegal Chinese immigrant may have exposed hundreds of people in the state to a rare, drug-resistant form of tuberculosis.
Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry and state Attorney General Liz Murrill on Wednesday said the unnamed migrant was moved by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) through different facilities in the state, possibly exposing at least 200 other detainees and staff.
The Chinese national has a rare, aggressive, and drug-resistant form of tuberculosis, which carries high mortality rates, the lawsuit states.
State officials have worked to prevent the spread of the disease, but ICE requests calls to hold detainees until they have been medically cleared by the Louisiana Department of Health.
"We have dodged a bullet this time. We have utilized the justice system to ensure that we can continue to protect the public," Landry told reporters Wednesday.
In addition to Mayorkas, the Department of Homeland Security, ICE and several detention facilities are named as defendants in the lawsuit. Fox News Digital has reached out to both agencies.
The Chinese citizen crossed illegally into California through the southern border in July, the lawsuit states. They were later flown with 100 other detainees to Alexandria, Louisiana. They were then bussed to another facility with more detainees.
The patient tested for TB and was transferred to two other facilities before returning to a detention center at Richwood. Despite having symptoms of TB, they were released into the general population in August at the South Louisiana ICE Processing Center in Basile, the lawsuit said. "
This administration continues to put Americans at great risk due to their lack of ability to solve serious problems. Yeah, we want Harris as our president...
Yes, tuberculosis (TB) has seen a rise in cases over the past four years, particularly in the United States. The CDC reported an increase in TB cases during 2020 and 2021, partly attributed to disruptions in TB prevention and control efforts caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Although there was a temporary decline in 2020, cases rebounded in subsequent years, with the U.S. recording over 7,800 cases in 2021—a significant rise compared to previous years. Reports indicate that this upward trend continued into 2022 and 2023, raising ongoing public health concerns. Additionally, there are worries that an influx of migrants, especially those arriving from areas with high TB prevalence, could contribute to the increasing number of cases in the U.S. In response, health authorities are actively working to address this resurgence, emphasizing the need for enhanced screening and treatment programs to control TB and prevent its spread. Overall, the rise in TB cases over the last four years reflects both a public health challenge and the necessity for robust intervention strategies.
Yup, people are waking up... realizing the government and media is lying to them, about everything from the border to the economy to their efforts to escalate the wars we are in.
Another fine example:
FBI's historic crime stat update PROVES Trump was RIGHT
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGXAKB39v1YKen, they are waking up. I have always shared that I have great faith in Americans. It is becoming more evident every day. The Dems had a bit of a run with their crazy, but people are living the results of all their crazy. I mean look at the mess the country is in.
Take a good, hard look at your candidate. I think those of us who support Trump know exactly who we stand behind. If you’re looking for answers, you’d probably need to ask a large crowd to get a better sense. I’m not sure why you think it’s appropriate to point fingers at so many people. The other side could easily ask what’s wrong with anyone who would vote for Harris. We live in a democracy, so is it really intelligent to make such sweeping statements?
He agrees.
Is It Fascism? A Leading Historian Changes His Mind.
Robert Paxton thought the label was overused. But now he’s alarmed by what he sees in global politics — including Trumpism.
LINKNY Times... most people know what they are all about...
One more Billionaire owned rag of misinformation...
Those who haven't figured it out by now are probably beyond hope...
Or worse, they are in support of the subjugation and enslavement of Americans...HIS words. Before and his change of mind.
2017: https://harpers.org/archive/2017/05/american-duce/
2012: https://www.newsweek.com/robert-paxton- … st-1560652
As Election Nears, Kelly Warns Trump Would Rule Like a Dictator...
Kelly said that, in his opinion, Mr. Trump met the definition of a fascist, would govern like a dictator if allowed, and had no understanding of the Constitution or the concept of rule of law.
He discussed and confirmed previous reports that Mr. Trump had made admiring statements about Hitler, had expressed contempt for disabled veterans and had characterized those who died on the battlefield for the United States as “losers” and “suckers” — comments first reported in 2020 by The Atlantic.
He added: “Certainly the former president is in the far-right area, he’s certainly an authoritarian, admires people who are dictators — he has said that. So he certainly falls into the general definition of fascist, for sure.”
He certainly prefers the dictator approach to government,” Mr. Kelly said.
Why is he speaking now?
Kelly said he was deeply troubled by Trump’s recent comments about using the military against domestic opponents.
When Mr. Kelly left the White House in 2019, he decided he would speak out on the record only if Mr. Trump said something that he found deeply troubling or involved him and was wildly inaccurate.
Mr. Trump’s recent comments about using the military against what he called the “enemy within” were so dangerous, he said, that he felt he had to speak out
“And I think this issue of using the military on — to go after — American citizens is one of those things I think is a very, very bad thing — even to say it for political purposes to get elected — I think it’s a very, very bad thing, let alone actually doing it,” Mr. Kelly said.
Kelly said Mr. Trump lacked a fundamental understanding of basic American values and what being president is about.
“He’s certainly the only president that has all but rejected what America is all about, and what makes America America, in terms of our Constitution, in terms of our values, the way we look at everything, to include family and government —
Most shocking?
Trump told him that “Hitler did some good things.”
Mr. Kelly confirmed previous reports that on more than one occasion Mr. Trump spoke positively of Hitler.
“He commented more than once that, ‘You know, Hitler did some good things, too,’” Mr. Kelly said Mr. Trump told him.
Kelly said Trump looked down on those who were disabled on the battlefield.
In response to a question about previous stories about Mr. Trump having disdain for disabled veterans, Mr. Kelly said Mr. Trump did not want to be seen in public with those who had lost limbs on the battlefield...He would just say: ‘Look, it just doesn’t look good for me.’”
What a guy...
Confirming a statement he gave to CNN last year, Mr. Kelly said that on multiple occasions Mr. Trump told him that those Americans wounded, captured or killed in action were “losers and suckers.”
“The time in Paris was not the only time that he ever said it,” Mr. Kelly said, referring to reports that Mr. Trump told him that he did not want to visit a cemetery where American service members killed during World War I were buried.
Mr. Kelly had nothing good to say about Mr. Trump
Mr. Kelly was asked whether Mr. Trump had any empathy.
“No,” Mr. Kelly said.
The times article includes audio from the interview
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/22/us/p … acter.htmlWe have a man with a massive ego who has spent his entire career in the spotlight, and after getting fired, he clearly harbors...
That sounds familiar.This was my last attempt to warn those who drank the Trump Kool-Aid. There is no hope for them and if he wins they will get what they deserve. Unfortunately, everybody else will get it too.
Fox: A new independent analysis just found that Social Security would run out in six years if Trump's agenda is enacted...cool I guess?
https://x.com/KamalaHQ/status/1849157358078885961Kelly...
"He (Trump)commented more than once that, you know, that Hitler did some good things, too,”
Do tell?
“I need the kind of generals that Hitler had."
Lol, the "stable genius" doesn't realize that Hitler's generals tried to assassinate him...if we learned Harris once said she needed “the kind of Marxist guerrillas Che Guevara had.”. Would that be a-ok? Would we attack the source of the information? Refuse to believe it? Latch onto the statement?
But hey this is Trump, so what’s a bit of Nazi-envy?
Kelly is an honorable patriot with absolutely nothing to gain from sharing this story. If anything, he’s putting himself in a position to be the first to get locked up, face a military tribunal and death under a fascist government if Trump wins this election.
Trump, on the other hand, is a lying convicted felon who nobody in their right mind should trust.
Shrugging off a wish for Hitler's generals is not OK...ever
We’ve heard a lot lately about people “sanewashing” Trump’s rambling, incoherent babbling to make it sound normal. But to hear people take Trump’s views and shrug them is a whole other ballgame.
I’m going to stick with the more widely accepted view that all Nazis were bad, fascism sucks and veterans deserve our respect and admiration.
And I’m sure as hell not voting for someone who thinks otherwise.Thanks to Trump and his propaganda, the MAGA sphere is concerned about three things: immigration, the economy, and if you are an Evangelical, Trump was sent from heaven to save them.
MAGA's want to believe that immigrants are taking their jobs, raping their women, and eating their pets. Unless you are a native American, we all come from immigrants. The early settlers here made refugees out of the indigenous people who took over their land all in the name of Manifest Destiny. Look it up if you don't know what it means.
The MAGA sphere believes the economy is bad, because Trump's propaganda has overshadowed the good of the Biden and Harris economy. I hate to repeat myself, but unemployment is at a 50 year low. The stock market is at an all time high, Interest rates are down and so is inflation. Groceries are high because of corporate greed, but Trumpers don't buy that, they think Biden is responsible for the price increases.
The Evangelical Christians think Trump is God like because he was spared death from the assassination's attempt. Now he is here to save them and promote their form of religion. Even though they realize he is not a good person, he is imperfect to them and that even makes it better for them...
Trump loves to traffic in unfounded conspiracy theories like the deep state and the enemy from within.
They have been warned. But if he wins, we will all pay for their blindness to the facts.
Got The Joy Joy Joy down in my heart!
Yikes! The joy went south... LOL
The photos tell the whole story. She’s a candidate in desperation, facing dwindling poll numbers, and it's revealing a foolish side of her. This is the same aspect many noticed before she entered the race—her low approval ratings highlighted how unlikable she is. The joyful persona didn’t work out, and now she’s resorting to desperately shouting from podiums, attacking Trump. She has nothing to offer...At all. She is as phony as her laugh.
Hopefully, some watched her on Andreson last night. She was on full display for all her crazy.Someone continues to live in the 2022 red wave fabricated reality. And then attempts to project the Trump crazy onto Harris. Sad tactics, but typical from the devoted in MAGA.
Diversion, off subject In May 2024, Kamala Harris had an approval rating of approximately 38.2%, while her disapproval rating was around 51.3%. Not sure history shows a VP getting these forms of stats. Harris’s approval ratings, hovering around the low 30s to high 30s, are among the lowest for a sitting vice president. However, her stats grew quickly when she tossed her hat in the ring... LOL Yikes what does that say?
Where did her joy go?Harris’s approval ratings, hovering around the low 30s to high 30s, are among the lowest for a sitting vice president. However, her stats grew quickly when she tossed her hat in the ring... LOL Yikes what does that say?
That A LOT of people really dislike Trump?
I mean, they fired him the last time, so.
LOLBut it appears many are having buyer's remorse.
Maybe in your right-wing media ecosystem. Out here in the real world, a large chunk of the GOP are never-Trumpers and women are showing up in massive numbers to vote against a MAGA movement intent on stripping them of their basic rights.
I think your claim about GOP voters overlooks the bigger picture. While there are some "Never-Trumpers," Trump's base remains solid, and early voting numbers show strong Republican turnout, particularly in key swing states like Michigan. The idea that women are voting in droves against Trump isn't fully backed by polling either. Many women are more concerned about rising costs, immigration, and foreign policy. They also don’t necessarily see reproductive rights as the only issue, believing responsible choices can be made without resorting to voting for a president they feel is not qualified to handle the issues that they feel are more important to them. Most women find avoiding pregnancy very easy.
Pew "The top issue driving women's votes in the 2024 election is the economy, particularly concerns over inflation, housing, and cost-of-living increases. While reproductive rights, especially in relation to abortion, remain highly significant, the economic landscape is crucial for many women. Issues like health care, education, and immigration also factor into their decisions, but financial stability has emerged as a dominant theme for a large number of female voters"
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/20 … -election/It isn't always about avoiding pregnancy though. Some people want to get pregnant and have children but then this happens...
https://youtu.be/fCI4y4En9vw?si=xHjC3OkKdw0H63Z7
Cool? The state forcing a woman to carry a baby to term so that she could watch him gasp for air and suffer for 90 minutes.While watching the video, I noticed that she didn’t provide any information on how physicians addressed the situation or what they might have recommended, if anything. You often seem to focus on the emotional aspects when discussing the lack of access to abortion in certain states. Deborah Dorbert, however, could have technically traveled to another state where abortion laws are less restrictive. After all, many states still allow abortion for fatal fetal abnormalities or other reasons, even after Roe v. Wade was overturned. Women do have this option, don't they? It’s clear she knew the diagnosis and had to make a choice: carry the fetus to term or travel to another state for an abortion, as Florida’s abortion restrictions didn’t offer that option. She was certainly aware of Florida’s 15-week abortion ban, passed by the legislature in 2022 and signed by Governor Ron DeSantis, meaning it was elected officials making these decisions, not a direct vote by the people.
This is currently what some women have to deal with. Is it fair? That is up to individual opinion, is it not? At this point, it’s also clear that women must take it upon themselves to make logical, although difficult, decisions if they desire an abortion. That decision could also entail traveling if laws in their state forbid abortion care. Perhaps it's not the ideal situation, but women are resilient and self-sufficient enough to handle the challenges that come their way.
In Michigan, abortion is permitted on demand up to 24 weeks, after which it is allowed only for the health or life of the mother. At 24 weeks, a fetus is on the edge of viability, meaning it has a chance of surviving outside the womb with significant medical assistance. If a fetus is aborted at this stage, it typically exhibits signs of life—such as movement, a heartbeat, or attempts to gasp or breathe—for a brief period, usually ranging from a few minutes up to 10 minutes. This is what any mother might observe if the fetus is not removed immediately, as occurs during an abortion or in the case of a miscarriage. Women considering an abortion should be informed about fetal development and the implications of their decision.
It’s clear that you support abortion, and I hope you have a solid understanding of the topic. Your comment indicates that you feel saddened by the idea of Deborah’s baby gasping for air, which is something many fetuses aborted at 24 weeks experience as well. Does this at all concern you?Not everyone is able to pick up and go to another state for an abortion.
She had an anatomy scan at 18 weeks.
The physician stated that she'd have to, under the law in florida, carry the fetus with Potters Syndrome to term. It was also stated that those born with this syndrome live minutes to a few hours. What does it matter what the physician recommended? In a state that bans abortion, it doesn't matter what the doctor thinks. The law is no abortion, plain and simple.
And no, it is absolutely unfair that some women have to be put through this, make these sorts of choices.
Not sure why you keep bringing up disapproval ratings when Trump had the lowest approval ratings of any president in history. Pew had Trump at just a 29% approval rating when he left office. 29%! So, if you want to compare the history of the two candidates' lowest approval ratings, it's another comparison where your candidate sucks the worst of any person in political history.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads … c-opinion/Gallup --- WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Nearly identical percentages of U.S. adults rate Donald Trump (46%) and Kamala Harris (44%) favorably in Gallup’s latest Sept. 3-15 poll,
Gallup ---- These results are based on an Oct. 1-12 Gallup poll that asked Americans to rate the two major-party presidential nominees on a scale ranging from +5 to -5, something it has done in all presidential election years except 1988, 1996 and 2000. Gallup used this “scalometer” to measure favorability toward national figures until the 1990s, when it shifted to using a binary favorable/unfavorable scale. Gallup’s latest measure of the two nominees using the binary rating scale, from late September, also shows them closely matched, with 48% favorable for Harris and 47% for Trump.
Pew -- Voters are evenly split in their support for Trump (49%) and Biden (48%), but overall lack confidence in both on a range of traits.
Trump is ahead 48% to 46% in a CNBC survey of registered voters released Thursday (margin of error 3.1), and he leads 47% to 45% in a Wall Street Journal registered voter poll out Wednesday (margin of error 2.5)—a shift in Trump’s favor since August, when Harris led 47% to 45% in a Journal survey.
Trump also leads Harris by two points, 51% to 49%, nationally among likely voters, including those who are leaning toward one candidate, according to a HarrisX/Forbes survey released Wednesday (margin of error 2.5), and he’s up one point, 49% to 48%, without so-called leanersWell, at least you're finally using recent polling instead of polling from five months ago when Harris was just the Vice President.
And for a large section of women voters, abortion is their main issue.
https://apnews.com/article/younger-wome … 57a3e3a4dc
And here is something that pollsters are calling Red Wave 2024 to shape the polling averages more to favor Trump. They have released more than 81 different polls from 31 different organizations since the end of August. Last week, they released 13 polls in the last eight days. When you take the GOP-heavy polling out and just look at the Independent polling, the race is has Harris up by around 3 points and resembles the 2022 midterm races.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EiyCRczNvMI guess that badly left leaning CBS news went to the GOP-heavy polling to get their results. They're reporting Trump slightly ahead.
I will leave it to the majority to decide on Harris's future in politics. Mine is only one view. It does not look good, she is fading, and the media have abandoned her, in my view.
She is fading?
She has this won... the machine will ensure it...
Our collapse requires it...
I just love this insight:
https://youtu.be/0Hh7uL6vIdU?t=424Ken,
I don’t think she stands much of a chance at this point. I’ve looked at recent polling data and gone back to polls from 2016 and 2020, examining who conducts them and which organizations have shown themselves to be fairer and better at predictions in all three elections. Most polls, like those from the New York Times, tend to have clear biases. I wouldn’t be surprised if they skew the questions or even alter the final results they report.
Here in Michigan, my local news reports that in communities like Dearborn and Hamtramck, a significant number of Muslim voters are leaning toward Trump this election. These areas are in Wayne County, which rarely votes Republican, but we might have a shot at flipping it, which would be big since it’s the largest county in Michigan. Plus, more Black Detroiters are openly expressing dissatisfaction with the Democratic Party, which could also impact the usual vote split.
There’s a chance cheating could happen, but I believe this time there will be intense scrutiny on the vote count.I commend you for your diligence and research...
I have to warn you, the changes that were put on the books for 2020 are still there in all those 'swing states' which are still run by Democrats...
They have taken it a step further, in states like CA making it illegal to even ask for ID...
In too many States now, the validity of the election process will be less trustworthy than a Venezuelan election, the Party in control will get the results from the election they want.
Harris will be the next President... I have always said that... they have all but taken off the mask... Harris was elected by no one to be the nominee... Harris will not be elected by the American people now either...
It won't matter, she is the next President... they will not allow a Trump presidency, not because he is a threat to America, or would bring about WWIII, or any of the other nonsense they spout...
They will not allow him to be President because he is a threat to their efforts to transform America, the world, and to DE-escalate the wars we are currently engaged in... they do not want peace... they do not want Free Speech... Property Rights... the Constitution... all they need is a few more years... they cannot allow Trump to reverse their efforts, so they won't allow it.
If the people of America refuse to accept the mirage of Democracy they have unsuccessfully woven with this 'election' they have already authorized the military to step in and enforce it, this was authorized back in September, despite its not being allowed in the Constitution.
These are people that have openly pursued war against Russia...
They have sent billions to Iran, who in turn fund Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis...
They have brought millions of foreigners into America and put them on government assistance...
They are not going to let a little thing like an election get in the way of their agendas now.
"Hopefully, some watched her on Andreson last night. She was on full display for all her crazy.".
So, when Trump speaks forcefully, even in an angry manner it is an indication of conviction or passion but when she does it it's just crazy?
So she believes that Trump is a fascist? It's obvious to a large number of us that he certainly is.
Her appearance on cnn? Absolutely more substantive than Trump on any day...ever.It’s clear that the country is deeply divided in its views on Trump, with public opinion closely split. It’s intriguing to witness so many people turning against the status quo in Washington, and I find it personally satisfying. Meanwhile, Harris attempts to convey a sense of joy in promoting her campaign, despite the overall dissatisfaction with the political landscape.
I have not witnessed Trump screaming in any forum. His demeanor is always calm.
Determining how many Americans view Trump as a fascist is indeed complex, given the diversity of individual beliefs. Polls indicate that many people trust him to be a good president, which suggests that a significant portion of the population supports him despite the polarized opinions surrounding him.
While some critics label him as fascist, the interpretation varies greatly among individuals. The ultimate insight into how many Americans believe he would make a good president will likely come from the vote count in the upcoming elections. Polls consistently show that a considerable number of respondents express confidence in his leadership abilities, indicating a robust base of support.
No one can deny that there are individuals who share your perspective. While I find it perplexing, I accept that this diversity of opinion exists.AVID MARCUS: Kamala Harris called Trump 'fascist.' Here's why it won't matter
There are a few reasons why this late-in-the-game attempt to paint Trump as a fascist is not going to work
There are a few reasons why this late-in-the-game attempt to paint Trump as a fascist is not going to work, and they are so glaringly obvious that you can see them from space. They are also all things I have heard directly from voters across the country.
The first, of course, is that Trump was already president for four years and little to no fascism ensued, no roving bands of Brownshirts, not even armbands, and the Trump administration didn’t lock up its political enemies.
That brings us to the second point, which is that voters know the Biden and Harris administration has locked up its political opponents in the form of Pro-Life activists and January 6th defendants, and are actively seeking to put Trump in jail.
But Trump being Trump, somehow, the more they indict him, the closer he gets to the presidency."Trump was already president for four years and little to no fascism ensued, no roving bands of Brownshirts, not even armbands, and the Trump administration didn’t lock up its political enemies.
There were people in key positions that kept the guardrails in place. Yes he fired them one after the other but if, God forbid he wins this election, there will be no such guardrails at the outset.
The man is a fascist. He admires Hitler. He wants generals like Hitler's generals. He has repeatedly told us what he would like to do. I'm taking him at his word. Not the interpretations of fox talking heads and other enablers. Do you notice how Trump bristles at them when they try to correct or soften his outrageous statements by giving him the line "oh you don't really mean that"... And he doubles down.... He means what he says.
Pretty sure Trump's secret police in Seattle during the George Floyd protests were the equivalent of the Brownshirts. Trump asking if they could shoot peaceful protesters is certainly fascist. Trump saying he wants to suspend the parts of the Constitution he doesn't like is fascist.
And Harris-Biden had nothing to do with states finding that Trump and the J6 insurrectionists who staged a violent attack on our nation committed actual crimes. In Trump's case, his crimes were to win the one election he was successful in. Without breaking the law, he probably would have lost in 2016 as the Evangelicals might not have backed someone who was cheating on his current wife with adult film actresses.
Related Discussions
- 86
Democrats, are we in a circular firing squad?
by Credence2 14 months ago
I can’t believe it, we have allowed the aura or stench of Trumpism to affect our own party with insiders leading the way.We are actually ready to throw President Biden under the bus for one poor debate performance?While, Trump has broken every rule in the book as a convicted felon and he gets...
- 123
Trump may well win, my greatest fears realized.....
by Credence2 10 months ago
A contemporary "Reign of Terror" when Trump wins, buckle up.Bill Maher, and many forum participants on the left and Right has said that Harris would win. Some have directed me to look at the outrage against women and their reproductive rights promoted by Trump and the Republicans.I don't...
- 24
How in the HELL does Donald Trump lead in the Republican primary polls?
by Josh Ratzburg 9 years ago
How in the HELL does Donald Trump lead in the Republican primary polls?People who support him have to be trolling, right?
- 16
If Trump & Clinton are so despised then why not vote third party?
by ptosis 9 years ago
If Trump & Clinton are so despised then why not vote third party?The Founding Fathers were vehemently against a national party (faction) system, especially a two-party model. 2016 3rd party Prez candidates; Darrell Castle, Gary Johnson, Chris Keniston and Jill Stein. Sanders...
- 23
What do you think is good and/or bad about Donald Trump running for President?
by H C Palting 9 years ago
What do you think is good and/or bad about Donald Trump running for President?
- 22
Why are Clinton and Trump the front runners this election year?
by Jack Lee 9 years ago
Why are Clinton and Trump the front runners this election year?I'm baffled. According to polls, 70% of Americans say we are headed in the wrong direction. Yet, we have Clinton ahead in the Democratic primary. More over, on the GOP side, this was supposed to be the year of the people against the...