2024 Field
- Thread starter Jaw
- Start date
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
I wish I could go back in time to get the reaction of people 25 years ago to the Republican party being so corrupt even Dick Cheney won't vote for them. I imagine they would be shocked to find out he is still alive.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
Can you show me where there's been any significant fraud because of the lack of requirement? Requiring an ID because there's fraud in .000001% of the vote isn't reasonable. You only favor it because you want more hurdles hoping less people vote. And don't pretend otherwise, it's just insulting to everyone's intelligence.
I am not opposed to requiring an ID so long as safeguards are put in place so your side can't do **** like close DMVs ok poor areas 6 months before an election, require hard copy IDs but make it take longer to get the hard copies, shortening DMV hours or cutting staff hoping longer likes means some people give up, etc. If it's in the same bill with these and other restrictions which specifically good the ID requirement if any single one is changed by a new law. Anyone who takes the word of your side that they won't do these things without getting it encoded into law is a sucker.
Without existence testing confirming fraud is impossible. It’s all based on analytics that inform the public the likelihood of fraud is extremely high. Democrats insistence on stopping existence testing is the tell and always has been.
They were so corrupt which is what the Republican voters have rejected them.
Because the Russian behind the scheme supposedly has a history of being anti-Trump.
As I said a lot of info hasn't been released yet. We don't have a clear picture.
Last edited by a moderator:
The only people that don’t think there is fraud are the ones that haven’t been paying attention.
It’s right in your face and it’s been going on for a long time. Trump was just so popular they had to take it to a whole new level.
Tapate50
Well-known member
Totally normal for people to go by drop boxes 30+ times in the middle of the night
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
No
Yes within reason.
Personally I understand both sides of the second argument. We had a rapid inflation spurred off the backs of opportunists. Had they been content with normal profits, inflation wouldn't have been as stark. But also these buisnesses need to make money. If Eggs are short because of Bird flu, then you cannot reasonably force people to sell eggs at a loss. I don't believe the government can be agile enough to make laws to enforce that.
That being said, the question comes down to should there be no oversight? I don't think that's the answer either and I think there should be some form of penalty for price gougers to try and keep them honest.
As far as Trump policy being worse or more dangerous. Trump barely has any policies. He has buzz words, he likes to scare people by saying things. I think buidling the wall is a stupid pointless process because unless you spend a ton of time money and effort maintaining it and staffing it it will be broken and manipulated. I personally believe in an easier path to immigration and citizenship because we need low skilled laborers.
As far as things he's said I'm against it's countless, he wants to end citizenship for illegal immigrants children. WHich aside from being unconstitutional, would be hellish to enforce.
Aside from specific policies, I'm of a simple and clear opinion, since Trump took over as the leader of the RNC, we've seen a rise in white nationalism, white nationalism is something I'm severely opposed to.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
And take pictures of the drop boxes. Totally normal.
acesfull86
Well-known member
I'd much prefer (so called) price gouging.
I have little to no confidence in the government determining "normal profits," and I have little to no confidence that anti-gouging laws will do a better job of rationing goods in a shortage, or lessening the duration of the shortage, than simply allowing prices to rise.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
Profits and price markups are among the more useful indicators of market power. They're often used in antitrust cases.
Markets only produce efficient outcomes when they are competitive.
Corporate profits as a percentage of GDP has almost doubled in the past 25 years. That represents a transfer each year of $4,000 per year from American consumers to corporations. $4,000 per man, woman and child. Each and every year. Would be great if we could turn back the clock on that one.
Markets only produce efficient outcomes when they are competitive.
Corporate profits as a percentage of GDP has almost doubled in the past 25 years. That represents a transfer each year of $4,000 per year from American consumers to corporations. $4,000 per man, woman and child. Each and every year. Would be great if we could turn back the clock on that one.
Last edited by a moderator:
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
$4,000 per year is a lot of dough. If someone would explain it like that to voters antitrust would become a sexy topic.
I think a lot understand but those that have the power are the ones that have benefited from consolidation and globalization the most.