Second ('Third') Trump Presidency Thread

Where is Gavin Newsom demanding an audit of the billions of money lit on fire towards projects that have yield negative results?

I dont understand why 57 isnt more upset about this than sturg33. The people you pretend to care about most are the ones not getting the money spent for them
 
sturg33 said:
Wonderful. That was 10 years ago for a scam involving $4M.

it also happens to be the criminals were white.
Click to expand...
you tell me.
What legislative candidates in Texas are campaigning on waste and "fraud".
I see none where I live, and very few succeeding anywhere.

Executive candidates words are not to be taken seriously

Tilting at windmills is according to Cervantes delusional
 
sturg33 said:
Where is Gavin Newsom demanding an audit of the billions of money lit on fire towards projects that have yield negative results?

I dont understand why 57 isnt more upset about this than sturg33. The people you pretend to care about most are the ones not getting the money spent for them
Click to expand...
i dont live in California or follow Newsome
When and if he becomes a national candidate ...
otherwise i might as well take seriously the words of Kid Rock
 
Peter Coyote

4h
Peter Coyote

I’m going to make a Prophecy and I hope I’m wrong. It is that the Democrats will take power, will win both houses and will not do any of the following: they will not raise the tax rates on billionaires, they will not cut back Trump‘s tax breaks for billionaires, they will not pull the department of justice out of the executive branch, They will not raise the minimum wage, they will not pass universal healthcare,. I say this because the Democratic Party as it’s presently constituted Is basically the corporate party. They represent the kind of order and PLANNING that the corporate sector likes. But it is the corporate sector they serve, and all of their decisions have to be made according to the laws of business that serve the corporate sector. And the reason that this is the case and is not the case in the Western Europeans and Scandinavian Parliament is because we have not protected our political system from the power of money. And until we begin Insisting on full federal funding of elections, no private contributions, no corporate contributions, (because after all our corporation only exists to make profits for its shareholders), Until we insist on universal voting of legal inhabitants, and begin leading a week to get voting done so that it’s easy, we will never create a system where legislators can vote their consciences and their best thoughts without having to compromise with the interest of money. So I don’t want to be a bummer, but I’m 84 years old and I’ve been involved with politics Since I was 14. And I’ve watched the same seesaw back-and-forth between the Republicans and the Democrats, the handwringing, the prayers are with you – it’s 2026 and there’s still not a law against lynching. When are people going to wake up that unregulated capitalism or neoliberalism is not a system that creates a stable culture, healthy work, good healthcare. We need to be asking for what we want and we keep asking for charismatic figures instead of policies that really puts citizens first. . I hope I’m wrong
/////////////////////////////

Or Peter Coyote
 
57Brave said:
you tell me.
What legislative candidates in Texas are campaigning on waste and "fraud".
I see none where I live, and very few succeeding anywhere.

Executive candidates words are not to be taken seriously

Tilting at windmills is according to Cervantes delusional
Click to expand...
Just say you also dont care about it and we can move on

There is no incentive for D politicians to change because their voters are 57
 
57Brave said:
WWJD ?
Click to expand...
"WWJD?" Cute. But you're an atheist. You don't believe Jesus was divine, you don't believe the Bible is true, and you don't accept religious authority on anything else. So why do you try to use my morals against me? You reject Christianity 364 days a year until it conveniently backs your open-borders welfare stance, then it's 'WWJD?' Pick a lane.

Even if we humor your biblical cosplay for a second: Jesus never once told the Roman government to tax citizens and hand out free stuff to non-citizens. He never lobbied Caesar for expanded welfare programs. He preached personal, voluntary charity - sell your cloak and give to the poor yourself, help the stranger you personally encounter (Good Samaritan was one guy on the road, not a federal entitlement program). He fed the 5,000 with a miracle, not by raiding the treasury. The early church helped widows, orphans, and travelers out of their own pockets, not by forcing non-believers to fund it at gunpoint.

The actual social contract in a secular democracy is simple: Citizens pay taxes because they consent (via voting and the Constitution) to a system for themselves and their posterity. Non-citizens aren't part of that contract. They didn't fight in our wars, didn't build the infrastructure, didn't vote for the welfare state. Giving them automatic access to citizen-funded benefits is just theft by ballot. Take money from people who did consent and giving it to people who didn't. Private charity, churches, and voluntary organizations can (and do) help foreigners all day long. That's the Jesus model if you're into that. Government welfare isn't.

If your real argument is 'compassion requires open taxpayer-funded spigot for anyone who crosses the border,' then own the secular version: unlimited incentives create unlimited migration, bankrupt the system, and punish the actual citizens who built it. Jesus helped individuals. He didn't destroy the village to save the stranger.

I ask again: why should a non citizen be given free lunch?

If you want to invoke Jesus, then we can pivot the conversation to abortion and ensure you're consistent in your newfound love of Christ
 
sturg33 said:
Why should a non citizen get free lunch?
Click to expand...
Who's saying they aren't.

Let's say Jose and Gabrielle come to America on a cisa, they have a kid, they keep up their good standing as a non-citizen worker but their kid is. The parents technically get the welfare benefit even though it;s benefiting an American citizen. That's one simple logical example to how a non-citizen can get a benefit but the benefit actually benefits an American citizen.
 
zitothebrave said:
Who's saying they aren't.

Let's say Jose and Gabrielle come to America on a cisa, they have a kid, they keep up their good standing as a non-citizen worker but their kid is. The parents technically get the welfare benefit even though it;s benefiting an American citizen. That's one simple logical example to how a non-citizen can get a benefit but the benefit actually benefits an American citizen.
Click to expand...
That is a very niche example

The data i posted is non citizens are getting 2x wellfare benfits than citizens.

Do you think that is from anchor babies getting free lunch?

I really dont get why youre bending over backwards trying to make an impossible argument. If your argument is "they are here, and we must help"... then make that argument. Stop trying to create delusions as justifications
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top