This drama is just about over. Looks like the finale is taking shape. Wonder what the credits will look like?
Same here. But the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy is so much fun, when you want to prove a point that really isn't obvious. Reagan used it in 1984 and it worked. Why not try using it again? Especially since it would tend to indicate the "success" of at least three-quarters of presidential administrations.
Here's what Trump supporters do (when they're not rioting and looting and blaming it on "antifa") A hay bale display constructed on a Massachusetts farm in support of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden and his running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), was set on fire Friday night. Kate Pike, a manager at the Holiday Brook Farm in Dalton, Mass., told WAMC Northeast Public Radio that the display honoring the Democratic candidates was constructed just one day before along Route 9. “You know, we expected it to be vandalized leading up to the election, you know, and we had plenty of paint to paint over it to fix it,” Pike said. “And I was driving home last night and saw that it looked like there was coffee spilled on it or something, so I pulled back around and kinda figured, ‘OK, I’ll be fixing that in the morning.’ Like, it didn’t even last 24 hours. And then, basically, before I made the ten minute drive home it was up in flames.”
Trump is trying to raid the Medicare budget to the tune of $19 million to send out $200 discount cards to seniors that will have his name on them. https://crooksandliars.com/2020/10/trump-reportedly-trying-raid-medicare-pay Where's Lanzman right now to complain about politicians trying to use "free stuff" to buy votes? Hmm?
Talk about throwing red meat to the base. The olds are going to vote for you in droves no matter what you do, Donald.
Maybe not, hence why he's trying this: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/10/08/senior-citizens-trump-biden-2020-voters-428131
I've noticed this with my own mother - she's far more likely to attribute bad qualities to female politicians whilst seeing older male politicians as, if not trustworthy, then "knowing what they are doing". I'd remind her about how fucking hopeless my Dad and most other older men in our family have been and how it's the women, like her, who keep things going, but... #brickwall.
They've been watching their friends die off with COVID-19, and now that their hero has infected everyone in the WH, they're bringing out the long knives.
Who knew that "you should be willing to sacrifice your life for the stock market" would turn out not to be a winning message?
It's petty, but I think they should still have the "debate." Just cut to an empty podium for Trump's turn to speak with a text that says the President refused to participate.
I mean, it's worked since the 1950s, but maybe some folk are finally realizing that stock market gains don't correlate to their own wages going up?
President Trump picks up a key endorsement! https://www.cbsnews.com/news/taliban-on-trump-we-hope-he-will-win-the-election-withdraw-us-troops/
Stock market gains correlate to my investments gaining value. Watching the idiot parade march on, just like you. Is it really necessary for me to call out what anyone with a brain can already see?
In other news, Donnie-boy was supposed to hold a rally in the swing state of Pennsylvania today. Instead, he did an Evita from the WH balcony. Took his doctors' advice? Dubious. Other hypotheses welcome...
That's not unfair free stuff like health care, that's beautiful godly free money as a reward for having money.
@Bailey is still correct. They do not just hand out insurance. I am assuming it is life insurance. If you do not have the money to pay for it, then you don't get the payout. In this way your investment in insurance for a payout on a death becomes getting more money for having money. Your person who does not have disposable income to buy stocks, gamble at a casino, or pay the premiums for a payout when a loved one dies is pretty much getting a financial gain based on getting a payout for having money.
Of course, since the stock market has done better under Democratic presidents than Republican ones for the past several decades...
So, bets on the wellbeing of your loved ones become a legitimate way of money earning money? How many times has life insurance become motivation to off yourself or a loved one for a payday? Perhaps it is the reality that we make survival so based on money that we become part of the problems of the immoral and unethical behaviors of people. The insurance of food, shelter, medicine, and other things we can provide for everyone would actually be a far cheaper all around form of life insurance. Life insurance itself is a form of communal funding for those who buy in. If we all bought into the insurance of survival within our community through our government it would not be something limited to people who have the money to make free money, and it would be far more beneficial to us all rather than some check that could go anywhere and be squandered. This is the very core of the argument against the wasteful greed and selfishness of capitalism vs socializing survival for everyone and then allowing for some capitalistic gains that are not at the expense of society. I do have to admit it seems very sad the loss of a spouse is relegated to a payday. That does not sound very pleasant. I could ask the question of how many people are going hungry, cold, and sick with no hope so that he could have such a payday. How much money is held up in things like life insurance when we could actually be insuring lives? On top of that we could throw the entire rigged gambling system known as the stock market. It is part of the problem, and as soon as those things come up it becomes please I am a victim because I do not want to talk about it anymore.
Maybe, but in this case Lanz brought up something in the discussion that probably shouldn't have been so let's drop it.