Wake Up, America! Wake Up! PLEASE!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
So are you saying that if Trump wins people who look like you will not have an opportunity to succeed in life? People who look like you are depending on a candidate to get out of the rut they're in?
"people who look like you" .... lol Be careful, now!
Yeah, coming from a Righttard, your response isn't surprising. I believe ed is no different than the rest of us, we prefer the path of less resistance when planning our goals & successes in Life. We have enough challenges in life without having someone tie a weight to our ankles. You can deny all you wish, but Trump is a rascist, a Nazi sympathizer, a segregationist, divider, hater of the bottom half of Americans, against higher education, etc ... besides being dishonest, a liar, fake, con, and traitor to the USA.
If you're looking for sympathy HERE ... you'll only find it in the dictionary between ******* & syphilis.
 
So are you saying that if Trump wins people who look like you will not have an opportunity to succeed in life? People who look like you are depending on a candidate to get out of the rut they're in? I'm sorry dude I'm going to have to say that doesn't say much about people who "look like you"
If you're looking for Mac in the dictionary, you'll find simpleton is also between ******* and syphilis.
 
So are you saying that if Trump wins people who look like you will not have an opportunity to succeed in life? People who look like you are depending on a candidate to get out of the rut they're in? I'm sorry dude I'm going to have to say that doesn't say much about people who "look like you"
People who look like me, and me, are not dependent or waiting for stuff from a candidate. We need a candidate who will not impede our progress, who understand we are as much Americans as whites, even more, and the Constitution applies to us too.

You went the racist route and immediately framed it as we need someone or are dependent to get out of a rut. It show how little regard or value you have for people like me. It's exactly why we don't need a president with these views any longer.

Not too mention the exponential rise in membership to hate groups and hate group activity. You align yourself with people who hate other Americans and wish to change the very foundation of the republic. It's why they're cool with court packing, Trump having no qualms about supporting a peaceful transfer, the almost destruction of the values of the Justice Department.

You tried to be clever, but all you continue to do is exposed yourself.
 
You and every other person in this country can make it regardless who is in office. That's what I mean about being chill about the election. And for you to continually disparage my service to this country because I was a successful government employee is just another contradiction. You give me ******* about being paid by the government but yet you want these two clowns in office to do what? I'm goin to guess so the government can "pay" the poor people too damned lazy to get it on their own.
You were a government employee. Enjoying the protections that others had to secure before you, believing you accomplished something that gave you the right to call yourself a success. All you did was show up to work most of the time, and hide your racist and sexist views. What the fuck did you accomplish? How many people's family depended in your ability to be a success and maintain a workforce beneath you? How many of your employees went on to also become successes on the own ventures? Now ask me. I don't mind bragging. Listen, we got two different lifestyles. You pissed away any opportunity that you could have had with the nanny state taking care of you, and your envious of those who choose to do the right thing. So you have to tell yourself, I was a successful government employee, though you'd have to actually shoot someone to loose your job, and then you'd probably appeal to get your retirement.
Anyway, I like your view of public employees, I hope you extend that to teachers, who actually perform.
 
"people who look like you" .... lol Be careful, now!
Yeah, coming from a Righttard, your response isn't surprising. I believe ed is no different than the rest of us, we prefer the path of less resistance when planning our goals & successes in Life. We have enough challenges in life without having someone tie a weight to our ankles. You can deny all you wish, but Trump is a rascist, a Nazi sympathizer, a segregationist, divider, hater of the bottom half of Americans, against higher education, etc ... besides being dishonest, a liar, fake, con, and traitor to the USA.
If you're looking for sympathy HERE ... you'll only find it in the dictionary between ******* & syphilis.C’mon mac. Don’t do narrative adjustments. I simply used what Ed said

People who look like me, and me, are not dependent or waiting for stuff from a candidate. We need a candidate who will not impede our progress, who understand we are as much Americans as whites, even more, and the Constitution applies to us too.

You went the racist route and immediately framed it as we need someone or are dependent to get out of a rut. It show how little regard or value you have for people like me. It's exactly why we don't need a president with these views any longer.

Not too mention the exponential rise in membership to hate groups and hate group activity. You align yourself with people who hate other Americans and wish to change the very foundation of the republic. It's why they're cool with court packing, Trump having no qualms about supporting a peaceful transfer, the almost destruction of the values of the Justice Department.

You tried to be clever, but all you continue to do is exposed yourself.
 
People who look like me, and me, are not dependent or waiting for stuff from a candidate. We need a candidate who will not impede our progress, who understand we are as much Americans as whites, even more, and the Constitution applies to us too.

You went the racist route and immediately framed it as we need someone or are dependent to get out of a rut. It show how little regard or value you have for people like me. It's exactly why we don't need a president with these views any longer.

Not too mention the exponential rise in membership to hate groups and hate group activity. You align yourself with people who hate other Americans and wish to change the very foundation of the republic. It's why they're cool with court packing, Trump having no qualms about supporting a peaceful transfer, the almost destruction of the values of the Justice Department.

You tried to be clever, but all you continue to do is exposed yourself.
People who look like me, and me, are not dependent or waiting for stuff from a candidate. We need a candidate who will not impede our progress, who understand we are as much Americans as whites, even more, and the Constitution applies to us too.

You went the racist route and immediately framed it as we need someone or are dependent to get out of a rut. It show how little regard or value you have for people like me. It's exactly why we don't need a president with these views any longer.

Not too mention the exponential rise in membership to hate groups and hate group activity. You align yourself with people who hate other Americans and wish to change the very foundation of the republic. It's why they're cool with court packing, Trump having no qualms about supporting a peaceful transfer, the almost destruction of the values of the Justice Department.

You tried to be clever, but all you continue to do is exposed yourself.
Your interpretation. Accuse me of being a racist all you want. I know the truth you don't. It's what you liberals' do. If people of all colors don't agree with the bullshit liberal ideology which is so fucked they are sell out or uncle Tom's if they are black and racist if they are white. C'mon man you don't seem as intelligent as you try to portray but I know you can't be that ignorant.
 
You were a government employee. Enjoying the protections that others had to secure before you, believing you accomplished something that gave you the right to call yourself a success. All you did was show up to work most of the time, and hide your racist and sexist views. What the fuck did you accomplish? How many people's family depended in your ability to be a success and maintain a workforce beneath you? How many of your employees went on to also become successes on the own ventures? Now ask me. I don't mind bragging. Listen, we got two different lifestyles. You pissed away any opportunity that you could have had with the nanny state taking care of you, and your envious of those who choose to do the right thing. So you have to tell yourself, I was a successful government employee, though you'd have to actually shoot someone to loose your job, and then you'd probably appeal to get your retirement.
Anyway, I like your view of public employees, I hope you extend that to teachers, who actually perform.
Damn. Just when I thought Sub was the only boneheaded one way closed minded person on here.
 
If you have a lot of political parties, why only have two choices at the federal level ? Which political tendencies are most represented by the smallest political parties ? The two majority parties at the federal level also exist in the other strata of American political life ? Is the rumor of secession from the western states credible ? Why do republicans support Donald Trump if his personality is divisive ? Why did not you choose Mike Pence ?

Since I became interested in what is going on with you, these are questions that I ask myself.
 
As Trump refuses to say he’ll accept election results, Republicans press to make voting harder

Republican officials have rhetorically brushed aside President Trump’s refusal to say he will accept the results of the election. They note that presidencies have changed hands peacefully since the start of the republic. Meanwhile, they are engaged in a systematic effort to make voting more difficult.

These actions are not the work of a confident, expanding party; they are not signs of a party that sees its coalition growing and its appeal widening. Instead, they are an acknowledgment that, unless something changes, they could face a bleak future, one in which winning elections will depend more on holding down the size of an increasingly diverse electorate than on encouraging the widest possible enfranchisement.

This is not a new phenomenon. For some years, Republicans at the state level have instituted barriers to voting. They have done this in the name of ballot integrity, despite the absence of evidence of widespread fraud in voting.

In 2013, the Supreme Court, in a 5-to-4 decision, struck down a key section of the Voting Rights Act, eliminating the need for a group of mostly Southern states to obtain preclearance from the Justice Department before making changes in voting practices. The state of Alabama moved almost immediately to implement a voter identification bill that had been held up in the state legislature under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. The state then closed more than two dozen driver’s license offices, a principal place for obtaining a proper ID. The offices closed were disproportionately in areas with large Black populations.

Before 2006, no state required voters to produce identification. The first was enacted in Indiana and later upheld by the Supreme Court. Today, 36 states have voter ID laws, some more strict than others. In 2012, civil rights groups filed a lawsuit against a voter ID law in Pennsylvania. In the filings, the state, in defending the law, acknowledged that there had been “no investigations or prosecutions of in-person voter fraud in Pennsylvania” and that none of the parties in the suit had any direct knowledge of investigations or prosecutions in other states.

The ends to which the GOP has gone are extensive. Two years ago, Florida voters overwhelmingly approved a ballot initiative to restore voting rights to most ex-felons who had fully served their time in prison and parole. Florida’s Republican-controlled legislature then crafted a law that said the newly eligible voters would be prohibited from casting ballots until they had paid all outstanding court fines or fees. It is described by critics as a modern-day poll tax.

The issue has gone back and forth in the courts, but the Florida requirement still stands. Recently, former New York mayor Mike Bloomberg pledged $16 million to help pay the fines. Several prominent athletes and entertainers have also chipped in. People have been scrambling to register and mobilize these newly enfranchised voters with time running out.

 
Lawmakers Balk at Trump Administration's Latest Stimulus Offer

WASHINGTON—Both Senate Republicans and House Democrats signaled opposition to the Trump administration’s $1.8 trillion offer for coronavirus relief aid, again clouding the prospects for an agreement before Election Day.

During a conference call Saturday morning with White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, several Senate Republicans said they were opposed to passing another large aid package, according to people familiar with the call. Mr. Meadows said he would bring their concerns back to President Trump, suggesting he expected a less than warm reception by joking that as a result the lawmakers would have to attend his funeral, according to the people.

The pushback from Senate Republicans comes after the White House increased its offer on Friday to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) in the on-again, off-again effort to reach an agreement on a fifth aid package before the election. The new bid calls for more than $1.8 trillion in spending, with about $400 billion of the funds reallocated from unspent money from earlier legislation, bringing the total cost to about $1.5 trillion, according to a person familiar with the offer.

That proposal comes closer to the $2.2 trillion plan that House Democrats approved last week, though major differences between the Democrats and the White House remain. In a letter to House Democrats Saturday, Mrs. Pelosi wrote that the new offer from the White House “amounted to one step forward, two steps back.”

“At this point, we still have disagreement on many priorities, and Democrats are awaiting language from the Administration on several provisions as the negotiations on the overall funding amount continue,” Mrs. Pelosi wrote.

Mrs. Pelosi listed several policy provisions—including baby care and aid for state and local governments—that remain at issue in the negotiations.

The sharp opposition from Senate Republicans will further complicate the Trump administration’s efforts to reach a compromise with Democrats. Before Friday, Mr. Mnuchin had signaled that the administration could support a $1.6 trillion package, a smaller figure that many Republicans had also opposed.

Senate Republicans last month rallied around an aid proposal that calls for about $650 billion in spending, offset by about $350 billion in savings elsewhere for a total cost of around $300 billion. GOP lawmakers told the Trump administration officials on Saturday that the Republican bill should be the starting point for talks with Democrats, according to the people familiar with the call, calling such a large package unnecessary.

One major source of concern among Senate Republicans is the White House proposal’s provision to expand the Affordable Care Act’s subsidies for people who have lost jobs, and with them their employer-sponsored health care, during the pandemic.

Many Republicans oppose an expansion of the ACA, which they have criticized and sought to repeal for years. Many Republicans also view its restrictions on abortion funding as insufficient and see expanding the subsidies as compounding that problem. They conveyed to Mr. Mnuchin that such a provision was unacceptable, according to GOP aides.

During the call, Sen. John Barrasso (R., Wyo.) said a proposed expansion to eligibility for Affordable Care Act subsidies would represent an “enormous betrayal,” according to the people.

Democrats said Republicans were simply opposing an expansion of the ACA and noted that the health law already bars the use of federal funds made available to consumers through subsidies and tax credits for most abortions, with some exceptions for *******, ******* and when the life of a pregnant woman is in danger. Health plans on exchanges may cover other abortions, but they have to set aside separate funding so it doesn’t come from federal subsidies.

The effort to reach an agreement on another round of aid to households and businesses struggling during the coronavirus pandemic has whipsawed all week. Mr. Trump called off the negotiations on Tuesday after a phone call with top Republicans, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.). Mr. McConnell told Mr. Trump during that call that any agreement between Mr. Mnuchin and Mrs. Pelosi would be difficult to pass in the GOP-controlled Senate, according to a person familiar with the call.

Mr. Trump and the administration then pivoted to pushing for legislation focused on individual aid priorities, including assistance for airlines, before restarting talks on a broader package with Democrats. The $1.8 trillion offer made on Friday is the largest proposal from the Trump administration throughout the talks, which began in July and have dragged on for weeks.

Absent another relief deal, economists say, temporary layoffs will become permanent and more businesses will close, features of a typical recession rather than the temporary shock and quick rebound policy makers hoped for earlier this year.

The risks that Congress provides too little support to the economy are greater than the risks of providing too much, Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell said this week. The former could lead to a longer, weaker recovery, he said.

Write to Andrew Duehren at andrew.duehren@wsj.com and Lindsay Wise at lindsay.wise@wsj.com

Continue Reading

 

Pennsylvania judge tosses Trump lawsuit over mail-in ...

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-lawsuit-idUSKBN26V0RT
15 hours ago · A federal judge on Saturday dismissed a lawsuit by U.S. President Donald Trump’s re-election campaign that sought to block drop boxes for Pennsylvania's vote by mail system, a …

Federal judge in Pennsylvania dismisses Trump campaign ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/...
13 hours ago · A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by the Trump campaign in Pennsylvania seeking to block the use of drop boxes as receptacles for mail ballots, require ballot signatures to …
 

Pelosi Says No Action on Airline Aid Without Bigger Stimulus

pelosi-says-no...
2 days ago · Pelosi said aid for airlines would have to be part of a larger stimulus conversation. She has rebuffed President Donald Trump’s called for Congress to pass relief legislation piecemeal.

Pelosi says no stand-alone aid for airlines without bigger ...

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/08/pelosi-says-there...
2 days ago · House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday said there won't be stand-alone bill for additional airline aid without a larger coronavirus stimulus package, another obstacle to further federal support ...
 
more of the right and their win at all costs...…Texas stands a decent chance of going blue...and they can not stand that....kind of like Cruz and his mysterious win...…..all of sudden no more talk of that...why.

Texas Gov wins latest court battle of election drop-boxes

https://nypost.com/2020/10/11/texas-gov-wins...
8 hours ago · Texas Republicans have won the latest round in an ongoing court battle over ballot boxes in the state. On Saturday, a federal appeals court granted …



Texas Purges Thousands Of Voters To Help Ted Cruz Win Re ...

Oct 09, 2018 · New reports show that several thousand newly-registered voters in the state of Texas have been illegally purged from the state’s voting rolls, a move that will certainly benefit struggling incumbent Senator Ted Cruz.The state has seen a surge in new voter registrations, and that is never a good sign for Republicans, which helps explain the illegal purges.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top