The Real timschochet

I’ll care. I don’t need people to suffer in order to prove me right. And I shop too.

I think this is a terrible idea and I have said so many times. Trump’s original idea to place tariffs on ALL countries would have been catastrophic; hopefully he’s backed away from that. But this is bad enough. That being said, it wasn’t a secret. Trump campaigned on this and the public voted for him so this is clearly what they want. So let it happen I guess. I can only hope that the people who claim this is a negotiating tool are right. I don’t think they are, but I always hope for the best.

Yeesh my fault for asking I guess.

Thank you. Follow up question: the viable alternatives to fossil fuels- nuclear, solar, wind etc. are all obviously quite different but they have one thing in common: they all require large government funding to subsidize them at least at first. While you’re opposed to government “forcing things” (which I assume means restrictions on fossil fuels) are you also opposed to funding? And what if China makes a major push towards nuclear energy and is government funded? Should our position remain “we’re gonna wait until the market does it”?

Is there a connection between your response and my question to RLLD?

Let’s also be very clear: the vast majority of scientists who study man made climate change tell us that it is approaching catastrophic proportions for the human race but that there is still time to fight it by attempting to restrict fossil fuels. A small minority of scientists say that it’s already too late, the catastrophe is coming no matter what we do. Another small minority (though magnified by the conservative movement in this country) argue that the whole thing is overblown and we don’t have anything to worry about. Our new President agrees with this last position, while Biden agreed with the vast majority.

@RLLD question for you: you wrote that Biden attacked the energy industry which increased inflation. Assuming that’s correct, are you suggesting that our policy should be to ignore all concerns about climate change and simply give oil and coal companies carte blanche to do whatever they want? This was Trump’s exact campaign position, I just want to see if you agree with it 100%.

These numbers don’t surprise me but I also don’t expect them to last. Starting in January, Fox News will spend all its time praising and defending the new Administration, which is frankly boring. Meanwhile CNN and MSNBC will be criticizing and attacking which is far more interesting. So their ratings should go up.

Yeah no. Globalism isn’t going away because we’re right. And that means we will win out eventually no matter the obstacles. Deal with it.

2 competing theories regarding this: 1. In the social media age, in which people are more tuned in to TikTok, podcasts, Netflix etc than they are to live television, spending money on campaign ads doesn’t really work anymore. Folks aren’t paying attention. 2. Donald Trump is such a unique figure in American politics that none of the election rules applied to him. But because he is so unique we shouldn’t over correct in terms of how to spend campaign money; when he’s gone the old rules will still apply. I don’t know which is true. Perhaps they’re both partly true.

I hope so. Honestly I hope you and everyone else doing this makes as much money as you can. So long as it doesn’t cause me to lose money, why not? But I still don’t get it.

I agree. And I’ll add, while it’s fine for a guy like @Engorgeous George to argue that it was not really a thrashing, liberals shouldn’t do it. It looks weak and whiny. We lost. No excuses, no “yeah but”, no “it was closer than it seems.” Fock that. We got our asses kicked. Take the l, hope we can do better next time.

George, insulting me in this manner is pretty boring too. It’s also useless, I’m immune to it. I’ll likely continue to offer my opinions. Some of them will no doubt appear hyperbolic. Some of them you may find thoughtful and some absurd. Feel free to comment or not. I actually appreciate being refuted when it’s done thoughtfully.

All of it boring as hell.

If the filibuster is used successfully to stop important parts of Trump’s agenda, he will insist that it be removed, just as he did 4 years ago, and this time I suspect the Senate Republicans will go along.

Lol no it isn’t (interesting.)

I spent the last 6 months here explaining why I voted for her and why you should have as well. No need to rehash it, my side lost.

It still seems like it is, right? You guys are buying and selling and some of you are making money, and good for you. But it still doesn’t seem to be tied to anything real or tangible. I have stocks tied to blue chip companies that I have held onto for years and will continue to do so. But they’re not volatile. I’m not looking to make a fast buck, just want my money to be safe with perhaps a little more interest than a money market account would give me. I don’t understand Crypto (which is why I started a thread asking about it) but it seems very flashy and very risky.

I voted for Kamala, proudly, and would do so again. And I’m still defending wokeness and undocumented immigrants who are non-violent felons. What you got? Bring it on focker!

It’s never acceptable. And it hasn’t happened since the 1950s.

I don’t think you would. Such a move would be a national embarrassment for the President, would completely derail the rest of his agenda, and result in no convictions whatsoever.

I don’t agree. I believe, firmly, that the charges against Donald Trump were legitimate and it would have been derelict of the Justice Department not to charge him. The only mistake made was not to charge him a year earlier; because of Garland’s hesitation (obviously due to fear of looking political) we now have to deal with him once again as President. But even if I were absolutely wrong about this, even if the prosecutions against Trump were complete BS and politically motivated, it would still not excuse Bondi attempting to retaliate in any way.

I won’t complain about Bondi if she starts firing people left and right. That’s fine, it’s her prerogative (and Trump’s). If they want to crack down on what conservatives call “the deep state”, no problem, we’ll see how that goes. If they start attempting to prosecute innocent people based on “retribution” or because Trump regards them as enemies, I’ll have a huge problem with that and hopefully so will most people. But until that happens I’m good.

Tony Tony Tony…so funny you think I’m a life loser. Pretty sure my life is better than yours in every way imaginable.

If you don’t think so then you’re not very smart about this. Why do you think we crafted NAFTA in the first place? You think we just put up tariffs and other countries won’t retaliate?