The Real timschochet

I offered it above. 4-1 odds that Biden is the Democratic nominee. Even odds that Biden wins. Name the amount for either or both.

None in this forum.

He mixed up the names. It proves nothing.

Hey everyone here is so confident Biden is going to be replaced, or if he isn’t Trump is going to beat him. Let them lay their money down.

I will offer 4-1 odds that Biden will be the Democratic nominee in November. Name the amount. I will offer even odds that Biden will be re-elected. Name the amount.

It’s not a great look. But it’s contradicted, at least for me, by what I hear from him. When he talks he sounds perfectly cogent to me. And he makes a lot of sense. For a supposedly senile old man the job he has been doing has been pretty excellent IMO. He’s going to be re-elected so I guess we’ll all find out in the next 4 years how he’s doing.

Fock your bump. I’m not going to go looking. I don’t care. The accusation stands. If you want to discuss rhe topic go ahead. But I’m not interested in any further discussion of what a jackass you are. That’s your thing not mine. You love to attack people, I don’t. I said my piece, it’s true, and now we’re done talking about it.

Fair enough. But your argument remains problematic to me. You’re warning me about spending pennies while ignoring the hundred dollar bills going out the door. You know damn well that if doubled or quadrupled the amount we spend on undocumented immigrants, or, conversely, eliminated spending on them altogether, it wouldn’t make a significant impact on the debt or deficit either way. It’s all too big.

Much more interesting is whether or not they take up the immunity case, and if so, will they stay the trial? That takes 5 justices, and will have a profound effect on the election either way. We’ll know next week. Basically: if the Supreme Court takes up immunity and stays the trial, Trump will have achieved his goal of delaying all of the indictments until after the election (except for the hush money case which most people don’t care about.) But if the SC does not grant a stay, there will be a Jan 6 trial beginning early summer. And a likely conviction by August. Which will, let’s be frank, aid Biden considerably. So there is much at stake here.

This is correct. It will be a 7-2 or 8-1 decision, perhaps unanimous. But they will avoid discussing whether or not Trump committed or aided insurrection.

Look, if Trump’s numbers roughly match Obama’s numbers, and the only thing that Biden has done is return policy back to what Obama was doing, then I don’t see how you can blame this current explosion on Biden. Logically if that was the case, then the numbers would have been large under Obama, small under Trump, and large again under Biden. But that is not the case. That’s why I conclude that this current explosion is not a result of Biden’s policies (though as President it is his responsibility whether or not he is to blame for it.)

You spend so much time on this crap. Ripping people for starting threads. Who cares if there is a dozen threads on this topic? How about discussing the topic? And if you don’t care to discuss it then why post? All you do is whine and complain, so annoying.

That’s not a good argument. If Trump were under 35, or running for a third term, or not born in the USA, he would not be on the ballot, and democracy would not be harmed. What is a good argument is that Trump has not received due process. I don’t think a court can simply determine that he is guilty of insurrection without some sort of trial.

They’re spending a lot of time on the whole “officer” thing. Seems kind of a lame argument to me (the President is exempt from the 14th Amendment because he is not an officer). But I am not a legal scholar..:

You’re wrong but thankfully we’ll never have to learn how wrong you are. Because we will never close the border.

Go back another 10 years. Obama’s policies are essentially the same as Biden’s. Your analysis is flawed.

No. It wouldn’t. It’s not even close. Our trade at the southern border exceeds a billion dollars a day.

So awful.

But it’s also higher than Obama’s or Bush’s. Which indicates two facts: 1. The current crisis has nothing to do with Biden’s policies. 2. The current crisis would have occurred almost exactly the same if Trump was President right now. This is a new situation and has nothing to do with previous or current policies on the border.

You think? That “commercial impact” you’re referring to would be an economic catastrophe that would be far far greater than any impact of undocumented immigrants, and it wouldn’t take very long. Thats why your idea is unworkable. It will never happen.

“CLOSE THE BORDER” is a meaningless phrase unless you provide specifics as to what you mean. I agree with you that this wouldn’t mean much to the cartels, but illegal inmigration was never the primary source of fetanyl anyhow. I agree that the border wall won’t work but it’s what you guys wanted. ALL of this bill is what you guys wanted.

As insisted upon by Mike Johnson.

This would be a legitimate argument for conservatives except that when they get into power they never cut any spending and consistently increase the debt worse than liberals do. So it’s not a question of too much spending, it’s only a question of what spending is preferred.

The other day all of the essential facts were out there and you found the bill reasonable and worth supporting. What specifically have you learned that changed your mind?

It was almost entirely written by Republicans.