What did Trump mean when he told Christians: "In four years, you won’t have to vote again"?

[RLLD 4,275]

3 minutes ago, squistion said:

He suspends the elections (for whatever reason) and SCOTUS backs him up because they gave POTUS unlimited power and immunity from any acts while President (similar to Nixon's famous quote saying "If the President does it, then it's legal). 

Sure, and Biden is rigging the court to ensure they can take down any competition from ever being able to wint he Presidency again.... I mean, we can go back and forth with farcical scenarios about how one side or the other is intent upon evil doings....but neither of us will be correct.   So perhaps, we can dispense with all the fear mongering?  And perhaps we can avoid perverting our system to fend off this fake threat?

[The Real timschochet 7,384]

33 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

The problem, which we've discussed countless times, is that you equate the success of our past immigration system with our current situation.  In most of our history, immigration was restricted to certain cultures, and immigrants had no safety nets to save them.  I've seen estimates of 30%+ of immigrants went back home because they couldn't hack it.  Those that made it assimilated or stayed contained in their cultural pockets within the city.

Which brings us to your studies which show that immigration improves the economy.  What you miss, or choose to ignore, is that it does NOT do so for first-generation, which consistently costs money.  Second generations are a slight net positive but not enough to outweigh the initial costs, and it's not until 3rd that the overall "investment" is considered a positive.  And again, this was in the past, highly controlled system.

As I type this it occurs to me:  there is little incentive for the feds to stem immigration.  The burden of that first-generation cost falls primarily on local and state governments.  The feds just sit back and wait to collect taxes in the future.  It makes me think that maybe we should stop shipping them to random cities and start dropping them all off at the Capitol.  

Appreciate the response and it deserves just as long a rebuttal. But later, gotta go to work. 

[HellToupee 2,172]

4 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

gotta go to work. 

What is your typical daily routine? Checking properties etc? A lot of downtime or pretty much on the go? 

[BrahmaBulls 914]

3 minutes ago, HellToupee said:

What is your typical daily routine? Checking properties etc? A lot of downtime or pretty much on the go? 

Get $20 out of the ATM and drive to 7-11 to find a painter.

[IGotWorms 4,063]

It’s pretty obvious he was saying that he’ll give Christian conservatives everything they’ve ever wanted over the next four years. And he’s already got a huge start on that with eradicating the right to choose.

It should be scary because the Christian right is nutso and most people don’t want that agenda. But no, I don’t think he meant he’ll do away with elections forever. I can understand the concern given January 6 and Russia and those other things but let’s focus on the actual threat here — giving those Christian right loonies everything they want and foisting that sh1t on the rest of us

[thegeneral 3,556]

10 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

It’s pretty obvious he was saying that he’ll give Christian conservatives everything they’ve ever wanted over the next four years. And he’s already got a huge start on that with eradicating the right to choose.

It should be scary because the Christian right is nutso and most people don’t want that agenda. But no, I don’t think he meant he’ll do away with elections forever. I can understand the concern given January 6 and Russia and those other things but let’s focus on the actual threat here — giving those Christian right loonies everything they want and foisting that sh1t on the rest of us

It was typical pandering said in a word salad manner because Trump has a limited vocabulary and frequently says things oddly.

With his track record of judges people should listen to him and take it seriously however when he says this. 

[JuneJuly 212]

45 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

It’s pretty obvious he was saying that he’ll give Christian conservatives everything they’ve ever wanted over the next four years. And he’s already got a huge start on that with eradicating the right to choose.

It should be scary because the Christian right is nutso and most people don’t want that agenda. But no, I don’t think he meant he’ll do away with elections forever. I can understand the concern given January 6 and Russia and those other things but let’s focus on the actual threat here — giving those Christian right loonies everything they want and foisting that sh1t on the rest of us

Scary.  lol   They really play it to the Karen's feelings don't they.  

[The Real timschochet 7,384]

1 hour ago, HellToupee said:

What is your typical daily routine? Checking properties etc? A lot of downtime or pretty much on the go? 

Honestly it depends on the day. In addition to the properties I’m involved in several business investments- importing/exporting. 

[Engorgeous George 2,332]

2 hours ago, purdygood said:

I feel like we have plenty of room for immigrants if they want to go live in Nebraska or Wyoming, but they all want to live in California and New York.  I welcome them as well, but they need to come here and establish roots in West Virginia. (by the way why do we need 2 Virginia's and 2 Dakotas?)

Sure, you're fine with two Carolinas, but let the dakotas party it up and you are against it.  You are an anti-Dakota-ite.

[purdygood 355]

Just now, Engorgeous George said:

Sure, yiou're fine with two Carolinas, but let the dakotas party it up and you are against it.  You are an anti-Dakota-ite.

I forgot about the Carolina's!  Don't like them either!   I love how NC and SC both wear football jerseys with CAROLINA though because they both claim to be the only Carolina hahahaha   so petty

[Engorgeous George 2,332]

1 hour ago, IGotWorms said:

It’s pretty obvious he was saying that he’ll give Christian conservatives everything they’ve ever wanted over the next four years. And he’s already got a huge start on that with eradicating the right to choose.

It should be scary because the Christian right is nutso and most people don’t want that agenda. But no, I don’t think he meant he’ll do away with elections forever. I can understand the concern given January 6 and Russia and those other things but let’s focus on the actual threat here — giving those Christian right loonies everything they want and foisting that sh1t on the rest of us

I thought the right to choose was sent back to the States, the entity closer to the people, so that the people may determine the extent, the breadth of that right.  I would not call that erradicating the right.

[Engorgeous George 2,332]

3 minutes ago, purdygood said:

I forgot about the Carolina's!  Don't like them either!   I love how NC and SC both wear football jerseys with CAROLINA though because they both claim to be the only Carolina hahahaha   so petty

What about Michigan and Upper Michigan?

[jerryskids 7,057]

 

1 minute ago, Engorgeous George said:

I thought the right to chose was sent back to the States, the entity closer to the people, so that the people may determine the extent, the breadth of that right.  I would not call that erradicating the right.

It did, and Trump has said that he will not push for a national ban.  But since this statement does not fall into the bucket of "Ima be a dictator!", the Left considers this one a lie.  If instead he had said he plans to institute such a law, the Left would consider it a stone cold lock.

When you view things through this lens, it makes their reactions much clearer.   

[Engorgeous George 2,332]

1 minute ago, jerryskids said:

 

It did, and Trump has said that he will not push for a national ban.  But since this statement does not fall into the bucket of "Ima be a dictator!", the Left considers this one a lie.  If instead he had said he plans to institute such a law, the Left would consider it a stone cold lock.

When you view things through this lens, it makes their reactions much clearer.   

Won't using those lenses when you already have 20/20 vision end up damaging your eyesight?

[thegeneral 3,556]

14 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

Sure, you're fine with two Carolinas, but let the dakotas party it up and you are against it.  You are an anti-Dakota-ite.

That we have two Dakotas is absurd. I realize we needed the nice round number and all but come on.

[jerryskids 7,057]

9 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

Won't using those lenses when you already have 20/20 vision end up damaging your eyesight?

No, they are more like those x-ray glasses you used to get in cereal boxes.   

[Engorgeous George 2,332]

8 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

That we have two Dakotas is absurd. I realize we needed the nice round number and all but come on.

Each has their separate charm.

[Engorgeous George 2,332]

2 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

No, they are more like those x-ray glasses you used to get in cereal boxes.   

I liked the ones from the backs of Comics.  With those bad boys you could see right through womens clothes.

[thegeneral 3,556]

Just now, Engorgeous George said:

Each has their seperate charm.

I’m team South Dakota.

[Engorgeous George 2,332]

Just now, thegeneral said:

I’m team South Dakota.

Kristi Noem is hot, dog killer or not.

[thegeneral 3,556]

4 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

Kristi Noem is hot, dog killer or not.

Despite her it’s the superior of the two states!

 

[HellToupee 2,172]

25 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

What about Michigan and Upper Michigan?

Massachusetts and little Massachusett(Rhode Island)

[Engorgeous George 2,332]

2 minutes ago, HellToupee said:

Massachusetts and little Massachusett(Rhode Island)

Rhode island and Connecticutt could be rolled into one called the Bowels of Massachusetts.  Delaware could be called jersey's Anus.

[Reality 3,121]

29 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

I thought the right to choose was sent back to the States, the entity closer to the people, so that the people may determine the extent, the breadth of that right.  I would not call that erradicating the right.

Worm's struggles with any topic related to law, 2 decades and counting.

[thegeneral 3,556]

Washington would be ideal for two states. 

Divide at the mountains.

Instead we get two Dakotas that are the same thing

[Engorgeous George 2,332]

2 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

Washington would be ideal for two states. 

Divide at the mountains.

Instead we get two Dakotas that are the same thing

Idaho could be divided into two, Idaho and Idaprude

[IGotWorms 4,063]

1 hour ago, Engorgeous George said:

I thought the right to choose was sent back to the States, the entity closer to the people, so that the people may determine the extent, the breadth of that right.  I would not call that erradicating the right.

You seem like a bright dude so I know you know that’s bullsh1t.

There was a federal right to choose that had to be recognized anywhere in the country, no matter what state you lived in.

Now there is not.

So yes, the right is gone.

Now you may have a different right depending on what state you live in. It may be a statutory right and not a constitutional right. Or maybe you basically have no right at all. But that’s obviously a very different thing. And you know it

[seafoam1 3,403]

2 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

You seem like a bright dude so I know you know that’s bullsh1t.

There was a federal right to choose that had to be recognized anywhere in the country, no matter what state you lived in.

Now there is not.

So yes, the right is gone.

Now you may have a different right depending on what state you live in. It may be a statutory right and not a constitutional right. Or maybe you basically have no right at all. But that’s obviously a very different thing. And you know it