seafoam1 Posted May 11 Posted May 11 13 minutes ago, JuneJuly said: Top 5% Based on reports and financial disclosures, Nancy Pelosi and her husband, Paul Pelosi, have seen their net worth grow significantly during her time in Congress, with estimated stock profits of approximately $130 million over her nearly 40 years in office.. Quote
dogcows Posted May 11 Author Posted May 11 I agree with this man. A lot of conservatives are badly underestimating AOC. 3 Quote
EternalShinyAndChrome Posted May 11 Posted May 11 8 minutes ago, dogcows said: I agree with this man. A lot of conservatives are badly underestimating AOC. And a lot of you liberal lapdogs are badly OVERESTIMATING her. Quote
seafoam1 Posted May 11 Posted May 11 58 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said: And a lot of you liberal lapdogs are badly OVERESTIMATING her. Can you imagine picking a bigger idiot than AOCrap to praise? Oh wait...obama, killary, creepy joe, the kameltoe.... Quote
Maximum Overkill Posted May 11 Posted May 11 First Biden then Kamala, now this dunce Liberals love stupid. @dogcows Quote
supermike80 Posted May 12 Posted May 12 3 hours ago, dogcows said: I agree with this man. A lot of conservatives are badly underestimating AOC. Conservatives aren't underestimating AOC one bit. We are well aware liberals would vote for her in a hot second Quote
Engorgeous George Posted May 12 Posted May 12 She's not experientially qualified to run a Cinnabon. Being able to parrot party line group think is a pretty low level skill set. She is a vapid influencer and nothing more, but folks eat it up so good for her I guess to have the confidence and the hubris to put herself forward. Quote
dogcows Posted May 12 Author Posted May 12 5 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said: She's not experientially qualified to run a Cinnabon. Being able to parrot party line group think is a pretty low level skill set. She is a vapid influencer and nothing more, but folks eat it up so good for her I guess to have the confidence and the hubris to put herself forward. Even if you think this, she’s still substantially more qualified than the “As Seen on TV” administration in office right now. Quote
Maximum Overkill Posted May 12 Posted May 12 8 hours ago, dogcows said: Even if you think this, she’s still substantially more qualified than the “As Seen on TV” administration in office right now. She's a tard, a bartender by trade. She'd be cowering right now, probably talking in her fake black/Puerto Rican accent in an interview somewhere Quote
Engorgeous George Posted May 12 Posted May 12 16 hours ago, dogcows said: Even if you think this, she’s still substantially more qualified than the “As Seen on TV” administration in office right now. I do think that. I also note that though Trump is vapid and venal he does have life experience by virtue of age and he has been at the head of multiple million and billion dollar businesses meaning he has some concept of budgeting, scheduling, tax planning and land use laws and in theory he had thousands of people answerable top him. He is imminently more qualified. Now if you want to note that he has often failed at business, has had much of his success handed to him by his father, and has shown a disregard for civil and criminal laws and for women and for contractual obligations and you believe that negates his likelihood or ability to be a good President go ahead. I would join in pointing out his many shortcomings, but he is objectively more experientially qualified. You would likely be successful with me arguing she is more morally qualified and you could argue her philosophical leaning is better than his on any number of issues, though I do not believe in socialism. The point is she is so unqualified that even whataboutism/butfor arguments with who you consider the least qualified President don't remotely hold water, and that is a problem. Maybe you should support Mayor Pete or Gov. Shapiro, persons with some relevant experience. Just a thought. 2 Quote
Caine Mutiny Posted May 12 Posted May 12 AOC has no shot at winning the nomination even if she runs. Neither does any other leftist or socialist candidate. There is room for these folks in the Democratic Party, as mayors, Senators, etc. But not at the top of the Presidential ticket. The reason for this is purely mathematical. In order to win the Democratic nomination you have to win the southern primaries: in particular, South Carolina. The southern primaries are dominated and essentially controlled by African-Americans who are conservative and don’t vote for leftists. That’s why Bernie lost in 2016 and 2020. 2 Quote
seafoam1 Posted May 12 Posted May 12 3 hours ago, Caine Mutiny said: AOC has no shot at winning the nomination even if she runs. Neither does any other leftist or socialist candidate. There is room for these folks in the Democratic Party, as mayors, Senators, etc. But not at the top of the Presidential ticket. The reason for this is purely mathematical. In order to win the Democratic nomination you have to win the southern primaries: in particular, South Carolina. The southern primaries are dominated and essentially controlled by African-Americans who are conservative and don’t vote for leftists. That’s why Bernie lost in 2016 and 2020. Liberals are so stupid. Quote
TBayXXXVII Posted May 12 Posted May 12 3 hours ago, Caine Mutiny said: AOC has no shot at winning the nomination even if she runs. Neither does any other leftist or socialist candidate. There is room for these folks in the Democratic Party, as mayors, Senators, etc. But not at the top of the Presidential ticket. The reason for this is purely mathematical. In order to win the Democratic nomination you have to win the southern primaries: in particular, South Carolina. The southern primaries are dominated and essentially controlled by African-Americans who are conservative and don’t vote for leftists. That’s why Bernie lost in 2016 and 2020. You better let The Hill know. They listed their top candidates and all of them are leftist or socialist types. Quote
Engorgeous George Posted May 12 Posted May 12 4 minutes ago, SUXBNME said: You can't earn a Billion dollars In my case that looks to likely be true, particularly given I am retired, but there may still be an outside chance as I have a couple of good ideas in the hopper. Probably million dollar ideas, though and not billion dollar ideas. Quote
dogcows Posted May 12 Author Posted May 12 9 hours ago, Engorgeous George said: I do think that. I also note that though Trump is vapid and venal he does have life experience by virtue of age and he has been at the head of multiple million and billion dollar businesses meaning he has some concept of budgeting, scheduling, tax planning and land use laws and in theory he had thousands of people answerable top him. He is imminently more qualified. Now if you want to note that he has often failed at business, has had much of his success handed to him by his father, and has shown a disregard for civil and criminal laws and for women and for contractual obligations and you believe that negates his likelihood or ability to be a good President go ahead. I would join in pointing out his many shortcomings, but he is objectively more experientially qualified. You would likely be successful with me arguing she is more morally qualified and you could argue her philosophical leaning is better than his on any number of issues, though I do not believe in socialism. The point is she is so unqualified that even whataboutism/butfor arguments with who you consider the least qualified President don't remotely hold water, and that is a problem. Maybe you should support Mayor Pete or Gov. Shapiro, persons with some relevant experience. Just a thought. I wouldn’t put her at the top of my list for presidential candidates at her age. But I think we need more people who put policies above personal gain, and she’s an example of that. Quote
Engorgeous George Posted May 12 Posted May 12 3 minutes ago, dogcows said: I wouldn’t put her at the top of my list for presidential candidates at her age. But I think we need more people who put policies above personal gain, and she’s an example of that. Maybe she is an example of that, or maybe she is an example of a politician paying lip service toideals. Me, i have no way of knowing. As i mentioned earlier i am jaded so don't go by me. Your instinct is that she is worthy of some praise and who is to say your instinct is not much sharper than my tired old jaded ass. Quote
supermike80 Posted May 12 Posted May 12 28 minutes ago, dogcows said: I wouldn’t put her at the top of my list for presidential candidates at her age. But I think we need more people who put policies above personal gain, and she’s an example of that. See. Thats where youre wrong and being fooled. Never ever. And i mean ever, believe a politician isn't about personal gain first and foremost. If you dont believe that youll be bamboozled Quote
seafoam1 Posted May 12 Posted May 12 1 hour ago, dogcows said: I wouldn’t put her at the top of my list for presidential candidates at her age. But I think we need more people who put policies above personal gain, and she’s an example of that. Libtards at work. Quote
Maximum Overkill Posted May 13 Posted May 13 On 5/11/2026 at 9:53 AM, Grace Under Pressure said: Pay attention to the voters who simp for the mega-millionaires and billionaires. These are the dopes who have been brainwashed into fighting for the 0.1% wealthiest. The politicians who do this are getting paid to move up into their ranks. The simps just do it for free. Quote
dogcows Posted May 13 Author Posted May 13 7 minutes ago, Maximum Overkill said: Gene Simmons, who is worth $400 million, thinks rich people are great. What a shock! Quote
JuneJuly Posted May 13 Posted May 13 On 5/11/2026 at 11:08 PM, dogcows said: Even if you think this, she’s still substantially more qualified than the “As Seen on TV” administration in office right now. AOC net worth $100,000. Trump's net worth $6,500,000,000. Who's the idiot again? Quote
JuneJuly Posted May 13 Posted May 13 2 minutes ago, dogcows said: Gene Simmons, who is worth $400 million, thinks rich people are great. What a shock! And you think poor people like AOC are great. What a shock! Quote
JuneJuly Posted May 13 Posted May 13 We're all playing this game called life. AOC is almost 40 with $100,000 to her name and still paying off student loans. Her only hope in life is to become one of those entire life congressmen that never leave. Pretty sad. Quote
dogcows Posted May 13 Author Posted May 13 34 minutes ago, JuneJuly said: AOC net worth $100,000. Trump's net worth $6,500,000,000. Who's the idiot again? Easy answer: The simp who foolishly thinks the billionaire is helping them and the middle-class person is ripping them off. Quote
jerryskids Posted May 14 Posted May 14 On 5/11/2026 at 3:31 PM, dogcows said: I agree with this man. A lot of conservatives are badly underestimating AOC. I'm sufficiently concerned about her. She is good enough looking, with great cans. She's energetic and charismatic. She speaks the language of today's youth, which is promising free stuff like a middle school class president promises no homework, and that failure is never your own fault. She would get curb stomped by Vance or Rubio in a debate, but she would have the full power of the MSDNC behind her, reminding everyone how she is the fresh new face of the people, while RubiVance is more Trumpy than Trump ever was! 1 Quote
seafoam1 Posted May 14 Posted May 14 4 hours ago, dogcows said: Easy answer: The simp who foolishly thinks the billionaire is helping them and the middle-class person is ripping them off. They both earned what they have. Sorry dogcraps.... Quote
EternalShinyAndChrome Posted May 14 Posted May 14 4 hours ago, dogcows said: Easy answer: The simp who foolishly thinks the billionaire is helping them and the middle-class person is ripping them off. This has got to be the dumbest statement I've seen in a whiile. Are you suggesting middle-class people don't rip people off? Only Billionaires? You seem to forget that most of your elected politicians went into Government poor and came out multimillionaires. That doesn't happen because they aren't ripping people off. AOC is on her way. Don't thing she isn't in it to get hers. "Let's do it for the little people" is a cute line they use when they're screwing you in the ass. Don't worry, you'll be giving up yours but she isn't giving up sh#t. Quote
seafoam1 Posted May 14 Posted May 14 On 5/10/2026 at 11:12 AM, dogcows said: She is not part of the elite. No rich and famous family, or big money, or Ivy League connections. We could really use more politicians who have actually worked for a living. But here’s the big one; she’s more interested in policy goals than personal ambition. Here’s her response to being asked about a Senate or Presidential run. Whether you agree or disagree with her goals, it’s refreshing to have somebody who is interested in outcomes. Not just trying to lock down their seat and all the perks that go along with it for 50 years. Cool. You are stupid. Quote
JuneJuly Posted May 14 Posted May 14 12 hours ago, dogcows said: Easy answer: The simp who foolishly thinks the billionaire is helping them and the middle-class person is ripping them off. You should retitle the thread to dogcows self-owns. That's twice in a row now. Quote
supermike80 Posted May 14 Posted May 14 7 hours ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said: This has got to be the dumbest statement I've seen in a whiile. Are you suggesting middle-class people don't rip people off? Only Billionaires? You seem to forget that most of your elected politicians went into Government poor and came out multimillionaires. That doesn't happen because they aren't ripping people off. AOC is on her way. Don't thing she isn't in it to get hers. "Let's do it for the little people" is a cute line they use when they're screwing you in the ass. Don't worry, you'll be giving up yours but she isn't giving up sh#t. Not to mention. How many jobs do billionaires create? How many Tesla and Space X jobs are out there? Amazon? Microsoft? Facebook? Silly little statements like that frost me. But they are gaining traction. Quote
supermike80 Posted May 14 Posted May 14 I really really believe this country is headed toward some form of socialism. It's happening. I mean all you have to do is see what silly crap dogcows posts and you can see people really believe this crap. It's scary 1 Quote
dogcows Posted May 14 Author Posted May 14 1 hour ago, supermike80 said: Not to mention. How many jobs do billionaires create? How many Tesla and Space X jobs are out there? Amazon? Microsoft? Facebook? Silly little statements like that frost me. But they are gaining traction. Billionaires CREATE jobs? You invoked Amazon, so let’s go there. How many local stores went out of business due to Amazon? Business owners and the decent jobs they created… Now replaced by low-paying warehouse jobs. Amazing to see an otherwise intelligent person snowed by the story that destroying jobs and replacing them with worse jobs is somehow “creating” jobs. 1 Quote
dogcows Posted May 14 Author Posted May 14 1 hour ago, supermike80 said: I really really believe this country is headed toward some form of socialism. It's happening. I mean all you have to do is see what silly crap dogcows posts and you can see people really believe this crap. It's scary If the country goes socialist, it will be due to the vast wealth disparity. As billionaires work their way to becoming trillionaires, costs for everybody else keep going up faster than wages. The younger generations of today will NOT be better off than their parents. Which is supposed to be the promise of America and of technology and business. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/01/09/trends-in-income-and-wealth-inequality/ This study is worth a read, but if you don’t have time? One glaring fact. In 1970, middle income people made 62% of the money, high income folks 29%. Today? Middle income down to 43% of the money earned and high income 48%. The wealthy have been straight-up robbing the middle class. Just some modest tax increases for top earners and some reforms for workers could go a long way to improving society and disabusing folks of the notion that socialism would be better. The most “socialist” we should get IMO is expanding Medicare to all ages. Highest healthcare costs in the world and a decreasing life expectancy. We need to make healthcare something everybody gets if we really want to be a superpower. 1 Quote
Frozenbeernuts Posted May 27 Posted May 27 AOC, who claims women are oppressed, dresses in a hijab. This is the hero of the left. The board trannies love it. Quote
Maximum Overkill Posted May 27 Posted May 27 50 minutes ago, Frozenbeernuts said: AOC, who claims women are oppressed, dresses in a hijab. This is the hero of the left. The board trannies love it. Liberals are frauds @dogcows They hate Women to Quote
jerryskids Posted May 28 Posted May 28 On 5/14/2026 at 6:23 AM, dogcows said: Billionaires CREATE jobs? You invoked Amazon, so let’s go there. How many local stores went out of business due to Amazon? Business owners and the decent jobs they created… Now replaced by low-paying warehouse jobs. Amazing to see an otherwise intelligent person snowed by the story that destroying jobs and replacing them with worse jobs is somehow “creating” jobs. And how many companies have been created and are successful because Amazon provides a channel which reaches the entire world? 1 Quote
dogcows Posted May 28 Author Posted May 28 5 minutes ago, jerryskids said: And how many companies have been created and are successful because Amazon provides a channel which reaches the entire world? A LOT of them in China. They are the ones benefitting from Amazon, not Americans. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.