Joe Biden
84,263 Views |
771 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by BBW12OG
The fear mongering from both sides is so hysterically terrible this election. My mailbox is stuffed daily full of fliers from both parties talking about how the other is going to destroy the country if they win in November.
I never thought an election cycle could be worse than 2016, but this one is right there with it. I cannot wait for it to be over one way or another
I never thought an election cycle could be worse than 2016, but this one is right there with it. I cannot wait for it to be over one way or another
I work as a consultant and have a few government support clients. There may be spending in places people do not agree with. but there is so much waste. Public companies would be out of business if they operated with the same level of waste.lumberpack5 said:
Another thought I have is that too many people expect things that are not a business to run like a business.
Businesses have cost and other price signals to gauge demand. Businesses know who the stockholders are and what they expect. Business does not have a fiduciary duty to the general public. Most cities and towns can get by without a paid fire department and if something burns, that will likely be cheaper than maintaining the department. But without a paid fire department everyone's insurance is higher and some places with have flows that can't be covered. For most places the fire department has turned into an insurance thing and a medical rescue thing. And that's okay, but a lot of people just don't think of it that way.
When government wastes your tax money, as long as they do not burn it, it is not wasted, just spent in a place you would not spend it. But no one really wants a fully effiencient governments because such a government is akin to Nazism and they will allow grandma to die.
Tell us how it is "wasted" and how that money disappeared from the economy.Cthepack said:I work as a consultant and have a few government support clients. There may be spending in places people do not agree with. but there is so much waste. Public companies would be out of business if they operated with the same level of waste.lumberpack5 said:
Another thought I have is that too many people expect things that are not a business to run like a business.
Businesses have cost and other price signals to gauge demand. Businesses know who the stockholders are and what they expect. Business does not have a fiduciary duty to the general public. Most cities and towns can get by without a paid fire department and if something burns, that will likely be cheaper than maintaining the department. But without a paid fire department everyone's insurance is higher and some places with have flows that can't be covered. For most places the fire department has turned into an insurance thing and a medical rescue thing. And that's okay, but a lot of people just don't think of it that way.
When government wastes your tax money, as long as they do not burn it, it is not wasted, just spent in a place you would not spend it. But no one really wants a fully effiencient governments because such a government is akin to Nazism and they will allow grandma to die.
I like the athletic type
N/M.
Cthepack said:I work as a consultant and have a few government support clients. There may be spending in places people do not agree with. but there is so much waste. Public companies would be out of business if they operated with the same level of waste.lumberpack5 said:
Another thought I have is that too many people expect things that are not a business to run like a business.
Businesses have cost and other price signals to gauge demand. Businesses know who the stockholders are and what they expect. Business does not have a fiduciary duty to the general public. Most cities and towns can get by without a paid fire department and if something burns, that will likely be cheaper than maintaining the department. But without a paid fire department everyone's insurance is higher and some places with have flows that can't be covered. For most places the fire department has turned into an insurance thing and a medical rescue thing. And that's okay, but a lot of people just don't think of it that way.
When government wastes your tax money, as long as they do not burn it, it is not wasted, just spent in a place you would not spend it. But no one really wants a fully effiencient governments because such a government is akin to Nazism and they will allow grandma to die.
Yes, I've been in a similar situation.... consulting mostly for private companies, but on a couple of major government client projects as well.
You really have to adjust yourself to the government culture when you get involved with those assignments. The way they do things is very slow, cumbersome, and shockingly wasteful.
It's just incredible how big the difference is between the public and private sector.
packgrad said:
I just would like to know if there are people out there who - for reals for reals - believe Joe Biden when he says off-the-wall nutty stuff like this.
I know their MO is to take any bad thing that ever happens and blame it on the President, but there has to be a point in which even the legions of mind-numb bots have to pause and say, "That's crazy".
If the wind don't get you, the fires will.
Like I said, if you cant get hyped for the Carolina game, why are you here?
-Earl Wolff-
-Earl Wolff-
SupplyChainPack said:
I just would like to know if there are people out there who - for reals for reals - believe Joe Biden when he says off-the-wall nutty stuff like this.
I know their MO is to take any bad thing that ever happens and blame it on the President, but there has to be a point in which even the legions of mind-numb bots have to pause and say, "That's crazy".
If Trump/Republican supporters are allowed to take all the nonsensical stuff Trump says, filter it, refine it, and try to discern some coherent meaning from it, Biden/Dem supporters should be allowed to do the same, yeah?
Are hurricanes and wildfire activity exacerbated by global warming? Is Trump appropriately addressing global warming?
I'd ask you the same thing - "do you for reals for reals believe Trumpers when he says off-the-wall nutty stuff about global warming?"
The problem is, like most issues of consequence, he has no coherent stance on the topic.
Straight from the horse's mouth:
Civilized said:SupplyChainPack said:
I just would like to know if there are people out there who - for reals for reals - believe Joe Biden when he says off-the-wall nutty stuff like this.
I know their MO is to take any bad thing that ever happens and blame it on the President, but there has to be a point in which even the legions of mind-numb bots have to pause and say, "That's crazy".
If Trump/Republican supporters are allowed to take all the nonsensical stuff Trump says, filter it, refine it, and try to discern some coherent meaning from it, Biden/Dem supporters should be allowed to do the same, yeah?
Are hurricanes and wildfire activity exacerbated by global warming? Is Trump appropriately addressing global warming?
I'd ask you the same thing - "do you for reals for reals believe Trumpers when he says off-the-wall nutty stuff about global warming?"
The problem is, like most issues of consequence, he has no coherent stance on the topic.
Straight from the horse's mouth:
What is the problem with those quotes? None are remotely comparable to Biden's bumbling, stumbling attempts to get words out.
Yeah, not seeing the comparison there. Not perfect English by any stretch, but it's easy to see it's just live-speaking minor mistakes, not actual cognitive issues and confusion.packgrad said:Civilized said:SupplyChainPack said:
I just would like to know if there are people out there who - for reals for reals - believe Joe Biden when he says off-the-wall nutty stuff like this.
I know their MO is to take any bad thing that ever happens and blame it on the President, but there has to be a point in which even the legions of mind-numb bots have to pause and say, "That's crazy".
If Trump/Republican supporters are allowed to take all the nonsensical stuff Trump says, filter it, refine it, and try to discern some coherent meaning from it, Biden/Dem supporters should be allowed to do the same, yeah?
Are hurricanes and wildfire activity exacerbated by global warming? Is Trump appropriately addressing global warming?
I'd ask you the same thing - "do you for reals for reals believe Trumpers when he says off-the-wall nutty stuff about global warming?"
The problem is, like most issues of consequence, he has no coherent stance on the topic.
Straight from the horse's mouth:
What is the problem with those quotes? None are remotely comparable to Biden's bumbling, stumbling attempts to get words out.
Pacfanweb said:Yeah, not seeing the comparison there. Not perfect English by any stretch, but it's easy to see it's just live-speaking minor mistakes, not actual cognitive issues and confusion.packgrad said:Civilized said:SupplyChainPack said:
I just would like to know if there are people out there who - for reals for reals - believe Joe Biden when he says off-the-wall nutty stuff like this.
I know their MO is to take any bad thing that ever happens and blame it on the President, but there has to be a point in which even the legions of mind-numb bots have to pause and say, "That's crazy".
If Trump/Republican supporters are allowed to take all the nonsensical stuff Trump says, filter it, refine it, and try to discern some coherent meaning from it, Biden/Dem supporters should be allowed to do the same, yeah?
Are hurricanes and wildfire activity exacerbated by global warming? Is Trump appropriately addressing global warming?
I'd ask you the same thing - "do you for reals for reals believe Trumpers when he says off-the-wall nutty stuff about global warming?"
The problem is, like most issues of consequence, he has no coherent stance on the topic.
Straight from the horse's mouth:
What is the problem with those quotes? None are remotely comparable to Biden's bumbling, stumbling attempts to get words out.
I'm not talking about his syntax. I'm saying if you read literally what he's saying he has no coherent stance or strategy on the topic.
"I don't think it's a hoax but it's not manmade."
j/k "Global warming HOAXTERS..."
j/k "It was made by the Chinese."
j/k "I'm an environmentalist..." "We're planting a trillion trees"
His stance is wildly inconsistent. Does he support environmental protections, or not? Is global warming a hoax, or not? Is it manmade, or not? Did the Chinese make it, or not?
Generally though, through interpretation and inference you can fathom a guess that Trump pushes back about it being man-made and resists environmental policies intended to curb it, either because he doesn't believe they do any good or because he is simply unwilling to reign in businesses for the sake of the environment.
Through interpretation and inference, you can also fathom a guess that Biden isn't literally blaming Trump for hurricane or saying he started wildfires. He's pushing back on Trump's environmental policies that thumb their nose at global warming.
If we're going to consistently use interpretation and inference to discern meaning from Trump's inconsistent or largely incoherent statements why aren't you doing the same thing for Biden?
For 4 years every statement and misstatement Trump has made has been analyzed and critiqued. For three months, Biden's has and we're complaining about not giving him the benefit of the doubt. Lol.
You can't deny Biden's stumbling by saying Trump makes outlandish statements I disagree with politically. They are not the same.
You can't deny Biden's stumbling by saying Trump makes outlandish statements I disagree with politically. They are not the same.
packgrad said:
For 4 years every statement and misstatement Trump has made has been analyzed and critiqued. For three months, Biden's has and we're complaining about not giving him the benefit of the doubt. Lol.
You can't deny Biden's stumbling by saying Trump makes outlandish statements I disagree with politically. They are not the same.
If y'all are just raging at the MSM for unfair or unequal treatment of Trump, I can't help with that.
If we're going to discuss the substance of their stances on global warming then let's do it.
There is a TON of time spent arguing about media portrayals of political figures, and most all of it is a colossal waste of time.
Trump's portrayal in the media won't matter a generation or two from now. Neither will Biden's. Nobody will care that Trump and the MSM feuded his whole presidency or that Biden stumbles over his words.
How they/we attack issues of consequence during and after their presidencies will be what lives on.
Do you really believe that Trump is causing flooding in the suburbs? And,if so, that Biden will make them all go away?
Civilized said:SupplyChainPack said:
I just would like to know if there are people out there who - for reals for reals - believe Joe Biden when he says off-the-wall nutty stuff like this.
I know their MO is to take any bad thing that ever happens and blame it on the President, but there has to be a point in which even the legions of mind-numb bots have to pause and say, "That's crazy".
If Trump/Republican supporters are allowed to take all the nonsensical stuff Trump says, filter it, refine it, and try to discern some coherent meaning from it, Biden/Dem supporters should be allowed to do the same, yeah?
Are hurricanes and wildfire activity exacerbated by global warming? Is Trump appropriately addressing global warming?
I'd ask you the same thing - "do you for reals for reals believe Trumpers when he says off-the-wall nutty stuff about global warming?"
The problem is, like most issues of consequence, he has no coherent stance on the topic.
Straight from the horse's mouth:
Let me know when you find those 57 states that Obama was talking about in 2007 when he was running for president...
Every president says off the wall things sometimes, but if you can't see the difference between past presidents saying something incorrectly and Biden's bumbling I don't know what to tell you
I can't wait to watch a debate between these two. When will that take place?
Civilized said:packgrad said:
For 4 years every statement and misstatement Trump has made has been analyzed and critiqued. For three months, Biden's has and we're complaining about not giving him the benefit of the doubt. Lol.
You can't deny Biden's stumbling by saying Trump makes outlandish statements I disagree with politically. They are not the same.
If y'all are just raging at the MSM for unfair or unequal treatment of Trump, I can't help with that.
If we're going to discuss the substance of their stances on global warming then let's do it.
There is a TON of time spent arguing about media portrayals of political figures, and most all of it is a colossal waste of time.
Trump's portrayal in the media won't matter a generation or two from now. Neither will Biden's. Nobody will care that Trump and the MSM feuded his whole presidency or that Biden stumbles over his words.
How they/we attack issues of consequence during and after their presidencies will be what lives on.
https://www.prageru.com/video/the-paris-climate-agreement-wont-change-the-climate/
Joe Biden waves to his throngs of supporters:
SupplyChainPack said:
Joe Biden waves to his throngs of supporters:
In Biden's defense those probably are his supporters....especially now that we know that it isn't a Biden administration...it's a Harris administration with Joe Biden
*Chortle*
Civilized said:packgrad said:
For 4 years every statement and misstatement Trump has made has been analyzed and critiqued. For three months, Biden's has and we're complaining about not giving him the benefit of the doubt. Lol.
You can't deny Biden's stumbling by saying Trump makes outlandish statements I disagree with politically. They are not the same.
If y'all are just raging at the MSM for unfair or unequal treatment of Trump, I can't help with that.
If we're going to discuss the substance of their stances on global warming then let's do it.
There is a TON of time spent arguing about media portrayals of political figures, and most all of it is a colossal waste of time.
Trump's portrayal in the media won't matter a generation or two from now. Neither will Biden's. Nobody will care that Trump and the MSM feuded his whole presidency or that Biden stumbles over his words.
How they/we attack issues of consequence during and after their presidencies will be what lives on.
It seems like most discussions get derailed by someone arguing with CNN's anchors as opposed to the people actually posting
IseWolf22 said:Civilized said:packgrad said:
For 4 years every statement and misstatement Trump has made has been analyzed and critiqued. For three months, Biden's has and we're complaining about not giving him the benefit of the doubt. Lol.
You can't deny Biden's stumbling by saying Trump makes outlandish statements I disagree with politically. They are not the same.
If y'all are just raging at the MSM for unfair or unequal treatment of Trump, I can't help with that.
If we're going to discuss the substance of their stances on global warming then let's do it.
There is a TON of time spent arguing about media portrayals of political figures, and most all of it is a colossal waste of time.
Trump's portrayal in the media won't matter a generation or two from now. Neither will Biden's. Nobody will care that Trump and the MSM feuded his whole presidency or that Biden stumbles over his words.
How they/we attack issues of consequence during and after their presidencies will be what lives on.
It seems like most discussions get derailed by someone arguing with CNN's anchors as opposed to the people actually posting
True. As evidenced by the left on a milk carton in regards to all of the good work in the ME. Issues of consequence. Probably because cnn doesn't want to cover it.
IseWolf22 said:Civilized said:packgrad said:
For 4 years every statement and misstatement Trump has made has been analyzed and critiqued. For three months, Biden's has and we're complaining about not giving him the benefit of the doubt. Lol.
You can't deny Biden's stumbling by saying Trump makes outlandish statements I disagree with politically. They are not the same.
If y'all are just raging at the MSM for unfair or unequal treatment of Trump, I can't help with that.
If we're going to discuss the substance of their stances on global warming then let's do it.
There is a TON of time spent arguing about media portrayals of political figures, and most all of it is a colossal waste of time.
Trump's portrayal in the media won't matter a generation or two from now. Neither will Biden's. Nobody will care that Trump and the MSM feuded his whole presidency or that Biden stumbles over his words.
How they/we attack issues of consequence during and after their presidencies will be what lives on.
It seems like most discussions get derailed by someone arguing with CNN's anchors as opposed to the people actually posting
100%.
Pubs are so disgusted with MSM portrayals of Trump that it's all mockingly hollering "Orange man bad" at the sky at this point.
Trump has done some good things. He inspires consumer confidence, founded or not. His admin's work on sex trafficking seems great. The middle east peace deal coverage has been woefully inadequate.
He's also wantonly adversarial with the media and the most emotionally immature, impulsive president in our country's history with (for really the first time in history) the Twitter platform to broadcast all that impulsivity. He lies and hyperbolizes at a never before seen rate.
He makes himself a really, really easy target for liberal MSM angst and he and pubs have to own some sizable portion of that.
If the MSM portrays our next pub president as negatively as they do Trump, IPS pubs can lambast me for being wrong. I'll eat a heaping pile of crow. He gets covered differently because he is different.
They did the same thing to W.Civilized said:
If the MSM portrays our next pub president as negatively as they do Trump, IPS pubs can lambast me for being wrong. I'll eat a heaping pile of crow. He gets covered differently because he is different.
Only difference is, W didn't fight back like Trumps does, so it didn't get as petty and excessive as they are with Trump, but they covered W the same as they do Trump.
About the only difference is 9/11. They had to back off because W's handling of that was pretty awesome and he was very popular at that time and they knew the country didn't want to hear/see them bashing him....but as soon as enough time went by they went right back at him.
Did the same thing to McCain and Ronmey as well when they were running for President.Pacfanweb said:They did the same thing to W.Civilized said:
If the MSM portrays our next pub president as negatively as they do Trump, IPS pubs can lambast me for being wrong. I'll eat a heaping pile of crow. He gets covered differently because he is different.
Only difference is, W didn't fight back like Trumps does, so it didn't get as petty and excessive as they are with Trump, but they covered W the same as they do Trump.
About the only difference is 9/11. They had to back off because W's handling of that was pretty awesome and he was very popular at that time and they knew the country didn't want to hear/see them bashing him....but as soon as enough time went by they went right back at him.
Trump gives it right back to them. Does it get into a nasty tit for tat that we could all do without...yes...but the media doesn't have any integrity in the whole matter. The fact of the matter is that if the media treated Trump like they treated Obama we would have to hear Trump talk about how they are all best friends.
Even when the Obama administration did things like spy on a reporter (James Rosen) no one in the media cared because of the letter behind the name.
cowboypack02 said:Did the same thing to McCain and Ronmey as well when they were running for President.Pacfanweb said:They did the same thing to W.Civilized said:
If the MSM portrays our next pub president as negatively as they do Trump, IPS pubs can lambast me for being wrong. I'll eat a heaping pile of crow. He gets covered differently because he is different.
Only difference is, W didn't fight back like Trumps does, so it didn't get as petty and excessive as they are with Trump, but they covered W the same as they do Trump.
About the only difference is 9/11. They had to back off because W's handling of that was pretty awesome and he was very popular at that time and they knew the country didn't want to hear/see them bashing him....but as soon as enough time went by they went right back at him.
Trump gives it right back to them. Does it get into a nasty tit for tat that we could all do without...yes...but the media doesn't have any integrity in the whole matter. The fact of the matter is that if the media treated Trump like they treated Obama we would have to hear Trump talk about how they are all best friends.
Even when the Obama administration did things like spy on a reporter (James Rosen) no one in the media cared because of the letter behind the name.
I think that's a false equivalency between negative reporting about Bush vs. Trump. Was the press critical with Bush, McCain, etc.? Yes, but not nearly to the same degree. You can't just say they did "it" with Bush, McCain, Romney, et. al. too. If "it" is critical reporting there is a massive range of frequencies and intensities of "it".
The frequency and intensity of negative MSM reporting is not in the same ballpark with past pub presidents and candidates as it is with Trump.
You guys are couching this as simply anti-pub sentiment in the MSM when really it's anti-pub sentiment amplified significantly by the particulars of Trump's impulsivity and personality.
So in other words, "TDS". You just described what it is.Civilized said:
You guys are couching this as simply anti-pub sentiment in the MSM when really it's anti-pub sentiment amplified significantly by the particulars of Trump's impulsivity and personality.
The media is no better than they try to make Trump out to be.
Featured Stories
See All
Payton Wilson Headed To Pittsburgh
by James Henderson
3:47
9h ago
131
DUGOUT REPORT: Wolfpack Wins Series Opener Versus Ball State
by Daniel Wilson
Makarewicz's Grand Slam Powers Pack Past Cardinals
by Daniel Wilson
COMMIT ALERT: Caitlin Weimar picks NC State
by Ethan Barry
14:50
19h ago
630
TOP PLAYS: Payton Wilson
by Bryant Carson