Does this signal a move by the establishment to set up a resignation of Biden?
Liberal Press being instructed to go after WH press secretary.
Posts
Total:
27
The classified docs too. Are they really using the same moves on Biden that they used on Trump?
Won't it backfire to have the left be just as awakened as the right about what is going on?
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
This has all the markings of an internal insurrection.
-->
@Greyparrot
I assumed he was dropping out and letting Kamala run, but she is so hates it was looking like he would get a second term. Isn't it a little late for them to be planning another primary?
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Betting today has Biden at 23 percent to resign.
-->
@Greyparrot
I would bet no on that. He could drop dead any second from age related diseases which is just as likely as resigning. We have to assume that not resigning is a strong option even if he stays alive. I think smart money puts him at 90% not to resign
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
I just bet 100 dollars for funsies. Wish me luck!
-->
@Greyparrot
I would bet money that trump drops out before the first state votes. People forget most of the times he runs, he drops out
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
That's already a high probability, wont make much money
DeSantis is wayy ahead of Trump on the betting market, and he hasn't even officially declared.
-->
@Greyparrot
KJP lacks the ability to think on one’s feet that the job requires. I think we’ll see her resignation well before Biden’s. It is eyebrow raising to see the White House press corps being sharks smelling blood as opposed to the softball pitchers they have been, with the notable exception of Peter Doocy.
Maybe the MSM is going after Biden so hard so that they can go after Trump for a similar scandal? In other words, if taking down Trump requires taking down Biden, so be it.
-->
@cristo71
This is corporate media we are talking about. The orders all come from the same source.
-->
@Greyparrot
George Soros?
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
I see you have a new avatar. Are you aware that Reagan killed the middle class? A guy like you suffered greatly from the policies of Reagan. He cut taxes for the wealthy and raised them on the working poor.
You said you object to social security taxes, well he raised them more than any other President.
The Social Security Amendments of 1983 laid the foundation for 30-years of federal embezzlement of Social Security money in order to use the money to pay for wars, tax cuts and other government programs.
-->
@cristo71
George Soros?
Think deeper. There was a time during the JFK era when the powers that be were limited to ballistic weaponry.
My opinion is based on statistics. Statistically speaking more people were lifted out of the poverty zone than under any other president. When he first entered office it looks like total poverty was up to about 15% and by the time his policies took effect a little time after he left the poverty was down to around 10%.
Okay Roosevelt?
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Um, are you sure Reagan didn’t “lift” people out of poverty by redefining what constitutes poverty? For example, by changing the income threshold to qualify for food stamps from 20,000/year to 10,000/ year you could drastically reduce the number of families that are considered impoverished and who qualify for assistance. Reagan did this for many safety net programs. Doesn’t mean those families are doing any better.
The Census Bureau shows poverty increasing between 1980 and 1993. See the chart here:
It's actually possible for more people to be lifted out of poverty while poverty levels increase based on how fluid people can move up and down on the economic indexes.
I would love to see studies that isolate Reagan's polices and measure the 50 year impact of them next to the 50 year impact of what would have happened had he not made those policies.
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Under Mr. Reagan, conservatives were finally able to begin dismantling the New Deal state and Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society. In 1981 and 1982, Mr. Reagan made more than $22 billion in cuts to social welfare programs, including federal student loans and the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act, a modest program that paid businesses to train and hire economically disadvantaged people.
And forget about claiming fiscal responsibility as the reason for the cuts -
“The federal deficit grew anyway, as Mr. Reagan cut taxes and accelerated military spending. Inheriting a national debt of about $995 billion, he nearly tripled it. But conservative activists still cheered”
“Mr. Reagan’s welfare reforms just made the poor poorer. When a three-year recession hit in 1980, six million more Americans fell into poverty. By 1989, employment recovered, but a weak social safety net meant that workers were an illness or an accident away from hardship”
The new deal as I have already proven in another debate with you was bad for society.
Cuts in social welfare help people become less dependent on the state and ultimately make the economy better on long timelines such as 50 year and 100 year timelines, while being bad for short term timelines.
Like pulling off a bandaid. It hurts now but once you pull it off your wound can air out
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Like pulling off a bandaid. It hurts now but once you pull it off your wound can air out
An uncovered wound can also become dirty and infected
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
The new deal as I have already proven in another debate with you was bad for society.
Um, no you never proved the New Deal was bad for society. Much of the New Deal remains in place including unemployment insurance, social security, and the Securities and Exchange Commission. When Republicans insisted we end Glass-Steagall, the New Deal era law that separated Commercial Banking from Investment Banking, the result was the Great Bush Recession, Financial Crisis and Bailout.
Yes but what were the 200 year effects of repealing glass seagull? Proved economy over not doing it is the spoiler alert
It's not easy to track those impacts but you can look into Austrian economics and learn the theories surrounding it if you have time
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
It's not easy to track those impacts but you can look into Austrian economics and learn the theories surrounding it if you have time
You can pretend that you read “Austrian economics” lol - if you want to, but with your intellect and lack of formal education you wouldn’t understand what you were reading. You’re such a student of economics you spell Glass-Steagall as glass seagull lol
And to suggest you need 200 years to determine the impact of any given economic policy is just ludicrous.
Other than theory how would you know the 200 year impact of a policy or set of policies
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
And to suggest you need 200 years to determine the impact of any given economic policy is just ludicrous.
Seriously. And good luck finding a voter who would ever think "Yeah, but what does this mean for my kitchen table in 200 years?"
-->
@ludofl3x
Do you think laws should do what's good for everyone or just what's good for you?
If everyone than we must consider all future non existent people as equal to us