2 2
brenthutch

Kamala Harris critics corner

Recommended Posts

Point is it wasn't necessary.  3T had already been dumped into the money supply.

Let's recap - Harris wanted to give first time home buyers $25,000.00. <s> that would have quelled the upward spiral of home prices</s>

Every American gets $2,000/month during covid.  As it was DC was passing out money like drunken sailors.

Eliminate private insurance altogether.  She was for it before she was against it.

Banning fracking, mandatory gun buybacks, border control.

I'd rather not have the most liberal Senator as POTUS.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
18 minutes ago, airdvr said:

Point is it wasn't necessary. 

Then support that point. Just saying that it is so does not convince anyone, and neither does quoting some other guy who is just saying that it is so.

Quote

Eliminate private insurance altogether.  She was for it before she was against it.

Medical insurance? You'll get there eventually anyway. Every single Republican politician alive was against any form of universal government healthcare plan until Obama care, and they screamed and shouted about that for years afterwards. Now? They can't run for office without saying they want to improve it, not scrap it.

Edited by jakee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
7 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Ken,

I am very sure that it requires one to be born in this country.

That is why the John McCain birth location was an issue; for a while.

Jerry Baumchen

 

Status as a natural-born citizen of the United States is one of the eligibility requirements established in the United States Constitution for holding the office of president or vice president. This requirement was intended to protect the nation from foreign influence.[1]

The U.S. Constitution uses but does not define the phrase "natural born Citizen" and various opinions have been offered over time regarding its exact meaning. The consensus of early 21st-century constitutional and legal scholars, together with relevant case law, is that natural-born citizens include, subject to exceptions, those born in the United States. As to those born elsewhere who meet the legal requirements for birthright citizenship, the consensus emerging as of 2016 was that they also are natural-born citizens.[2][3][4]

 

I was born in another country to an American father. I was born with US citizenship. I did not need to apply for anything except a passport.

Edited by okalb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, airdvr said:

You won't find me defending Trump and I'm not so stupid to think a video would change anyone's mind.  I also noted that not many addressed the claims in the vid.  I'm honestly pissed that these are my 2 choices.

 

Hi airdvr,

60 yrs ago I voted for Pres for the first time.  I have NEVER had two good choices.  I simply voted for the best candidate.

How you and/or I see them is totally subjective.

Jerry Baumchen

PS)  Since you seem to not like either candidate; what have you done to get some other person[s] on the ballot?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/18/2024 at 11:25 AM, brenthutch said:

Funny how none of those countries are socialist ¬¬

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_socialist_states

Even funnier when you look at the countries that are.

No, but the Democrats advocating the same policies are apparently rabid communists, who will turn the US into a wasteland unless they elect a felon.

The rest of the world shakes its head in disbelief at the crass ignorance and stupidity displayed by the MAGA mob.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

I am very sure that it requires one to be born in this country.

Why are you so sure? The Constitution does not say so, and the issue has never been legally tested.

Is a person who the law says has citizenship at birth a natural born citizen? If not, why not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Ken,

I am very sure that it requires one to be born in this country.

That is why the John McCain birth location was an issue; for a while.

Jerry Baumchen

 

I believe Ted Cruz was born in Canada. He tried to run, no one believed he was not eligible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
9 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

I believe Ted Cruz was born in Canada. He tried to run, no one believed he was not eligible.

Very good point. He was born outside the US, his dad was not a US citizen, and the GOP had no problem with it, because they knew it was legal.

McCain's birth location was never really an issue from either side either, people only ever brought it up to point out to the racist birther morons how stupid they were.

Edited by jakee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

I believe Ted Cruz was born in Canada. He tried to run, no one believed he was not eligible.

Hi Ken,

Here you go:  what are the requirements to be president - Search (bing.com)

To be President of the United States, a candidate must meet three basic constitutional requirements:

  1. Natural-born citizen: The candidate must be a natural-born citizen of the United States12.
  2. Age: The candidate must be at least 35 years old12.
  3. Residency: The candidate must have lived in the United States for at least 14 years12.

These requirements are outlined in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution12.

Jerry Baumchen

PS)  I was unaware of #3.  Live & learn.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, tkhayes said:

without providing a single example.... ever.... of either concern..... ever.....

I have zero expectation that meticulously documented research would have any impact on your stance.  If it isn't obvious, you're likely oblivious.

I shudder at the prospect of another 4 years of Trump.  The only skill he might be able to bring comes from negotiating bankruptcies.

Let's say there are roughly 100,000,000 US citizens who actually pay taxes.  Divide $3.4 Billion into that and you have $340,000 debt per taxpayer.  At an historical norm of 5%, we have $17,000 per year per taxpayer in interest alone just to maintain that level of indebtedness.  Then we start spending the real money of running the government.

It doesn't take a lot of insight to listen to a candidate and pick up on the fact that these numbers are lost on them.  They might be perfectly lovely people with the best of intentions, but have no understanding of fiscal realities.

To say that Harris' proposals entail spending money like a drunken sailor is an insult to drunken sailors everywhere - when drunken sailors run out of money, they quit spending.  At that point, too many politicians are just warming up.

While I hope to see a stake through Trump's political heart - though he makes Rasputin look fragile by comparison - putting Harris in charge to do so is on a par with giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.

Regardless who wins, we're royally fucked.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kallend said:

I don't see BH's troll posts, but do I understand that he thinks $1.9T stands out more than $3T, just because he doesn't like Biden and likes the rapist?

While ignoring the $7.8 trillion Trump added to the debt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, winsor said:

Let's say there are roughly 100,000,000 US citizens who actually pay taxes.  Divide $3.4 Billion into that and you have $340,000 debt per taxpayer. 

Not sure you'll see this as I'm probably blocked, but this is some terrible maths.

I'm pretty sure $3.4 billion / 100 million americans = $34.

Unless you meant the old definition of billion as "million million" (or trillion) but that's still just $34,000.

15 minutes ago, winsor said:

It doesn't take a lot of insight to listen to a candidate and pick up on the fact that these numbers are lost on them.

Looks like the numbers are lost on you, too.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, airdvr said:

1. Point is it wasn't necessary.  3T had already been dumped into the money supply.

 

2. Every American gets $2,000/month during covid.  As it was DC was passing out money like drunken sailors.

 

 

1. Says who?  The rapist con-man?

 

2. Neither I nor my wife nor my adult sons did.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, olofscience said:

Looks like the numbers are lost on you, too.

How dare you question his meticulously documented research!

Ah damn, funniest thing I've read all day. It's like a compulsion with these guys that whatever incompetence they accuse Harris of they have to immediately demonstrate that they are significantly worse.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, kallend said:

I don't see BH's troll posts, but do I understand that he thinks $1.9T stands out more than $3T, just because he doesn't like Biden and likes the rapist?

No it’s the 1.9T on top of the 3T. While I think the 3T was more than adequate, the 1.9T added “gasoline to the fire”. While Trump is morally reprehensible, the average American was better off during the Trump administration than during the Biden administration, and the right track wrong track polling agreed with that assessment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, olofscience said:

Not sure you'll see this as I'm probably blocked, but this is some terrible maths.

I'm pretty sure $3.4 billion / 100 million americans = $34.

Unless you meant the old definition of billion as "million million" (or trillion) but that's still just $34,000.

Looks like the numbers are lost on you, too.

I think you might have missed a zero.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
10 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

A lot more?

 

Canada spent 18.9% of GDP on stimulus spending

USA spent 19.6% of GDP on stimulus spending

Now, I know you struggle with percentages, but that difference isn't normally qualified as "a lot more."

:rofl:Canada? Our deficit is larger than your entire GDP. 18.9% of not much, is still not that much. Canada? When the U.S. spits, Canada swims. 

Edited by brenthutch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

2 2