b_m_b_m_b_m

Yeah they are doing this on purpose.

"Do you remember when you were born?"

"No, beca..."

"No further questions, they're clearly an illegal"

1 hour ago, Kal-El814 said:

For as easy as it is to shit on the obviously poor when it comes to fiscal responsibility, there are a tremendous amount of middle class people who are an unexpected event and a short hourglass away from poverty themselves. They don’t struggle, they just don’t plan long term and have no meaningful savings. They landed a better job than someone in a low skill position, but their decisions are equivalently bad or actually routinely worse, they can just absorb them provided they never lose their employment.

 

If we could get our collective shit together, we’d have federally mandated statistics, home economics, and financial studies classes as part of the grade and high school curriculum. It’s fucking ridiculous that you can graduate high school having taken a class on trigonometry but not know how APRs fuck you, how to cook for yourself, or have a rudimentary understanding of probability.

Like anyone would pay attention in any of those classes. We have an education problem in this country and no amount of schooling can fix that.

Fwiw Chris wrey isn't as shitty as I would have expected

This thread is beautiful

I'm glad you can eat GDP growth

43 minutes ago, RedSoxFan9 said:

 

It is possible they made amends in the 18 years since that happened.

@SaysWho? What's the deal here?

15 minutes ago, Signifyin(g)Monkey said:

I am more confident than ever that, sans a recession before Election Day, Trump will be re-elected.

Fwiw, the gap has closed somewhat (by about 30k) to 1.6M R / 1.5M D

I think Florida is going to become more and more conservative as white boomers from the Midwest go to retire there due to the lack of income tax and no snow. I don't think that democratic or associated minority voting turnout or population in GA, AZ, TX, and NC are there yet to counter the conservative growth in FL and some other Midwestern states like OH and WI. I do agree though. There may be a decent amount of population growth/change but it isn't reflected in the census until after the 2020 election.

This should help in 2020

6 hours ago, mclumber1 said:

 

Monetary expense, and political capital.  If 70% of voters now want single payer, you'll likely have enough support from GOP congressman, along with all Democratic lawmakers to pass the law.  But if you start adding on their "extras", you likely start to lose support among both conservative voters and law makers.  

 

I'm just saying don't let perfect be the enemy of good enough.  

If you think that Republican politicians will support Medicare for all, or l have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.

52 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

Definitely four of the races I'm watching closely.

 

 

Watch them all lose. Ololol 

1 minute ago, thewhyteboar said:

Reagan should be remembered as one of the worst presidents of all time. 

Basically all of them since Nixon were pretty shitty in their own unique shit way

Edit no, Johnson

Wait, Kennedy

Ok, ok, Eisenhower.

Truman wasn't that special either.

Fdr was a cripple.

In a world where Medicare for all is reality (read: higher taxes by necessity) what people also need is """reasonable""" cost controls on necessary medications and medical treatment, which people can clearly afford.

4 minutes ago, RedSoxFan9 said:

Good

"I'm ok with Republicans keeping the house if perfect saints dont get elected to districts I don't live in"

Her opponent is Dave brat so no surprise his Allies would get this sort of info

3 minutes ago, marioandsonic said:

You just know that if the Dems take the house or the senate, Trump will say that it was due to hacking/fraud/immigrants/crab people/whatever, and want to start an investigation.

The seeds for this are already being sewn. "The only collusion is between crooked h and Russia and [other named non sequiturs]"

21 minutes ago, Chairslinger said:

I have been doing some thinking on what the long term play here is and I think maybe it's not so much about kneecapping Mueller.

 

Because waiting until after the midterms makes such a thing pretty pointless.

 

Unless the Dems tank things and can't even take the House(in which case, Mueller is only one of a dozen Oh Shit priorities to worry about) then what you gain by removing Sessions is not removing Mueller....it's controlling Justice with a sycophant.

 

That list the GOP has been circulating shows they know what is in store from a Dem House. What I think they are aiming to do is harness the entire Executive Branch to play out a full scale version of Trump's '16 strategy. 

 

Make everyone dirty, so the dirtiest guy in the room won't look so bad.

 

They want someone at Justice who will start investigating all of Trump and the GOP's political enemies so they can throw their dirt when the Dem House starts actual oversight on Trump.

 

Basically, Trump is going to make a genuine power play to enlist Justice and the FBI in helping to destroy his political enemies.

 

Grahmn and Grassley have already tipped their hand here. They have both given strong approval to the, "The real scandal is the investigation!" claim.

I'd wager a solid majority of Republicans would be a ok with using Justice/the FBI to arbitrarily investigate Trump's enemies and lock them up. Real "what-they-actually-mean-by-drain-the-swamp" type of stuff

59 minutes ago, TwinIon said:

The Verge on where that 96% figure came from:

 

I know that Trump's talk about how "this is a very serious situation-will be addressed!" is the empty threat of a early morning Twitter troll, but let's for a brief moment consider what kind of action could actually be taken here. Do these conservatives really want the US government to go to a private company and force them to change results based on some kind of political fairness algorithm. Setting aside the impossibility of pleasing anyone with such an algorithm, it would be an unprecedented (I hope) and obviously unconstitutional example of governmental overreach.

 

I know it's all bluster, but even the most cursory thought to the potential policy behind his specious reasoning can't possibly pass muster. 

 

 

A fairness doctrine for internet search engine results. Hilarious given the pushback if something similar we're proposed for AM radio, for example.

Don't worry I'm sure the solution will be found with the policy wonks in the Trump administration

Just pay the schools directly as part of normal appropriations.

It is really rare when David frum gets the best take