Now The Left Are Criticizing Trump For Wanting 2K For Americans

[ataraxia]

Why is that relevant in any way? The bill passed both Houses very easily with a veto proof majority.

So why did the Republican congressmen not follow through and override Trump's veto?

Because they are afraid of Trump supporters like you. You are aware that all of this Trump support you are pouring your heart into is doing nothing other than hurting this country in a really bad way, don't you?

Let it go man. This stuff is toxic. We all need to move on in this country. You made a mistake in putting so much faith and love in a narcissist. That's OK. We all make mistakes like that. The key is to move on. Don't throw any more good money after bad.

 

[Antiwar]

Another ludicrous argument. While I may not agree entirely with Antiwar's analysis, purging voter rolls means those voters purged don't get to vote. So they would not have figured into any vote count.

Prior to the 2016 presidential selection ...

Are you familiar with Greg Palast's work on investigating and reporting on Interstate Crosscheck?

 

[Moderate Right]

Another ludicrous argument. While I may not agree entirely with Antiwar's analysis, purging voter rolls means those voters purged don't get to vote. So they would not have figured into any vote count.

LOL. And the number of those purged would not have any effect on the election. I don't know about this particular purging we are talking about but voter databases need to be purged from time to time. The left loves to claim that purging dead or moved people or people who haven't voted in many elections is voter suppression. How ridiculous.

 

[jnug]

[Edit: Prior to the 2016 presidential selection, s]ome "Republican states" falsely purged voter rolls using Interstate Crosscheck. That and the unequal voting-power of the Confederate College is more why the R Team candidate "won" the presidency than Trump's rhetoric.

While we have veered off topic, my analysis of Hillary's defeat in 2016 are as follows:
- she was already an unpopular candidate which set the stage for negativity towards her yielding a considerable result
- James Comes (see above)
- Russian maligned election interference
- voter suppression
- Hillary was and is a terrible candidate. She is a solid bureaucrat but a horrid candidate for public office.

Least we forget, Obama went screaming past Hillary like she was standing still in 2008.

 

[Antiwar]

AND HE LOST. Another effort at a circular argument on your part. You are trolling the forum.

No, MR has a good point: Trump still got a lot of votes!

 

[Moderate Right]

AND HE LOST. Another effort at a circular argument on your part. You are trolling the forum.

If you claim that an election is a referendom on the current president and 8 MILLION more people voted for them since the previous election, that is not a rejection of that president.

 

[Antiwar]

LOL. And the number of those purged would not have any effect on the election. I don't know about this particular purging we are talking about but voter databases need to be purged from time to time. The left loves to claim that purging dead or moved people or people who haven't voted in many elections is voter suppression. How ridiculous.

The margins of victory in battleground states was small. The purges were likely much higher than the margins. Look into Greg Palast's work.

 

[jnug]

Prior to the 2016 presidential selection ...

Are you familiar with Greg Palast's work on investigating and reporting on Interstate Crosscheck?

I was referring to the post

LOL. And the number of those purged would not have any effect on the election. I don't know about this particular purging we are talking about but voter databases need to be purged from time to time. The left loves to claim that purging dead or moved people or people who haven't voted in many elections is voter suppression. How ridiculous.

Not ridiculous at all. The GOP has been honing its voter suppression skills for decades and they are quite good at it now.

 

[jnug]

If you claim that an election is a referendom on the current president and 8 MILLION more people voted for them since the previous election, that is not a rejection of that president.

When he loses by 7 million votes it is. Are you trying to make the case that vote totals election to election are in a static state. Ah-huh....TYPICAL

 

[jnug]

How can it possibly do that when the bill passed both houses very easily with a veto proof majority?

The Legislature does not get an opportunity to overturn a pocket veto.

 

[Moderate Right]

Learn what a pocket veto is and get back to us.

OK. I looked it up and you were right. I learned something today. I don't understand it though. I don't understand why Congress can override a regular veto but not a pocket veto. That makes no sense to me. Any president who doesn't like a bill can just not veto it and not sign it and he gets his way, even if more than 2/3's of Congress could have overridden a regular veto. This actually gives me more hope that either Trump will get his way or negotiate for a higher amount.

 

[Antiwar]

While we have veered off topic, my analysis of Hillary's defeat in 2016 are as follows:
- she was already an unpopular candidate which set the stage for negativity towards her yielding a considerable result
- James Comes (see above)
- Russian maligned election interference
- voter suppression
- Hillary was and is a terrible candidate. She is a solid bureaucrat but a horrid candidate for public office.

Least we forget, Obama went screaming past Hillary like she was standing still in 2008.

Look into Greg Palast's work. I did the calculations for the unequal voting-power of the Confederate College for 2016. The R Team got a ~25% total voting-power advantage in 2016. There is good evidence that the R Team purged potentially over a million (generally targeted) voters off of rolls in several states, including battleground states. The D Team ran a neoliberal.

 

[jnug]

No, MR has a good point: Trump still got a lot of votes!

Another guy that thinks vote totals are in a static state from one election to the next. Had Trump won with his 74M votes as opposed to getting creamed then MR has an argument. Trump didn't.

 

[Moderate Right]

When he loses by 7 million votes it is. Are you trying to make the case that vote totals election to election are in a static state. Ah-huh....TYPICAL

If you claim that an election is a referendom on the current president and 8 MILLION more people voted for them since the previous election, that is not a rejection of that president.

 

[ataraxia]

How can it possibly do that when the bill passed both houses very easily with a veto proof majority?

Because all those Republican congressmen who voted for it the first time, after delaying it to cut the benefits, got scared of the ignorant Trump-supporting pitchfork-carrying mobs after Trump's veto and calling it a "disgrace", and then telling them it wasn't enough. You have to realize they have no spine or principles or shame, and just do what Trump tells them to do. They voted one way when they thought that's what Trump wanted them to do, but then voted the other way as soon as he kicked them like a dog and yanked their leash. It's hard to believe grown men tolerating this level of public humiliation and degradation. But hey, that's your Republican congressmen these days.

So where was Trump to pull their leash and muzzle them when they were delaying the bill arguing for lower personal payments? After all, that's what they thought they were supposed to be doing as the "fiscally responsible" party, right? Why did Trump wait until after all those endless negotiations to yank their chain? Because the real point was to delay everything and tank the economy right before he left. That's yet one more example of Trump's scorched Earth policy and the present he wants to leave the American people. That's usually what happens when you deal with a malignant narcissist.

And you still are sitting here cheering this travesty. So sad.

 

[jnug]

Look into Greg Palast's work. I did the calculations for the unequal voting-power of the Confederate College for 2016. The R Team got a ~25% total voting-power advantage in 2016. There is good evidence that the R Team purged potentially over a million (generally targeted) voters off of rolls in several states, including battleground states. The D Team ran a neoliberal.

Which is a form of voter suppression. See item 4 in my list.

 

[jnug]

If you claim that an election is a referendom on the current president and 8 MILLION more people voted for them since the previous election, that is not a rejection of that president.

Yes it is IF he went from winning in one election cycle to losing in the next.

 

[Antiwar]

Another guy that thinks vote totals are in a static state from one election to the next. Had Trump won with his 74M votes as opposed to getting creamed then MR has an argument. Trump didn't.

I know that votes aren't "static."

Trump is STILL popular.

 

[jnug]

I know that votes aren't "static."

Trump is STILL popular.

So what. Watch how popular he remains when he does not have the power and voice of the bully pulpit at his disposal.

 

[Moderate Right]

Another guy that thinks vote totals are in a static state from one election to the next. Had Trump won with his 74M votes as opposed to getting creamed then MR has an argument. Trump didn't.

Seriously? You guys kept on harping up the fact that Hillary won the popular vote in 2016 and yet refused to acknowledge that if the election were about popular vote instead of the electoral vote process, that the vote totals would have been the same. If Trump had campaigned for popular votes instead of electoral votes, he would have gotten many more votes in 2016. He was out to win the election under the rules, not by the popular vote. The vote total would NOT have been the same if the election were held in a different manner.

 

[Antiwar]

Which is a form of voter suppression. See item 4 in my list.

I agree, but I don't think you were aware of Interstate Crosscheck purges, and most people aren't.

 

[Moderate Right]

So what. Watch how popular he remains when he does not have the power and voice of the bully pulpit at his disposal.

Ummmmmmmmmmmmm, he didn't have the bully pulpit at his disposal in 2016.

 

[jnug]

Seriously? You guys kept on harping up the fact that Hillary won the popular vote in 2016 and yet refused to acknowledge that if the election were about popular vote instead of the electoral vote process, that the vote totals would have been the same. If Trump had campaigned for popular votes instead of electoral votes, he would have gotten many more votes in 2016. He was out to win the election under the rules, not by the popular vote. The vote total would NOT have been the same if the election were held in a different manner.

I never harped on Hillary having won the popular vote in 2016. I did harp on the narrow popular vote margin Trump parlayed into an EC win. Another FAiL on your part. You have me confused with somebody else.

 

[jnug]

Ummmmmmmmmmmmm, he didn't have the bully pulpit at his disposal in 2016.

But he did have the 24/7's frothing at the mouth to provide him free advertising in the form of coverage based on his outrageousness.

Remember, the 24/7's are addicted to dog pile on the carpet stories and donnie is surely a dog.

 

[jnug]

I agree, but I don't think you were aware of Interstate Crosscheck purges, and most people aren't.

I was .....used improperly it can be a form of voter suppression. Happy now or do I have to repeat myself again?