Si Senor, you can bet you bottom Baht
[QUOTE=EihTooms;2960041]All of your quotes and political categories, to which I replied, were specifically regarding Presidential / Commander-In-Chief issues except the Bernie Sanders Cat Lady's, which, predictably, was all about White Supremecy and his obsession with White Boys. However, since his whole Bernie Sanders thing is about helping Repubs win elections, it is safe to assume his was also a pro Repub president rant, as long as the Repub is a White Man.
They were not about the City Councilman or Dog Catcher in Ithoughtitwasafart, Oklahoma.
And your vote for Nobody for President in 2024 was as specifically designed to help Trump win and deliver his next Great Repub Economic Disaster as the vote for everyone else you quoted except me.[/QUOTE]I will always be in favor of the most qualified to steer this country, you know the ones that built it into what it is for the last 250+yrs.
As opposed to some Indian anchor baby whoor!!
The Koolest Jew on the planet
Deputy because not bad I would of liked to see because or Atty General.
I sure hope he is POTUS soon.
[URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/11/us/politics/stephen-miller-trump.html[/URL]
YUGE congrats Mi Amigo.
Trump for Dog Catcher? Or Chase what's is name?
[QUOTE=Tiny12;2959074]Spidy's definition of bloviate: conflicts with my political position and is not simple minded[/QUOTE](...kkkk!) Says Tiny 12, the flip-flop artist and bothsider/neithersider guy, who wouldn't [I][b]"...vote for Trump, for dog catcher" (...kkkk!)[/b][/I], who voted (supposedly) for Chevy Chase?
[QUOTE=MarquisdeSade1;2959445]There is a wide political spectrum in the USA but I must say the [b]most vile[/b] position on the whole spectrum is the one Chase Oliver represents. [/QUOTE]Ahem!, pardon me, I stand corrected...Olive Chase for president was it? [I][b](...kkkk!)[/b][/I]
Tiny 12, according to MDS1, "...most vile..."? Oh well, no one's candidate is always going to be perfect, but "most vile" is an interesting take!
[QUOTE=EihTooms;2959419][b]Covering your ass already, I see. [/b]
Lololol. That might be the most oblivious, slavishily pro Repub pretend "Bothsider / Neithersider" load of crap you have ever posted.
Gee, if only an outgoing Dem president would sometimes hand an incoming Repub president economic conditions as rosy and workable as the outgoing Repubs always hand incoming Dems. Then America would not have to suffer the consequences of those "ticking time bombs" they leave behind that are magically and brilliantly timed just right to coincide with [b]the 4 years, 8 years, 12 years or however long Repub administrations take to blow up the American economy and sometimes that of the whole world as well, right "Bothsider / Neithersider" Tiny?[/b][/QUOTE]Agreed!
As if voting for Trump by way of Oliver Chase wasn't bad enough.
[QUOTE=Spidy;2960192](...kkkk!) Says Tiny 12, the flip-flop artist and bothsider/neithersider guy, who wouldn't [I][b]"...vote for Trump, for dog catcher" (...kkkk!)[/b][/I], who voted (supposedly) for Chevy Chase?
Ahem!, pardon me, I stand corrected...Olive Chase for president was it? [I][b](...kkkk!)[/b][/I]
Tiny 12, according to MDS1, "...most vile..."? Oh well, no one's candidate is always going to be perfect, but "most vile" is an interesting take!
Agreed![/QUOTE]The more honest direct Trump voters are finding out right about now that their vote was actually for President-elect "Elonia" Musk by way of golfer Donald Trump. Lolol.
Trump's golf clubs are going to get even more use and golf cart adding a lot more mileage this time around.
Which might be fine from the point of view that the current Bidenomics is such a great economy with all cylinders firing that even a total economic disaster numbskull like Trump would have to work very hard to fuck it up so the more time he spends on his failed golf courses, the better.
But with "Elonia" Musk actually running the country, directing the economy and foreign policy, nobody really knows how boundless his ability to fuck things up are yet.
1 photos
Congressional Repubs beg ChristoFascist Mike not to scrap Bidenomics!
Watch for Trump to take credit for all of the great economic outcomes produced entirely by the heavy-lifting and political risk-taking of Biden, Harris and the Dems and absolutely nothing to do with anything he did. Unless someone considers adding Trillions to the defict in order to produce a million fewer jobs, ushering in and exacerbating Trump's Pandemic and all of the deaths, supply-chain collapse, business and school closures, massive jobs destruction by the millions, hyper-inflation, skyrocketing prices and opportunistic corporate price-gouging that naturally and unavoidable followed to have been "good" for America.
And, bear in mind, as has been fully substantiated by all available evidence and data, Bidenomics and those 2018 and 2019 wage increases enacted first in primarily Blue Cities and Blue States has also generously out-paced the Cost Of Living increases triggered by Trump's Pandemic groceries, rent and, oh, even things like speculative crypto stock purchases. Obviously.
[B]Trump Win Shows Political Limits of Bidens Industrial Policy Vision.
Long-term economic investments in domestic manufacturing were overshadowed by real-time anxiety over rent and grocery prices.
Nov. 8, 2024[/B]
[URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/08/us/politics/trump-biden-economy-manufacturing.html[/URL]
[QUOTE]An irony for Mr. Biden is that Mr. Trump could soon benefit from investments that Mr. Biden set in motion. Although Mr. Trump has said that he wants to repeal the Inflation Reduction Act, [b]he is likely to meet resistance from Republicans.
In August, a group of 18 House Republicans sent a letter to Speaker Mike Johnson urging him to prioritize business and market certainty as he considers repealing the climate and tax law.
Energy tax credits have spurred innovation, incentivized investment, and created good jobs in many parts of the country including many districts represented by members of our conference, the Republican lawmakers wrote.[/b]
This month, Mr. Johnson suggested that he would look to repeal the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act. [B]He then walked that back, explaining that he would look to streamline and improve the law, which provided more than $50 billion to the semiconductor manufacturing industry.[/b]
Mr. Trump could ultimately end up declaring that the new factories and jobs were his doing.
The Trump administration will have the ability to claim a lot of the credit and wins for this, said Todd Tucker, director of the industrial policy and trade program at the Roosevelt Institute.[/QUOTE]Lolol. Remember all those Bidenomics good and higher wage-creating jobs projects ribbon-cutings that lying congressional Repubs raced over to in order to bamboozle their sucker constituencies into thinking they had something to do with them when their only contribution was to vote AGAINST them? Lolol.
When will you thank Joe and Kamala for that TV?
[QUOTE=SubCmdr;2960148]I have democratic friends who won't even talk to me now. I have others that do not want to hear anything about how well I am doing since the [I]Trump Pump[/I]. As I am currently typing this I have a girl over watching a movie on the brand new Haier 65", OLED, Smart TV that was delivered today and put up on my wall. Paid for with profits from the [I]Trump Pump[/I]. Holla!
Don't hate! The Democrats do not support crypto. BTC is 84,000/ USD and climbing as I write this. Trump has not even taken office yet. [B]Gotta love it when plan comes together[/B]![/QUOTE]First of all, 65" is kind of small, isn't it. Is that your first big flat-screen tv? Most people find you don't start replicating anything like a cinema experience until you hit 75" or larger.
But no matter.
You know all of these speculative crypto stock purchases are being made with Bidenomics money and none of it with Trump's Pandemic money, right?
In fact, practically ALL of the money going into this typical post-election relief rally is Bidenomics money and no Trump's Pandemic money. Except maybe purchases made by pharmaceutical company executives and funeral home owners I suppose.
So at this point no presidential administration has been more materially pro crypto than the Biden-Harris Administration.
Just sayin'.
Only a Democrat can take credit for something that they never did
Really getting tired of the sore loser democrats. Makes it seem to me it is the first time they ever voted. They had their virginity taken and didn't even get a kiss. Now they are angry. LOL!
That's right, pleased to meet you; I still won't tell you my name; Don't you believe in mystery?; Dont you want to play my game?
[QUOTE=EihTooms;2960296]You know all of these [b]speculative crypto stock purchases[/b] are being made with Bidenomics money and none of it with Trump's Pandemic money, right?[/QUOTE]Until you roll out some data to back up your statement it is your opinion at best and [B]YOU LIE[/B] at worst.
Define what a crypto stock is? Tell me how it is purchased? Lastly, why do you think it is speculative?
[I]Im looking for a man to love me; Like I've never been loved before; Im looking for a man that'll do it anywhere; Even on the limousine floor[/I]
[QUOTE=EihTooms;2960296] In fact, practically ALL of the money going into this typical post-election relief rally is Bidenomics money and no Trump's Pandemic money. Except maybe purchases made by pharmaceutical company executives and funeral home owners I suppose.[/QUOTE]Until you roll out some data to back up your statement it is your opinion at best and you lie at worst.
[QUOTE=EihTooms;2960296] So at this point no presidential administration has been more materially pro crypto than the Biden-Harris Administration.[/QUOTE]Now you are straight out lying like the best politicians at the highest of levels.
[I]The SEC continued to view cryptocurrency-related enforcement as a top priority, bringing 46 enforcement actions against various digital-asset market participants in 2023. This number is the highest since 2013 and a 53% increase from 2022[/I]
[I]In the first months of 2023, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has notably ramped up its cryptocurrency-related enforcement. As of June 6, the SEC has brought 24 cryptocurrency enforcement actions between litigations and administrative proceedings. The number of cryptocurrency enforcement actions brought by the SEC in 2023 is advancing at a record pace[/I]
You were saying what exactly again? I don't consider enforcement actions against a industry that has held talks with the SEC in an attempt to become compliant with regulatory efforts. SEC Chair Gary has been playing gotcha games with the industry. That (compound profanity redacted) even taught a course on Crypto Currency.
[I]SEC Chair Gary Gensler has made clear that he believes the existing securities regime appropriately governs cryptocurrencies. In his view, most cryptocurrencies are securities based on the Howey test. Under the Howey test, a transaction is considered a security if it meets four criteria:
money is invested;
there is an expectation that the investor will earn a profit;
the investment is a common enterprise; and
profits are generated through the efforts of others.
Yet recent cases have shown that determining whether a cryptocurrency is a security is a complex task that may not always have a clear answer. This uncertainty has increasingly prompted some judges to question why there is no specific regulation addressing cryptocurrency. For instance, U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the District of Columbia, who is presiding over the SECs case against Binance, made her views known on this issue during a hearing when she asked:
Wheres the SEC been? Does that matter why is it that if theyre trying to achieve legislation, is that some suggestion theres something missing in the statute to cover this? Why are we doing this on a coin-by-coin, case-by-case, judge-by-judge litigation which depends on the vagaries of the individual districts as opposed to issuing a reg that tells everybody this is it?
Similarly, U.S. District Court Judge Katherine Polk Failla of the Southern District of New York, who is overseeing the SECs case against Coinbase, made similar remarks last fall, noting that neither Congress nor the federal courts have made any definitive determinations on whether certain crypto qualifies as a security.
These judges are not alone in questioning whether cryptocurrency requires tailored regulation. Seeking a uniform system of regulation has been a priority of many cryptocurrency lobbyists. Although the legislative efforts in Congress have made some progress, the SEC has been pushing back on the need for new rules on the securities side. The SEC has similarly rejected Coinbases petition last year asking the SEC to make a clear set of rules to determine if a token is a security and to specify how issuers can legally register with the SEC. Following the rejection, Coinbases chief legal officer Paul Grewal stated that no one looking fairly at the industry thinks the law is clear. He called for a further dialogue stating that he would rather work together with the SEC to create laws that will benefit consumers than defend lawsuits based on legal positions that change month after month.[/I]
I ask again, what exactly are you talking about? You have already admitted that you don't know anything about crypto.
[QUOTE=EihTooms;2959703]I don't follow the crypto scene and have barely ever mentioned it even in passing here.[/QUOTE][B]I know[/B]! But suddenly you are an expert on monetary inflows to the crypto market. Where did this sudden knowledge infusion come from?
[I]Thats right, it's been a long time; Since I had a man that did it real good; If you ain't scared, take it out; Ill do it like a real life nasty girl should[/I]
[QUOTE=EihTooms;2960296] First of all, 65" is kind of small, isn't it. Is that your first big flat-screen tv? Most people find you don't start replicating anything like a cinema experience until you hit 75" or larger. [b]But no matter[/b].[/QUOTE]No brother [B]size matters[/B]. When girls come over to look at my 65" TV they do not have the reaction that you had. They say it is perfectly fine. When I drop my pants and show them what I am working with they say: [B]Oh my, thats big[/B].
You have not told us the size of your TV. But I bet when you drop your pants a girls reaction is: [I]Uh, is that it? Wake me when you're done; I guess you'll be the only one having fun[/I] - Nasty Girls, [B]Vanity 6[/B].
[B]How you like me now?
ROTLMAO[/B]
Yes. Exxon CEO to Mr. Drill Baby Drill!
[QUOTE=Sirioja;2960326]When Netanyahou will kill many jews all over the world, from his war, and even maybe more than Hamas and Hezbollah. No brain Trump should also kill many US, when not caring about pollution, when then increasing hurricanes and fire now around LA and NYC. And of course, killing children with free weapons, when they already killed Indians. But US always made good business, when their citizens died. Wars are always good for US business.[/QUOTE][B]Exxon CEO says Trump should keep USA Involved in global climate change efforts.[/B]
[URL]https://www.cnbc.com/2024/11/12/exxon-ceo-says-trump-should-keep-us-involved-in-global-effort-to-address-climate-change.html?__source=androidappshare[/URL]
[QUOTE] The U.S. should continue to influence global climate change policy under a second Trump administration, Exxon CEO Darren Woods said.
President-elect Donald Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement in 2017 and is expected to do so again in his second term.
Woods warned that Exxons investments in carbon capture technologies would change if federal tax incentives are weakened under Trump.
President-elect Donald Trump should keep the U.S. involved in global efforts to address climate change, Exxon Mobil CEO Darren Woods said Tuesday.
Trump should try to bring a common sense approach to the annual U.N. Climate Change Conference and continue to have the U.S. influence policy around the world, Woods told CNBCs Squawk Box Tuesday. Woods spoke from the climate conference, which kicked off this week in Baku, Azerbaijan.
Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement in 2017 and is expected to do so again in his second term. President Joe Biden signed an order to rejoin the agreement on his first day in office in 2021, a decision that Exxon supported.
Trump slammed the Paris agreement as horribly unfair to the U.S. and vowed to rescind all unspent funds under the Inflation Reduction Act in an address to the Economic Club of New York in September. He made energy policy a central part of his campaign platform, calling for unconstrained fossil fuel production.
Exxon has plans to invest $20 billion through 2027 in carbon capture and storage technology, hydrogen fuel, and lithium mining in the U.S. for electric vehicle batteries.
Woods told CNBC on Tuesday that Exxons investments in technologies to lower emissions depend on federal tax credits that were established or expanded under the IRA. He warned that the companys investments in these technologies would change if the incentives are weakened or repealed.
"There needs to be an incentive to reward those investments and generate a return, Woods said. If we find that those incentives dissipate or go away entirely, then that would definitely change our investment plans.
Wood previously said Exxons oil and gas production levels will not change, at least in the short term, in response to the outcome of the U.S. presidential election.
Im not sure how drill, baby, drill translates into policy, Woods told CNBCs Squawk Box on Nov. 1, referencing one of Trumps campaign slogans.
The CEO said Exxon has not faced constraints on its shale production under the Biden administration. Exxons production levels are based on how much money the company can return to shareholders, not which political party is on office, he said.
Exxon shares have risen more than 20% since the start of the year. [/QUOTE]
Democrats are negative and uninterested in providing real solutions to the country
[B]Majority of Americans support more nuclear power in the country[/B]
[I]A majority of U.S. adults remain supportive of expanding nuclear power in the country, according to a Pew Research Center survey from May. Overall, 56% say they favor more nuclear power plants to generate electricity. This share is statistically unchanged from last year.
[b]Republicans are more likely than Democrats to favor expanding nuclear power to generate electricity in the U.S[/b]. Two-thirds of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say they support this, compared with about half of Democrats and Democratic leaners.
Republicans have supported nuclear power in greater shares than Democrats each time this question has been asked since 2016.[/I]
[URL]https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/08/05/majority-of-americans-support-more-nuclear-power-in-the-country/[/URL]
Democrats oppose crypto. Democrats oppose nuclear power. But if you got a dick and want to identify as a girl then they got at a government program for that!
