Trump is dominating the primaries. That doesn’t mean he’ll beat Biden

[Yellowtail]

3 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

You could be right, but let's see a link.

Sorry, same link I posted earlier. 

The Fed - Distribution: Distribution of Household Wealth in the U.S. since 1989 (federalreserve.gov)

[EVENKEEL]

The poor are learning that the dems aren't their friends. Imagine barely getting by in a democratic stronghold while the migrants and illegals are being helped more than it's own citizens. All Americans regardless of color want the same thing....a better life.... a chance to succeed. Does anyone honestly think the millions crossing our southern border are helping the cause of the poor.

 

That's why Trump is backed by more and more Blacks and Latinos.

[Yellowtail]

4 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

The poor are learning that the dems aren't their friends. Imagine barely getting by in a democratic stronghold while the migrants and illegals are being helped more than it's own citizens. All Americans regardless of color want the same thing....a better life.... a chance to succeed. Does anyone honestly think the millions crossing our southern border are helping the cause of the poor.

 

That's why Trump is backed by more and more Blacks and Latinos.

I would not bet on it. 

[Felton Jarvis]

13 hours ago, heybruce said:

President Biden wants higher taxes on the rich, which would reduce the gap.  I support that.  Republicans are opposed.  How about you?

Nobody wants higher taxes, even the ones who can easily afford it. They are also the ones who can buy off enough politicians to insure that never happens. I wouldn't look for any increase in taxes on the wealthy.

[Danderman123]

17 minutes ago, Felton Jarvis said:

Nobody wants higher taxes, even the ones who can easily afford it. They are also the ones who can buy off enough politicians to insure that never happens. I wouldn't look for any increase in taxes on the wealthy.

All it will take is the Trump billionaire tax cuts to expire next year. I doubt any Congress will extend them.

[Yellowtail]

15 minutes ago, Felton Jarvis said:

Nobody wants higher taxes, even the ones who can easily afford it. They are also the ones who can buy off enough politicians to insure that never happens. I wouldn't look for any increase in taxes on the wealthy.

Everyone on the left, and even the "data driven centrists" want higher taxes. 

 

“So long as the gap is smaller, they’d rather have the poor poorer.”

 

[Yellowtail]

1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:

All it will take is the Trump billionaire tax cuts to expire next year. I doubt any Congress will extend them.

Do you have any idea what taxes Trump cut?

 

I think not. I bet you know nothing about it, you just regurgitate a leftist talking point, and will post a link to somthing you haven't read or read and did not understand. 

 

“So long as the gap is smaller, they’d rather have the poor poorer.”

 

 

[morrobay]

39 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I would not bet on it. 

And you are also betting against Trump?https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/01/trump-biden-latino-voters-poll

[Yellowtail]

Just now, morrobay said:

And you are also betting against Trump?https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/01/trump-biden-latino-voters-poll

I don't see Trump winning. 

 

What does your link say about it? Did you read it? 

[morrobay]

42 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I would not bet on it. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/09/19/trump-poll-support-black-hispanic/

[Yellowtail]

4 minutes ago, morrobay said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/09/19/trump-poll-support-black-hispanic/

I don't see Trump winning. 

 

What does your link say about it? Did you read it? 

[morrobay]

9 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I don't see Trump winning. 

 

What does your link say about it? Did you read it? 

If you read this then I don't have to spell it out for youhttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/07/black-hispanic-voters-democrat-republican-biden

[Robert Paulson]

13 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Not all Trump voters are maga.

I would say if you meet an American fascist, it's very probable they are maga, unless Trump isn't enough of a Nazi for their tastes.

So I am genuinely curious. Are you happy with the Biden administration? I know you were pushing hard for him. It seems like one of those careful what you wish for situations but I don’t mean to put words in your mouth. 

[Jingthing]

41 minutes ago, Robert Paulson said:

So I am genuinely curious. Are you happy with the Biden administration? I know you were pushing hard for him. It seems like one of those careful what you wish for situations but I don’t mean to put words in your mouth. 

You're neither genuine nor curious. 

[thaibeachlovers]

On 2/5/2024 at 2:58 AM, Danderman123 said:

Please provide a link showing that people who supported Biden on January 6 participated in the insurrection. 

 

If you cannot, please delete your post, don't just run away.

Can I assume then, that the next time I ask you to provide a link, having not done so as required, you will provide a link, instead of just ignoring me?

 

BTW, do try and get it right. We can't delete posts once the time to edit them has passed.

[Berkshire]

1 hour ago, Robert Paulson said:

So I am genuinely curious. Are you happy with the Biden administration? I know you were pushing hard for him. It seems like one of those careful what you wish for situations but I don’t mean to put words in your mouth. 

America made the right choice with President Biden.  It would have been a disaster both domestically and internationally if Trump had won reelection.  Thank God Trump will never be POTUS again.

[dhupverg]

10 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

America made the right choice with President Biden.  It would have been a disaster both domestically and internationally if Trump had won reelection.  Thank God Trump will never be POTUS again.

Just curious, do the people really like Biden, or is it more of "anyone but Trump"?  From what I read in various polls, it's more to do with "anyone but Trump" instead of " we love Joe Biden".  Surely this can't be true, Biden is a mental giant and physical specimen.

[xylophone]

10 minutes ago, dhupverg said:

Just curious, do the people really like Biden, or is it more of "anyone but Trump"?  From what I read in various polls, it's more to do with "anyone but Trump" instead of " we love Joe Biden".  Surely this can't be true, Biden is a mental giant and physical specimen.

I will try and help you out here, whilst people may not "love Joe Biden", the other option is an absolute disaster. What is there to like about Trump, who is a compulsive liar, a convicted thief, stealing from a charity, a "rapist", someone who has ripped off the average American working man with his bankruptcies, possibly endangering America safety and security by the stealing of classified documents and a man who pays for his hookers out of campaign funds – – and plenty more to add to this but I'm sure you get the picture.

 

Oh, and one more thing, he is as dumb as a bag of rocks.

[heybruce]

5 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

 

Another weak dodge. 

 

You support Biden's plan to tax the rich and post a link. You claim to understand the plan, yet you:

1. Can't define rich in the context of the plan.

2. Can't say what taxes he wants to raise, and or by how much.

3. Explain how raising taxes will reduce the gap. 

 

Typical

 

At least you are backing away from your first request.  You initially posted "Define rich." and then argued that the definition is not subjective, which it clearly is.

 

Rich as defined in Biden's tax plan are those people people earning at least $100 million a year.  You'd know that if you'd read the short, easy to understand link I provided instead of constantly asking me to summarize it for you.

 

I won't re-answer the second and third.  They were answered in sufficient detail before.  Instead of addressing my answers you are simple repeating the questions.  In other words, you are trolling.

[heybruce]

4 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Everyone on the left, and even the "data driven centrists" want higher taxes. 

 

“So long as the gap is smaller, they’d rather have the poor poorer.”

 

Initially you asked how taxing the rich would reduce the disparity.  I explained the obvious immediate cause in simple terms.  You rejected the explanation without disputing it.

 

Now you are asking how taxing the rich can improve the economics for the poor.  Additional money can do so in many ways:  Universal healthcare so the poor and middle class aren't bankrupted by medical bills, earlier childhood education and nutrition programs so children are better prepared for later education and better jobs, daycare so more women and single parents can work, etc.  The list is a long one.

[Yellowtail]

3 hours ago, morrobay said:

If you read this then I don't have to spell it out for youhttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/07/black-hispanic-voters-democrat-republican-biden

So, you didn't read it. A lot of that going around. 

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Can I assume then, that the next time I ask you to provide a link, having not done so as required, you will provide a link, instead of just ignoring me?

 

BTW, do try and get it right. We can't delete posts once the time to edit them has passed.

Summary:  You can't support your clam with a link.

[Yellowtail]

8 minutes ago, heybruce said:

At least you are backing away from your first request.  You initially posted "Define rich." and then argued that the definition is not subjective, which it clearly is.

Still lying I see. that all you have. 

8 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Rich as defined in Biden's tax plan are those people people earning at least $100 million a year.  You'd know that if you'd read the short, easy to understand link I provided instead of constantly asking me to summarize it for you.

I read it, and it looked like a lot more people than that would be taxed. 

8 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I won't re-answer the second and third.  They were answered in sufficient detail before.  Instead of addressing my answers you are simple repeating the questions.  In other words, you are trolling.

You couldn't answer them the first time, and you still can't, but pretend you did. 

 

Typical. 

 

[morrobay]

11 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So, you didn't read it. A lot of that going around. 

More one liner nonsense. Are you a stealth democrat ?? Because you seem to be in denial : Hispanics and Blacks are increasingly supporting Trump. So your bets that Trump cannot get elected are contrary to facts. At this point you are on the wrong side of the fence in my book

 

 

 

[Yellowtail]

2 minutes ago, morrobay said:

More one liner nonsense. Are you a stealth democrat ?? Because you seem to be in denial : Hispanics and Blacks are increasingly supporting Trump.

I don't think I ever said they were not. As I remember, I responded to a thread that said a few things, and my response was that I would not bet on it. 

2 minutes ago, morrobay said:

So your bets that Trump cannot get elected are contrary to facts. At this point you are on the wrong side of the fence in my book

I never said Trump could not win. I would like to see him win, but I do not see it. Believe me, I hope I am wrong. 

 

Generally, I do not bother reading links people do not bother to explain, because what usually happens, is that they google-up a headline, and pretend it supports their argument, but it almost never does. Then when you call them on it, they lie and say it did, and or post another link to a headline they google-up. 

[heybruce]

36 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Still lying I see. that all you have. 

I read it, and it looked like a lot more people than that would be taxed. 

You couldn't answer them the first time, and you still can't, but pretend you did. 

 

Typical. 

 

Still trolling.  I'll keep this short and simple:  Identify my lie.

[heybruce]

5 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I don't think I ever said they were not. As I remember, I responded to a thread that said a few things, and my response was that I would not bet on it. 

I never said Trump could not win. I would like to see him win, but I do not see it. Believe me, I hope I am wrong. 

 

Generally, I do not bother reading links people do not bother to explain, because what usually happens, is that they google-up a headline, and pretend it supports their argument, but it almost never does. Then when you call them on it, they lie and say it did, and or post another link to a headline they google-up. 

News flash:  Some of us read the links that we post, and even read the links of posts we reply to.  The last part can be fun, I sometimes find links posted in support of a position actually decisively undermine it. 

 

Since you don't read unless things are made very short and simple and put right in front of you:  Biden's two key tax proposals are a minimum 20% tax on the very rich, $100 million or more, and a tax increase on share buybacks.  My biggest reservation about it is the same reservation I have about all adjustments to the tax system; I don't think tweaking a ridiculously complicated system is good enough, I think it needs a massive overhaul.  However that is off-topic.

 

You may resume your trolling.

[Yellowtail]

17 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Still trolling.  I'll keep this short and simple:  Identify my lie.

I never argued that the definition of rich is not subjective. You made that up. 

 

I said it was not subjective in the context of the discussion, which you later proved by providing a number. 

 

 

 

 

[Yellowtail]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

Initially you asked how taxing the rich would reduce the disparity.  I explained the obvious immediate cause in simple terms.  You rejected the explanation without disputing it.

No, you did not explain it, and I said as much at the time. 

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

Now you are asking how taxing the rich can improve the economics for the poor.  Additional money can do so in many ways:  Universal healthcare so the poor and middle class aren't bankrupted by medical bills, earlier childhood education and nutrition programs so children are better prepared for later education and better jobs, daycare so more women and single parents can work, etc.  The list is a long one.

You seem to think the numbers are all constant, and that it's a zero-sum game. Typical one stage thinking. 

 

Yes, if only the left had more money, it would be utopia. 

 

[heybruce]

9 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I never argued that the definition of rich is not subjective. You made that up. 

 

I said it was not subjective in the context of the discussion, which you later proved by providing a number.

You challenged me to "Define rich."  That's it.  No mention of context, so I replied that it is subjective, which it is.  When asked to define rich within the context of Biden's proposed tax increases I answered, because that was an answerable question.

 

Lesson for you:  Ask sensible questions.