Republicans for Biden

[Boilermaker03]

You must have missed this story among all the tumult... Report published in WAPO on Oct 24,2019

"Oct. 24, 2019, at 1:44 p.m. EDT
After an Ebola epidemic devastated West Africa in 2014, many countries took steps to boost their preparedness. But even as the risk of such outbreaks increases, no country — the United States included — is fully prepared to respond to a deliberate or accidental threat with the potential to wipe out humanity, according to a report assessing the efforts of 195 countries.

The report, released Thursday, is the first comprehensive assessment of global health capabilities, giving countries an overall score based on several measures. Unlike other ratings, the Global Health Security Index benchmarks health security in the context of tools critical to fighting outbreaks, such as robust health systems, adherence to global norms, and political and security risks, including public confidence in government.

The United States does well in five of six preparedness categories but ranks 19th — after Australia, Canada, Singapore and more than a half-dozen European countries — in an assessment of overall risk and vulnerability to biological threats. The factors driving down the U.S. score include the risks of social unrest and terrorism and low public confidence in the government. Liechtenstein ranked No. 1 on this measure."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/heal...luded-is-fully-prepared-pandemic-report-says/

The point that TheCainer is making is the respective responses from Trump and Biden the next day- Oct 25,2019...

Biden obviously READ the WAPO article and felt it warranted attention...Here's Biden's tweet from Oct 25...

View embedded media

Trump, on the other hand, decided to tweet about his displeasure with the removal of the home button on the iPhone

View embedded media

Notice how Trump tweeted 3 hrs AFTER Biden and even then still didn't feel that responding to the WAPO article might be relevant?

Which one seemed to have more attentiveness to the actual JOB of POTUS?... Still determined to push that Trump more intelligent than Biden narrative?... Good luck...

What?? I never said Trump was more intelligent. In fact, there's nothing here to come to any kind of conclusion that one is more intelligent than the other.

Saying someone saw this coming and saying they believe we aren't prepared aren't exactly the same thing. BTW, the link you gave to the article must have been removed because it's not there so makes it hard to read and comment.

 

[70boiler]

Add Colin Powell to the list...

 

[tsmatthias]

You do realize Wolf gave an "essential" exemption to the business he had a large stake in (literally owned) prior to his election but shut other similar businesses down as not essential. Nothing hypocritical about that...

But, you're not going to post the source? Or because once you read it, it says nothing damning?
Wolf has had absolutely no ties to that business since 2015 and no one in his family still works there. York county, location of the business, rules that the company is essential because they make building supplies.
Whole lot of nothing there dude.
Wolf still has a 64% approval rating as of May 20th, fyi.

 

[purduepat1969]

But, you're not going to post the source? Or because once you read it, it says nothing damning?
Wolf has had absolutely no ties to that business since 2015 and no one in his family still works there. York county, location of the business, rules that the company is essential because they make building supplies.
Whole lot of nothing there dude.
Wolf still has a 64% approval rating as of May 20th, fyi.

The company I used to work for is a building materials manufacturer. Their location in PA was shut down, while Wolf Distributing was not. There is clearly some conflict of interest regardless of whether he owns the business or not. He may have sold off his share, but there are still ties.

 

[tsmatthias]

The company I used to work for is a building materials manufacturer. Their location in PA was shut down, while Wolf Distributing was not. There is clearly some conflict of interest regardless of whether he owns the business or not. He may have sold off his share, but there are still ties.

Proof that he still has ties to the company other than the name Wolf (family name since 1860's)? There is none whatsoever. Please provide a legit source. I have a couple that contradict exactly what you say.

 

[70boiler]

I don't know if he is a Republican or Democrat but I do know this is the VIEW OF PRESIDENT TRUMP of an 88 year old retired USMC Colonel who was the Marine One pilot for JFK and LBJ

 

[70boiler]

Who cares if he has financial ties. He has political ties to that company who helped fund his election. He was literally asking executives from Wolf suppliers to donate to his election. Are you that dense?

Assuming for the sake of argument such relationships exist, are you as outraged and vocal concerning the Trump organization's relationship to the White House?

 

[tsmatthias]

Who cares if he has financial ties. He has political ties to that company who helped fund his election. He was literally asking executives from Wolf suppliers to donate to his election. Are you that dense?

So, no actual proof. Ok. Still waiting for a legit source.

 

[tsmatthias]

Dude, there is no "journalistic" source on this. But it happened. Take it for what you want.

Ah, ok. Another baseless conspiracy theory from the Right.
You burn any 5G towers down lately? Maybe Q-anon told you that Wolf was bad? Are you a flat-earther too?

 

[purduepat1969]

Ah, ok. Another baseless conspiracy theory from the Right.
You burn any 5G towers down lately? Maybe Q-anon told you that Wolf was bad? Are you a flat-earther too?

Yes. I forgot I should follow this narrative.

Republicans = Always bad and right wing conspiracists
Democrats = Always good and salt of the earth

There, I'm drinking your Koolaid now...

 

[SDBoiler1]

Ah, ok. Another baseless conspiracy theory from the Right.
You burn any 5G towers down lately? Maybe Q-anon told you that Wolf was bad? Are you a flat-earther too?

Do you just throw $hit out there to see what sticks on the wall? You're the one seeming to expound in conspiracy theories. Q-Anon. LMAO.

But I bet by your way of thinking Antifa is a great organization and standing up for "the little guy"?

 

[tsmatthias]

Yes. I forgot I should follow this narrative.

Republicans = Always bad and right wing conspiracists
Democrats = Always good and salt of the earth

There, I'm drinking your Koolaid now...

Still waiting on your source. Seems like a juicy story that someone would certainly write about.

 

[70boiler]

The company I used to work for is a building materials manufacturer. Their location in PA was shut down, while Wolf Distributing was not. There is clearly some conflict of interest regardless of whether he owns the business or not. He may have sold off his share, but there are still ties.

Who cares if he has financial ties. He has political ties to that company who helped fund his election. He was literally asking executives from Wolf suppliers to donate to his election. Are you that dense?

Assuming for the sake of argument such relationships exist, are you as outraged and vocal concerning the Trump organization's relationship to the White House?

I'm just telling you he isn't squeaky clean like you want to believe. Again, take it for what you will...

I take this series to mean that you don't want to answer my question.
And my normal inference from the series also would be that you choose to look at the situations only through your partisan lens.
You are certainly free to view it as you wish.

 

[indy35]

Do you just throw $hit out there to see what sticks on the wall? You're the one seeming to expound in conspiracy theories. Q-Anon. LMAO.

But I bet by your way of thinking Antifa is a great organization and standing up for "the little guy"?

Lol, count on SD to come in and completely be a fool. Pat was the one throwing out claims with no proof.

 

[TMan92]

Add Colin Powell to the list...

View embedded media

The one of the many things I appreciate about military leadership is their knowledge of history. They understand the current threat of this President.

And this guy is the one that disrespects our military.

 

[TMan92]

 

[MJ-79Boiler]

The one of the many things I appreciate about military leadership is their knowledge of history. They understand the current threat of this President.

And this guy is the one that disrespects our military.

View embedded media

And . . their loyalty to their fellow soldiers. With every tweet, he loses more votes. The on-board response to the USS Roosevelt Captain being relieved of command says it all !

 

[cosmickid]

What?? I never said Trump was more intelligent. In fact, there's nothing here to come to any kind of conclusion that one is more intelligent than the other.

Saying someone saw this coming and saying they believe we aren't prepared aren't exactly the same thing. BTW, the link you gave to the article must have been removed because it's not there so makes it hard to read and comment.

Thought you were one of the "Biden mentally unfit" crowd. My apologies...

Also sorry about the broken link. Here is the story Biden was responding to on Oct 25,2019...

"After an Ebola epidemic devastated West Africa in 2014, many countries took steps to boost their preparedness. But even as the risk of such outbreaks increases, no country — the United States included — is fully prepared to respond to a deliberate or accidental threat with the potential to wipe out humanity, according to a report assessing the efforts of 195 countries.

The report, released Thursday, is the first comprehensive assessment of global health capabilities, giving countries an overall score based on several measures. Unlike other ratings, the Global Health Security Index benchmarks health security in the context of tools critical to fighting outbreaks, such as robust health systems, adherence to global norms, and political and security risks, including public confidence in the government.

The United States does well in five of six preparedness categories but ranks 19th — after Australia, Canada, Singapore and more than a half-dozen European countries — in an assessment of overall risk and vulnerability to biological threats. The factors driving down the U.S. score include the risks of social unrest and terrorism and low public confidence in government. Liechtenstein ranked No. 1 on this measure."


https://www.washingtonpost.com/heal...luded-is-fully-prepared-pandemic-report-says/

 

[Bethboilerfan]

TMan92: Thank you for posting the link. The current Republican Party would be unrecognizable to Republicans like Eisenhower.

 

[SDBoiler1]

TMan92: Thank you for posting the link. The current Republican Party would be unrecognizable to Republicans like Eisenhower.

The current D party would be unrecognizable to Democrats like JFK. So?

 

[indy35]

The current D party would be unrecognizable to Democrats like JFK. So?

If you did any reading about JFK at all, you’d realize that is a false.

 

[Fansince72]

The current D party would be unrecognizable to Democrats like JFK. So?

So us people in the middle have to decide which side to vote for , the idiots on the right or the idiots on the left?

 

[SDBoiler1]

So us people in the middle have to decide which side to vote for , the idiots on the right or the idiots on the left?

Unfortunately, that is the current state of affairs.

 

[SDBoiler1]

If you did any reading about JFK at all, you’d realize that is a false.

Really? Kennedy would be pro-abortion, pro-illegal immigration and open borders, pro-unfettered free trade (which benefits China and hurts American workers), pro-LTGBQXXX…..WTF planet do you live on? Kennedy was fairly moderate in his views. You don't know what you're talking about.

 

[indy35]

Really? Kennedy would be pro-abortion, pro-illegal immigration and open borders, pro-unfettered free trade (which benefits China and hurts American workers), pro-LTGBQXXX…..WTF planet do you live on? Kennedy was fairly moderate in his views. You don't know what you're talking about.

See, you're believing in boogeymen instead of reality.

 

[70boiler]

Really? Kennedy would be pro-abortion, pro-illegal immigration and open borders, pro-unfettered free trade (which benefits China and hurts American workers), pro-LTGBQXXX…..WTF planet do you live on? Kennedy was fairly moderate in his views. You don't know what you're talking about.

Perhaps he doesn't nor do I, but that being said, I think that it's very reasonable to conclude that were JFK alive today, his positions would have evolved, as his brothers, Bobby and Edward, did to the left. Imho, he would be generally aligned with the rest of his currently living family.
What would make you think that he would be different than they, apart from wishful thinking and creating a talking point?

 

[SDBoiler1]

Perhaps he doesn't nor do I, but that being said, I think that it's very reasonable to conclude that were JFK alive today, his positions would have evolved, as his brothers, Bobby and Edward, did to the left. Imho, he would be generally aligned with the rest of his currently living family.
What would make you think that he would be different than they, apart from wishful thinking and creating a talking point?

You shouldn't deal in hypotheticals when talking about a man who has been dead for nearly 50 years. You have no idea how his stances would have changed (if at all) and neither do I. All you know is what policies he espoused when he was alive. And he was much more moderate than you make him out to be.

 

[70boiler]

You shouldn't deal in hypotheticals when talking about a man who has been dead for nearly 50 years. You have no idea how his stances would have changed (if at all) and neither do I. All you know is what policies he espoused when he was alive. And he was much more moderate than you make him out to be.

That's a strange post given what led to it.
Perhaps we should review how this unfolded

Really? Kennedy would be pro-abortion, pro-illegal immigration and open borders, pro-unfettered free trade (which benefits China and hurts American workers), pro-LTGBQXXX…..WTF planet do you live on? Kennedy was fairly moderate in his views. You don't know what you're talking about.

Perhaps he doesn't nor do I, but that being said, I think that it's very reasonable to conclude that were JFK alive today, his positions would have evolved, as his brothers, Bobby and Edward, did to the left. Imho, he would be generally aligned with the rest of his currently living family.
What would make you think that he would be different than they, apart from wishful thinking and creating a talking point?

 

[kescwi]

You shouldn't deal in hypotheticals when talking about a man who has been dead for nearly 50 years. You have no idea how his stances would have changed (if at all) and neither do I. All you know is what policies he espoused when he was alive. And he was much more moderate than you make him out to be.

WTF, you deal in hypotheticals with the zealousness of a used car salesman.

 

[kescwi]

Perhaps he doesn't nor do I, but that being said, I think that it's very reasonable to conclude that were JFK alive today, his positions would have evolved, as his brothers, Bobby and Edward, did to the left. Imho, he would be generally aligned with the rest of his currently living family.
What would make you think that he would be different than they, apart from wishful thinking and creating a talking point?

Bobby Kennedy fascinates me and I do wonder if long after we are gone he doesn't get as much, or maybe more, attention from historians than JFK. The evolution from Joe McCarthy to his last year in life, at least publicly, is astounding.

Edit: It's hard to be cynical regarding Bobby's evolution/growth when you hear this unscripted speech, the only time, as I understand it, he mentions his brother during the campaign.

 

[BuilderBob6]

An IU guy but it still counts.

 

[boilersteel]

An IU guy but it still counts.

View embedded media

A die hard IU guy that wants to vote against trump? I can't be in the same camp as an IU guy! My head is burning!

 

[BuilderBob6]

 

[70boiler]

Literally lol at this ad financed by Repubs

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Really? Kennedy would be pro-abortion, pro-illegal immigration and open borders, pro-unfettered free trade (which benefits China and hurts American workers), pro-LTGBQXXX…..WTF planet do you live on? Kennedy was fairly moderate in his views. You don't know what you're talking about.

JFK was a tax-cutting defense hawk, who said, "ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." Libs don’t want to hear that.

 

[70boiler]

JFK was a tax-cutting defense hawk...

That view of his economic position is truncated, to say the least. A segment of his graduation address at Yale in June, 1962 provides far more insight into his thoughts, I would argue. Additional, examining the 1960 election debates demonstrates a far broader position than simply having a goal of tax cutting.
A segment of the Yale address and the gist of the debate remarks follow -

Yale Address 1962 -
The truth about big government is the truth about any other great activity—it is complex. Certainly it is true that size brings dangers—but it is also true that size can bring benefits. Here at Yale which has contributed so much to our national progress in science and medicine, it may be proper for me to mention one great and little noticed expansion of government which has brought strength to our whole society—the new role of our Federal Government as the major patron of research in science and in medicine. Few people realize that in 1961, in support of all university research in science and medicine, three dollars out of every four came from the Federal Government. I need hardly point out that this has taken place without undue enlargement of Government control—that American scientists remain second to none in their independence and in their individualism.

I am not suggesting that Federal expenditures cannot bring some measure of control. The whole thrust of Federal expenditures in agriculture have been related by purpose and design to control, as a means of dealing with the problems created by our farmers and our growing productivity. Each sector, my point is, of activity must be approached on its own merits and in terms of specific national needs. Generalities in regard to federal expenditures, therefore, can be misleading—each case, science, urban renewal, education, agriculture, natural resources, each case must be determined on its merits if we are to profit from our unrivaled ability to combine the strength of public and private purpose.

Next, let us turn to the problem of our fiscal policy. Here the myths are legion and the truth hard to find. But let me take as a prime example the problem of the Federal budget. We persist in measuring our federal fiscal integrity today by the conventional or administrative budget—with results which would be regarded as absurd in any business firm—in any country of Europe—or in any careful assessment of the reality of our national finances. The administrative budget has sound administrative uses. But for wider purposes it is less helpful. It omits our special trust funds and the effect that they have on our economy; it neglects changes in assets or inventories. It cannot tell a loan from a straight expenditure—and worst of all it cannot distinguish between operating expenditures and long term investments.

This budget, in relation to the great problems of Federal fiscal policy which are basic to our economy in 1962, is not simply irrelevant; it can be actively misleading. And yet there is a mythology that measures all of our national soundness or unsoundness on the single simple basis of this same annual administrative budget. If our Federal budget is to serve not the debate but the country, we must and will find ways of clarifying this area of discourse.

Still in the area of fiscal policy, let me say a word about deficits. The myth persists that Federal deficits create inflation and budget surpluses prevent it. Yet sizeable budget surpluses after the war did not prevent inflation, and persistent deficits for the last several years have not upset our basic price stability. Obviously deficits are sometimes dangerous—and so are surpluses. But honest assessment plainly requires a more sophisticated view than the old and automatic cliché that deficits automatically bring inflation.

There are myths also about our public debt. It is widely supposed that this debt is growing at a dangerously rapid rate. In fact, both the debt per person and the debt as a proportion of our gross national product have declined sharply since the Second World War. In absolute terms the national debt since the end of World War II has increased only 8 percent, while private debt was increasing 305 percent, and the debts of State and local governments—on whom people frequently suggest we should place additional burdens—the debts of State and local governments have increased 378 percent. Moreover, debts, public and private, are neither good nor bad, in and of themselves. Borrowing can lead to over-extension and collapse—but it can also lead to expansion and strength. There is no single, simple slogan in this field that we can trust.

1st Debate September 26, 1960 -
- Kennedy does not advocate reducing the federal debt. He explains how he would make welfare and education programs fiscally sound. Nixon states that Kennedy's programs will raise taxes or unbalance the budget.
2nd Debate October 7, 1960 -
- On unemployment Kennedy points out that area redevelopment bills he co-authored were vetoed in 1955. He calls for including medical aid in social security, increasing surplus food distribution, and stimulating the economy.
- Kennedy argues that a tax increase in 1961 would slow the economy, and cites programs that would strengthen the nation. He believes Americans will have to make sacrifices to maintain freedom.
3rd Debate October 13, 1960
- Kennedy defends the cost of his agricultural program and cites the rejection of programs that Nixon supports.
- Kennedy wants to thoroughly examine the depletion allowances of oil and other minerals and cut them if necessary. Nixon favors the present oil depletion allowance.

 

[BuilderBob6]

 

[TMan92]

View embedded media

RINO Y'all

 

[70boiler]

We can now add Carly Fiorina to the list, it seems.

 

[Bethboilerfan]

The article reminded me of the attacks on her by Trump. Those attacks may return to haunt him in the next few months as more and more prominent Republicans speak out.