Elizabeth Warren

[bonefish1]

Well, certainly in his (Trump's) own mind...
but not so much if we look toward results of his Presidential negotiations to date beginning with any legislative agenda when Repubs held both houses of Congress, trade negotiations, Iran negotiations, North Korea negotiations, et al, and obviously not in Mr. Hansen's opinion.

It's the economy......Record low unemployment. A growing stock market. More jobs than job candidates. Lower taxes. Putting American industries first. Leveling the playing field with our international trading partners.
Trump has the US in a position of power when it comes to economic negotiations. He's doing just fine.

 

[bonefish1]

Just a quick FYI reminder - Obama was last President in early January, 2017.

The point is, Purdue1 is whining that Trump didn't denounce David Duke (but actually, he did) while conveniently forgetting that his hero Obama buddied up with one of the biggest racist, anti-semites in the country.
Did someone say "Double standard"?

 

[Fansince72]

forgetting that his hero Obama buddied up with one of the biggest racist, anti-semites in the

Yea but the topic is Elizabeth Warren, not Obama. She doesn't have the baggage that Trump and Hillary has.

 

[PurdueFan1]

The second to last paragraph in there overrides everything else in my opinion because he said it AS THE PRESIDENT.

Why do white supremacists fawn over him and not prior presidents? Gnaw on that one a bit.

When all else fails, play the race card. Well done.

I’m not playing it. Trump is. By saying “send them back” about four Congresswomen who are women of color; by allowing the crowd at a rally to scream it and not stop them; by the fine people on both sides after the Charlottesville mess.

You can claim all you want that race doesn’t play a factor with him and his base and I would tell you that you may want to check your white privilege at the door.

 

[glidresquirrel]

Yea but the topic is Elizabeth Warren, not Obama. She doesn't have the baggage that Trump and Hillary has.

Native Americans travel light

 

[bonefish1]

Yea but the topic is Elizabeth Warren, not Obama. She doesn't have the baggage that Trump and Hillary has.

Well...when you're running your campaign on raising taxes, that's never a good platform to stand on.

 

[PurdueFan1]

Yea but the topic is Elizabeth Warren, not Obama. She doesn't have the baggage that Trump and Hillary has.

Well...when you're running your campaign on raising taxes, that's never a good platform to stand on.

But she’s not. She’s asking for people who make a lot of money to pay a proportionate amount. That’s not the same thing at all.

 

[glidresquirrel]

But she’s not. She’s asking for people who make a lot of money to pay a proportionate amount. That’s not the same thing at all.

So she is asking for donations then?

 

[bonefish1]

I’m not playing it. Trump is. By saying “send them back” about four Congresswomen who are women of color; by allowing the crowd at a rally to scream it and not stop them; by the fine people on both sides after the Charlottesville mess.

You can claim all you want that race doesn’t play a factor with him and his base and I would tell you that you may want to check your white privilege at the door.

Not only am I white and male, I'm also straight, married, Catholic, conservative (fiscally, somewhat socially liberal) white collar, drive an SUV, not quite a 1%er.
And, I don't apologize for any of it.
And as they say in the Reese's commercials "Not sorry"

 

[bonefish1]

But she’s not. She’s asking for people who make a lot of money to pay a proportionate amount. That’s not the same thing at all.

Oh...that's right...the whole "fair share" argument?
You mean penalizing people for being successful?
You mean incentivizing people with a lot of money to find ways to shelter it from the govt?

Do you realize:

• The top 1 percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes (37.3 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (30.5 percent).

Now who's paying their fair share?

 

[PurdueFan1]

But she’s not. She’s asking for people who make a lot of money to pay a proportionate amount. That’s not the same thing at all.

So she is asking for donations then?

You said her campaign is based on raising taxes. That would imply she wants everyone to pay more. Again, not true.

 

[glidresquirrel]

You said her campaign is based on raising taxes. That would imply she wants everyone to pay more. Again, not true.

I never said that at all but you said she isn't saying she will raise taxes . Reading is fundamental!

 

[bonefish1]

You said her campaign is based on raising taxes. That would imply she wants everyone to pay more. Again, not true.

Do you want to pay more or less in taxes?
Do you believe the govt can better spend your money than you can?

 

[PurdueFan1]

I’m not playing it. Trump is. By saying “send them back” about four Congresswomen who are women of color; by allowing the crowd at a rally to scream it and not stop them; by the fine people on both sides after the Charlottesville mess.

You can claim all you want that race doesn’t play a factor with him and his base and I would tell you that you may want to check your white privilege at the door.

Not only am I white and male, I'm also straight, married, Catholic, conservative (fiscally, somewhat socially liberal) white collar, drive an SUV, not quite a 1%er.
And, I don't apologize for any of it.
And as they say in the Reese's commercials "Not sorry"

No one is asking for you to apologize for it. Not everyone is in your same lane though, which is where you seem to struggle and don’t have a right to hold yourself higher than anyone else.

 

[PurdueFan1]

But she’s not. She’s asking for people who make a lot of money to pay a proportionate amount. That’s not the same thing at all.

Oh...that's right...the whole "fair share" argument?
You mean penalizing people for being successful?
You mean incentivizing people with a lot of money to find ways to shelter it from the govt?

Do you realize:

• The top 1 percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes (37.3 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (30.5 percent).

Now who's paying their fair share?

How is it penalizing someone for having them pay a proportionate share of their earnings? Why should a middle class family pay far more of a percentage of their income in taxes than someone who makes 100 times what they do?

Would i like less intervention by the government? Of course. But have you seen what corporations are doing with their savings? They are just hoarding the cash and funneling it to the shareholders. So you can’t count on them to distribute the wealth either.

 

[glidresquirrel]

No one is asking for you to apologize for it. Not everyone is in your same lane though, which is where you seem to struggle and don’t have a right to hold yourself higher than anyone else.

What? Do you really even read what you and your posse post demeaning everyone that doesnt agree with you? I have never seen Bonefish hold himself higher than others. I don't know him but have never seen posts telling people that don't agree they are 8th grade educated living in shacks .

 

[PurdueFan1]

You said her campaign is based on raising taxes. That would imply she wants everyone to pay more. Again, not true.

I never said that at all but you said she isn't saying she will raise taxes . Reading is fundamental!

You literally said she’s running her campaign on raising taxes. Am I supposed to interpret that a different way?

 

[PurdueFan1]

No one is asking for you to apologize for it. Not everyone is in your same lane though, which is where you seem to struggle and don’t have a right to hold yourself higher than anyone else.

What? Do you really even read what you and your posse post demeaning everyone that doesnt agree with you? I have never seen Bonefish hold himself higher than others. I don't know him but have never seen posts telling people that don't agree they are 8th grade educated living in shacks .

I’m sure he appreciates your adamant defense of his privileged whiteness.

 

[glidresquirrel]

How is it penalizing someone for having them pay a proportionate share of their earnings? Why should a middle class family pay far more of a percentage of their income in taxes than someone who makes 100 times what they do?

Would i like less intervention by the government? Of course. But have you seen what corporations are doing with their savings? They are just hoarding the cash and funneling it to the shareholders. So you can’t count on them to distribute the wealth either.

Where do you come up with this? The whole their share? How much more should they pay? A large share of people that make more money provide jobs for the very people you are talking about. If there is no incentive what is the point? Socialism! Good luck with that one.

 

[bonefish1]

No one is asking for you to apologize for it. Not everyone is in your same lane though, which is where you seem to struggle and don’t have a right to hold yourself higher than anyone else.

Yeh, we're all different, that's what's so great.
But, in today's society of blaming your problems on someone else, the white male is the easy target.
You're a white male also, correct? Do we have the same privilege?

 

[glidresquirrel]

You literally said she’s running her campaign on raising taxes. Am I supposed to interpret that a different way?

Imay have quoted a post I didn't '' literally say that''

 

[glidresquirrel]

I’m sure he appreciates your adamant defense of his privileged whiteness.

What are you talking about? You sound very bigoted or maybe you are the one living in the shack your buddy W talks about. How do you know anything about him and how he made his vast wealth that you assume?

 

[PurdueFan1]

How is it penalizing someone for having them pay a proportionate share of their earnings? Why should a middle class family pay far more of a percentage of their income in taxes than someone who makes 100 times what they do?

Would i like less intervention by the government? Of course. But have you seen what corporations are doing with their savings? They are just hoarding the cash and funneling it to the shareholders. So you can’t count on them to distribute the wealth either.

Where do you come up with this? The whole their share? How much more should they pay? A large share of people that make more money provide jobs for the very people you are talking about. If there is no incentive what is the point? Socialism! Good luck with that one.

They have plenty of incentive already but corporate greed takes over and it all goes back to the shareholder. You’re defending corporate greed because you don’t like the person speaking out against it. Whatever.

 

[PurdueFan1]

You literally said she’s running her campaign on raising taxes. Am I supposed to interpret that a different way?

Imay have quoted a post I didn't '' literally say that''

Oh sorry, it was bone. You pretty much spout the same nonsense so I can’t tell the difference.

 

[glidresquirrel]

They have plenty of incentive already but corporate greed takes over and it all goes back to the shareholder. You’re defending corporate greed because you don’t like the person speaking out against it. Whatever.

What? you infer way too much of whatever your own problems are into what others say. Have you tried starting a corporation if that even applies to Bonefish? You are projecting things on people that you have no idea of what you speak about. How about people that try and start a business and provide employment and lose their ass?

 

[bonefish1]

How is it penalizing someone for having them pay a proportionate share of their earnings? Why should a middle class family pay far more of a percentage of their income in taxes than someone who makes 100 times what they do?

Would i like less intervention by the government? Of course. But have you seen what corporations are doing with their savings? They are just hoarding the cash and funneling it to the shareholders. So you can’t count on them to distribute the wealth either.

I don't believe in socialist ideas like wealth redistribution.
Again,if I worked my as$ off, took risk, suffered, saved, etc and am now doing very well financially, why should I be punished by having more of my very hard earned money taken away?
How is that fair?
Most middle class families (those with pensions, 401Ks, any type of investment account, etc), benefit from corporations being successful and funneling that money to shareholders.

 

[bonefish1]

They have plenty of incentive already but corporate greed takes over and it all goes back to the shareholder. You’re defending corporate greed because you don’t like the person speaking out against it. Whatever.

Do you have a pension? 401K? IRA? any other investment vehicles?
Do you know how those accounts grow and improve YOUR financial position? If so, I think you'd have a different opinion on that evil corporate greed.

 

[doubleyous]

Skill set? You're talking about one of the greatest negotiators in the world. A businessman, not a politician. If ANYONE has the skill set and experience to fix things with China, it's Trump, not a career politician who's never had to actually work in the economy.

DJT ?? One of the greatest SELF-PROCLAIMED negotiators.
Success in negotiating hotel, office building and resort "deals" hardly classifies one as an expert in international geo-political & military matters.

 

[glidresquirrel]

One of your " All-Time", bone..................
A "Spititual " advisor ??
100% ridiculous accusation.

How is Al Sharpton doing on his taxes, he was the highest numbered visitor to Obama's Whitehouse as I recall.

 

[doubleyous]

The point is, Purdue1 is whining that Trump didn't denounce David Duke (but actually, he did) while conveniently forgetting that his hero Obama buddied up with one of the biggest racist, anti-semites in the country.
Did someone say "Double standard"?

Obama "buddied up " with Farrakhan like you "buddy up" with political truth.
You might as well bust out some Kenya/Islam muck, while you're at it.

 

[bonefish1]

DJT ?? One of the greatest SELF-PROCLAIMED negotiators.
Success in negotiating hotel, office building and resort "deals" hardly classifies one as an expert in international geo-political & military matters.

What are Warrens qualifications in those matters? What has she negotiated successfully?
You should read "Art of the Deal". It's interesting.

 

[doubleyous]

How is Al Sharpton doing on his taxes, he was the highest numbered visitor to Obama's Whitehouse as I recall.

Probably a whole lot better than Trump's former campaign manager, foreign affairs adviser, and personal lawyer (among others) who'll be SPENDING TIME IN PRISON !!

 

[bonefish1]

One of your " All-Time", bone..................
A "Spititual " advisor ??
100% ridiculous accusation.

Ok, fair enough. How about Obama and Rev. Jeremiah Wright?

 

[glidresquirrel]

Probably a whole lot better than Trump's former campaign manager, foreign affairs adviser, and personal lawyer (among others) who'll be SPENDING TIME IN PRISON !!

Why is Sharpton not in prison? He owes like 4 million and doesn't pay. If he weren't a Dem he would already be in prison between Hillary and Obamas cells so they couldn't fight with each other over who got them there.

 

[glidresquirrel]

Ok, fair enough. How about Obama and Rev. Jeremiah Wright?

Man just having to look at that smarmy face............you had to do it but ouch!

 

[bonefish1]

What were Trump's qualifications in PUBLIC LIFE to become president ??
Next.

You see, that's the beauty of Trump. He wasn't a politician. He doesn't act like a politician. He's different. That's why we love him.
He doesn't make empty promises during the campaign just to pander to the voters.
He's done what he said he's going to do (the wall is a work in progress) unlike most politicians who just play the game.

 

[bonefish1]

Good points.
Wondering how the 60% of voting age Americans continue to overlook " the beauty of Trump", as you put it.
We'll try to look harder.

Most people are going to vote in their own best interests (most). Yes, there are an ideological few that will believe they're voting in some form for the greater good, but most people are going to vote for what impacts them the most ( hint...it starts with an E and ends with a Y).
If the E is still humming come election time next year, I'm not sure what the Dems are going to compaign on? Making the E even stronger? Doubtful.

 

[PurdueFan1]

Good points.
Wondering how the 60% of voting age Americans continue to overlook " the beauty of Trump", as you put it.
We'll try to look harder.

Most people are going to vote in their own best interests (most). Yes, there are an ideological few that will believe they're voting in some form for the greater good, but most people are going to vote for what impacts them the most ( hint...it starts with an E and ends with a Y).
If the E is still humming come election time next year, I'm not sure what the Dems are going to compaign on? Making the E even stronger? Doubtful.

It’s always about the economy, you’re right. And it’s the one thing Trump has working in his favor (and it’s a huge one to be sure).

But if the economy starts the really struggle, then where does he go? Not that I want the economy to struggle, but I am really not sure what he could bring to the table.

The democrats have to just be wary of getting sucked into the personal aspects of how Trump campaigns (a lesson I need to take to heart on here) and be firm on their platform. The other democrats who are left also need to fully back the eventual nominee. Punching down to his level won’t work.

 

[tjreese]

She, and others, potentially have a huge potential inroad to a significant segment of Trump voters if she or they can utilize the position being put forward by John Hansen, the President of the Nebraska Farmer’s Union, slamming President Trump over his escalating trade war with China, calling it a "huge unforced error." He further said he fears Trump “does not have the skill set or the experience to fix things” with China.

Not going to get pulled into a tariff discussion, whether they are ever good...sometimes good and how any of that reflects on China with anyone in this forum. I'm offering the link only as background into the market facilitation program to provide some help while this battle wages. Payment will probably be on soybean mostly since that is how China is attacking to try to get Trump to back down. For reference...can probably figure 52-62 bushel typical yields for bean. Price after margin where I am was $8.49 in the fall. Although beans were $12 a few years ago...probably safe to consider $9.70 to $10.00 reasonable numbers recently. So beans are down $1.20/ $1.50 a bushel for better understanding.

https://www.farmers.gov/sites/default/files/documents/PaymentRates.pdf

 

[BuilderBob6]

Skill set? You're talking about one of the greatest negotiators in the world. A businessman, not a politician. If ANYONE has the skill set and experience to fix things with China, it's Trump, not a career politician who's never had to actually work in the economy.

Great negotiators don't give something without getting something in return.

Trump moved the embassy and recognized Jerusalem as the capital. Seems like a great bargaining chip to get something back in Kushner's middle East peace plan. Nothing.

Trump has met with Kim three times. He gave Kim legitimacy, prestige, recognition, bargaining power. We got some supposed Korean war remains and a couple hostages.....one of which might as well have been dead when we got him.......and Trump excused Kim for it anyway. Seems like a fair trade.
Great negotiators use different methods to achieve the desired results based on the circumstances and the other party. Trump know one way........punish the other party. Whether it was lawsuits as a businessman or tariffs as president......that's what he does. See Iran and China.