Joe Biden’s really plastering the airwaves with ads. Saw another one. Did you know Trump gave tax cuts to the rich? Yep. Said it right in the ad, so it must be true.
I wonder . . . what are the qualifications to get that tax cut? My wife and I got a check earlier this Spring – $1,200 apiece – was that the tax cut for the rich? I think we also got a bigger refund last year. Maybe that was it?
I have my taxes done by HR Block. You’d think they would have mentioned if I could take advantage of a tax cut. Maybe I’m not rich enough? How rich do you have to be? If Biden is going to take away tax cuts, that means somebody is paying higher taxes. Is it going to be me?
You know, Joe, before I fill in the box next to your name, I’m going to want a few more details on which tax cuts you’re taking back. Care to be more specific?
Joe Doakes
It’s true because shut up.
1992 —“It’s the economy, stupid”
2020 — “It’s the stupid, economy”
I think investors are always rewarded when they focus on the businesses they buy and their fundamental long term value, rather than on short term sentiment moves influenced by elections. We had more or less equal number of democrat or republican presidents during the last 70-80 years. Does not matter what the president is, good businesses create value and compound it no matter the president is Nixon, Trump or Obama…
There were certainly some tax cuts thus far under Trump as well as some tax code changes that benefited some people, didn’t change anything for some, and increased taxes owed for others.
But, Trump has also been fairly free with stimulus money to off set economic damage from the trade war and tariffs and to offset effects of Covid. Those things coupled with the high unemployment that I am seeing amongst my neighbors, co-workers’ families and customers will eventually end up on our tax bills, whether we like it or not and whether we vote for it or not. I don’t think any candidate on the ballot is aptly prepared or qualified for righting this ship.
The economic forecast I’m most confident about is that the Republicans’ taste for stimulus for an ailing economy is going to suddenly shift after the election if Biden is elected.
Just heard Jay Nordlinger interview #nevertrumper Bret Stephens on a podcast. Nordlinger brought up the topic of the Hunter Biden emails, and Stephens went on for some time how Hunter Biden was clearly corrupt, but that we really shouldn’t judge Joe Biden by Hunter Biden’s behavior, and more than we would GW Bush by the behavior of ne’er-do-well Neil Bush.
But, if we believe Hunter Biden’s uncovered emails, Hunter was kicking back money to ‘Pops.’ This is grade-A corruption, this is what the emails allege. Neil Bush was never connected at the hip with GW Bush the way Hunter Biden is connected to Joe Biden.
#nevertrumpers always seem to be missing the point . . .
Maybe stop worrying about the Never Trumpers and start worrying about the guy actually blowing up the GOP?
Those are the #nevertrumpers, twit.
And Biden is hinting that will appoint #nevertrumpers Kasich & Flake to his cabinet in an effort to lure moderate Republicans into voting Democrat.
So within an hour of Emery’s 03:29, he was shown, once again, to be wrong.
This is getting tedious.
👆 Okay — Let’s look at recent Republican history.
Eisenhower was a Republican Internationalist, once a major wing of the Republican party. He was brought forward in 1952 to forestall the isolationist and heartland conservative wing (the Primitives in Dean Acheson’s famous characterization) from nominating either Senator Robert Taft (colloquially known as “Mr Republican”) or General of the Army Douglas MacArthur, a man whose outsized vanity diminished the reach of a fine mind. Eisenhower was something of an exception even in that era. He did have a big Middle Western grin.
The Republican Internationalists later were hijacked by nationalists (Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld) and the neoconservatives which brought a mix of truculence and delusion to foreign policy plus a lack of competence which tenure in high office never seemed to improve.
Eisenhower had a minimal impact on domestic policy except that he managed to have three recessions in eight years, the last one in 1958-59 being significant and which brought a long-standing Democratic majority to the House. The 1950s were more lackluster than as they are remembered.
The Republican Internationalists are no more. The 2016 election saw to that.
After the election, Republican power will be centered on small state Republican senators who have disproportionate power in the Senate. This political power is entirely sterile (see Mitch McConnell) because it is plutocratically funded to support reactionary politics in general via vituperous cultural politics. The only policy goal is continued wealth concentration for the top .1 of 1% with a sprinkle for the 1%. The concentration of benefits on such a small group of people is truly exceptional in such a large economy in a country that seems to think it is democratic (votes and voters matter).
Necessity is going to drive the Democrats to focus on broadening their electoral appeal by stressing working and middle class issues in the smaller Republican red states whose senators currently comprise a blocking force. Otherwise Democrats will face a reactionary wall in the Senate for as far as the eye can see. If this plutocratically supported group of reactionary senators can be dented in their home states, then there would be some sort of contest of ideas and policies out in the American heartland that would probably be beneficial for the country.
More blather from Mr. Wrong.
Wrong about Hillary winning by a landslide in 2016.
Wrong about Trump trashing the economy.
Wrong about Russian collusion.
Wrong about Joe Biden’s and Ukraine.
Wrong about everything, especially when he gets his lead from The Economist.
You would think that Emery would, eventually, learn something. But I suppose, like so many leftists, he has been driven mad by his hatred.
I’m not saying Biden will win this election. Trump as the incumbent has the advantage. It’s his race to lose.