Become a Patron!

To Date which US Presidential candidate will you be voting for & why?

Which US Presidential candidate will you be voting for?

  • Total voters
    237
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tpat591

Diamond Contributor
Member For 4 Years
pulsevape said:
I think your right..... but micheal obama.
Click to expand...
I do not believe Michael has enough personal magnetism to draw enough support to even come close to carrying Creepy Joe over the finish line. Whoever Joe runs with is gonna have to carry the bulk of the load. While I hate everything about both of them, I still cannot deny that Barack had a true gift as an orator. His eloquence could get the weak minded to believe anything.

Why bother with Michael when you can pull out the stops & use the master & attack the institution of term limits while there is a growing call in America to institute them.
 
Last edited:
T

Tpat591

Diamond Contributor
Member For 4 Years
bs78md0wlnn21.png
 
T

Tpat591

Diamond Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Last edited:
T

Tpat591

Diamond Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Rossum said:
"Rape." They keep using that word. I don't think it means what they think it means.
Click to expand...
I'm thinking we need to require Democrats, Feminists & LGBTQ people to live in the heart of a no go zone for a month so they may more fully understand the meanings of certain terms they regularly use as well as the true meaning of Diversity.
 
Rossum

Rossum

Gold Contributor
Member For 3 Years
hellcatrydr said:
NJ Governor Signs "Rain Tax" Bill; Residents' Property Rates Rise "Based On The Weather"
Click to expand...
Unfortunately that article does a pretty poor job of explaining the bill in question.
Here's one that does:
https://www.northjersey.com/story/n...nto-law-heres-what-is-whos-paying/3201036002/
It does not impose a tax "based on the weather", but rather on how much run-off a property generates. So if you put a lot of impervious cover on you property without adequate means of catching and controlling the inevitable run-off this will generate, you're gonna get taxed. Dumping water off your property that would sink into the ground if the property was in its natural state really is a problem in some places.
 
Rossum

Rossum

Gold Contributor
Member For 3 Years
Tpat591 said:
  • This used to be high school curriculum years ago.
So South Carolina Democrats are literally arguing against teaching students about the Constitution. Such a surprise.
Click to expand...
Agreed; kids should know this stuff in before they can graduate from high school. "Civics" was once a mandatory class, but it seems that's no longer the case.
 
T

Tpat591

Diamond Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Rossum said:
Unfortunately that article does a pretty poor job of explaining the bill in question.
Here's one that does:
https://www.northjersey.com/story/n...nto-law-heres-what-is-whos-paying/3201036002/
It does not impose a tax "based on the weather", but rather on how much run-off a property generates. So if you put a lot of impervious cover on you property without adequate means of catching and controlling the inevitable run-off this will generate, you're gonna get taxed. Dumping water off your property that would sink into the ground if the property was in its natural state really is a problem in some places.
Click to expand...
All of that is covered in normal building codes at the local level. No ther legislation is necessary. If there is a real problem, it is with the local building officials not doing their job.
 
Rossum

Rossum

Gold Contributor
Member For 3 Years
Tpat591 said:
All of that is covered in normal building codes at the local level. No ther legislation is necessary. If there is a real problem, it is with the local building officials not doing their job.
Click to expand...
It is indeed for new development projects, but those codes were not in place when much of what exists in Nazi Jersey was built.
 
T

Tpat591

Diamond Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Rossum said:
Agreed; kids should know this stuff in before they can graduate from high school. "Civics" was once a mandatory class, but it seems that's no longer the case.
Click to expand...
Democrats have worked hard for decades to dumb down the schools in order to destroy America for their global takeover. Used to think it was lazy incompetence in the old days, surprise, surprise, it was intentional.
 
T

Tpat591

Diamond Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Rossum said:
It is indeed for new development projects, but those codes were not in place when much of what exists in Nazi Jersey was built.
Click to expand...
Bullshit excuse for not investing in infrastructure modernization to adequately handle runoff & attempting to monetize it for other purposes.
 
Last edited:
Rossum

Rossum

Gold Contributor
Member For 3 Years
Tpat591 said:
Bullshit excuse for not investing in infrastructure modernization to adequately handle runoff & attempting to monetize it for other purposes.
Click to expand...
It seems to me that investing in infrastructure modernization is exactly what they're looking to do.

Now the question is: Who should pay for this? Everyone in the state, collectively, no matter whether their property causes runoff or not? Or would it be better if those who cause the most runoff get charged them most?

IMO, the latter approach is better than the former.
 
P

pulsevape

Diamond Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Rossum said:
Unfortunately that article does a pretty poor job of explaining the bill in question.
Here's one that does:
https://www.northjersey.com/story/n...nto-law-heres-what-is-whos-paying/3201036002/
It does not impose a tax "based on the weather", but rather on how much run-off a property generates. So if you put a lot of impervious cover on you property without adequate means of catching and controlling the inevitable run-off this will generate, you're gonna get taxed. Dumping water off your property that would sink into the ground if the property was in its natural state really is a problem in some places.
Click to expand...
yep.. restore the top soil,and the health of the soil... and runoff will be cut way down....we should be restoring the top soil of the entire country.
 
Rossum

Rossum

Gold Contributor
Member For 3 Years
T

Tpat591

Diamond Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Rossum said:
It seems to me that investing in infrastructure modernization is exactly what they're looking to do.

Now the question is: Who should pay for this? Everyone in the state, collectively, no matter whether their property causes runoff or not? Or would it be better if those who cause the most runoff get charged them most?

IMO, the latter approach is better than the former.
Click to expand...
If only that is where the money truly went for things like this. Invariably the funds are misappropriated & you are double tapped for same projects.
 
Last edited:
Rossum

Rossum

Gold Contributor
Member For 3 Years
Tpat591 said:
2020 Democrat pushes back on calls to eliminate Electoral College, filibuster
Click to expand...
Fox News is losing it.
The four-term Hawaii Democrat, national guard officer and Iraq War veteran appeared to push back both on calls to eliminate the Electoral College and scrap the Senate’s filibuster rule – two longstanding political traditions and institutions – in an interview Friday.
Click to expand...
They're equating a procedural rule in the Senate with something that's fixed in Constitution. :rolleyes:

Tulsi seemed like the most reasonable Democrat, but now she comes along with:
“I’ve actually co-sponsored a bill – HR40 in the House of Representatives – that would put together a commission that would look at the damage that has occurred because of our country’s dark history with slavery and to figure out what is the best way to bring about those reparations,” she told Fox News. “I think we need to bring about reparations, it’s really a question of what is the right way and how.”
Click to expand...
Uhm.. There is not single a ex-slave still alive today. And the decedents of those slaves have been getting special treatment from the rest of us since the 1960s. They get preference in college admissions, in hiring, not to mention several trillion dollars in "Great Society" programs. When exactly does the guilt trip end?

PS: Am I the only one who sees "reparations" as a blatant attempt to bribe black voters to stay on the Democrat plantation?
 
Last edited:
T

Tpat591

Diamond Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Rossum said:
Fox News is losing it.

They're equating a procedural rule in the Senate with something that's fixed in Constitution. :rolleyes:

Tulsi seemed like the most reasonable Democrat, but now she comes along with:

Uhm.. There is not single ex-slave still alive today. And the decedents of those slaves have been getting special treatment from the rest of us since the 1960s. They get preference in college admissions, in hiring, not to mention several trillion dollars in "Great Society" programs. When exactly does the guilt trip end?

PS: Am I the only one who sees "reparations" as a blatant attempt to bribe black voters to stay on the Democrat plantation?
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more. Tulsi is the best they have, but has a history of modifying her own views by buckling to the party line to mainain access to necessary party funding for her campaigns.
 
T

Tpat591

Diamond Contributor
Member For 4 Years
What do you want to bet there will be a line in the Mueller Report which states something along the lines that although after extensive investigation no evidence of the Trump Campaign colluding with Russia to influence the election, extensive evidence that they colluded with Israel to influence the 2016 campaign is evident and can be found if properly investigated under a separate Special Council


STUNNING: ZERO Democratic Candidates for President to Attend Non-Partisan Pro-Israel AIPAC Conference this Year (VIDEO)

The 2020 campaign will be centered around Israeli influence over 2016 belection & Trump Administration I'll guess. Dems have replaced their AIPAC funding with deep pockets from EU, Sorros, Iran, & CAIR it seems.
 
Last edited:
chopdoc

chopdoc

VU Donator
Platinum Contributor
Member For 4 Years
ECF Refugee
Found out sumptin very interesting today guys. Next time you hear the tax cuts are only for the rich, tell them bullshit. As of the 2018 tax year social security benefits are no longer taxable.

The Trump tax cuts just saved me around $5K :teehee:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

VU Sponsors

Top