***Official Political Discussion Thread***

I think you are confusing programs. The discussion was about direct stimulus payments to individuals.

I think you are asking about small business advances.

But no, I don’t plan on giving back the small business advance.

Not only are you a crook and a scam artist Delk but you are probably the worst NTer ever. Your stockx scam ain't a small business pal.
 
Happy New Year political fam

Yall blessed me with knowledge, hope, laughs, sobering feels, challenging ideas and everything in between

Blessings to you all
wow.png
 
Last edited:
I think you are confusing programs. The discussion was about direct stimulus payments to individuals.

I think you are asking about small business advances.

But no, I don’t plan on giving back the small business advance.
Unsurprisingly, you missed the point:
Neither you nor McConnell took issue with running up the national debt by granting stimulus funds to those who didn't need them when it came to the PPP and EIDL programs. Now, suddenly, it's a concern. (And a greater concern than mass evictions, at that.)


If anyone else with a deep and abiding sense of outrage over government waste is reading this:
 
Unsurprisingly, you missed the point:
Neither you nor McConnell took issue with running up the national debt by granting stimulus funds to those who didn't need them when it came to the PPP and EIDL programs. Now, suddenly, it's a concern. (And a greater concern than mass evictions, at that.)


If anyone else with a deep and abiding sense of outrage over government waste is reading this:

I don’t have an issue with anyone getting $600 checks or 2k checks.

Someone asked for McConnell’s reasoning so I just gave the response he gave on the floor.

You have to remember that my reasoning for Trump was that he could get stuff past an otherwise obstructive GOP-led Senate. McConnell is certainly problematic.
 
I don’t have an issue with anyone getting $600 checks or 2k checks.

Someone asked for McConnell’s reasoning so I just gave the response he gave on the floor.

You have to remember that my reasoning for Trump was that he could get stuff past an otherwise obstructive GOP-led Senate. McConnell is certainly problematic.

So, it didn’t matter what the content of the “stuff” was - just that they could get something done?

That’s an odd stance to take - harm is better than inaction?
 
I don’t have an issue with anyone getting $600 checks or 2k checks.

Someone asked for McConnell’s reasoning so I just gave the response he gave on the floor.

You have to remember that my reasoning for Trump was that he could get stuff past an otherwise obstructive GOP-led Senate. McConnell is certainly problematic.

I voted for a republican because republicans are **** heads is maybe the dumbest logic I’ve read on here. It’s right up there with not voting so your voice can be heard and cutting welfare for the poor because **** em.
 
You have to remember that my reasoning for Trump was that he could get stuff past an otherwise obstructive GOP-led Senate. McConnell is certainly problematic.
Who are you trying to convince? The participants in this thread, or you?

Anyone subscribing to observable reality is not buying this nonsense. We've been over this many times.

What was Trump going to "get past [sic] through an obstructive GOP-led Senate?" The "criminal justice reforms" he ran on in 2016 were NATIONWIDE STOP AND FRISK and racist immigration restrictions.

Donald Trump vetoed a defense spending bill passed by the "GOP-led Senate" to protect CONFEDERATE base names.

So much for that "theory."


If you want slightly more honesty about this:

In case you missed my positions, I will restate them below:

1. I am pro-life and anti-abortion (although I understand provisions when it is medically necessary or due to rape).
2. I believe that we need substantive immigration reform (the status quo has resulted in human trafficking and drug trafficking at the border).
3. I think that the current tax plan nets more in the pockets of working Americans than the past tax plan.
Let's state the obvious here: this was about reducing your tax obligations, first and foremost. (Even that is dishonestly framed as faux-concern for the working class, who were so obviously not the primary beneficiary class of the legislation: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/10/06/opinion/income-tax-rate-wealthy.html )

Stop trying to play it off like you did this to advance criminal justice reform. Tell that to Brandon Bernard.

 
I think you are confusing programs. The discussion was about direct stimulus payments to individuals.

I think you are asking about small business advances.

But no, I don’t plan on giving back the small business advance.
Just like the black delegation doesn’t plan on giving you your black card back.
 
Back
Top Bottom