Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 111 of 610 FirstFirst ... 1161101109110111112113121161211 ... LastLast
Results 1,651 to 1,665 of 9139
  1. #1651
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    10,847
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    Do you just accumulate useless comments from Qanon and Breitbart and post them? It really seems like you’re posting has become like tourette syndrome.

  2. #1652
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    19,138
    Quote Originally Posted by ManRam View Post
    I'm not deflecting by talking about Trump.

    Your post started with these word:



    Yes, I'm referring to AOC's laundry list of stupidity. It has nothing to do with Trump so trying to bring up "Trump's list" shouldn't discredit what I wrote. You weren't even trying to argue against what I said. Immediately jumped into the, "But Trump's list is bigger."!!! FYI, I didn't vote for Trump. But if you're in a room with both and think AOC is the more intelligent individual, I would question your intellect. That's all I meant by that quote you posted.

    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    This was your first paragraph lol. You made the direct comparison yourself from the start. I don't think AOC is great but you can easily make a much longer list for the guy you mention above.

    For just an example of issues on your points, #10 is something that a majority of Americans support and a recent analysis found that it not only helps everyone get covered but could likely help with costs etc too.

    https://thehill.com/policy/healthcar...dicare-for-all
    https://www.businessinsider.com/bern...e-money-2018-7
    https://www.commondreams.org/news/20...ost-efficiency

    There are more but I don't have time to keep going atm.
    Refer to my post above in response to ManRam.

    The guy above has been in the spotlight for his entire life. AOC has only been, wait for it, relevant for less than a year. The amount of garbage and inaccurate statements she has made is ridiculous for someone who claims to be "fighting" corruption. As for your evidence that most Americans would support it, of course. Most Americans don't actually know the true cost of it and if they're not the ones "paying" for it, they'll assume it's just another benefit they can have without paying for it. Also, I've read those same reports. They're mostly assuming the corruption stops and from what I've read, Bernie has tried to get it working in Vermont and it didn't work.

    https://www.quora.com/What-should-I-...e-for-All-bill

    Truthfully, no one knows how much it will really cost but it's going to be A LOT and to say, "it'll actually cost less" when you're dealing with 300 million + Americans just because an article told you so, it's not exactly solid evidence to have legislation passed. I would like to see you debunk the rest.. pretty difficult to do considering it came out of her mouth.

  3. #1653
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    19,138
    Quote Originally Posted by ManRam View Post
    I'm not deflecting by talking about Trump.

    Your post started with these word:



    Quote Originally Posted by ManRam View Post
    The post that started this discussion: "Here's a whole post about why I think AOC is worse than Trump, largely consisting of opinion I'm stating as fact, intentionally misrepresenting information and blowing innocuous quotes way out of proportion".

    Responses: "THIS is how you're proving she's worse than Trump?!??! By listing some things you think she said that are dumb/lies/uninformed!?!?!?"

    Conservatives: "Why are you deflecting by bringing up Trump?!?!?"



    Love the discourse on PSD dot com slash politics. Y'all are a bunch of weirdos
    Yet, you haven't debunked any of what I said. I'm waiting. If you took the time to argue about me saying something about Trump being more intelligent than AOC, spend some time arguing just a few of what I listed that AOC herself stated.

  4. #1654
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    19,138
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    So for a lot of these you have little data/stats/science or any real proof of what she has said and why your opinions on some of these issues matter more than hers. I get you have opinions and so does she so in order to prove anything you need some data too (like I provided for 10). I can't tell what she has actually said and what you are making up here from your own opinion and what she is actually saying/said. 9 for example seems like your opinion while most are for it http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/...-tax-rate.html

    for example 3 what do you mean? Like when many have pointed out our tax code's history and what it was in the past? I believe under Eisenhower it actually was that high for example so if they are doing it in that context doesn't it make sense?

    Any issues in particular you have with actual substance? I think some of what you say is true she seems ignorant on certain issues and often is a little more based in what she thinks is right (emotion) than necessarily smart ideas. I don't think she is great necessarily but I also don't think the comparison you made is valid at all.
    I see you don't understand the tax code. Marginal tax rates don't mean anything if the tax codes allow you to manipulate the amount of "income" you actually earned. It's like if the marginal tax rate was 90% but a deduction allowed me to deduct 100% of my income if I worked at NYC for one day out of the year. That would effectively mean I pay 0% taxes if I just worked in NYC for one day out of the year. So the lesson here is quite simple: Marginal tax rates =/= effective tax rate. Her continuously quoting that marginal tax rate while not knowing that it was heavily manipulated is misleading. Tax code = ALL the deductions/exclusions/exemptions, etc., Marginal tax rate = 90%. Big difference there. It's why accountants exist.

    Just because "most are up for it", doesn't mean it is ideal. People have their selfish desires. If they could tax the wealthy 100% of their money, I am willing to bet an overwhelming population would agree to it because it would mean they get more benefits. This "majority trumps minority" on policy is a laughable suggestion or evidence that it is ideal.

    Look, I really dislike AOC because I live in the district she won in. She's no different than Trump in a sense that she's ignorant and continues making these statements with very little repercussion. Her social media gains steam the more she writes ignorant statements such as Trump. There is very little difference between Trump and AOC other than the fact I legitimately think AOC isn't a bright individual outside of politics. In case you didn't know, she is a part of some Democratic Socialist membership group. Literally, all her opinions are printed on a brochure and stated on their website. She's like a teenage girl just reading off the pamphlet and makes silly statements.

  5. #1655
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    13,546
    Quote Originally Posted by FlashBolt View Post
    Yes, I'm referring to AOC's laundry list of stupidity. It has nothing to do with Trump so trying to bring up "Trump's list" shouldn't discredit what I wrote. You weren't even trying to argue against what I said. Immediately jumped into the, "But Trump's list is bigger."!!! FYI, I didn't vote for Trump. But if you're in a room with both and think AOC is the more intelligent individual, I would question your intellect. That's all I meant by that quote you posted.



    Refer to my post above in response to ManRam.

    The guy above has been in the spotlight for his entire life. AOC has only been, wait for it, relevant for less than a year. The amount of garbage and inaccurate statements she has made is ridiculous for someone who claims to be "fighting" corruption. As for your evidence that most Americans would support it, of course. Most Americans don't actually know the true cost of it and if they're not the ones "paying" for it, they'll assume it's just another benefit they can have without paying for it. Also, I've read those same reports. They're mostly assuming the corruption stops and from what I've read, Bernie has tried to get it working in Vermont and it didn't work.

    https://www.quora.com/What-should-I-...e-for-All-bill

    Truthfully, no one knows how much it will really cost but it's going to be A LOT and to say, "it'll actually cost less" when you're dealing with 300 million + Americans just because an article told you so, it's not exactly solid evidence to have legislation passed. I would like to see you debunk the rest.. pretty difficult to do considering it came out of her mouth.
    Lol so you don't deny you brought him up and even did it again you just like to be hypocritical and not let others do the same? Got it. Who cares how long they have been in the spotlight etc. there is tons of garbage on Trump on a regular basis it isn't like only a few times over the years its all the time. Again you keep bringing up comparisons about them but then say it has nothing to do with Trump, how do you not see this?

    Alright so to the points. I agree many Americans probably don't know much because they just believe what they believe and even when evidence against it is provided they just post something like a Quora post instead of actually looking at research done into it. If you read the links posted, specifically the last one you would get an actual study instead of just a persons opinion with little data on an online community haha. https://www.citizen.org/sites/defaul...-_february.pdf

    This copy and pasted from the 2nd article quoting the study it was sourcing for Sanders plan.

    A new report from the libertarian Mercatus Center found that Sen. Bernie Sanders' "Medicare for All" plan would cost the federal government an additional $32.6 trillion over 10 years.
    But the Mercatus report also found that the national health expenditure — the total amount spent on healthcare in the US by the federal government, states, businesses, and individuals — would come in below current projections under Sanders' plan.
    So while the price tag for the federal government would increase, the total cost of healthcare would go down, and more than 30 million uninsured Americans would get access to healthcare, according to Mercatus' model.

    Most people want it, millions would gain coverage who don't have it, a recent actual analysis found it would actually save money despite the rhetoric, an earlier analysis found Sanders plan would also do the same thing in the end but this guy on Quora has some issues I tell ya.

    I am not saying for sure it ends up cheaper I am just pointing out what actual studies/analysis has found. Those articles put some context in for people and had other links too ya sure that helps my case as well here. I am just saying your points don't seem to have anything to back them up and there is plenty out there against your simple opinions. I am all for bashing her crazy ideas but if you want to bash normal ideas as crazy then you should probably have something more than your opinion/opinion of some people on a different online community. It hurts the entire post when you don't seem to back anything up and some things seem so off base themselves.
    Last edited by mngopher35; 02-06-2019 at 09:26 PM.

  6. #1656
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    13,546
    Quote Originally Posted by FlashBolt View Post
    I see you don't understand the tax code. Marginal tax rates don't mean anything if the tax codes allow you to manipulate the amount of "income" you actually earned. It's like if the marginal tax rate was 90% but a deduction allowed me to deduct 100% of my income if I worked at NYC for one day out of the year. That would effectively mean I pay 0% taxes if I just worked in NYC for one day out of the year. So the lesson here is quite simple: Marginal tax rates =/= effective tax rate. Her continuously quoting that marginal tax rate while not knowing that it was heavily manipulated is misleading. Tax code = ALL the deductions/exclusions/exemptions, etc., Marginal tax rate = 90%. Big difference there. It's why accountants exist.

    Just because "most are up for it", doesn't mean it is ideal. People have their selfish desires. If they could tax the wealthy 100% of their money, I am willing to bet an overwhelming population would agree to it because it would mean they get more benefits. This "majority trumps minority" on policy is a laughable suggestion or evidence that it is ideal.

    Look, I really dislike AOC because I live in the district she won in. She's no different than Trump in a sense that she's ignorant and continues making these statements with very little repercussion. Her social media gains steam the more she writes ignorant statements such as Trump. There is very little difference between Trump and AOC other than the fact I legitimately think AOC isn't a bright individual outside of politics. In case you didn't know, she is a part of some Democratic Socialist membership group. Literally, all her opinions are printed on a brochure and stated on their website. She's like a teenage girl just reading off the pamphlet and makes silly statements.
    Wait you are just saying there are loopholes to manipulate type thing? Ok I agree with you on what you are saying that doesn't change anything though. I was asking for the context and pointing out if they were saying it has been that in the past they would be correct. That is a true statement still you just went off on random stuff now unrelated to my questions or adding context just assuming I didn't know something because it wasn't stated clearly as a point (like most of that post).

    This is what I mean you don't really make much sense in your points. You are making up guesses about what you think other people might want while I actually provided evidence of it. How can you keep putting your opinion over everything else then whine about her doing it?

    I agree just because everyone is up for it doesn't necessarily mean it needs to happen but you still don't really make much sense overall except you seem to really dislike her that makes a lot of sense based on the posts. Why are we at Trump again?

    Look I am just pointing out in a general sense if you want to criticize her do it rationally and make real points because your posts have looked kinda ridiculous so far just ranting at her with opinion/emotion and leaving reality a bit (just like you are mad she does). I don't love her and think some of the criticisms you had probably are legitimate but it is hard to weed out which ones you have a point on because some seem off base immediately or I just don't understand the context behind your issue at all you just kinda rant.

    https://www.peri.umass.edu/reviewer-...dicare-for-all
    here is another study/analysis of single payer
    Last edited by mngopher35; 02-06-2019 at 09:24 PM.

  7. #1657
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    19,138
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    Wait you are just saying there are loopholes to manipulate type thing? Ok I agree with you on what you are saying that doesn't change anything though. I was asking for the context and pointing out if they were saying it has been that in the past they would be correct. That is a true statement still you just went off on random stuff now unrelated to my questions or adding context just assuming I didn't know something because it wasn't stated clearly as a point (like most of that post).

    This is what I mean you don't really make much sense in your points. You are making up guesses about what you think other people might want while I actually provided evidence of it. How can you keep putting your opinion over everything else then whine about her doing it?

    I agree just because everyone is up for it doesn't necessarily mean it needs to happen but you still don't really make much sense overall except you seem to really dislike her that makes a lot of sense based on the posts. Why are we at Trump again?

    Look I am just pointing out in a general sense if you want to criticize her do it rationally and make real points because your posts have looked kinda ridiculous so far just ranting at her with opinion/emotion and leaving reality a bit (just like you are mad she does). I don't love her and think some of the criticisms you had probably are legitimate but it is hard to weed out which ones you have a point on because some seem off base immediately or I just don't understand the context behind your issue at all you just kinda rant.

    https://www.peri.umass.edu/reviewer-...dicare-for-all
    here is another study/analysis of single payer
    It's funny you just say I'm ranting but you haven't debunked any of what I've said. You just seem to type a whole bunch of words to avoid trying to confront any of it. I'm not putting my opinion over it. Which opinion am I putting? These are estimates made by studies. Estimates that are even sourced in articles you've provided. "I don't make much sense." Buddy, she's the one who said all these things. Now confront them or excuse yourself because there is no point in this. So far all you did was tackle on the single payer (which is impossible to calculate but it first depends on if you can stop the corruption/lobbyists) but won't explain how she thinks there is 500 million people in America or that she said we should replace over 250+ million gas vehicles in America with electric vehicles by 2030. Is that my opinion as well? "I don't make sense." You're all over the place. And you don't even know how the tax code works but I'm supposed to reply back to you about me not making any sense?

  8. #1658
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    19,138
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    Wait you are just saying there are loopholes to manipulate type thing? Ok I agree with you on what you are saying that doesn't change anything though. I was asking for the context and pointing out if they were saying it has been that in the past they would be correct. That is a true statement still you just went off on random stuff now unrelated to my questions or adding context just assuming I didn't know something because it wasn't stated clearly as a point (like most of that post).

    This is what I mean you don't really make much sense in your points. You are making up guesses about what you think other people might want while I actually provided evidence of it. How can you keep putting your opinion over everything else then whine about her doing it?

    I agree just because everyone is up for it doesn't necessarily mean it needs to happen but you still don't really make much sense overall except you seem to really dislike her that makes a lot of sense based on the posts. Why are we at Trump again?

    Look I am just pointing out in a general sense if you want to criticize her do it rationally and make real points because your posts have looked kinda ridiculous so far just ranting at her with opinion/emotion and leaving reality a bit (just like you are mad she does). I don't love her and think some of the criticisms you had probably are legitimate but it is hard to weed out which ones you have a point on because some seem off base immediately or I just don't understand the context behind your issue at all you just kinda rant.

    https://www.peri.umass.edu/reviewer-...dicare-for-all
    here is another study/analysis of single payer
    Post #1639. Where did I place my opinion on any of these issues that isn't a factual argument? I'm waiting. You keep saying it's my opinion. NO. These are STATEMENTS made by HER. I am simply expanding on how stupid it is. Not my opinion. My opinion is she's dumb because she makes statements like these.

  9. #1659
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    19,138
    Also, I have no idea if you're confusing single payer with universal health care. They aren't the same thing.

  10. #1660
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    13,546
    Quote Originally Posted by FlashBolt View Post
    It's funny you just say I'm ranting but you haven't debunked any of what I've said. You just seem to type a whole bunch of words to avoid trying to confront any of it. I'm not putting my opinion over it. Which opinion am I putting? These are estimates made by studies. Estimates that are even sourced in articles you've provided. "I don't make much sense." Buddy, she's the one who said all these things. Now confront them or excuse yourself because there is no point in this. So far all you did was tackle on the single payer (which is impossible to calculate but it first depends on if you can stop the corruption/lobbyists) but won't explain how she thinks there is 500 million people in America or that she said we should replace over 250+ million gas vehicles in America with electric vehicles by 2030. Is that my opinion as well? "I don't make sense." You're all over the place. And you don't even know how the tax code works but I'm supposed to reply back to you about me not making any sense?
    I shared 3 different studies now that have debunked what you said lol.

    I don't know where that 500 million comment is coming from or anything you didn't provide any detail etc. I don't agree with her if she literally said that.

    I honestly have no idea what that last part is about you once again are just rambling. I already stated I was asking a question. The issue is when you don't have coherent points it is tough to answer anything about them.
    Last edited by mngopher35; 02-07-2019 at 12:07 AM.

  11. #1661
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    13,546
    Quote Originally Posted by FlashBolt View Post
    Also, I have no idea if you're confusing single payer with universal health care. They aren't the same thing.
    I am talking medicare for all, that last study I shared was a look at the single payer approach to that.

  12. #1662
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    13,546
    Quote Originally Posted by FlashBolt View Post
    Post #1639. Where did I place my opinion on any of these issues that isn't a factual argument? I'm waiting. You keep saying it's my opinion. NO. These are STATEMENTS made by HER. I am simply expanding on how stupid it is. Not my opinion. My opinion is she's dumb because she makes statements like these.
    I just shared 3 different studies disputing you lol. Your opinion on 10 apparently matters more than everything else provided.

    You don't source anything to show the context about what she is saying and then go only off opinion when complaining about it nothing to source and show how she was wrong. When questioned you just attack instead of answer what I asked then pretended you made a point and I don't understand despite already saying that simply isn't what I was asking about. You even admitted you are just angry about her haha. It is very clear you didn't have to tell us and it shows in how illogical you have been.

    11) When asked how she will pay for these policies, she said, "No one asks how we will pay for the space force." Studies show that the space force that Trump planned to fund would only cost $3 billion in a five year span. She's comparing $3 trillion to $600 million. Totally appropriate.

    Like this is the one right after and you are actually doing exactly that. Complaining about the cost of something that the analysis given says would save money while all for adding 600 million without giving any reasoning. It just makes your whole post look silly when nothing is sourced, some can be shown wrong with real evidence, then the next point laughably is her calling out people with your exact rhetoric (because it looks dumb when people argue about the cost of something without having any idea or doing no research). That goes for you just as much as it does her.

    I already said I bet a lot of the criticism is legitimate it is just tough to tell because of how lacking that initial post was and how you can't even answer questions on it.

  13. #1663
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    31,818
    Quote Originally Posted by rrzubnyy View Post
    Who in this country wants Socialism...

    Fossil Fuels is going nowhere!

    She is a dope!

    So in 10 years nobody has a car unless they are electric?


    Planes can’t fly anymore?

    You can’t cut your grass?

    Come on Cortez! Get real!

    Her crap would never fly in this Country.

    Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez thinks the world will end in 12 years.

    https://thehill.com/policy/energy-en...e-dont-address

    Ocasio-Cortez: 'World will end in 12 years' if climate change not addressed
    Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) on Monday said she thinks that there is an urgency needed in addressing man-made climate change, warning that it will "destroy the planet" in a dozen years if humans do not address the issue, no matter the cost.
    also relevant, this from 1989..

    https://www.apnews.com/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0

    A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.


    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    a person is smart. people are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals.
    #TrumpDerangementSyndrome


  14. #1664
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    74,831
    It's infinitely worse to outright deny climate change than to believe in the worst predictions.

    Not even comparable. One side is completely denying a bevy of evidence, and frankly common sense. The other is not.

    Screw off.
    HELLO

  15. #1665
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    10,847
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    I just shared 3 different studies disputing you lol. Your opinion on 10 apparently matters more than everything else provided.

    You don't source anything to show the context about what she is saying and then go only off opinion when complaining about it nothing to source and show how she was wrong. When questioned you just attack instead of answer what I asked then pretended you made a point and I don't understand despite already saying that simply isn't what I was asking about. You even admitted you are just angry about her haha. It is very clear you didn't have to tell us and it shows in how illogical you have been.

    11) When asked how she will pay for these policies, she said, "No one asks how we will pay for the space force." Studies show that the space force that Trump planned to fund would only cost $3 billion in a five year span. She's comparing $3 trillion to $600 million. Totally appropriate.

    Like this is the one right after and you are actually doing exactly that. Complaining about the cost of something that the analysis given says would save money while all for adding 600 million without giving any reasoning. It just makes your whole post look silly when nothing is sourced, some can be shown wrong with real evidence, then the next point laughably is her calling out people with your exact rhetoric (because it looks dumb when people argue about the cost of something without having any idea or doing no research). That goes for you just as much as it does her.

    I already said I bet a lot of the criticism is legitimate it is just tough to tell because of how lacking that initial post was and how you can't even answer questions on it.
    I appreciate your efforts to counter the litany of Ocasio-Cortez’s apparent horrors.

    I just do not have the energy.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •