Joe Biden: U.S. President

Politics US Politics
6651

More on the ahem progress made in ahem averting the strike.

Not much good news from Biden’s home state either:

Just getting harder and harder to make the vote.

“This ruling upheld the rule of law in Delaware when not long-ago election officials across the country were ignoring the law,” said PILF President J. Christian Adams in a press release. “This law violated the election protections in Delaware’s Constitution. Election officials must follow the law. When laws are followed, even losers of elections can agree with the outcomes. Consent of the governed increases when the election rules are followed.”

Well, yah.

1 Like
6652

Well, shouldn’t the FBI be fine with this? It’s right in their wheelhouse. Making shit happen.

6653

Martha’s Vineyard stunts don’t seem to be working.

6654

Biden’s answer to $5 gas is for you to buy a $60,000 vehicle. That alone explains just how out of touch he has become.

6655

Chevy Bolt. $26k, will become reeligible (if you qualify) for the $7500 tax rebate come jan 2023. Probably just about the best practical vehicle for a good number of americans, but don’t nobody not want to drive their $50k+ pick’em’ups while bitching about the cost of electric vehicles. But of course that’s not what that article is really taking issue with. ;D

6656

I just link up what’s out there. Snot like I take the side of every article. Lol

price wise sure, not every ev is a Tesla. However, the battery replacement issue is a problem most people don’t know exists. They think a Tesla battery last forever. Noop

6657

No cars last forever, but a Tesla battery is warranted for longer than most car engines, the batteries show pretty low degradation at 160k, and there are examples of tesla batteries going over 300-400k. People warned of Prius batteries for years before switching to tesla batteries, and those things were also champs. (don’t mention the uncooled nissan leaf batteries though)

1 Like
6658

Maybe some of them new IRS folks can start checking out these friendly neighborhood non profits.

1 Like
6659

Hunter and Joe Biden crossover. I wanna say this is old news, as I heard this a while ago and was stunned that no one seemed to friggin care enough to even ask a question or two to the big guy. They’re fittin’ to ask up now.

In response, Comer said that “based on the documents provided in this letter, we request all SARs from Biden family transactions, including those involving President Biden, related to transactions with Chinese entities. We are concerned that the President may have compromised national security in his dealings with the country most adverse to U.S. interests—China. These SARs will inform our analysis of this matter.”

Comer said Oversight Republicans have obtained a “presentation” emailed to Hunter Biden’s firm Hudson West III LLC (Hudson West) on December 13, 2017. The document, translated from Mandarin Chinese, is titled, “Overview of the U.S. Natural Gas Industry Chain, and is concerned with selling American natural resources to China.”

Well, that’s something the good people of Scranton should be asked about. I mean, Biden’s got their backs, right?

“Jiaqi Bao, who created the presentation, was previously an employee of the CCP, and worked for Hunter Biden’s corporate entity Hudson West,” the letter states.

Comer provided Yellen with two maps that were part of a presentation emailed to Hunter Biden. The maps include sophisticated analysis written in Chinese, and show the United States carved up based on natural gas reserves “with particular emphasis on Pennsylvania, Louisiana, Texas, Oklahoma, and Wyoming.”

Sophisticated in what way?

“The emails that accompany the transmitted maps reveal a plan to sell natural gas reserves to China via the same corporate entity branded on the presentation-Hudson West III LLC (Hudson West)–set up by Hunter Biden with officials from the Chinese company CEFC, at the time, one of the largest oil companies in China,” the letter stated.

Not just the milk, but the whole cow.

But, that’s simply just my regrettable fascist bias presenting as cynicism… :cowboy_hat_face: :man_walking: :salt: :earth_africa:

6660

At least you’re honest with yourself. :raising_hand_man:

6661

Did Jim Crow win?

Georgia’s recent primary election drew record turnout after the law took effect which specifically contradicted not only the main argument against the bill but also against specific complaints about several provisions in the bill, Von Spakovsky said.

Von Spakovsky pointed to one provision in the bill that was questioned by the DOJ where the deadline to request an absentee ballot was moved from four days before the election to eleven days. The 11-day mark is less than the 15-day mark suggested by the United States Postal Service and still resulted in higher early voting numbers than in previous elections.

And on Biden’s war on energy with Shellenberger in Congress doing some fact checking:

6662

High turnout doesn’t contradict there were attempts to suppress voter turnout, as others were simultaneously working to bring awareness to it, drive turnout, and nature the attempts unsuccessful.

6663

Ha. That’s good spin. :bowing:

1 Like
6664

We were literally told this was Jim Crow. Turnouts are notoriously low in US elections at the best of times. If all it takes is to “bring awareness, drive turnout”, then what the heck were they talking about? This must have been the worst attempt to “suppress voter turnout” in history, despite its fearsome reputation we were informed about constantly. I would go with “it was propaganda”–another set of damaging propaganda wantonly damaging confidence in our democratic processes for political ends by the way–and that the measures in the law, the “Election Integrity Act of 2021”, which look exactly like they were designed to ensure election integrity, were just that.

2 Likes
6665

Since we talk baseball, saying higher turnout disproves an attempt at voter suppression would be analogous to the Red Sox blowing out the Yankees as proof that the Yankees weren’t trying to prevent the Red Sox from scoring. One doesn’t disprove the other when there are other factors at play, and especially so when others are actively contesting what you’re trying to do.

1 Like
6666

Your analogy is backwards. It would be more like the Red Sox scored no runs, but we’ve been told constantly that the Yankees will allow them to them score against ordinary practice and rules. You’re right that it’s not proof of the contrary in itself, but it certainly would make you wonder what people were going on about, wouldn’t it? Then we’d have to look at what actually happened in the game.

1 Like
6667

Right. Honestly, these days I don’t think they would know the truth if you asked one. Spin is king.

1 Like
6668

Driving turnout is a continuous, difficult thing. That it was successful this time, when there’s unusually high interest in politics, despite attempts to make voting more difficult, doesn’t exactly mean the problem has been solved.

it seems quite obvious to me that there was a deliberate attempt to target “some” areas with these laws. Particularly transparent was attempts to eliminate Sunday voting (particularly popular in “some” communities); that the “propaganda” managed to limit some of the suppression doesn’t mean that it wasn’t attempted (some more limited measures passed). Things like banning handing out water by non poll workers obviously is meant to target high population areas (specifically Fulton county, which had lines up to 8 hours long in 90% humidity in the summer primaries in 2020. a county with a population less than 2k isn’t dealing with that.). Eliminating provisional ballots for those at the wrong precinct hits poor people waaaay harder.

you turned my analogy of vote suppression == run suppression into… vote suppression into allowing runs? And no, ordinary practices and rules doesn’t fly, as these are specific new laws implemented./ proposed.

6669

It wasn’t in the final law.

Really? Water? It could still be provided by election officials I saw. Bring some? It really wouldn’t be surprising to see electioneering associated with this.

People can’t get to the right precinct? Is that so hard for poor people? Seems they could, I guess.

Yes, because you set up a situation where the Red Sox scored many runs and the Yankees were going to not try to prevent them from scoring. On surface evidence the allegation was true in this case. The opposite happened in the election. The allegation did not pan out.

Yes they clearly do because laws and common sense prevent states from suppressing the vote. The allegation is that Georgia was acting contrary to those rules and norms, as if a baseball team on defense deliberately allowed the other team to score.

6670

nope; that’s why I explicitly passed and attempted, and pointed out that the “propaganda” helped prevent some of the attempts.

really, water. it’s supposedly to prevent electioneering, which is, of course, already banned. election officials can provide self service water stands. so, what, in extreme situations, after 4 hours in line, people hop out of line to get some water? that definitely wouldn’t discourage some votes, right?

Georgia really kind of sucks with this shit. My last two primaries, my precinct was in different locations. Both active. yea. For me, it’s not a big deal - I hop in my car, and show up to work when I want. You can see how this is problematic for someone with a more restrictive job, that relies on public transport, right? And the point of it, would be what? These would be ballots for registered voters, that would be vetted before being counted. But we’re going to change this because… what?