Red envelopes for low-and middle-income households - DPP trying to get back the trust from public?


#181

Time magazine cover July 1996


#182

Less political theater (which is all these “investigations” are), more actual work strengthening cyber security.


#183

It’s like it wasn’t even a secret. :sunglasses:


#184

They were boasting about it.


#185

I wasn’t aware of any major breaches of cyber security concerning the elections. What are you referring to ? Or you mean just on a general level, which I don’t see as relevant to the discussion concerning the election


#186

I guess maybe you missed all the accusations by the Democrats that the Russians “hacked the election.” Which they didn’t succeed in doing. So yes, I mean more at the level of cyber warfare, which is of course a never-ending effort by all the governments that have the capability to engage in it. But bolstering the security of voting systems is always a good idea. I’m sure hacking into voting machines is the holy grail for all kinds of bad actors.


#187

Et tu, WaPo? Gasp!


#188

Okay, I think I understand where you are coming from.

Trump 2020, make American even more great(again)!


#189

Not if those sneaky Russians can help it.

image


#190

I loved that cartoon
The Rocky and Bullwinkle show if I’m not mistaken


#191

Yes, it was awesome. Great writing for a cartoon of that era.


#192

Has anybody promised to re-instate the pension scheme for the next election?


#193

The tax discussed is income tax, under a certain income amount (near 30k I think)people already didn’t pay it.


#194

All the email stuff was Russian hackers and you’re claiming that didn’t have a big effect on the elections ?

That’s laughable.


#195

Your exact words:

Your complaint is what, exactly? People voted Left-A, but the hongbao scheme is Left-B, yet Left-A and Left-B are not antithetical, just different enough for one to involve “valid”* acts and the other to involve “robbery”* and “confiscation”**?

*your exact word
**almost your exact word (“confiscated”)

Very picky you are. :roll:


We don’t disagree about everything. :slight_smile: :heart:

Nah, not even close. She just gave the planet a hint of what lies beneath. Don’t ask me how I know. :zipper_mouth_face: :flying_saucer:


Facebook is one thing, but in no way has the robot revolution peaked. Mark my words. :robot:


#196

Just the other day on FNews, in reference to the Don’s wall speech, some pundit was complaining that when Democrat media people do so-called fact checking, they present subjective definitions as if they were “facts”!

(That’s a paraphrase. Don’t let any angry residents of your farm taze me for not using the pundit’s exact words!)

Try putting 60 bills into one bucket and a single drop of water into another bucket. It may open your eyes, but not literally, unless you have one hell of a Rube Goldberg machine. :eek:


#197

Thanks for giving us some context. What I was getting at, though, is whether or not the hongbao scheme is antithetical to significantly different from the kind of platform voters were presented with back in 2016, i.e.

  • did the party imply this sort of scheme is something it would never consider, or
  • did it imply this sort of scheme is a valid act of government, or
  • did it leave this area of policy entirely to the imagination?

#198

Evidence?


#199

Loads…Google it.


#200

Just like I thought. :grin: