Will Trump win again???

[pgg]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I support reasonable 'assault weapons" legislation but I don't think it will make an impact on gun related deaths in the USA. My main reason for supporting some sort of legislation is that I'm tired of hearing liberals complain about assault weapons.

They will not stop until they are all registered, banned, and confiscated or destroyed.

Unconstitutional legislation that we know won't even have the promised or hoped-for impact shouldn't be passed to temporarily appease the ignorant.

 

[radsisrad]

Yup. So much so that after declaring the NK threat over the first summer summit with Kim, he's letting him launch missiles left and right nowadays without a peep. Minus asking for a nobel peace prize of course.

Obama didn't deserve one and neither does Trump.

Nonetheless, Trump's constant Twitter lies/gaslighting are nothing short of fascinating

Yeah, he's hyperbolic. We've known that about him since the 80s.

You know, maybe he'd have gotten more done with NK if the Left hadn't paralyzed American politics with their "ridiculous bull****" (as Trump aptly put it) for three years and counting. I'm trying to be polite about this - I really am - but, like many other Americans, I've grown tired of snooty, humorless academics and professionals pearl-clutching at Trump's tweets and off-the-cuff remarks, which normal people correctly recognize as normalcy. It's not "presidential", but many people had had enough of "presidential" in 2016 and voted for a shake-up.

 

[deleted87051]

They still would have happened

However they may not have reach their respective rank and level of mayhem without their chosen weapons.

 

[ChiDO]

Via /u/PinheadLarry2323

The ACTUAL facts about gun violence in America

There are about 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, this number is not disputed. (1)

U.S. population 328 million as of January 2018. (2)

Do the math: 0.00915% of the population dies from gun related actions each year.

Statistically speaking, this is insignificant. It's not even a rounding error.

What is not insignificant, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths:

• 22,938 (76%) are by suicide which can't be prevented by gun laws (3)

• 987 (3%) are by law enforcement, thus not relevant to Gun Control discussion. (4)

• 489 (2%) are accidental (5)

So no, "gun violence" isn't 30,000 annually, but rather 5,577... 0.0017% of the population.

Still too many? Let's look at location:

298 (5%) - St Louis, MO (6)

327 (6%) - Detroit, MI (6)

328 (6%) - Baltimore, MD (6)

764 (14%) - Chicago, IL (6)

That's over 30% of all gun crime. In just 4 cities.

This leaves 3,856 for for everywhere else in America... about 77 deaths per state. Obviously some States have higher rates than others

Yes, 5,577 is absolutely horrific, but let's think for a minute...

But what about other deaths each year?

70,000+ die from a drug overdose (7)

49,000 people die per year from the flu (8)

37,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities (9)

Now it gets interesting:

250,000+ people die each year from preventable medical errors. (10)

You are safer in Chicago than when you are in a hospital!

610,000 people die per year from heart disease (11)

Even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save about twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.).

A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides.

Simple, easily preventable, 10% reductions!

We don't have a gun problem... We have a political agenda and media sensationalism problem.

Here are some statistics about defensive gun use in the U.S. as well.

Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence | Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence | The National Academies Press

Read chapter Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence: In 2010, more than 105,000 people were injured or killed in the Uni...

www.nap.edu

Page 15:

Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million (Kleck, 2001a), in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008 (BJS, 2010).

That's a minimum 500,000 incidents/assaults deterred, if you were to play devil's advocate and say that only 10% of that low end number is accurate, then that is still more than the number of deaths, even including the suicides.

Older study, 1995:

https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6853&context=jclc

Page 164

The most technically sound estimates presented in Table 2 are those based on the shorter one-year recall period that rely on Rs' first-hand accounts of their own experiences (person-based estimates). These estimates appear in the first two columns. They indicate that each year in the U.S. there are about 2.2 to 2.5 million DGUs of all types by civilians against humans, with about 1.5 to 1.9 million of the incidents involving use of handguns.

r/dgu is a great sub to pay attention to, when you want to know whether or not someone is defensively using a gun

——sources——

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf

Firearm Suicide in the United States

Firearm suicide is preventable, and addressing it is an essential element of any strategy to reduce gun violence in America.

everytownresearch.org

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhamcs/web_tables/2015_ed_web_tables.pdf

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2017/?tid=a_inl_manual

Amid rising gun violence, accidental shooting deaths have plummeted. Why?

A country music festival in Las Vegas: 58 dead.

www.latimes.com

Cities With the Most Gun Violence (stats halved as reported statistics cover 2 years, single year statistics not found)

Drug Overdose Deaths: Facts and Figures | National Institute on Drug Abuse

See facts and figures on overdose deaths as reported by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

www.drugabuse.gov

Frequently Asked Questions about Estimated Flu Burden | CDC

Links to key resources on the burden of influenza - CDC

www.cdc.gov

https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812603

The third-leading cause of death in US most doctors don't want you to know about

More than 250,000 people in the US die every year because of medical mistakes, making it the third-leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer.

www.google.com

Heart Disease Facts | cdc.gov

Learn facts about how race, ethnicity, age, and other risk factors can contribute to heart disease risk.

www.cdc.gov

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

However they may not have reach their respective rank and level of mayhem without their chosen weapons.

And that's my only issue with it: may not have. People want to confiscate the property of hundreds of thousands of law abiding gun owners for maybe a decrease in the number of people killed in mass shootings.

 

[vector2]

Yeah, he's hyperbolic. We've known that about him since the 80s.

You know, maybe he'd have gotten more done with NK if the Left hadn't paralyzed American politics with their "ridiculous bull****" (as Trump aptly put it) for three years and counting. I'm trying to be polite about this - I really am - but, like many other Americans, I've grown tired of snooty, humorless academics and professionals pearl-clutching at Trump's tweets and off-the-cuff remarks, which normal people correctly recognize as normalcy. It's not "presidential", but many people had had enough of "presidential" in 2016 and voted for a shake-up.

Hardcore trumpies tolerate or maybe even like his tweeting. Most dyed red in the wool conservatives including my father in law and his brother hate it with a passion as much as the left does. They think his tweeting, bullying, and overall boorishness detracts and distracts from the overall excellent agenda he is enacting.

And before you get too enamored with the nonsense about paralysis being caused solely by the dems, why don't you refresh yourself about which party controlled all three branches of government until recently. If you have a problem with the Senate needing 60 votes to pass a lot of things then take it up with the Senate rules and the Constitution, not the opposition party.

 

[pgg]

PGG, where do you stand on Trump vs Warren? Will you vote for Trump to keep SCOTUS conservative? Or, will you vote for Warren then give up your AR15 per her Executive order in 2020?

I will not vote for either.

To be clear, I don't view a conservative SCOTUS as unequivocally desirable. Just ... less somewhat less undesirable than a liberal court.

What I want is a libertarian, originalist SCOTUS. While Republicans are more likely to appoint that sort than Democrats, Republican appointees frequently carry a lot of distinctly non-libertarian baggage concerning religion, gay rights, abortion, drug prohibition. I'm one of those weird people who is grateful for all of the Bill of Rights. I value individual rights over collective comfort and I would prefer that courts go too far rather than not far enough in protecting those individual rights. I think cocaine and methamphetamine should be legal but kept behind the counter with the flavored vape juice. An adult should be allowed to squirt Liquid Plumr into his left carotid if he wants.

We libertarians catch a lot of well-deserved flak because there are some real crazy people in our tent. Anarchists, Ayn Rand fanboys, stoners, economic policies that could've been written by robber barons. Well, the stoners are mostly harmless, but they make it a little harder for the party (such as it is) to be taken seriously. I voted for Gary Johnson in the last election. I think he'd have done a good job, despite not knowing what an Aleppo is.

I doubt RBG will survive another year, and I think Trump (or possibly Pence 😉) will appoint her replacement. McConnell will get the nominee confirmed, no matter what. The federal courts and SCOTUS now lean right and that momentum will continue. If SCOTUS goes 6-3 I will happily enjoy the long-awaited 2A ruling in favor of strict scrutiny, and then watch state bans on magazine restrictions and "assault weapons" fall one by one. At the same time, I will be unhappy and/or disgusted with their rulings on things like abortion, which I view as the worst kind of government interference with an individual's rights.

I don't believe Warren would bother trying to ban/confiscate AR15s by EO. It's a ridiculous thing to attempt, she's not stupid, the courts would immediately block it, and the resulting midterm losses would be so massive that any hope of enacting any of her agenda in the 2nd half of her term would be gone. She'll certainly stretch the limits of EOs to infringe the 2A but the courts have shifted enough in the last 3 years that anything truly crazy she tries by that route will be stopped.

In the final, end state, whoever's president and whatever SCOTUS looks like, if AR15s are made illegal and confiscation begins, I will not comply.

I know socialism is a failed policy from the past. It hasn't ever worked and won't work under Warren. What it will do is inflict a great deal of pain on the most successful people in the USA in order to give a few more crumbs to those who voted for Warren.

Warren will blow an even bigger hole in our deficit while raising taxes to a level we haven't seen in decades. The results of these programs will be mostly govt. waste with little to show for it.

Even if she wins, it seems very unlikely that there will also be the kind of Democrat supermajority in the House or especially the Senate that will let her run amok.


I suck at predictions, but here's mine: President Trump appoints one more Justice, but is not re-elected in 2020. Republicans keep control of the Senate in 2020. President Warren (or whoever) gets nothing done before the 2022 midterms, when the Republicans retake the House. Meanwhile the 6-3 SCOTUS makes all of us alternately happy then sad.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the Atlantic, the Brits will figure out some more amazing ways to bone up Brexit, and chortle in that weird British way at their younger sibling nation's failed attempt to out-circus their government.

The world will not stop spinning and fling us all into space.

It'll be OK.

 

[radsisrad]

Hardcore trumpies tolerate or maybe even like his tweeting. Most dyed red in the wool conservatives including my father in law and his brother hate it with a passion as much as the left does. They think his tweeting, bullying, and overall boorishness detracts and distracts from the overall excellent agenda he is enacting.

And before you get too enamored with the nonsense about paralysis being caused solely by the dems, why don't you refresh yourself about which party controlled all three branches of government until recently. If you have a problem with the Senate needing 60 votes to pass a lot of things then take it up with the Senate rules and the Constitution, not the opposition party.

Lol at "bullying." I've never seen bullies as repugnant as the modern Left. They dox, threaten conservatives' jobs, and - to top it all off - censor right-wingers from Twitter, Google, Facebook, and YouTube because they know that in an open, no-holds-barred fight, the populist Right wins just about every single time. So, you know what? I don't mind having a president who fights back just a bit on Twitter. And though I initially found his boorishness distasteful (and occasionally still do), what I love about it is that it functions as a giant ****-you to the establishment against which we voted in 2016.

And read my post again. I don't mind when the govt. is paralyzed. What I mind is that they've paralyzed his America-First agenda with "ridiculous bull****." When Bill Maher can root, to cheers from his audience, for a recession so as to stick it to Trump... yeah, the Left can go to hell, screeching from the blue-checkmarks notwithstanding.

 

[BoolaHI]

Hmmm, what is the most distinguishable feature of the worlds two most populist right politicians, Trump and Johnson, both leaders share the rather incongruent and embarrassing fact that neither of them actually have a popular mandate to govern.

Trump losing the popular vote by close to 3 million votes.

Johnson’s situation is slightly more complex. He won a seat in Parliament in last summer’s general election, where the Conservative Party also won the most seats overall in the House of Commons. But the British electorate did not vote for a Conservative government led by Boris Johnson; they voted for one led by Theresa May, who stepped down over the summer after a humiliating series of defeats in Parliament over her Brexit agreement with the European Union. Johnson then won the race to succeed her as Conservative party leader, thus making him the prime minister.

Hmmmmn.

 

[radsisrad]

Embarrassing if you never grew out of high school-level popularity contests.

 

[BoolaHI]

Those are binary facts-period.

 

[doctalaughs]

Lol at "bullying." I've never seen bullies as repugnant as the modern Left. They dox, threaten conservatives' jobs, and - to top it all off - censor right-wingers from Twitter, Google, Facebook, and YouTube because they know that in an open, no-holds-barred fight, the populist Right wins just about every single time. So, you know what? I don't mind having a president who fights back just a bit on Twitter. And though I initially found his boorishness distasteful (and occasionally still do), what I love about it is that it functions as a giant ****-you to the establishment against which we voted in 2016.

And read my post again. I don't mind when the govt. is paralyzed. What I mind is that they've paralyzed his America-First agenda with "ridiculous bull****." When Bill Maher can root, to cheers from his audience, for a recession so as to stick it to Trump... yeah, the Left can go to hell, screeching from the blue-checkmarks notwithstanding.

I guess you fall into his hardcore base then.... I think you are in the small minority though.

A larger demographic is those that think the liberal left policies are ridiculous....

but also still hold out a small hope that one day we can have a president with a shred of dignity, civility or a moral compass.... which Trump has repeatedly struck out on all 3....

 

[radsisrad]

I voted for him with an enthusiasm that later waned. But I've been driven back to his camp by the sheer disgust at the antics of the media and Democrats over the past three years.

Yes, I hope that one day, we'll have another Teddy Roosevelt. But TR doesn't appear to be running next year, so Trump will need to suffice. I am, however, watching Rand Paul with some interest. I disagree with him on trade and immigration, but he has inherited a principled character from his father.

 

[medgator]

. I am, however, watching Rand Paul with some interest. I disagree with him on trade and immigration, but he has inherited a principled character from his father.

He's no Ron

He was happy to help pass the deficit laden tax cut but then all of a sudden finds fiscal conservatism when it comes time to find money for 9/11 responders.

Give me a break

Rand Paul blocks Senate from approving 9/11 victim compensation fund

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on Wednesday blocked an attempt by Democrats to pass an extension of the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) tried to win the Sena…

thehill.com

Rand Paul Tells 9/11 Victims to Suck It

The senator is happy to add to the debt when tax cuts are on the line, but sick 9/11 first responders can take a hike.

www.vanityfair.com

Too many Republicans have become fiscal hypocrites and Rand is no different

 

[BLADEMDA]

He's no Ron

He was happy to help pass the deficit laden tax cut but then all of a sudden finds fiscal conservatism when it comes time to find money for 9/11 responders.

Give me a break

Rand Paul blocks Senate from approving 9/11 victim compensation fund

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on Wednesday blocked an attempt by Democrats to pass an extension of the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) tried to win the Sena…

thehill.com

Rand Paul Tells 9/11 Victims to Suck It

The senator is happy to add to the debt when tax cuts are on the line, but sick 9/11 first responders can take a hike.

www.vanityfair.com

Too many Republicans have become fiscal hypocrites and Rand is no different

Rand is different but like many politicians he folded to the pressure from his party.

Paul Rand would balance the budget. He is a decent man with good values. He believes in individual liberty and limited govt.

 

[vector2]

Lol at "bullying." I've never seen bullies as repugnant as the modern Left. They dox, threaten conservatives' jobs, and - to top it all off - censor right-wingers from Twitter, Google, Facebook, and YouTube because they know that in an open, no-holds-barred fight, the populist Right wins just about every single time. So, you know what? I don't mind having a president who fights back just a bit on Twitter. And though I initially found his boorishness distasteful (and occasionally still do), what I love about it is that it functions as a giant ****-you to the establishment against which we voted in 2016.

And read my post again. I don't mind when the govt. is paralyzed. What I mind is that they've paralyzed his America-First agenda with "ridiculous bull****." When Bill Maher can root, to cheers from his audience, for a recession so as to stick it to Trump... yeah, the Left can go to hell, screeching from the blue-checkmarks notwithstanding.

You really are delusional if you think that Trump's twitter nonsense is anything more than a pretense to give a "****-you" to "the establishment." His administration is filled with corporatist / lobbying toads like Chao and Mnuchin and Ross and Kudlow. Let's also not forget former toadies like Tom Price and Scott Pruitt and Ryan Zinke who had to resign due to grift and corruption.

He passed a tax cut which was a giveaway to the donor class, and every special interest from big ag to big oil is still getting heavy subsidies. Trump is as much "the establishment" as any left or right politician.

 

[medgator]

You really are delusional if you think that Trump's twitter nonsense is anything more than a pretense to give a "****-you" to "the establishment." His cabinet is filled with corporatist / lobbying toads like Chao and Mnuchin and Ross and Kudlow. Let's also not forget former toadies like Tom Price and Scott Pruitt who had to resign due to grift and corruption.

He passed a tax cut which was a giveaway to the donor class, and every special interest from big ag to big oil is still getting heavy subsidies. Trump is as much "the establishment" as any left or right politician.

People wanted a "non" politician when they voted for Trump. They were foolish when they didn't consider he'd lie far more often and be far more swampier when it came to his cabinet and his policies.

Literally everything has been pro corporation. Hell the only permanent Tax cut is for them, the dirty little secret most forget when it was passed in 2017. Let's not forget about big Oil and his fight with California to make us buy less efficient cars so we can pay more at the pump and use more oil.

Won't even get started on how much Saudi @$$ he kisses....

 

[Mikkel]

Trump is a practical ideas guy with actual leadership skills, despite some personality flaws.

Is illegal immigration a problem? Yes. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (Wall, enforcement, no welfare, no amnesty)

Is unemployment a problem? Yes. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (Tax cuts, bring manufacturing back to US, decease regulation).

Is Iran a problem? Yes. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (Strong sanctions, no war, strong support of Israel).

Is North Korea a problem? Yes. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (Strong sanctions, no war).

Is Russia a problem? Yes. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (Strong sanctions, strong support of Eastern European countries, no war).

Is the opioid epidemic a problem? Yes. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (Decrease demand through education and addiction treatment, decrease supply by addressing China directly and also closing down illicit supply from central America, border wall, enforcement).

Is China a problem? Yes, huge. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (New trade deal, weaken desirability for Chinese manufacturing, address rare mineral mining monopoly, find new sources for minerals like Greenland, support Hong Kong independence, support Taiwan, support Japan, support South Korea, address South China Sea).



There are a lot of other issues to address obviously, but these are things that come to mind.

Ask yourself what the Democrat answers are to the problems, and you'll see their problem.

 

[medgator]

Trump is a practical ideas guy with actual leadership skills, despite some personality flaws.

Is illegal immigration a problem? Yes. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (Wall, enforcement, no welfare, no amnesty)

Is unemployment a problem? Yes. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (Tax cuts, bring manufacturing back to US, decease regulation).

Is Iran a problem? Yes. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (Strong sanctions, no war, strong support of Israel).

Is North Korea a problem? Yes. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (Strong sanctions, no war).

Is Russia a problem? Yes. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (Strong sanctions, strong support of Eastern European countries, no war).

Is the opioid epidemic a problem? Yes. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (Decrease demand through education and addiction treatment, decrease supply by addressing China directly and also closing down illicit supply from central America, border wall, enforcement).

Is China a problem? Yes, huge. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (New trade deal, weaken desirability for Chinese manufacturing, address rare mineral mining monopoly, find new sources for minerals like Greenland, support Hong Kong independence, support Taiwan, support Japan, support South Korea, address South China Sea).



There are a lot of other issues to address obviously, but these are things that come to mind.

Ask yourself what the Democrat answers are to the problems, and you'll see their problem.

Thanks to Trumps trade war we have the worst manufacturing numbers since 2009. But don't let facts get in the way of your agenda 😉. Wonder why Trump stopped tweeting about the stock market after his first year in office??

 

[BoolaHI]

Any economics professor, whether they have a R or L leaning will tell you that there are no winners in a trade war, but rather just survivors. Numerous business case studies prove this out. The more problematic feature of the current tariff strategy is not the notion of taking on China, where folks from both ends of the political spectrum would agree that it was something that needed to be addressed, but like a great deal of his others shortcomings—it is the execution and operation that fails miserably.

So, you ostracize most of Western Europe (our oldest and most robust allies) insult both our neighbors to the north and south, and then take on China by your lonesome? Most fair minded folks would have enlisted South America and Western Europe to triangulate and created multinational leverage to create a trade strangulation on China—instead we fight economic battles on almost every continent by ourselves.

If you think China will capitulate and fold, one only need look at the following: they are far more nationalistic than we are, and to exacerbate the situation they control most all dissemination of information and social media; two, all medium to large business in China are tied directly to their central bank and can basically get floated for an indefinite period of time; three, given Chinas history under previous western parochialism, they will not under any circumstance subordinate themselves to any western power, at least not in this generation.

What is more important is the underlying trade and investment sentiment between the US and China. American investment into China more than doubled this past quarter (2019), growing by 124.6 percent year-on-year. So, the posit should not be what happens if China succeeds, but rather what happens if China fails?

 

[Mikkel]

Any economics professor, whether they have a R or L leaning will tell you that there are no winners in a trade war, but rather just survivors. Numerous business case studies prove this out. The more problematic feature of the current tariff strategy is not the notion of taking on China, where folks from both ends of the political spectrum would agree that it was something that needed to be addressed, but like a great deal of his others shortcomings—it is the execution and operation that fails miserably.

So, you ostracize most of Western Europe (our oldest and most robust allies) insult both our neighbors to the north and south, and then take on China by your lonesome? Most fair minded folks would have enlisted South America and Western Europe to triangulate and created multinational leverage to create a trade strangulation on China—instead we fight economic battles on almost every continent by ourselves.

If you think China will capitulate and fold, one only need look at the following: they are far more nationalistic than we are, and to exacerbate the situation they control most all dissemination of information and social media; two, all medium to large business in China are tied directly to their central bank and can basically get floated for an indefinite period of time; three, given Chinas history under previous western parochialism, they will not under any circumstance subordinate themselves to any western power, at least not in this generation.

What is more important is the underlying trade and investment sentiment between the US and China. American investment into China more than doubled this past quarter (2019), growing by 124.6 percent year-on-year. So, the posit should not be what happens if China succeeds, but rather what happens if China fails?

China's government will push as long as they can, and they have the totalitarian power to do so. However, if China's economy slows significantly, their real estate bubble will explode, absolutely wrecking the middle and upper classes for years, possibly decades.

China can inflate their money supply, devalue their currency, and try to prop up valuation. This will also make it even more attractive for outside parties to invest in China. However, if tariffs are increased further in response to China's currency manipulation, this "cheaper" economy won't translate to increased growth since it doesn't appear actually cheaper, so it's a losing proposition for them to continue devaluing.

China knows this. The US knows this. The world knows this.

The USA can withstand temporary pain. But China? State run economies with bubbles ready the burst and dependent on other countries to buy their products are in the far weaker position.

Even if American manufacturing doesn't come back 100%, it's still a win to weaken China before they get too powerful.

They're trying to supplant the USA as world leader, and nobody in their right mind should want that to happen.


I think it's easy for China, today, to just cave. Sure, they'll be giving up on their world domination goal, but at least they survive.

 

[BLADEMDA]

Biden will be hurt by the scandal and his memory is poor
Sanders is too old with severe CAD
Warren will win the nomination


Bernie Sanders undergoes procedure for artery blockage, cancels events until further notice

Bernie Sanders undergoes procedure for artery blockage, cancels events until further notice

Sen. Bernie Sanders cancels all appearances until further notice after he suffered chest pain and doctors inserted two stents for artery blockage.

www.cnbc.com

 

[pgg]

Any economics professor, whether they have a R or L leaning will tell you that there are no winners in a trade war, but rather just survivors.

That is (literally) true of shooting wars, too.

That's not the same thing as saying that no trade (or shooting) war is ever worth fighting, however.

I'd be OK with "surviving" a trade war with China, provided they were hurt significantly more. Bonus points if it accomplished something else.

 

[BoolaHI]

China's government will push as long as they can, and they have the totalitarian power to do so. However, if China's economy slows significantly, their real estate bubble will explode, absolutely wrecking the middle and upper classes for years, possibly decades.

China can inflate their money supply, devalue their currency, and try to prop up valuation. This will also make it even more attractive for outside parties to invest in China. However, if tariffs are increased further in response to China's currency manipulation, this "cheaper" economy won't translate to increased growth since it doesn't appear actually cheaper, so it's a losing proposition for them to continue devaluing.

China knows this. The US knows this. The world knows this.

The USA can withstand temporary pain. But China? State run economies with bubbles ready the burst and dependent on other countries to buy their products are in the far weaker position.

Even if American manufacturing doesn't come back 100%, it's still a win to weaken China before they get too powerful.

They're trying to supplant the USA as world leader, and nobody in their right mind should want that to happen.


I think it's easy for China, today, to just cave. Sure, they'll be giving up on their world domination goal, but at least they survive.

U.S. imports from China last year totaled $506 billion, nearly four times its exports in the other direction ($131 billion). But the United States also sold $38 billion more in services to China than it bought in return, its biggest bilateral surplus. And whereas U.S. goods exports to China are mostly agricultural produce and finished products consisting of mostly American content and sold by U.S. firms, China’s exports to the United States are typically Chinese-assembled goods that contain many foreign parts and components — and are often American-branded to boot. A further 37 percent of U.S. imports from China consist of parts and components on which U.S.-based manufacturers rely.

When folks say move production and distribution lines to say Vietnam, they obviously do not know what they are talking as such integral elements of supply line management are at once complicated, costly and take years to unwind and unpack.By way of specific example, per one estimate, assembly in China accounts for only 3-6 percent of the $370 manufacturing cost of an iPhone X. Since that smartphone retails for $999, the bulk of the value added is American: Apple’s margin and that of U.S. retailers.

Even a blanket U.S. tariff on all Chinese goods exports — iPhones and all — would be bearable for China. The OECD reckons that around a third of the content of U.S. imports from China is actually of foreign origin. So the Chinese value added of its exports to the United States is perhaps $329 billion — some 2.7 percent of China’s $12 trillion economy. So even if a blanket Trump tariff slashed China’s exports to the United States by 25 percent, the direct hit to GDP would be 0.7 percent. That would hurt. But it would still leave the Chinese economy growing at 6.1 percent a year.

I reiterate and underscore because this is at the primacy why the strategy is flawed, threat isn’t just to American-branded products that American consumers love. A trade war also poses a threat to U.S.-based manufacturers that rely on Chinese parts and components to be globally competitive. Trump’s $46 billion list already targets aircraft propellers, machine tools, and other intermediate goods. Pushing up their costs would threaten manufacturing jobs in America’s heartland. And while those tariffs avoid consumer staples such as clothing and footwear, they will inflate the prices of some consumer goods, such as televisions and dishwashers.

China has a much better and poignant counter play—China’s potential retaliation is much better targeted. First in line is $16 billion of U.S. civilian aircraft exports. Boeing’s share price slumped when the Chinese move was announced. But Chinese airlines are expanding so fast that Boeing may be willing to slash prices to hang on to sales there, in which case none of the cost of the tariffs would fall on China. And if push comes to shove, the Chinese already have a reliable alternative supplier: Europe’s Airbus.

Second in line is $12.8 billion of U.S. soybean exports. China accounts for more than half of American soybean exports, giving it market power. Indeed, as talk of a trade war heated up, the hit to U.S. farmers was immediate: Soybean prices plunged. Here, too, China has an alternative supplier: Brazil. fpmag

 

[medgator]

Biden will be hurt by the scandal and his memory is poor
Sanders is too old with severe CAD
Warren will win the nomination


Bernie Sanders undergoes procedure for artery blockage, cancels events until further notice

Bernie Sanders undergoes procedure for artery blockage, cancels events until further notice

Sen. Bernie Sanders cancels all appearances until further notice after he suffered chest pain and doctors inserted two stents for artery blockage.

www.cnbc.com

While the liar in chief, along with the stock market, is disintegrating before our very eyes.

The Floodgates Open on Trump

In the wake of the whistle-blower complaint, the President’s disregard of democratic norms has reached a point of crisis. Will more people come forward with damning information?

www.newyorker.com

Sounds like president Warren it is

 

[medgator]

That is (literally) true of shooting wars, too.

That's not the same thing as saying that no trade (or shooting) war is ever worth fighting, however.

I'd be OK with "surviving" a trade war with China, provided they were hurt significantly more. Bonus points if it accomplished something else.

I hope you aren't hypocritical enough to use and keep all that Chinese tech at work and in your house....

 

[BLADEMDA]

Issue: Gun & Second Amendment

Tulsi Gabbard for President - Official Website

www.tulsi2020.com

Tulsi Gabbard looks interesting as a candidate but there are several issues:

1. She was Pro-Assad
2. She wants Medicare for All
3. She wants to take away PGG's AR15

 

[doctalaughs]

Trump is a practical ideas guy with actual leadership skills, despite some personality flaws.

Is illegal immigration a problem? Yes. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (Wall, enforcement, no welfare, no amnesty)

Is unemployment a problem? Yes. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (Tax cuts, bring manufacturing back to US, decease regulation).

Is Iran a problem? Yes. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (Strong sanctions, no war, strong support of Israel).

Is North Korea a problem? Yes. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (Strong sanctions, no war).

Is Russia a problem? Yes. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (Strong sanctions, strong support of Eastern European countries, no war).

Is the opioid epidemic a problem? Yes. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (Decrease demand through education and addiction treatment, decrease supply by addressing China directly and also closing down illicit supply from central America, border wall, enforcement).

Is China a problem? Yes, huge. Is Trump's platform the answer? Yes. (New trade deal, weaken desirability for Chinese manufacturing, address rare mineral mining monopoly, find new sources for minerals like Greenland, support Hong Kong independence, support Taiwan, support Japan, support South Korea, address South China Sea).



There are a lot of other issues to address obviously, but these are things that come to mind.

Ask yourself what the Democrat answers are to the problems, and you'll see their problem.

I give Trump credit for actually trying to do something about these big problems but I would rate his solutions as a C+. Liberal dems on the other hand are D minus. Too bad Trump’s childish antics also move him to the D minus garbage bin as well.

Immigration- big problem. Dems have really become the open border party. I have no problem with Trumps wall (10 billion is a rounding error) but why isn’t anyone talking about harsh penalties for employers along with a large worker program with harsh penalties for not registering? We could solve this issue overnight! Remove the economic incentive and Trump can prove people are gaming the asylum system. Instead we get botched ideas and hysteria of children in cages - who in the White House thought that would turn out well?

China- mixed feelings. Trump is doing more than his predecessors in confronting them, but why is he so against any sort of coalition? Europe and the rest of the world also recognized China was an economic cheat so why not also form alliances? America first doesn’t need to mean America only....

Iran/ Middle East: agree 100 with Trump on this one. Treaty was garbage and a joke. We need to be clear about who are our enemies and allies in that region.

Taxes: again mixed. While fiscal stimulus is good, it gives no thought to ballooning deficits and also sunsets for private citizens (whereas corporations get the break forever). Would have liked to see fixing/ normalizing the disparity between earned income rates and passive gains / capital gains....

Uniting the country: F minus in this category. Even if you are a big fan, he’s the most divisive president in recent memory which is not good for our country whether you lean left or right. Also, the more a president alienates certain large demographics (you can call it an “f-you” to the liberals if you want) the angrier people get and the more likely a backlash elects some nut-bag far left leader next. No one reasonable wants that.

 

[BoolaHI]

Issue: Gun & Second Amendment

Tulsi Gabbard for President - Official Website

www.tulsi2020.com

Tulsi Gabbard looks interesting as a candidate but there are several issues:

1. She was Pro-Assad
2. She wants Medicare for All
3. She wants to take away PGG's AR15

I know her personally, and before she was called on the mat to it, she was, as well as her family, a pronounced and practicing homophobe...further, she is not very bright. Many of her positions are just parroted talking point and pithy platitudes. Read the following for a better vantage—http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/tulsi-gabbard-2020-presidential-campaign.html

 

[Planktonmd]

Biden will be hurt by the scandal and his memory is poor
Sanders is too old with severe CAD
Warren will win the nomination

WOW, I might have to agree with blade... once!

 

[olabrador23]

Via /u/PinheadLarry2323

The ACTUAL facts about gun violence in America

There are about 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, this number is not disputed. (1)

U.S. population 328 million as of January 2018. (2)

Do the math: 0.00915% of the population dies from gun related actions each year.

Statistically speaking, this is insignificant. It's not even a rounding error.

What is not insignificant, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths:

• 22,938 (76%) are by suicide which can't be prevented by gun laws (3)

• 987 (3%) are by law enforcement, thus not relevant to Gun Control discussion. (4)

• 489 (2%) are accidental (5)

So no, "gun violence" isn't 30,000 annually, but rather 5,577... 0.0017% of the population.

Still too many? Let's look at location:

298 (5%) - St Louis, MO (6)

327 (6%) - Detroit, MI (6)

328 (6%) - Baltimore, MD (6)

764 (14%) - Chicago, IL (6)

That's over 30% of all gun crime. In just 4 cities.

This leaves 3,856 for for everywhere else in America... about 77 deaths per state. Obviously some States have higher rates than others

Yes, 5,577 is absolutely horrific, but let's think for a minute...

But what about other deaths each year?

70,000+ die from a drug overdose (7)

49,000 people die per year from the flu (8)

37,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities (9)

Now it gets interesting:

250,000+ people die each year from preventable medical errors. (10)

You are safer in Chicago than when you are in a hospital!

610,000 people die per year from heart disease (11)

Even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save about twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.).

A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides.

Simple, easily preventable, 10% reductions!

We don't have a gun problem... We have a political agenda and media sensationalism problem.

Here are some statistics about defensive gun use in the U.S. as well.

Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence | Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence | The National Academies Press

Read chapter Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence: In 2010, more than 105,000 people were injured or killed in the Uni...

www.nap.edu

Page 15:

Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million (Kleck, 2001a), in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008 (BJS, 2010).

That's a minimum 500,000 incidents/assaults deterred, if you were to play devil's advocate and say that only 10% of that low end number is accurate, then that is still more than the number of deaths, even including the suicides.

Older study, 1995:

https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6853&context=jclc

Page 164

The most technically sound estimates presented in Table 2 are those based on the shorter one-year recall period that rely on Rs' first-hand accounts of their own experiences (person-based estimates). These estimates appear in the first two columns. They indicate that each year in the U.S. there are about 2.2 to 2.5 million DGUs of all types by civilians against humans, with about 1.5 to 1.9 million of the incidents involving use of handguns.

r/dgu is a great sub to pay attention to, when you want to know whether or not someone is defensively using a gun

——sources——

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf

Firearm Suicide in the United States

Firearm suicide is preventable, and addressing it is an essential element of any strategy to reduce gun violence in America.

everytownresearch.org

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhamcs/web_tables/2015_ed_web_tables.pdf

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2017/?tid=a_inl_manual

Amid rising gun violence, accidental shooting deaths have plummeted. Why?

A country music festival in Las Vegas: 58 dead.

www.latimes.com

Cities With the Most Gun Violence (stats halved as reported statistics cover 2 years, single year statistics not found)

Drug Overdose Deaths: Facts and Figures | National Institute on Drug Abuse

See facts and figures on overdose deaths as reported by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

www.drugabuse.gov

Frequently Asked Questions about Estimated Flu Burden | CDC

Links to key resources on the burden of influenza - CDC

www.cdc.gov

https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812603

The third-leading cause of death in US most doctors don't want you to know about

More than 250,000 people in the US die every year because of medical mistakes, making it the third-leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer.

www.google.com

Heart Disease Facts | cdc.gov

Learn facts about how race, ethnicity, age, and other risk factors can contribute to heart disease risk.

www.cdc.gov

I love FACTS!!!!

you are my hero, SIR!!!! 👍 👍

 

[olabrador23]

Biden will be hurt by the scandal and his memory is poor
Sanders is too old with severe CAD
Warren will win the nomination


Bernie Sanders undergoes procedure for artery blockage, cancels events until further notice

Bernie Sanders undergoes procedure for artery blockage, cancels events until further notice

Sen. Bernie Sanders cancels all appearances until further notice after he suffered chest pain and doctors inserted two stents for artery blockage.

www.cnbc.com

While the liar in chief, along with the stock market, is disintegrating before our very eyes.

The Floodgates Open on Trump

In the wake of the whistle-blower complaint, the President’s disregard of democratic norms has reached a point of crisis. Will more people come forward with damning information?

www.newyorker.com

Sounds like president Warren it is

Warren-the first Native American president???? I have heard her winning odd is 1/1024 for 2020

https://www.bostonherald.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/0207-NWS-BHR-L-WarrenRegistrationcard.jpg?w=525

Elizabeth Warren’s ‘American Indian’ claim cuts to character

Call the political coroner. U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s presidential bid is DOA before it even started.

www.bostonherald.com

 

[PainDrain]

Biden will be hurt by the scandal and his memory is poor
Sanders is too old with severe CAD
Warren will win the nomination


Bernie Sanders undergoes procedure for artery blockage, cancels events until further notice

Bernie Sanders undergoes procedure for artery blockage, cancels events until further notice

Sen. Bernie Sanders cancels all appearances until further notice after he suffered chest pain and doctors inserted two stents for artery blockage.

www.cnbc.com

No way Warren can beat Trump. He will crush her in the debates.

 

[olabrador23]

Hmmm, what is the most distinguishable feature of the worlds two most populist right politicians, Trump and Johnson, both leaders share the rather incongruent and embarrassing fact that neither of them actually have a popular mandate to govern.

Trump losing the popular vote by close to 3 million votes.

Johnson’s situation is slightly more complex. He won a seat in Parliament in last summer’s general election, where the Conservative Party also won the most seats overall in the House of Commons. But the British electorate did not vote for a Conservative government led by Boris Johnson; they voted for one led by Theresa May, who stepped down over the summer after a humiliating series of defeats in Parliament over her Brexit agreement with the European Union. Johnson then won the race to succeed her as Conservative party leader, thus making him the prime minister.

Hmmmmn.

I keep hearing people saying Trump lost the popular votes by ~ 3M votes again and again.

But people seem to conveniently forget to mention this,

https://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/its-official-clintons-popular-vote-win-came-entirely-from-california/

hmmm....

I guess you fall into his hardcore base then.... I think you are in the small minority though.

A larger demographic is those that think the liberal left policies are ridiculous....

but also still hold out a small hope that one day we can have a president with a shred of dignity, civility or a moral compass.... which Trump has repeatedly struck out on all 3....

I do not think I can find anyone like that looking at the left. (sad)

 

[BoolaHI]

Last I looked, each of those votes came from a US citizen, and California is not a separate and distinct sovereign, thus my original statement and passage stands. Unless, you want to add a preface and asterisk that says, he actually does have a popular vote mandate to govern if one wants to by political conscription surgically omit the State of California, the most populous state in the nation and the sixth largest economy in the world....your call.

 

[medgator]

No way Warren can beat Trump. He will crush her in the debates.

The pathological liar crushing the Harvard professor? Riiight.

What will he campaign on? The trillion dollar annual deficits? The "non" peace deal with NK that he still wants a nobel for? Or locking more kids in cages than Obama did? Or killing the Obama bull market.

Lots of possibilities.

Not to mention trumpcession may be in full effect by that point....

 

[olabrador23]

Last I looked, each of those votes came from a US citizen, and California is not a separate and distinct sovereign, thus my original statement and passage stands. Unless, you want to add a preface and asterisk that says, he actually does have a popular vote mandate to govern if one wants to by political conscription surgically omit the State of California, the most populous state in the nation and the sixth largest economy in the world....your call.

well, what does the Constitution say about determining the winner of the presidential election??? are we doing popular votes now????

I really have trouble understanding why people keep mentioning that 3M popular votes like Trump was illegitimately voted U.S. President in 2016... The rules have been always there for like hundreds of years now... not like Trump changed the rules to win last night....

but if people keep mentioning 3M votes, I will remind them the fact that 3M+ additional votes came from entirely from California for them to consider. If you / they want California solely to run the country (vs. the rest of the country), I just chalk that as imagination.... unless California seceded to stand as an independent nation, then yeah, I guess their popular votes would count 🙂

 

[deleted162650]

The hypocrisy and denial in this thread is incredible.

 

[BoolaHI]

I never said it was illegitimate, I merely said if you are looking for an actual popular vote mandate, there was none. If you read any scholarship on the topic, many historians, both D and R, would say the exact same thing...

 

[olabrador23]

I never said it was illegitimate, I merely said if you are looking for an actual popular vote mandate, there was none. If you read any scholarship on the topic, many historians, both D and R, would say the exact same thing...

Why even mentioning popular vote mandate again??? Irrelevant...

Trump got voted President by the majority of U.S. States! So he did win the majority of the country in 2016. Good enough mandate to me!

as U.S. citizens with a minimum of high school education, esp. who go vote, we should already know that the winner of our presidential election is determined by Electoral College and votes. (Not Popular votes, unless the Constitution is changed / admended tomorrow). The END! 🙂

What is the Electoral College?

The Electoral College is a process, not a place. The Founding Fathers established it in the Constitution, in part, as a compromise between the election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens. What is the process? The Electoral...

www.archives.gov

 

[BLADEMDA]

No way Warren can beat Trump. He will crush her in the debates.

While I want your statement to be true I can't agree with it. Social Democracy is popular among about 1/3 of voters. Warren just needs to pivot a little to the middle and she will capture enough Independents this time around to beat Trump.

While I like most of Trump's policies (except for most of his environment policies) I do not like him as a person. He isn't nice, kind, considerate, tolerant or very bright.

 

[BoolaHI]

Your making a fairly belaboring point—one is how we elect our president (and I think it is safe to say we all have a fundamental understanding of the electoral college) , the other, and hopefully I don’t have to pedantically explain this to you is the actual number count.

 

[medgator]

Why even mentioning popular vote mandate again??? Irrelevant...

Trump got voted President by the majority of U.S. States! So he did win the majority of the country in 2016. Good enough mandate to me!

as U.S. citizens with a minimum of high school education, esp. who go vote, we should already know that the winner of our presidential election is determined by Electoral College and votes. (Not Popular votes, unless the Constitution is changed / admended tomorrow). The END! 🙂

What is the Electoral College?

The Electoral College is a process, not a place. The Founding Fathers established it in the Constitution, in part, as a compromise between the election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens. What is the process? The Electoral...

www.archives.gov

"The electoral college is a disaster for democracy"

-DJT, 2012

 

[olabrador23]

Your making a fairly belaboring point—one is how we elect our president (and I think it is safe to say we all have a fundamental understanding of the electoral college) , the other, and hopefully I don’t have to pedantically explain this to you is the actual number count.

lol... What number counts? Electoral votes or popular votes? But I do not know, please ask that to our founding fathers. In the mean time, I think we all should please accept the result and move on. OR go and vote to amend the Constitution in / by Congress.

Anyway, regarding the entire 3M+ extra votes came from one place, common sense tells me that is rather suspicious or at the minimum "something more is going on"... If I looked, I might probably see something really ugly... so no... lol

 

[olabrador23]

The pathological liar crushing the Harvard professor? Riiight.

What will he campaign on? The trillion dollar annual deficits? The "non" peace deal with NK that he still wants a nobel for? Or locking more kids in cages than Obama did? Or killing the Obama bull market.

Lots of possibilities.

Not to mention trumpcession may be in full effect by that point....

Havard professor??? You mean first Native American woman law professor at Harvard???

but no, she is neither lying nor pathological nor both... lol...

"The electoral college is a disaster for democracy"

-DJT, 2012

Talk is cheap! Go change it if you are really passionate about what you say!

 

[olabrador23]

While I want your statement to be true I can't agree with it. Social Democracy is popular among about 1/3 of voters. Warren just needs to pivot a little to the middle and she will capture enough Independents this time around to beat Trump.

While I like most of Trump's policies (except for most of his environment policies) I do not like him as a person. He isn't nice, kind, considerate, tolerant or very bright.

on the other hand, what is the other choice we are having??? Warren??? Thank you very much!!!!

But probably FB, Google, Apple, NRA will beat me to oppose her first 🙂 lol

 

[medgator]

on the other hand, what is the other choice we are having??? Warren??? Thank you very much!!!!

But probably FB, Google, Apple, NRA will beat me to oppose her first 🙂 lol

The smart populists would vote for her.

The dumb ones vote Trump

 

[doctalaughs]

I keep hearing people saying Trump lost the popular votes by ~ 3M votes again and again.

But people seem to conveniently forget to mention this,

https://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/its-official-clintons-popular-vote-win-came-entirely-from-california/

hmmm....




I do not think I can find anyone like that looking at the left. (sad)

I believe that some of the liberal dems are actually fairly non-corrupt ... just very misguided in their policies.

Same with some of the moderate republicans.... unfortunately civility, moderation and honesty seem to disqualify candidates on either side in today’s world.

We are literally choosing between the worst nut-jobs on either side.

I truly believe we need to get rid of the primary system (and probably the two party system as well).

 

[deleted941485]

So basically the Bernie supporters will just shift over to Warren basically putting her over the top. Biden will fight but it’s not clear he can clinch it.

Come an actual recession...more people willing to take chances on the left.

 

[PainDrain]

The pathological liar crushing the Harvard professor? Riiight.

What will he campaign on? The trillion dollar annual deficits? The "non" peace deal with NK that he still wants a nobel for? Or locking more kids in cages than Obama did? Or killing the Obama bull market.

Lots of possibilities.

Not to mention trumpcession may be in full effect by that point....

So I seriously don’t want Trump to win but he will use the same playbook from his first campaign and it will work. He is going to belittle and degrade Warren in front of the media. He will use the Pocahontas joke ad nauseam and his followers will eat it up. Evangelicals will come out in droves knowing he will likely sway the court. He will continue to paint illegals as bands of rapists and murderers coming to kill in droves. He will paint the Dems as giving away all your hard earned dollars and ruining your country. And in the end it will work because fear and hate are the most powerful and mind-numbing emotions, and they can make one suspend reality.