>> Again you describe what most politicians do. Trump's lying is not quantitatively nor qualitatively more severe than any other politician at that level, certainly not more than Biden or Kamala.
I'd argue that it is much worse - but each to his own bubble.
>> Need I remind you that Biden pardoned his son for a huge period of time and undisclosed crimes which he himself might be an accomplice?
ahh yes, the mythical Biden crime family... Any minute now there's be some evidence of literally anything - anything at all... No wait, before we get to evidence we'll at least have an idea of what crime he's supposed to have committed? (The drug and gun charges are fair enough - but they're very much related to Hunter - not to Joe.)
>> They are not down for more taxes, reduced benefits, or any such thing.
That's a pity then. 'Cause that's what's coming. That's obvious to anyone who's paid the slightest attention to the Republican agenda for this term. I _assumed_ that voters understood that's what they were voting for - whereas you're correcting me to explain that they were simply duped. (I'm not in the US, so it's hard to see that from here, so thank's for the correction...)
>> I don't know how many people think our Western lifestyles are sustainable.
>> ...
>> People want to believe there is a way, and they're not ready to give up their way of life yet just because some politician says [it's not possible].
So they cast a vote based on wishful thinking?
Ironically I think the current lifestyle is sustainable in the long term, with only minor lifestyle changes. But it would seem then that your voters would prefer to simply pretend the problems don't exist? That they can magically go back to 50 years ago?
I must say, it sounds like you have less faith in the US voter than I do...
>> it explicitly denied that any benefits would be cut or taxes increased (except for the tariffs).
I mean sure, if you call it a "tariff" not a "tax" then maybe it sounds better. But they're the same thing no? Given that it was such a focal point of the platform I'm pretty sure Republican voters understand that.
On the benefits front - a target cut of $2 trillion was made very clear. Looking at govt spending how exactly can that number be reached _without_ cutting benefits?
I guess the next 4 years will play out, and either it'll be better or worse. My money is on worse (just based on the economic impact of the policies already announced) but I don't have a crystal ball, so I guess anything is possible...
>ahh yes, the mythical Biden crime family... Any minute now there's be some evidence of literally anything - anything at all... No wait, before we get to evidence we'll at least have an idea of what crime he's supposed to have committed? (The drug and gun charges are fair enough - but they're very much related to Hunter - not to Joe.)
What more evidence do you need besides Biden pardoned his son in general for any and all offenses he committed in a 10 year period? The laptop has been acknowledged by even the pro-Democrat media now, after years of trying to bury the story and censor everyone on the topic. There is evidence of crimes related to Hunter's position on the board of Burisma, a Ukrainian oil company. Biden had a lot of political protection to cover this up which is falling apart now.
>So they cast a vote based on wishful thinking? Ironically I think the current lifestyle is sustainable in the long term, with only minor lifestyle changes. But it would seem then that your voters would prefer to simply pretend the problems don't exist? That they can magically go back to 50 years ago?
>I must say, it sounds like you have less faith in the US voter than I do...
I say it's wishful thinking because the bottom line is we are going deeper and deeper into debt, outsourcing everything, and this election is the first sign in a long time that the public is waking up to their own demise.
>On the benefits front - a target cut of $2 trillion was made very clear. Looking at govt spending how exactly can that number be reached _without_ cutting benefits?
That was quite literally a random number that the campaign picked. I don't think they know how to cut $2 trillion. They promised not to cut benefits. Ending the wars might help, and maybe some things can be made more efficient. But a noticeable reduction in government benefits won't fly.
>I guess the next 4 years will play out, and either it'll be better or worse. My money is on worse (just based on the economic impact of the policies already announced) but I don't have a crystal ball, so I guess anything is possible...
My money is on worse. Not because Trump has the wrong idea, but because it's never gone any other way in my lifetime really, and I don't think he is a magician. I think a lot of people recognize that we're in a lot of trouble but don't see a way out. They can't even stop their jobs from being given to foreign workers and overseas companies. Many of them are struggling to get by. I myself make "good" money but I don't know when or if I will be able to buy a house or retire. Don't even get me started on the dating/marriage market.
I'd argue that it is much worse - but each to his own bubble.
>> Need I remind you that Biden pardoned his son for a huge period of time and undisclosed crimes which he himself might be an accomplice?
ahh yes, the mythical Biden crime family... Any minute now there's be some evidence of literally anything - anything at all... No wait, before we get to evidence we'll at least have an idea of what crime he's supposed to have committed? (The drug and gun charges are fair enough - but they're very much related to Hunter - not to Joe.)
>> They are not down for more taxes, reduced benefits, or any such thing.
That's a pity then. 'Cause that's what's coming. That's obvious to anyone who's paid the slightest attention to the Republican agenda for this term. I _assumed_ that voters understood that's what they were voting for - whereas you're correcting me to explain that they were simply duped. (I'm not in the US, so it's hard to see that from here, so thank's for the correction...)
>> I don't know how many people think our Western lifestyles are sustainable. >> ... >> People want to believe there is a way, and they're not ready to give up their way of life yet just because some politician says [it's not possible].
So they cast a vote based on wishful thinking? Ironically I think the current lifestyle is sustainable in the long term, with only minor lifestyle changes. But it would seem then that your voters would prefer to simply pretend the problems don't exist? That they can magically go back to 50 years ago?
I must say, it sounds like you have less faith in the US voter than I do...
>> it explicitly denied that any benefits would be cut or taxes increased (except for the tariffs).
I mean sure, if you call it a "tariff" not a "tax" then maybe it sounds better. But they're the same thing no? Given that it was such a focal point of the platform I'm pretty sure Republican voters understand that.
On the benefits front - a target cut of $2 trillion was made very clear. Looking at govt spending how exactly can that number be reached _without_ cutting benefits?
I guess the next 4 years will play out, and either it'll be better or worse. My money is on worse (just based on the economic impact of the policies already announced) but I don't have a crystal ball, so I guess anything is possible...