Republican vs Democrat

[mjsuax13]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">BREAKING: Harris supporters and Illegal Aliens are turning out in MASS PROTEST in the nation’s capital to demand the “right” to vote in U.S. elections.<br><br>This is what Kamala’s job as “Border Czar” was really all about. <br> <a rel="nofollow" href="https://t.co/jxhe0QlL5P">pic.twitter.com/jxhe0QlL5P</a></p>&mdash; Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) <a rel="nofollow" href="https://twitter.com/kylenabecker/status/1819475924888571954?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" >August 2, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

LOL. What a disaster.

[19th Hole]

Totally Weird What Libtards Elevate As Aspirational. What Is Up With The Fagg*ot Sec. of Trans?

[DwightShrute]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="qme" dir="ltr"> <a href="https://t.co/2v1hgGkl4g">pic.twitter.com/2v1hgGkl4g</a></p>&mdash; ���� Deep₿lueCrypto ���� (@DeepBlueCrypto) <a href="https://twitter.com/DeepBlueCrypto/status/1819528551353254240?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" >August 3, 2024</a></blockquote><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[Hareeba!]

Originally Posted by DipShit
I'm assuming its about the debate. If so, why should Trump agree to debate her (or anyone for that matter) if she isn't even the democratic nominee? Answer that dummy.

By that argument, why did he debate Biden before the nomination? She's going to be the nominee, and we'll see if he will debate her. I don't think he can dodge it, but he'd sure like to.

Ok, Kamala is now the confirmed nominee.

Yet still TFG is backing out of debating her.

He's blaming his lawsuit against ABC for backing out of the debate.

But Trump filed his frivolous lawsuit in March and agreed to the debate in May.

The math ain’t mathin’. He is clearly terrified.

[Hareeba!]

Political spending tops $1.8 million at Trump properties this cycle

Campaigns and political groups have spent more than $1.8 million at Trump properties so far this election cycle. Donald Trump’s political operation, which consists of his campaign, fundraising committees and super PACs, has driven the bulk of the political spending, paying more than $1.2 million to Trump properties. But it’s not just Trump’s own political apparatus that’s providing the payday—Senate campaigns and the National Republican Senatorial Committee have spent more than $366,000 at Trump properties, and House campaigns have spent more than $256,000.

https://www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/crew-investigations/political-spending-tops-1-8-million-at-trump-properties-this-cycle/

[Hareeba!]

Originally Posted by DipShit
I'm assuming its about the debate. If so, why should Trump agree to debate her (or anyone for that matter) if she isn't even the democratic nominee? Answer that dummy.




Ok, Kamala is now the confirmed nominee.

Yet still TFG is backing out of debating her.

He's blaming his lawsuit against ABC for backing out of the debate.

But Trump filed his frivolous lawsuit in March and agreed to the debate in May.

The math ain’t mathin’. He is clearly terrified.

Trump now saying he will debate Kamala, but not on ABC as was originally agreed.

He will only do it on Fox News, and only in a stadium full of people Fox chooses (his supporters).

What a gutless wonder!

[Hareeba!]

Can you IMAGINE if she did this to trump during a debate, on national TV?

[Itsamazing777]

Trump now saying he will debate Kamala, but not on ABC as was originally agreed.

He will only do it on Fox News, and only in a stadium full of people Fox chooses (his supporters).

What a gutless wonder!

He already owned Biden on CNN without people.

[Itsamazing777]

This should appeal to some of our elderly posters...

Former President Donald Trump is promising to eliminate taxes on Social Security, a vow aimed squarely at the 67 million Americans who receive monthly benefit checks from the retirement and disability program.

"Seniors should not pay taxes on Social Security and they won't," Trump said at a Wednesday campaign rally in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

[str]

This should appeal to some of our elderly posters...

Former President Donald Trump is promising to eliminate taxes on Social Security, a vow aimed squarely at the 67 million Americans who receive monthly benefit checks from the retirement and disability program.

"Seniors should not pay taxes on Social Security and they won't," Trump said at a Wednesday campaign rally in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

Everyone on SS would love that at 1st glance, until they read the fine print. The reality though would be that most people that work like that waitress he used as an example earns about 14.00 an hour. That would equate to about 28,800 per year and that is not taxed already. It's amounts over that that are taxed.
Meanwhile, I can cut my sons pay to 28,800 per year and "tip" him the difference and it is tax free. I write it off and he pays no tax on it. Nor do I match his Soc. Sec. withholding so I tip him that as well. And I'm not " rich" like people that make a million a year. They just slash in half their pay to salary/ tip equally and the million dollar a year guy saves 180,000 per year in taxes.

Long story short, this would not help lower income people. Period. It would vastly help more wealthy people. And it would make the system go broke faster.
Therefore, it is actually a tax cut for the richer people that can maneuver their payments and payrolls.

It sounds great but it helps the rich not the poor or lower class like that waitress.

Smoke and mirrors unfortunately.

Typical case of...Measure twice and cut once.

[Itsamazing777]

Everyone on SS would love that at 1st glance, until they read the fine print. The reality though would be that most people that work like that waitress he used as an example earns about 14.00 an hour. That would equate to about 28,800 per year and that is not taxed already. It's amounts over that that are taxed.
Meanwhile, I can cut my sons pay to 28,800 per year and "tip" him the difference and it is tax free. I write it off and he pays no tax on it. Nor do I match his Soc. Sec. withholding so I tip him that as well. And I'm not " rich" like people that make a million a year. They just slash in half their pay to salary/ tip equally and the million dollar a year guy saves 180,000 per year in taxes.

Long story short, this would not help lower income people. Period. It would vastly help more wealthy people. And it would make the system go broke faster.
Therefore, it is actually a tax cut for the richer people that can maneuver their payments and payrolls.

It sounds great but it helps the rich not the poor or lower class like that waitress.

Smoke and mirrors unfortunately.

Typical case of...Measure twice and cut once.

Your son is a dependant, but that ends at age 26 or so. This is for older Americans, who paid more in over their lifetime than a minimum wage job. It won't help all low wage earners, but it will indeed help some.

[Itsamazing777]

[DwightShrute]

Trump now saying he will debate Kamala, but not on ABC as was originally agreed.

He will only do it on Fox News, and only in a stadium full of people Fox chooses (his supporters).

What a gutless wonder!

Trump never agreed to debate Kamala on ABC.

[Itsamazing777]

[str]

Your son is a dependant, but that ends at age 26 or so. This is for older Americans, who paid more in over their lifetime than a minimum wage job. It won't help all low wage earners, but it will indeed help some.

He is not a dependent. Correct.

But that waitress is SOL if she thinks that will help her save a dollar. It won't. It will cost the deficit 1.7 trillion per year and the people that gain from it will not be the people that currently get tips for a living. That is until they convert to that to save money.

It is indeed a tax break for the rich and upper class, deliberate or not. Not going to argue about it. The math tells the entire story.

[slewfan]

So, the Democrats give Billions of dollars to foreign aide, Billions to illegal immigrants also.

But not taxing Social Security will hurt the deficit.?

I'm thinking, you guys on the left are confused to the facts.

[str]

So, the Democrats give Billions of dollars to foreign aide, Billions to illegal immigrants also.

But not taxing Social Security will hurt the deficit.?

I'm thinking, you guys on the left are confused to the facts.

I’m not on the left.

My comment was simple math and stand alone. Don’t feel the need to expand what I said in to foreign aid or immigration.

I am speaking solely on math and the fact that his story about the waitress is ridiculous. It makes no sense . There is no confusion on this issue except the perception of what the statement makes until you simply look at the tax code and realize that his declaration will only help people that make more money or grossly more money.
it cannot possibly help that waitress which he implied it would.
Am I wrong?

[Itsamazing777]

I’m not on the left.

My comment was simple math and stand alone. Don’t feel the need to expand what I said in to foreign aid or immigration.

I am speaking solely on math and the fact that his story about the waitress is ridiculous. It makes no sense . There is no confusion on this issue except the perception of what the statement makes until you simply look at the tax code and realize that his declaration will only help people that make more money or grossly more money.
it cannot possibly help that waitress which he implied it would.
Am I wrong?

We are talking about social security not tipped workers

[getaloadoffatso]

Everyone on SS would love that at 1st glance, until they read the fine print. The reality though would be that most people that work like that waitress he used as an example earns about 14.00 an hour. That would equate to about 28,800 per year and that is not taxed already. It's amounts over that that are taxed.
Meanwhile, I can cut my sons pay to 28,800 per year and "tip" him the difference and it is tax free. I write it off and he pays no tax on it. Nor do I match his Soc. Sec. withholding so I tip him that as well. And I'm not " rich" like people that make a million a year. They just slash in half their pay to salary/ tip equally and the million dollar a year guy saves 180,000 per year in taxes.

Long story short, this would not help lower income people. Period. It would vastly help more wealthy people. And it would make the system go broke faster.
Therefore, it is actually a tax cut for the richer people that can maneuver their payments and payrolls.

It sounds great but it helps the rich not the poor or lower class like that waitress.

Smoke and mirrors unfortunately.

Typical case of...Measure twice and cut once.

What are you talking about???
His post is about not taxing SS benefits, which would obviously help seniors and the disabled

Why are you talking about tipped workers???
It's something Trump talked about, but certainly didn't lay out a specific strategy for

Are you OK???

[str]

What are you talking about???
His post is about not taxing SS benefits, which would obviously help seniors and the disabled

Why are you talking about tipped workers???
It's something Trump talked about, but certainly didn't lay out a specific strategy for

Are you OK???

Trump talked about both. I talked about both. Social Security would go broke sooner without the tax income and that would trigger automatic payment cuts , the same % for everyone. So when it cuts 25%, will that hurt people on SS with little or no money saved or will it hurt the richer people with assets and money already in the bank?
So his proposal sounds great but it is not. Same with the tips nonsense.
And I’m fine thanks. If you were unaware of these facts, maybe I should ask you if you are.

[str]

We are talking about social security not tipped workers

I spoke to both. Trump spoke to both. I have now explained both.

I’m not a democrat, I just don’t like to be talked down to by a candidate that assumes I am unaware of reality. Like I said, it all sounds great until you look at the entire picture. Once you do, I feel like he is trying to talk down to voters assuming they will bite at the headline instead of seeing the entire picture. I would assume most people would feel the same way.

[getaloadoffatso]

Trump talked about both. I talked about both. Social Security would go broke sooner without the tax income and that would trigger automatic payment cuts , the same % for everyone. So when it cuts 25%, will that hurt people on SS with little or no money saved or will it hurt the richer people with assets and money already in the bank?
So his proposal sounds great but it is not. Same with the tips nonsense.
And I’m fine thanks. If you were unaware of these facts, maybe I should ask you if you are.

Social Security will go broke anyway, unless it is paid back the money that has been stolen from it over decades, and high income earners over 144k are required to pay their fair share into it

Not taxing it would be the last thing out of a billion reasons that would harm it if it was made right by the thieves

You aren't as smart as you think you are

[str]

Social Security will go broke anyway, unless it is paid back the money that has been stolen from it over decades, and high income earners over 144k are required to pay their fair share into it

Not taxing it would be the last thing out of a billion reasons that would harm it if it was made right by the thieves

You aren't as smart as you think you are

“The thieves”. Oh thanks for enlightening us. And yes it would eventually go broke but years sooner with no tax. And again, who does that hurt most.

Maybe you should read a little more and not worry about the poor attempts at personal attacks. When you go to those attacks, it shows that you really have nothing of substance to add.
Im done with you.

[guitarjosh]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">BREAKING: Harris supporters and Illegal Aliens are turning out in MASS PROTEST in the nation’s capital to demand the “right” to vote in U.S. elections.<br><br>This is what Kamala’s job as “Border Czar” was really all about. <br> <a rel="nofollow" href="https://t.co/jxhe0QlL5P">pic.twitter.com/jxhe0QlL5P</a></p>— Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) <a rel="nofollow" href="https://twitter.com/kylenabecker/status/1819475924888571954?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" >August 2, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Hmm, so the same people complaining about Russia meddling in our elections are openly demanding that citizens of other countries be allowed to vote in our elections.

[str]

Social Security will go broke anyway, unless it is paid back the money that has been stolen from it over decades, and high income earners over 144k are required to pay their fair share into it

Not taxing it would be the last thing out of a billion reasons that would harm it if it was made right by the thieves

You aren't as smart as you think you are

“The thieves”. Oh thanks for enlightening us. And yes it would eventually go broke but years sooner with no tax. And again, who does that hurt most.

Maybe you should read a little more and not worry about the poor attempts at personal attacks. When you go to those attacks, it shows that you really have nothing of substance to add.
Im done with you.

[getaloadoffatso]

“The thieves”. Oh thanks for enlightening us. And yes it would eventually go broke but years sooner with no tax. And again, who does that hurt most.

Maybe you should read a little more and not worry about the poor attempts at personal attacks. When you go to those attacks, it shows that you really have nothing of substance to add.
Im done with you.

Even in it's current state, not taxing SS is the last reason that would bankrupt it

That's ludicrous
Keep reading

[str]

Even in it's current state, not taxing SS is the last reason that would bankrupt it
In
That's ludicrous
Keep reading

Actually it would be the first as bankruptcy would arrive sooner which I already said.

How about tax free for people that make under 50k total. That would help those that need it most but that would bother the rich republicans and he doesn’t dare want that.

[DwightShrute]

Hmm, so the same people complaining about Russia meddling in our elections are openly demanding that citizens of other countries be allowed to vote in our elections.

amazing right?

It quite funny how the Left looks at things sometimes. Most of the time. Yes, Russia does meddle in the US elections and several other countries I am sure. Who meddles in other countries' elections more than the US? When they aren't invading or nation building that is?

But hey, when Russia does meddle in the US elections, then Trump is behind it obviously. Its probably Trump's fault Russia invaded the Ukraine.

[Hareeba!]

Trump just cowardly pulled out of the debate with Kamala Harris on ABC and says he is only willing to debate on his turf, with his rules, on Fox “News.” What a joke.
There are a few things to unpack here.

Late Friday, Trump publicly agreed via his social media site to debate on Fox “News” on September 4th, two weeks before he gets sentenced for the 34 felony counts he was convicted of.
Trump named the hosts as rabid rightwing propagandists Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum, at an arena in Pennsylvania somewhere, with a full audience. I wonder who would screen those attendees?
Trump’s excuse for “terminating” the debate—and yes that’s the word he used—was because he would be facing Harris instead of Biden. And also the fact he is suing ABC. Just another time Donald’s legal troubles got in the way of his campaign.

In reality Trump is a petulant child who believes he should have full control over debate negotiations. It’s clear that Trump is terrified of debating Kamala Harris. That’s why he chose Fox “News,” which is not a place where anyone should expect a fair contest.

And Trump chose Pennsylvania for a reason. He’s betting she will say no to the ridiculous offer, hoping that will offend voters where she is currently leading in the polls.
But what’s worse is the fact that the mainstream media is covering Trump’s nonsense as if it’s a serious offer.
Nearly every major news org reported on it as if Trump agreed to debate Harris, without noting any criticism of the details surrounding said debate. And in reality, he’s just trying to weasel his way out of it.
Even The NY Times notes in their subtitle that Trump agreed for it to be held in the “battleground state” of Pennsylvania. That is exactly what Trump wants the media to be repeating. They’ve clearly learned absolutely nothing, except that they make more money this way.

Parroting what Trump says and presenting it as news is not, in fact, news. It’s only spreading Donald’s propaganda and doing his bidding. His hope is that mainstream media will be too lazy to cut through his lies and nonsense, and will basically copy and paste what he says. And that’s what they’ve done here.

[DwightShrute]

^
There was no debate ever scheduled with Trump and Kamala on ABC, and thus there was nothing to pull out of. Duh!

Trump agreed to 2 debates with Biden. Trump said anytime anywhere any rules. Biden had full control of the debate rules and the networks. Both were on Liberal outlets. Biden was destroyed so badly that he withdrew soon after.

Any sane person would agree the only fair thing is to have the next debate on a conservative news outlet.

The only petulant child is you Hareeballs. That will never change.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">STOP IT!!!������ <a href="https://t.co/KuyhOhIzt3">pic.twitter.com/KuyhOhIzt3</a></p>&mdash; il Donaldo Trumpo (@PapiTrumpo) <a href="https://twitter.com/PapiTrumpo/status/1819239424896491722?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" >August 2, 2024</a></blockquote><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[getaloadoffatso]

Actually it would be the first as bankruptcy would arrive sooner which I already said.

How about tax free for people that make under 50k total. That would help those that need it most but that would bother the rich republicans and he doesn’t dare want that.

Only 10 states tax SS
It's literally a non issue for the entire system, but it would help lots of people in those states

It makes no sense to tax it, given the nature of the program

I agree there are many ways to help people, but taxing or not taxing SS will not have any bearing on its solvency

Just let the people in those 10 states off the hook

[Hareeba!]

“Together we will stop Kamala Harris’ nation reckting— akfjslk I’ll tell you what...”

https://x.com/i/status/1819862105136242812

[DwightShrute]

“Together we will stop Kamala Harris’ nation reckting— akfjslk I’ll tell you what...”

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">This is the single most savage moment of the 2024 campaign cycle ������ <a href="https://t.co/U1mK2sIsn3">pic.twitter.com/U1mK2sIsn3</a></p>&mdash; Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) <a href="https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1819835386580848797?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" >August 3, 2024</a></blockquote><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[Hareeba!]

https://x.com/i/status/1819400322676412792

[DwightShrute]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Time to flush this mess down a sewer pipe back to California. <a href="https://t.co/dNyYLqMNIk">pic.twitter.com/dNyYLqMNIk</a></p>&mdash; Juanita Broaddrick (@atensnut) <a href="https://twitter.com/atensnut/status/1819853972942795224?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" >August 3, 2024</a></blockquote><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>