re: The Math just isn't there for Biden to have gotten 81 million individual votes in 2020

quote:

---

This argument would have a sliver of plausibility if Trump could have won a few court cases, but he didn’t.

---

FALSE

quote:

---

Fox News is paying millions upon millions for intentionally lying about the election being stolen.

---

FALSE

quote:

---

None of your claims hold any water in a court of law,

---

FALSE

quote:

---

all of the Trump campaigns high dollar lawyers couldn’t find anything credible to hold up in court

---

FALSE

quote:

---

BUT luckily the poli board of tigerdroppings knows better than all of that!!

---

TRUE

Do you have anything to support your claims besides bold text?

quote:

---

and I find you in contempt.

---

Yep, you got it.

He claims Trump won court cases, I don’t understand how asking for the citations is unfathomable. I thought conservatives were the group of “facts don’t care about your feeling”. Making a outrage post about asking to provide evidence to back up a claim is a whole lot more like feelings than facts

quote:

---

Bruh you’re not in some state kangaroo court with all the procedural land mines placed by Trump opposition legal teams, oftentimes with at least passive assistance of the bench.

---

I thought the Donald only hired the best? His lawyers couldn’t overcome a motion for summary judgement?

“Oftentimes with at least passive assistance of the bench”

Likely besides all the cases heard by judges he appointed.
Trump appointed 33% of the Supreme Court. His three appointees plus one more judge could have had the court hear the supposed best case they had Texas v. Pennsylvania

So do something about it. Bitching two years later means nothing.

quote:

---

Democrats think that everything is racist.

---

Fixed!

Yeah, Trump won about half of the legal case that were judged on their merit, but lost all of those that were rejected cowards and demprog judges on procedural "issues."

quote:

---

we have been over this over and over. quit spewing lies.

---

Yes tariffs are a tax, I’m sorry you don’t like it but it is what it is.

quote:

---

not me. i laid it out in a response to IB a chinaman. taxes are mandatory. me buying something is discretionary. not a tax. you hate american manufacturing and love chinese dumping huh?

the tariffs did not even affect us here. they worked many ways. we laid it all out. it really is common sense.

---

Taxes are mandatory and you buying something is discretionary, what is that percentage of your purchases that you fork over to the government? A tip?


LINK

quote:

---

Key Findings

The Trump administration imposed nearly $80 billion worth of new taxes on Americans by levying tariffs on thousands of products valued at approximately $380 billion in 2018 and 2019, amounting to one of the largest tax increases in decades.

The Biden administration has kept most of the Trump administration tariffs in place, except for a five-year suspension of WTO aircraft dispute tariffs, replacement of certain steel and aluminum tariffs with tariff rate quotas, and the expiration of washing machine tariffs.

We estimate the tariffs still in effect will reduce long-run GDP by 0.21 percent, wages by 0.14 percent, and employment by 166,000 full-time equivalent jobs.

---

Yes it’s a tax. Yes it has a negative impact on the economy. Yes it is having Americans subsidize certain industries, and in general unrelated industries pay the price when countries go on a price war with you.

quote:

---

That's bullshite, and I suspect dishonest bull shite since you specifically asked about legislation. He did a lot of things by executive order, especially in the regulatory world. That's why the demented grifter was able to screw everything up so quickly; EOs don't last.

---

Ok, you called bullshite on facts that I provided a link for and called me dishonest.

I will educate you again and you can chose to stick your head in the sand and remain ignorant or do a quick google search of "Obama GDP" and "Trump GDP" to verify for yourself what I am about to say, or not. I really don't care.

In four years, TOTAL GDP growth under TRump was 4.1%. The average was barely over 1%. Take out 2020 (covid) and Trump's average GDP growth was 2.5% and GDP growth under Trump declined in 2019 before covid, clocking in at 2.28%.

In four years under Obama TOTAL GDP growth was 8.6% with an average of 2.15%.

In 2016 GDP growth was 2%. In 2017 it was 2.3%, a small uptick but pretty much exactly in-line with Obama.

Why is that? The answer is because Trump didn't do anything, positive or negative. Period.

I am open minded. If you can or care to link me to an executive order Trump signed that impacted GDP in any measurable way, please do. But it needs to include some sort of quantitative analysis. Not just some BS talking point like Trump deregulated this or that and it was great. I am pretty sure if any of Trump's deregulation actions resulted in measurable economic growth someone would have said something. However, the oposite is the truth.

Goldman Sachs tried to figure it out with three different methodologies. Their conclusion was this:

quote:

---

"But what has been the economic impact? To arrive at some answers, Goldman tries three different approaches:

First, the bank asked its analysts what they are seeing on the ground. And so far not much: “Today, our equity analysts in non-financial sectors report that deregulation has largely taken a back seat to tax reform and has had only a modest impact on economic decisions so far.”

Second, the bank looked at whether job growth and capital spending have been stronger in sectors and companies that were more highly regulated before the election. Goldman: “We find no evidence that employment or capital spending accelerated more after the election in areas where regulatory burdens are higher.”

Third, to try and get a more forward-looking view of deregulation Goldman looked at stock market performance. But not much there, either: “We find a roughly 0 correlation between regulatory burdens and post-election returns among the full set of S&P 500 companies, consistent with our earlier results based on macroeconomic data.”

These findings don’t mean deregulation is unimportant. Going forward, the bank adds, financial deregulation might be especially meaningful. But as far as rules affecting the economic and business world outside Wall Street, not so much:

Overall, our results suggest that non-financial deregulation has had a limited impact on the economy to date. This is not that surprising for several reasons: the estimated costs of regulation are not that high; implementing regulatory change even by executive action can be slow and difficult; and some promising targets for change largely involve state and local rather than federal regulation."

---

quote:

---

The burden should be to prove votes cast were legal

---

Ummmm.....


That is exactly what was audited. The results of the AZ audit (comissioned and paid for by the Trump administration with his hand picked auditors) to determine whether each vote cast was a legal vote was to conclude that Biden actual won by MORE than the orignal count.