Not pretty when socialism runs out of money

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
53,145
17,917
1,743
#61
A new one was passed in 2018 when GOP carried the House, Senate, and POTUS. Did that radically reduce spending. Oh yeah that's what I thought.

Also I pointed out it was passed by GOP because the guy was complaining about the spending from it. So I have no doubt democrats could have wanted more. But acting like that spending is the democrats fault from 2014 is a false narrative.
The farm bill has always been a Democrat pushed bill for more spending historically. That's just simply the truth.
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
70,855
40,938
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#62
A new one was passed in 2018 when GOP carried the House, Senate, and POTUS. Did that radically reduce spending. Oh yeah that's what I thought.

Also I pointed out it was passed by GOP because the guy was complaining about the spending from it. So I have no doubt democrats could have wanted more. But acting like that spending is the democrats fault from 2014 is a false narrative.
The farm bill has always been a Democrat pushed bill for more spending historically. That's just simply the truth.
In 2001 Republicans held both houses of congress and the presidency. Instead of controlling spending they passed Medicare D.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
 

drbwh

Territorial Marshal
Sep 20, 2006
9,802
3,741
1,743
#63
When you are young and not a Democrat you have no heart...but when you are older and have knocked around
by life and yet remain a Democrat you have no brain.
When you claim Christianity then support a man that goes against nearly everything Jesus said or did, you look pretty ridiculous insulting others because they care about people other than themselves.
They care as long as “everyone pays their fair share”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

drbwh

Territorial Marshal
Sep 20, 2006
9,802
3,741
1,743
#64
Liberals are literally and willingly ok with paying a bit more in taxes to reduce as much poverty as possible.
You do understand that the tax rate only limits what the government can take. You can choose to pay more in taxes if you want. Have you literally and willingly been doing that?

Would you literally and willingly take the money I donate to private charities and instead give it to the government? Get off your damn high horse..people can care and think more government is not the solution. People can care without doing it exactly like YOU think they should care.
Well that way, he can pay less and care more


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

drbwh

Territorial Marshal
Sep 20, 2006
9,802
3,741
1,743
#65
Income and Poverty in the United States: 2019 (census.gov)

The U.S. poverty rate for 2019 was the lowest in history (or ate least since being measured in 1959), and real incomes were growing. Obama's goal was to get as many people a government check as possible, and it will be the goal of every Dem administration going forward. That's what makes me sick to my stomach.
I like how the link you provided also detailed out how Obama reduced the poverty level each of his last 4 years in office. Then go on to say how his "goal" was the exact opposite of what he did.

I mean if you want to find an administration that saw the poverty rates go up while he was in office. Look no farther back than W. Bush.


View attachment 87216
The bush’s are anything but conservatives. Give me a break. Clinton=Bush=Obama


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Jostate

Bluecolla's sock
A/V Subscriber
Jun 24, 2005
21,105
14,821
1,743
#66
Clinton=Bush=Obama


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And I suspect we will find they all = Biden. My wife is worried about Biden and his occasional get rid of fossil fuels type stance. I don't see him touching a cash cow like that.
 

OSUCowboy787

Territorial Marshal
Dec 31, 2008
6,653
4,697
1,743
33
Keller, Texas
#67
And I suspect we will find they all = Biden. My wife is worried about Biden and his occasional get rid of fossil fuels type stance. I don't see him touching a cash cow like that.
Biden won't do anything. Just need to be sure he survives his full term and we don't have Kamala in there. SHE is the one we all need to really worry about.
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
16,075
16,980
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#68
The worry isn't so much Biden, it's the senate. If the reps can hold on to the senate, then Biden or Harris won't look that much different from Obama's 2nd term...and we'll have the same old bad government we've apparently come to accept.

But, if the Dems take the senate, then Biden or Harris will sign whatever Pelosi sends to them and that's going to suck......come on Georgia, save us from that please.
 

cowboyinexile

Have some class
A/V Subscriber
Jun 29, 2004
16,916
10,355
1,743
40
Fairmont, MN
#69
The worry isn't so much Biden, it's the senate. If the reps can hold on to the senate, then Biden or Harris won't look that much different from Obama's 2nd term...and we'll have the same old bad government we've apparently come to accept.

But, if the Dems take the senate, then Biden or Harris will sign whatever Pelosi sends to them and that's going to suck......come on Georgia, save us from that please.
No they won't. If they had a 53-47 majority yeah, it would be like the last two years.

50/50 with Manchin or Warner. You shouldn't be too worried about a liberal revolution.

That being said 2022 looks tough for the Republicans. Republican seats in Iowa, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Wisconsin are up for grabs and all the dem seats are safe. Assuming redistricting doesn't screw the democratic majority in the house, we could see what the Republicans had the past 4 years.

Elections have consequences and whatnot.
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
16,075
16,980
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#70
No they won't. If they had a 53-47 majority yeah, it would be like the last two years.

50/50 with Manchin or Warner. You shouldn't be too worried about a liberal revolution.

That being said 2022 looks tough for the Republicans. Republican seats in Iowa, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Wisconsin are up for grabs and all the dem seats are safe. Assuming redistricting doesn't screw the democratic majority in the house, we could see what the Republicans had the past 4 years.

Elections have consequences and whatnot.
Way too early to say what 2022 is going to look like at this point.....12 months ago, Trump was a lock for re-election, then along comes covid. Heck it will likely be too early this time next year to know what's going to happen in 2022....I honestly don't know what to expect

First term presidents almost always lose seats in the house in the mid-term, regardless of party. Happened to Clinton, happened to Obama, happened to Trump....probably would have happened to Bush too if 9/11 hadn't happened. Doesn't mean that will happen this time, just that history says it's the most likely outcome.

Plus, I don't think the Dems can control themselves....maybe they'll surprise me (hopefully), but I wouldn't put it past them to push some big, radical "comprehensive" piece of legislation through, the way they did the ACA, and tick people off enough to make a huge change in the House, again, just like after the ACA. Pure speculation, I'd prefer to be wrong.