(11-05-2025 06:06 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 05:05 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 03:40 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 03:10 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(11-04-2025 08:09 PM)450bench Wrote:  Trump is the President of the United States

The senate is red.

The house is red.

Liberals are still nuts.

And allow me to add, for our short bus friends-

Your President, Donald J. Trump wasn’t on any of these ballots.

But sure, continue with the waves of illegals fleeing Marxism only to bring that to our shores.

I’ll never understand 2 things that confound me.

A. Why do people continue to vote against their own self interests
2. Why is basic economics or even history never allowed to be taught in our government schools any longer?

Hunh. One simple answer escapes The Crazy.

I'm thrilled to discuss economics, one of my favorite subjects that I only didn't major in because you can't actually do sh*t with it. So please, explain the basic economics of how people are voting against their own self interests. Can't wait!!!

You obviously didn't take a legitimate economics course.



Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

Took plenty little fella. Feel free to explain the elasticity of demand to me. Economics is not just simply taxes bad government bad, that's retard economics.

this should be good...

explain how to remain solvent when inelastic demand turns into elastic as the tax demand rises during a mass exodus running away with inflated dollars ... that's ye ol' blue in a nutshell ... once upon, it was called white flight ... now it's buh bye birdie where the tax burden is lightened ... not only is it leaving their urban centers, but leaving the states...

just wait until the white-collar folk feel the real impetus of AI ... that's when blood gets shed upon the 'elitists'...

nuts is all ears, bubby...

almost forgot muh disclaimer: nuts gave the finga bang to a few econ profs...

I wouldn't worry about it. People need to relax. You would've thought we lost TX last night

There's nothing new in NYC

VA is Globalist Capital HQ.

It feels like the first loss since Biden announced he was 'resigning.' I think Republicans were kind of due for a loss.

The only thing that's disappointing it seems extremely rare for Republicans to win in a Blue State, but Democrats can win in a Red State like KS / LA / KY, not easily, but it's a struggle more often

(11-05-2025 06:41 PM)Bronco14 Wrote:  I wouldn't worry about it. People need to relax. You would've thought we lost TX last night

There's nothing new in NYC

VA is Globalist Capital HQ.

It feels like the first loss since Biden announced he was 'resigning.' I think Republicans were kind of due for a loss.

The only thing that's disappointing it seems extremely rare for Republicans to win in a Blue State, but Democrats can win in a Red State like KS / LA / KY, not easily, but it's a struggle more often

Cheating helps

Wow, the daggers are drawn on an economics fight, and the *sole* comments in the economics arena are:

1. Why is basic economics or even history never allowed to be taught in our government schools any longer?
A1(Jons): Cool I like economics, please use it to explain how people are voting against self-interest.
R1 (maxi): You obviously didn't take a legitimate economics course. Ed. Note: (Pure Maxi snot **** response, at his finest)

A2 (Jons): Took plenty little fella. Feel free to explain the elasticity of demand to me. Economics is not just simply taxes bad government bad, that's retard economics.
R1 (maxi): Id suggest reading Friedman, Hayek, or Sowell... start there if youd like to educate yourself. Again, mommy and daddy overpaid for your ****** economics course(s). Ed Note (generalized broad response, along with the now infamous maxi **** talk)

R2 (stink): Well, AI is going to send a lot of people out. Oh and somehow it is the 'blue' plan when places need to tax more based on (some sort of unexplained) exodus. (as far as I can ascertain) (Ed note: a more direct econ answer, as opposed to the Maxi 'you suck' branch.)

(11-05-2025 02:58 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

Just so I can see it again.

It's nice talking about healthcare again. I got 'sick of' the culture wars

(11-05-2025 01:28 PM)mlb Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 01:25 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  It's NOT "healthcare". It is health insurance. Health care is a service that requires payment.

The ACA cut payments to hospitals from the government. So it still absolutely affected them. The feds wanted to put the hospitals under such financial strain that they could take them over under the watch of a national emergency, hence making it a nationalized system. Thus far they've been unable to put them all into bankruptcy... yet.

Instead they've all merged

#6.

(11-05-2025 06:41 PM)Bronco14 Wrote:  The only thing that's disappointing it seems extremely rare for Republicans to win in a Blue State, but Democrats can win in a Red State like KS / LA / KY, not easily, but it's a struggle more often

NM, NJ, MN, MD, ME, HI, CA, CO, CN, and MA governors (within the last 3-4 governors).

(11-05-2025 07:03 PM)TripleA Wrote:  #6.

Condensing a thread is now 'leftist' -- lolz.

You sure as hell have one stupidly odd rationale on what is 'leftist', bro. Double lolz.

I guess the rule is now -- if it gets under the skin of the folks in 3Aville, it *must* be leftist. Cool cool. Still stupider than a truckload of bricks, but still entertaining to watch the dude thrash to try and tag an idea as 'leftist'. triple lolz.

(11-05-2025 06:55 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Wow, the daggers are drawn on an economics fight, and the *sole* comments in the economics arena are:

1. Why is basic economics or even history never allowed to be taught in our government schools any longer?
A1(Jons): Cool I like economics, please use it to explain how people are voting against self-interest.
R1 (maxi): You obviously didn't take a legitimate economics course. Ed. Note: (Pure Maxi snot **** response, at his finest)

A2 (Jons): Took plenty little fella. Feel free to explain the elasticity of demand to me. Economics is not just simply taxes bad government bad, that's retard economics.
R1 (maxi): Id suggest reading Friedman, Hayek, or Sowell... start there if youd like to educate yourself. Again, mommy and daddy overpaid for your ****** economics course(s). Ed Note (generalized broad response, along with the now infamous maxi **** talk)

R2 (stink): Well, AI is going to send a lot of people out. Oh and somehow it is the 'blue' plan when places need to tax more based on (some sort of unexplained) exodus. (as far as I can ascertain) (Ed note: a more direct econ answer, as opposed to the Maxi 'you suck' branch.)

nobody is going to play with you on this as you managed to dodge the economics portion of muh class ... argue against my logic ... please...

he asked ... I gave it...

and Ja!, AI will infiltrate your world one day, too (if it already hasn't) ... it will be no different than programing a chess game once all the laws are in the centralized DB (or whatever they call it these days) ... AI will be able to update on the fly before you get it in an email or any other method of issuance ... I actually see it as an invaluable tool for the ones that wage battle in court ... it's the paralegals that will be negatively affected ... have another binary coded drink on nuts, bruv ...

(11-05-2025 07:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 06:41 PM)Bronco14 Wrote:  The only thing that's disappointing it seems extremely rare for Republicans to win in a Blue State, but Democrats can win in a Red State like KS / LA / KY, not easily, but it's a struggle more often

NM, NJ, MN, MD, ME, HI, CA, CO, CN, and MA governors (within the last 3-4 governors).

Some of these were like 30 years ago. That's what I mean by extremely. We'll see. There's not many right now (1? One of the New England states?). We'll see if we can get some upsets next time.

(11-05-2025 07:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 06:41 PM)Bronco14 Wrote:  The only thing that's disappointing it seems extremely rare for Republicans to win in a Blue State, but Democrats can win in a Red State like KS / LA / KY, not easily, but it's a struggle more often

NM, NJ, MN, MD, ME, HI, CA, CO, CN, and MA governors (within the last 3-4 governors).

lmmfao with muh histrionics and RINOs ... I'm laughin' hardest at muh Chris Christie and Ahhhnold ... where are all those states today, eh?

since reconstruction, the 'sip never had a pub guv until '92 ... then Musgrove had to muck it for his pitiful 'tour of four' thru '04 ... we've never looked back...

some folks learn lessons...

(11-05-2025 07:08 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:03 PM)TripleA Wrote:  #6.

Condensing a thread is now 'leftist' -- lolz.

You sure as hell have one stupidly odd rationale on what is 'leftist', bro. Double lolz.

I guess the rule is now -- if it gets under the skin of the folks in 3Aville, it *must* be leftist. Cool cool. Still stupider than a truckload of bricks, but still entertaining to watch the dude thrash to try and tag an idea as 'leftist'. triple lolz.

You disagree. What a shocker. Glad to see it bugs the crap out of you.

That little tantrum you went on about "your beloved Triple A" was cute, too.

Tanq, you could post Marx's economic theory, fully support it, I would add it to your Donk Count, and you would deny it.

Dayum, you are one entertaining dude.

P.S. I don't think you understand the analysis here. It's not necessarily "what a leftist would say." It is also "what a righty would NEVER say." And I'm not talking about any difference between libertarian and conservative views.

(11-05-2025 07:19 PM)Bronco14 Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 06:41 PM)Bronco14 Wrote:  The only thing that's disappointing it seems extremely rare for Republicans to win in a Blue State, but Democrats can win in a Red State like KS / LA / KY, not easily, but it's a struggle more often

NM, NJ, MN, MD, ME, HI, CA, CO, CN, and MA governors (within the last 3-4 governors).

Some of these were like 30 years ago. That's what I mean by extremely. We'll see. There's not many right now (1? One of the New England states?). We'll see if we can get some upsets next time.

None past 25. And within 3 - 4 governors.

I see you want to move the goalposts to 'right now"? Cool cool.

(11-05-2025 07:33 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:08 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:03 PM)TripleA Wrote:  #6.

Condensing a thread is now 'leftist' -- lolz.

You sure as hell have one stupidly odd rationale on what is 'leftist', bro. Double lolz.

I guess the rule is now -- if it gets under the skin of the folks in 3Aville, it *must* be leftist. Cool cool. Still stupider than a truckload of bricks, but still entertaining to watch the dude thrash to try and tag an idea as 'leftist'. triple lolz.

You disagree. What a shocker. Glad to see it bugs the crap out of you.

That little tantrum you went on about "your beloved Triple A" was cute, too.

Tanq, you could post Marx's economic theory, fully support it, I would add it to your Donk Count, and you would deny it.

Dayum, you are one entertaining dude.

Actually I would readily admit actual leftist policies if I had them. Hard to disagree with them when they are honestly presented as such.

Your incessant garbage is just stupid as fk. But that is what I expect from you. Not much more than mouth breathing lazy ass ****.

Your fixation on trying to classify anything and everything as leftist by simply slinging items simply points out how stupid you are.

I will tell you, that within the libertarian items, there are some that actually could be denoted as somewhat leftist. Albeit based on the Friedman and Hayeks work.

In terms of economics that define leftism -- not anywhere near that. But your magpie schtick simply denotes what an absolute idiot you are. Nor anywhere in the ideas of central government.

But that eludes you. Instead, you substitute anything that the talking heads tell you is that which you immediately turn around and squawk. Without any bother if it actually leftist or not. Good for you, sparky. I have met a lot of venal stupid people, and you are close to the top, my friend. Cool cool. Arent we all much better for that. Yay.

(11-05-2025 07:25 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 06:41 PM)Bronco14 Wrote:  The only thing that's disappointing it seems extremely rare for Republicans to win in a Blue State, but Democrats can win in a Red State like KS / LA / KY, not easily, but it's a struggle more often

NM, NJ, MN, MD, ME, HI, CA, CO, CN, and MA governors (within the last 3-4 governors).

lmmfao with muh histrionics and RINOs ... I'm laughin' hardest at muh Chris Christie and Ahhhnold ... where are all those states today, eh?

since reconstruction, the 'sip never had a pub guv until '92 ... then Musgrove had to muck it for his pitiful 'tour of four' thru '04 ... we've never looked back...

some folks learn lessons...

Different states require different Repubs to be elected. I mean, the MAGA dregs of Texas certainly wont be elected in Colorado. Apparently that is your hard litmus test. Good to know.

(11-05-2025 07:42 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:33 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:08 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:03 PM)TripleA Wrote:  #6.

Condensing a thread is now 'leftist' -- lolz.

You sure as hell have one stupidly odd rationale on what is 'leftist', bro. Double lolz.

I guess the rule is now -- if it gets under the skin of the folks in 3Aville, it *must* be leftist. Cool cool. Still stupider than a truckload of bricks, but still entertaining to watch the dude thrash to try and tag an idea as 'leftist'. triple lolz.

You disagree. What a shocker. Glad to see it bugs the crap out of you.

That little tantrum you went on about "your beloved Triple A" was cute, too.

Tanq, you could post Marx's economic theory, fully support it, I would add it to your Donk Count, and you would deny it.

Dayum, you are one entertaining dude.

Actually I would readily admit actual leftist policies. Hard to disagree with them.

I will tell you, that within the libertarian items, there are some that actually could be denoted as somewhat leftist. Albeit based on the Friedman and Hayeks work.

In terms of economics that define leftism -- not anywhere near that. Nor anywhere in the ideas of central government.

see how easy that was ... that's the tanq I remember...

@hadToCrop

(11-05-2025 03:40 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 03:10 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(11-04-2025 08:09 PM)450bench Wrote:  Trump is the President of the United States

The senate is red.

The house is red.

Liberals are still nuts.

And allow me to add, for our short bus friends-

Your President, Donald J. Trump wasn’t on any of these ballots.

But sure, continue with the waves of illegals fleeing Marxism only to bring that to our shores.

I’ll never understand 2 things that confound me.

A. Why do people continue to vote against their own self interests
2. Why is basic economics or even history never allowed to be taught in our government schools any longer?

Hunh. One simple answer escapes The Crazy.

I'm thrilled to discuss economics, one of my favorite subjects that I only didn't major in because you can't actually do sh*t with it. So please, explain the basic economics of how people are voting against their own self interests. Can't wait!!!

One of the most intelligent and wealthiest men i know has a BA in Econ.

(11-05-2025 07:44 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:25 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 06:41 PM)Bronco14 Wrote:  The only thing that's disappointing it seems extremely rare for Republicans to win in a Blue State, but Democrats can win in a Red State like KS / LA / KY, not easily, but it's a struggle more often

NM, NJ, MN, MD, ME, HI, CA, CO, CN, and MA governors (within the last 3-4 governors).

lmmfao with muh histrionics and RINOs ... I'm laughin' hardest at muh Chris Christie and Ahhhnold ... where are all those states today, eh?

since reconstruction, the 'sip never had a pub guv until '92 ... then Musgrove had to muck it for his pitiful 'tour of four' thru '04 ... we've never looked back...

some folks learn lessons...

Different states require different Repubs to be elected. I mean, the MAGA dregs of Texas certainly wont be elected in Colorado. Apparently that is your hard litmus test. Good to know.

that's a fact ... the nation can't afford to lose Tejas...

(11-05-2025 07:42 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:33 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:08 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-05-2025 07:03 PM)TripleA Wrote:  #6.

Condensing a thread is now 'leftist' -- lolz.

You sure as hell have one stupidly odd rationale on what is 'leftist', bro. Double lolz.

I guess the rule is now -- if it gets under the skin of the folks in 3Aville, it *must* be leftist. Cool cool. Still stupider than a truckload of bricks, but still entertaining to watch the dude thrash to try and tag an idea as 'leftist'. triple lolz.

You disagree. What a shocker. Glad to see it bugs the crap out of you.

That little tantrum you went on about "your beloved Triple A" was cute, too.

Tanq, you could post Marx's economic theory, fully support it, I would add it to your Donk Count, and you would deny it.

Dayum, you are one entertaining dude.

Actually I would readily admit actual leftist policies if I had them. Hard to disagree with them when they are honestly presented as such.

Your incessant garbage is just stupid as fk. But that is what I expect from you. Not much more than mouth breathing lazy ass ****.

Your fixation on trying to classify anything and everything as leftist by simply slinging items simply points out how stupid you are.

I will tell you, that within the libertarian items, there are some that actually could be denoted as somewhat leftist. Albeit based on the Friedman and Hayeks work.

In terms of economics that define leftism -- not anywhere near that. But your magpie schtick simply denotes what an absolute idiot you are. Nor anywhere in the ideas of central government.

But that eludes you. Instead, you substitute anything that the talking heads tell you is that which you immediately turn around and squawk. Without any bother if it actually leftist or not. Good for you, sparky. I have met a lot of venal stupid people, and you are close to the top, my friend. Cool cool. Arent we all much better for that. Yay.

1. Why do you care so much what anybody else thinks?

2. You come down on the side of "not conservative" quite a bit in here. Nobody is arguing any nuanced libertarian stances. It's clear black and white, or left and right, in most debates here.

And you take the anti-right position quite a bit. The rest of us don't really care. We have others here who take opposing positions.

But you take opposing opinions and then deny you took them.

Plus, if you have raging TDS, which even you admit, that puts you on the anti-right a lot. Those count, too. And before long, they all tend to blend together.