Early Voting Results It’s Bad and Good for Dems and GOP.

[Paratus]

NBC:
Republicans outpacing Democrats in early voting in key states, NBC News finds
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna922881

Fox:
Early voting points to massive turnout, potential warning signs for GOP
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...-to-massive-turnout-warning-signs-for-gop.amp


Hold on to your hats folks it’s going to be a wild ride.

 

[IronWing]

Trump demanding that federal agencies prepare for a 5% budget cut for next year suggests that he has written off the House to the Dems.

 

[Jhhnn]

Trump demanding that federal agencies prepare for a 5% budget cut for next year suggests that he has written off the House to the Dems.

Why would it suggest that?

 

[Paratus]

Trump demanding that federal agencies prepare for a 5% budget cut for next year suggests that he has written off the House to the Dems.

To make my views clear and stay away from arguments about polls and probabilities I will use Russian Roullete to convey my thoughts. For no particular reason i’ll use blowing our brains out as electing Republicans while not blowing our brains out is electing democrats.

I think it’s likely the Dems take the House.

• 1 Bullet out of 6 we blow our heads off

For the Senate I give it:

• 5 Bullets out of 6 We blow our heads off

 

[IronWing]

Why would it suggest that?

If the Reps hold both houses of Congress then zero shits given about spending and debt. If Dems control House then, "We must rein in this horrible waste, tighten our belts in shared sacrifice." Trump's direction to the agencies is slapping another coat of paint the facade of Republican fiscal responsibility. The Dems would be terribly irresponsible for thwarting Trump's plan for spending cuts.

 

[Jhhnn]

If the Reps hold both houses of Congress then zero shits given about spending and debt. If Dems control House then, "We must rein in this horrible waste, tighten our belts in shared sacrifice." Trump's direction to the agencies is slapping another coat of paint the facade of Republican fiscal responsibility. The Dems would be terribly irresponsible for thwarting Trump's plan for spending cuts.

Dems will thwart GOP plans for serious spending cuts to social programs if we take the house. We have no choice.

 

[compuwiz1]

Dems will thwart GOP plans for serious spending cuts to social programs if we take the house. We have no choice.

You mean that spending that continues to enable the able masses to sit on their asses? Those are the ones having the biggest hissy fit about potential spending cuts in those areas. And those are the same people who should be direct targets of such cuts.

 

[theeedude]

We all know GOP is suppressing the vote, purging voter rolls, and making it as difficult for possible for people to have a chance to pick their elected officials. It's all they have left, you don't hear much in terms of ideas from the right now, since trickle down isn't selling well.

 

[shortylickens]

We all know GOP is suppressing the vote, purging voter rolls, and making it as difficult for possible for people to have a chance to pick their elected officials. It's all they have left, you don't hear much in terms of ideas from the right now, since trickle down isn't selling well.

I dont recall anyone in either party "selling" Trickle Down during the last several years. Or did they just come up with a different code-word?

 

[theeedude]

I dont recall anyone in either party "selling" Trickle Down during the last several years. Or did they just come up with a different code-word?

Now Republicans just ram tax cuts for corporations and the rich through and don't even bother with what the people think about it. The people who are still waiting for trickle down after 40 years are reliable GOP voters anyways, and they can just suppress and gerrymander the rest away.

 

[fskimospy]

Did we already forget the lesson of 2016 that early voting has little to do with final outcomes?

 

[ecogen]

You mean that spending that continues to enable the able masses to sit on their asses? Those are the ones having the biggest hissy fit about potential spending cuts in those areas. And those are the same people who should be direct targets of such cuts.

Pretty ironic, coming from a welfare queen like you.

 

[sdifox]

You mean that spending that continues to enable the able masses to sit on their asses? Those are the ones having the biggest hissy fit about potential spending cuts in those areas. And those are the same people who should be direct targets of such cuts.

Make up your mind. Is the economy so good everyone is working or there are craploads of people sitting on their hands collecting EI.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Make up your mind. Is the economy so good everyone is working or there are craploads of people sitting on their hands collecting EI.

Read my mind.

I havent found any government website with the data, if someone does feel free to post it.
here's wallethub's take on federal goverment dependancy ...

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/

 

[Bitek]

You mean that spending that continues to enable the able masses to sit on their asses? Those are the ones having the biggest hissy fit about potential spending cuts in those areas. And those are the same people who should be direct targets of such cuts.

Who are you taking about?

The "able masses" of octagenarians collecting SS checks and Medicare in nursing homes after a lifetime of paying into the system?

No one cut my taxes 70%, so I expect to collect my pay in when I'm old.

 

[Bitek]

It's going to be a nail biter going into election night.

Ds have the problem of counting on millennials and Latinos caring enough to bother themselves to vote.

Yikes

 

[SlowSpyder]

Dems will thwart GOP plans for serious spending cuts to social programs if we take the house. We have no choice.

That would be a very good thing if we cut back on social programs. We spend way too much here.

 

[shortylickens]

Did we already forget the lesson of 2016 that early voting has little to do with final outcomes?

I believe there was a stink with the second FBI investigation. Somebody claimed that would have tainted early voters into thinking Hilary had committed a federal crime when she had not. The issue was not sorted out until after many people had voted early.

 

[K1052]

That would be a very good thing if we cut back on social programs. We spend way too much here.

It's like you want to kill rural red America. Large parts of this country literally couldn't survive without government social programs and it's not only the people the Republicans tell you it is.

 

[Bitek]

That would be a very good thing if we cut back on social programs. We spend way too much here.

We don't need any legislation.
Republicans can go ahead and return their social security checks and stop using Medicare at their doctor right now. They can save even more money by moving out of the nursing home and move back in with their kids.

 

[shortylickens]

My mom needs Medicare to live. She's been voting exclusively Republican for about 20 years. She cheered when Donald won.
I worry about her brain more than her cancer.

 

[zinfamous]

You mean that spending that continues to enable the able masses to sit on their asses? Those are the ones having the biggest hissy fit about potential spending cuts in those areas. And those are the same people who should be direct targets of such cuts.

So rather than having the lowest unemployment in decades (ever) and reaching "full employment" (I thought this is a good thing, no?), we still can't properly MAGA because the country is somehow held in thrall by a massive disease of "lazy, worthless, useless people that refuse to work and just suck away my tax dollars for welfare"?

What the fuck is it, already? Are you ever going to banish this stupid minotaur that is the "Welfare queen"? Do you even care that this has been a fucking lie as long as it has been crammed down your throat? The data on one hand that you love and thoroughly believe in, drastically rejects the existence of this phantom ghost that keeps you wetting your bed at nights.

What is it? When is it going to give with you gas-lighted idiots? How do you believe such thoroughly contradictory realities at the same time? How is this possible?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

You mean that spending that continues to enable the able masses to sit on their asses? Those are the ones having the biggest hissy fit about potential spending cuts in those areas. And those are the same people who should be direct targets of such cuts.

Yeah, starve the old folks Reps ripped off by supporting pension theft.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

That would be a very good thing if we cut back on social programs. We spend way too much here.

The French had a response for that which didn't end well for Louis.

 

[Meghan54]

So rather than having the lowest unemployment in decades (ever) and reaching "full employment" (I thought this is a good thing, no?), we still can't properly MAGA because the country is somehow held in thrall by a massive disease of "lazy, worthless, useless people that refuse to work and just suck away my tax dollars for welfare"?

What the fuck is it, already? Are you ever going to banish this stupid minotaur that is the "Welfare queen"? Do you even care that this has been a fucking lie as long as it has been crammed down your throat? The data on one hand that you love and thoroughly believe in, drastically rejects the existence of this phantom ghost that keeps you wetting your bed at nights.

What is it? When is it going to give with you gas-lighted idiots? How do you believe such thoroughly contradictory realities at the same time? How is this possible?

Mind boggling, isn't it? And none of the cons will ever admit they're arguing some asinine point of view that has no hold on reality whatsoever.