Why Are Republicans So Relentlessly Cruel to the Poor?

LIE on your part...again!

USA Today

5/15/2001

George W. Bush would have won a hand count of Florida's disputed ballots if the standard advocated by Al Gore had been used, the first full study of the ballots reveals. Bush would have won by 1,665 votes — more than triple his official 537-vote margin — if every dimple, hanging chad and mark on the ballots had been counted as votes, a USA TODAY/Miami Herald/Knight Ridder study shows. The study is the first comprehensive review of the 61,195 "undervote" ballots that were at the center of Florida's disputed presidential election.

USATODAY.com - Newspapers' recount shows Bush prevailed
They only counted the undervotes, not all the ballots that were in dispute. It is interesting to note, of the 4 standards for reviewing the votes, Gore would've won one of them.

From your link...
The fourth standard gives Gore a razor-thin win.

So where's the lie, asshole?


In Florida, the law is that you can't recount ballots in favored areas. If you have recounts in three Democrat areas, you must have three recounts in Republican areas as well.

It was yet another violation of the Florida laws when the court said Gore could have recounts in his districts only.

Well, apparently, declaring that the laws on the books actually must be applied constitutes "stealing an election". Who knew?
 
you can't make beer in a bathtub
My grandmother did during prohibition.


just goes to show you you don't know anything about good beer you drink Dos Equis from a can after all
No, it just shows I don't feel like driving down to the pub every time I want a drink or go through the extra hassle of buying a keg.

Yeah, but you're still stocking your house with cheap, crappy beer. I only buy Dos Equis if I'm planning to wash my hair with it.
 
we have had leftiest socialist dogma for a 100 years running the country why are there still poor people? Funny thing is the only time we do have less poor is when we stop using socialist dogma ...
Hilarious. 35 years of Reaganism not taxing the rich and not investing in America is what we've got, dupe.
Reagan was in office 8 years .... That LARGEST economic growth ever in the history of the country as well as less poor .... Now how is it it failed again ? So sad you are so ignorant of facts.
And all he had to do was triple the debt and have a giant corrupt S+L bubble. And the pander to rich bs has been wrecking the middle class and the country ever since...It worked ONCE- and never since...
The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 35 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 60 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/blog/09/04/27/CongratulationstoEmmanuelSaez/
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
4 = Federated Prudent Bear Fund (A): Overview
4 = FRB: Z.1 Release - Financial Accounts of the United States - Current Release
5/6 = 15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts
Hey fool do you know why the middle class shrunk under Reagan ? Because they got richer . That is called success you tool not failure.

That's bullshit. Reagan's "trickle down" was "trickle out" to China, India, etc.
Only when Clinton was selling them the Pattons
 
LIE on your part...again!

USA Today

5/15/2001

George W. Bush would have won a hand count of Florida's disputed ballots if the standard advocated by Al Gore had been used, the first full study of the ballots reveals. Bush would have won by 1,665 votes — more than triple his official 537-vote margin — if every dimple, hanging chad and mark on the ballots had been counted as votes, a USA TODAY/Miami Herald/Knight Ridder study shows. The study is the first comprehensive review of the 61,195 "undervote" ballots that were at the center of Florida's disputed presidential election.

USATODAY.com - Newspapers' recount shows Bush prevailed
They only counted the undervotes, not all the ballots that were in dispute. It is interesting to note, of the 4 standards for reviewing the votes, Gore would've won one of them.

From your link...
The fourth standard gives Gore a razor-thin win.

So where's the lie, asshole?


In Florida, the law is that you can't recount ballots in favored areas. If you have recounts in three Democrat areas, you must have three recounts in Republican areas as well.

It was yet another violation of the Florida laws when the court said Gore could have recounts in his districts only.

Well, apparently, declaring that the laws on the books actually must be applied constitutes "stealing an election". Who knew?
Another election the Dems screwed up to lose. Too bad the GOP is only good at fooling the dupes and winning elections on total bs...and pure mindless obstruction when they lose...
 
He knew because he knew what was in the bill that would make it almost impossible.
I saw plans in the California exchange that allowed you to keep your doctor. Maybe all the blue states had plans that allowed you to keep your doctor and it was the red states, with asshole republican governor's refusing to accept much needed federal subsidies in order to make Obama look bad?
 
Once again, the Florida law states that all ballots must be certified in seven days. I understand you are a liberal and probably pretty slow, but what don't you understand about this law? It's rather simplistic.

Yes, because the recount was illegal. The recount violated Florida election laws.

That's exactly what he did.
Alright, you called the game, if we are going to strictly follow the law, then the 687 flawed oversee votes that came in after the election date, should have not been counted. Bush won by 537 votes.

Florida's certified election results, listed on the Florida Department of State's Web site, show that ...Although Mr. Bush appeared to hold a fluctuating lead throughout the 36 days of recounts...without the overseas absentee ballots counted after Election Day, Mr. Gore would have won Florida by 202 votes, and thus the White House.

Scalia violated the law when he allowed the unequal treatment of these votes to be counted.

The unequal treatment of these ballots...conflicts with the equal protection guarantee that the United States Supreme Court invoked in December when it halted a statewide manual recount and effectively handed Florida to Mr. Bush.

The ballots were mostly from our overseas military which by Florida law, can be counted given the circumstance. Gore tried to stop that count and Bush took it to court and won. Furthermore, there is no way to know which contestant will be favored by absentee ballots until they are opened and counted. According to your one-sided story, they only counted votes for Bush which would be impossible without opening up the ballots first.

Judge orders Florida’s military votes counted
 
you can't make beer in a bathtub
My grandmother did during prohibition.


just goes to show you you don't know anything about good beer you drink Dos Equis from a can after all
No, it just shows I don't feel like driving down to the pub every time I want a drink or go through the extra hassle of buying a keg.

you make gin in a bathtub not beer you can't carbonate a liquid in a bathtub

but you still drink Dos Equis so that says it all
/--- In college I drank beer in a bathtub, then farted, Does that count?
bathtub.jpg
 
It was reported that ISIS got there hands on Saddam's old WMDs and used them, the military found a bunch of them BTW... So to out right say they were not there is as retarded to say Trump was not wire tapped.
Do you really think it is possible for us to be there over 10 years and not find anything and then, right after we leave, ISIS finds some?
 
Well, gee, how did everyone ELSE know ahead of time when they were saying, "Keep your doctor. Yeah, right. THAT'S not going to happen"? Were they psychic? Were they just smarter and more perceptive than Obama? Or did he know what they knew, and just lie his ass off to get support? I guess it depends on how ignorant one wishes to believe Obama to be.
Who's the "they" people you are referring to?
 
The ballots were mostly from our overseas military which by Florida law, can be counted given the circumstance. Gore tried to stop that count and Bush took it to court and won. Furthermore, there is no way to know which contestant will be favored by absentee ballots until they are opened and counted. According to your one-sided story, they only counted votes for Bush which would be impossible without opening up the ballots first.

Judge orders Florida’s military votes counted
I never said that.
 
Your lack of English comprehension is not my problem. Speak to your high school teachers about their failure in this area.
You keep trying to make this about me, which means you have no argument.

No, it means you haven't provided anything requiring or deserving argument. You just keep telling me about your opinions and your "feelz", and since I'm not a leftist, I don't consider those factual or important.
 
Well, gee, how did everyone ELSE know ahead of time when they were saying, "Keep your doctor. Yeah, right. THAT'S not going to happen"? Were they psychic? Were they just smarter and more perceptive than Obama? Or did he know what they knew, and just lie his ass off to get support? I guess it depends on how ignorant one wishes to believe Obama to be.
Who's the "they" people you are referring to?

Jesus God, you're stupid. You really, REALLY can't remember who was saying that "Keep your doctor" was horseshit?

You're on the Internet, chum. It's good for looking up other things besides porn. Try it.
 
The ballots were mostly from our overseas military which by Florida law, can be counted given the circumstance. Gore tried to stop that count and Bush took it to court and won. Furthermore, there is no way to know which contestant will be favored by absentee ballots until they are opened and counted. According to your one-sided story, they only counted votes for Bush which would be impossible without opening up the ballots first.

Judge orders Florida’s military votes counted
I never said that.

Your post did.
 

Forum List

Back
Top