Win/Win

[Dragonlady]

You don't know that. Here are her policies. Show me where she's wrong.

Nikki Haley Says Government’s Problem Is Spending, Data Backs Her Up

In arguing that the federal government’s problem is on the spending and not the tax side of the ledger, Nikki Haley has a lot of data supporting her case.

www.forbes.com

Simply stating that the problem is "spending" shows she's clueless. The problem is Republican tax cuts, and unfunded programs.

American billionaires and corporations don't need more tax cuts. They used the last one for share buy-backs because they have TOO much cash. What they need is stability in in both your government and your international trade deals.

Long term planning for corporate expansion has to be predicated on secure supply chains and long term trade deals so they can plan for the future earnings within a stable political framework.

And they need INFRASTRUCTURE. 5G WIFI from coast to coast; A cheap, stable and green electrical grid; a fully functioning and agile Department of Commerce.

Trump gutted the Department of Commerce the last time he was in office, started trade 7 trade wars, with all of your trading partners and basically fucked over US manufacturers with his steel tariffs, which cost the USA.

One only need look at your balance of trade with the world to see what a disaster Trump was for American business, and the damage is ongoing. These numbers are for hard goods only, but they show what the loss of US based manufacturing has meant to your balance of trade. Obama was REDUCING your trade deficits. Trump exploded them.

International Trade

www.census.gov

Your services sector blunts a good deal of the economic impact of your trade deficits in finished goods, it is impossible to overstate the tragedy that has happened to small family farms in the midwest because of Trump's trade war with China - record levels of small family farm bankruptcies for multiple years during Trump's administration, while bailouts went to large corporate owners, many of them owned by foreign based corporations, who don't live on the land.

International Trade

www.census.gov

 

[Dragonlady]

what crime would he be charged with??

It's an international war crime to invade another country. Murder of civilians. Basically all of the shit Putin is currently charged with.

Also, it would be illegal because only Congress can declare war. The President cannot attack another nation without Congressional consent. It's an impeachable offense.

Interpretation: Declare War Clause | Constitution Center

Interpretations of Declare War Clause by constitutional scholars

constitutioncenter.org

For someone who comes here an argues that you believe in the Constitution, how come you don't know what's in it?????

 

[TNHarley]

And yet you support Putin every time you post your opposition to giving aid to the Ukraine. Putin is COUNTING on people like you to hand him the Ukraine on a silver platter, if he can just hold out long enough, or find a way to get Trump back into office.

Every time you post opposition to continuing aid to the Ukraine, you give Putin reasons to go on.

By not wanting to work to support another countries war, pay pensions and subsidize businesses, isnt giving into putin, you brain dead dumbfuck.

 

[Lesh]

what crime would he be charged with??

I believe that would be a war crime. No?

Are you saying that invading Canada would not be illegal?

 

[progressive hunter]

I believe that would be a war crime. No?

Are you saying that invading Canada would not be illegal?

you tell me??
why would/did we invade canada??
we currently have justification to invade mexico,,

now we could go after him and anyone that voted for the patriot act that basically threw out all of the bill of rights,,

 

[Lesh]

It's an international war crime to invade another country. Murder of civilians. Basically all of the shit Putin is currently charged with.

Also, it would be illegal because only Congress can declare war. The President cannot attack another nation without Congressional consent. It's an impeachable offense.

For someone who comes here an argues that you believe in the Constitution, how come you don't know what's in it?????

Actually you point out a flaw in our system. The President CAN engage in military action but must seek Congressional approval if it goes longer than 90(?) days.

 

[kyzr]

Simply stating that the problem is "spending" shows she's clueless. The problem is Republican tax cuts, and unfunded programs.

American billionaires and corporations don't need more tax cuts. They used the last one for share buy-backs because they have TOO much cash. What they need is stability in in both your government and your international trade deals.

Long term planning for corporate expansion has to be predicated on secure supply chains and long term trade deals so they can plan for the future earnings within a stable political framework.

And they need INFRASTRUCTURE. 5G WIFI from coast to coast; A cheap, stable and green electrical grid; a fully functioning and agile Department of Commerce.

Trump gutted the Department of Commerce the last time he was in office, started trade 7 trade wars, with all of your trading partners and basically fucked over US manufacturers with his steel tariffs, which cost the USA.

One only need look at your balance of trade with the world to see what a disaster Trump was for American business, and the damage is ongoing. These numbers are for hard goods only, but they show what the loss of US based manufacturing has meant to your balance of trade. Obama was REDUCING your trade deficits. Trump exploded them.

Your services sector blunts a good deal of the economic impact of your trade deficits in finished goods, it is impossible to overstate the tragedy that has happened to small family farms in the midwest because of Trump's trade war with China - record levels of small family farm bankruptcies for multiple years during Trump's administration, while bailouts went to large corporate owners, many of them owned by foreign based corporations, who don't live on the land.

Nikki is correct that we have a spending problem. Here are the last few Budgets:

2023 $6.1T - $4.4T = $1.7T deficit
2022 $6.3T - $4.9T = $1.4T deficit
2021 $6.8T - $4.0T = $2.8T deficit
2020 $6.5T - $3.4T = $3.1T deficit
2019 $4.4T - $3.4T = $1.0T deficit

I don't know what the 2024 Budget will be yet, but I doubt it will start with a "4" like it needs to.
We need to get back to pre-COVID Budgets.

 

[TNHarley]

The President CAN engage in military action but must seek Congressional approval if it goes longer than 90(?) days.

Which is unconstitutional.

 

[kyzr]

Which is unconstitutional.

Nope.

War Powers Resolution - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The War Powers Resolution requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30-day withdrawal period, without congressional authorization for use of military force (AUMF) or a declaration of war by the United States. The resolution was passed by two-thirds each of the House and Senate, overriding the veto of President Richard Nixon.

 

[Lesh]

you tell me??
why would/did we invade canada??
we currently have justification to invade mexico,,

now we could go after him and anyone that voted for the patriot act that basically threw out all of the bill of rights,,

My point is that it would NOT be justified.
Neither would an invasion of Mexico

And if a President were to do something like that he should be held legally liable.

You appear to think otherwise

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Who told you that? I just googled this and found NOTHING. Not even a piece in the Gateway Pundit.

Please provide links.

Is that your hockey helmet lined with tin foil, just to keep you extra safe?

Lazy fuck.

I won’t respond to this. Last one was someone impersonating a US Marshall

In any event why is PedoPete denying RFK jr Secret Service protection

Lazy fuck

 

[Lesh]

Which is unconstitutional.

You’re wrong

 

[progressive hunter]

My point is that it would NOT be justified.
Neither would an invasion of Mexico

And if a President were to do something like that he should be held legally liable.

You appear to think otherwise

how would you know if it was or wasnt justified if you dont know the reason it happened?? or wat crime you would charge them with,,

an invasion of mexico would be to stop them from allowing miilions of people from other countries to use their country to invade our country,,

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Nikki is correct that we have a spending problem. Here are the last few Budgets:

2023 $6.1T - $4.4T = $1.7T deficit
2022 $6.3T - $4.9T = $1.4T deficit
2021 $6.8T - $4.0T = $2.8T deficit
2020 $6.5T - $3.4T = $3.1T deficit
2019 $4.4T - $3.4T = $1.0T deficit

I don't know what the 2024 Budget will be yet, but I doubt it will start with a "4" like it needs to.
We need to get back to pre-COVID Budgets.

Yup! The government currently occupying the USA normalized COVID budgeting and will fight to the death to maintain it

 

[Lesh]

how would you know if it was or wasnt justified if you dont know the reason it happened?? or wat crime you would charge them with,,

an invasion of mexico would be to stop them from allowing miilions of people from other countries to use their country to invade our country,,

You’re too stupid to engage in conversation with.

Go away

 

[progressive hunter]

You’re too stupid to engage in conversation with.

Go away

sorry didnt mean to make you think about what youre saying,,

better you just go back to rambleing incoherently,,

 

[Dragonlady]

No, until The Dems decided beating him means destroying our system if needed.

Trump is the guy promising to "destroy your system". He wants to ignore the Constitution, and he tried to overthrow the government.

 

[TNHarley]

Nope.

War Powers Resolution - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The War Powers Resolution requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30-day withdrawal period, without congressional authorization for use of military force (AUMF) or a declaration of war by the United States. The resolution was passed by two-thirds each of the House and Senate, overriding the veto of President Richard Nixon.

That doesnt make it constitutional

 

[TNHarley]

You’re wrong

Ok, then what does Article 1, Section 8, mean? Probably nothing to you...
The war powers act was a law. It wasnt an amendment to the Constitution.

 

[progressive hunter]

Ok, then what does Article 1, Section 8, mean? Probably nothing to you...
The war powers act was a law. It wasnt an amendment to the Constitution.

careful you dont make him think about things,, he doesnt like using logic and facts,, feelings are his preferred way of deciding things,,