Trending Content - Off Topic Forum
| +30 | SpaceX IPO - what are your thoughts | 5 | 19h |
| +27 | Should I use Claude or chatgpt? | 15 | 3m |
| +21 | Funny Things to Say to Interns | 7 | 2h |
| +17 | How did you meet your significant other/partner? | 13 | 16h |
| +17 | London's future as a financial centre | 18 | 1d |
| The Great Debate | 9 | 4h | |
| +7 | Test post will be deleted automatically. | 11 | 22h |
| +7 | E ink/electronic notepads | 4 | 17h |
| +6 | Stay Sharp All Day With Best Modvigil 200 MG Tablet | 0 | 13h |
| +5 | get a model before you model | 3 | 1d |
Career Resources
The drunk childless wine mom doesn't even have policy positions on her website. Her campaign is "Not Trump" and whatever can be said, true or not, that convinces people the past 4 years have all been because he must still secretly runs the government as a civilian while simultaneously battling half a dozen bogus prosecutions. CNN even crossed the friendly line to ask her if she'd been to the border a year or so back, and her responses to the journalist were "have you been the the border" and "I haven't been to Europe either" when pressed. She's on record during her last presidential run as someone who wanted to provide ALL illegal entrants with free healthcare and is pro sanctuary cities, which are some of those worst hit by the influx of 12m+ illegals during this administration.
Nothing of consequence will ever come out of this woman's mouth that was written/devised by her. If she's off script, she becomes the personification of filler for lengthening middle school essays to reach the teacher's character minimum. There's more than enough compilations on YouTube to see that much is clear.
Every Dem last cycle, incl. Kamala, stating they're pro free healthcare for illegals.
Begging you guys to be less weird.
This is just sad.
Begging you to come up with an original one liner that wasn't parroted to you by a dozen news anchors.
This is just sad.
Says the child castration and drag queens at the nuclear regulatory agency party.
Begging you to not support an astro-turfed campaign headed up by a racist.
fuck step parents amirite?
Kamala wasn’t the “border czar,” but more importantly, congressional Republicans and Democrats agreed on a comprehensive border bill to fix the problem but then Trump told them to kill it because it is more useful for him politically for it to be a problem. Numerous Republicans are even quoted as saying this is the case.
Trump chose his personal interests over the country’s interests, because he always does, and he always will.
Biden taps VP Harris to lead response to border challenges | AP News
Updated 7:29 PM EDT, March 24, 2021
Share
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden has tapped Vice President Kamala Harris to lead the White House effort to tackle the migration challenge at the U.S. southern border and work with Central American nations to address root causes of the problem.
Correct. From that article:
She was working with El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras - none of which have a border with the United States - to press them to strengthen their own borders and to help them eliminate the root causes of migration.
She was not tasked with anything directly related to the US/Mexico border.
Again, both Republicans and Democrats agree that the border is an issue. Both Republicans and Democrats came together to create a bipartisan deal that strengthened the border. A divided government actually figured out a way to be productive.
Trump ordered it killed for his own political benefit.
And you believed what she said?? Why??
You do realize the internet exists right? All your favorite stations called her Border Czar up until Biden dropped out a few weeks ago.
Not even close. The BS proposed legislation he advocated against completely legalized by giving clear citizenship paths to ~2m crossings per year and only instituted (incredibly weak) reductive measures once that threshold was met. Biden has the entire administration had sole discretion over this issue. He could've sent the military to the border to gun the hordes down if he wanted to, it's the President's sole authority as shown by Trump's institution of remain in Mexico policies that Biden single-handedly undid as soon as he took office. You're a sad, lying little lib.
I don’t know how you possibly think what a talking head on CNN says matters at all. Her actual responsibilities were linked above.
You can cry and bitch and parrot right wing twitter all you want, but you are still an angry little chode of a man who doesn’t understand this stuff anywhere near as well as you think you do. MAGA preys on people like you - the angry, the uninformed, the conspiratorial.
I can’t wait until Trump is defeated and all of the impotent little edgelords crawl back under the bridge they came from. The US needs a functional Republican Party, but MAGA isn’t it.
"You're a sad, lying little lib"
I think we need to recognize that the voters we disagree with aren't evil or out to get anyone. They are, for the most part, regular people who have a very different view from you because 1. The news you watch largely only shows good things about your party and bad things about the other party. 2. The other party's news largely shows them only good things about their party, and bad things about the other party.
The news is designed to inflame emotions, and get people angry and outraged (justifiably so in many cases) but as a result, we are unable to hold our own party's elected officials accountable when we are ultra focused on what the other party is doing
He's aware. He's choosing to be dishonest. Look there's no point in engaging in good faith discussion with people who act in bad faith. I get it that there are leftists with thought-out arguments but he's just repeating generic AOC/Maddow talking points
This is about as believable as Biden being "sharp" and "competent"
The article describing her role in immigration is linked above.
This has to be one of the most insane non-sequitur attempts at making a point that I've ever seen.
Nobody literally believes or is asserting her position was written into policy under the title "border czar" - every major news station across CNN, MSNBC, ABC, and affiliates were referring to her colloquially as this as recently as June of this year.
That is completely separate and unrelated to the supposed bi-partisan bill (which, it wasn't, otherwise it couldn't have been scuttled just because "Trump said so") which in fact was only agreed to by a minority of establishment Republicans and had almost no concessions from what was written by its primarily Democrat authors. Which I'm willing to bet $1k in Ether/Bitcoin you have not read if your supposed takeaway from that rag was how "comprehensive" it was.
Do you know what a non-sequitur is? Of course the two issues are separate, but they are far from unrelated as they both directly address the border. The attack of “she was the boarder czar and the border is still an issue” is two-pronged:
1. Was she or was she not a “border czar?”
2. Is the border still an issue?
She, of course, was not the “border czar” because a “border czar” would be tasked with directly solving the issue at the border and that is not what Kamala was charged with. I don’t give a shit what the name is, as I’ve said elsewhere in this thread. I care that it is a disingenuous attack. You can show me data that shows that illegal immigration from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras specifically has increased since she has been given that task, and if so, I will say “she didn’t succeed at the task assigned” but I will not say “oh yeah she was the border czar and since the border is still an issue, she failed.” That is incorrect, and frankly, stupid.
The answer to #2 is of course, yes, the border is still an issue, but it could be significantly better had that border bill passed. It was agreed to by a majority of Republicans and authored by quite a conservative Republican from Oklahoma, up until Trump selfishly told his minions to kill it. There were many concessions (Otherwise, how would there have been an agreement? Did Republicans just roll over?) and the bill was also supported by several right wing groups and parties such as the US Chamber of Commerce and the WSJ editorial board. The union that represents border patrol agents endorsed the bill.
How do you want to handle sending me the $1k?
Could more easily say that Democratic leadershp failed massively on the border for 3+ years and then scrambled to throw together a compromise for political purposes, when they realized that issue was going to cost them dearly.
Trump wisely didn't let them get away with it. I'd rather suffer 6 more months of failures than 4 more years of them.
This is completely unhinged. Do you not know what a law is? Or how the legislative process works? I mean, obviously you don't, you're a conservative and conservatives haven't actually had a policy position that they were interested in converting into law in several election cycles, but this is an indefensible level of stupidity.
Even IF you think that the Democrats addressed the border "for political purposes", who cares? Every law ever passed was "for political purposes." You run on a platform and then execute. Democrats passing a border security bill that runs counter to their previous belief is only a bad thing if you view politics as some sort of game in which your team winning is the most important thing, instead of crafting national policy.
Let me ask you - why do you care whether it was Democrats who passed that bill? It becomes law - they can't just ignore it or walk it back, so pretending like "4 more years of failure" would be the result is inane.
The only possible answer is that you don't care about policy and you don't care about the actual business of politics - you no longer have any real intelligible political position, you just care about hurting the other "team". Here we have a piece of legislation that you agree with in principle, but are unwilling to applaud because it's more important that Democrats lose than that laws you support get passed.
Why should anyone give half a shit about what you have to say, knowing that?
The border bill would have helped nothing. It didn’t address the DHS lack of ability to hold illegals past 20 days before releasing freely into the United States and it provided over $10 billion to various NGO’s which are the problem. Like the NGO’s in the Middle East, NGO’s on the border work with or are controlled by the cartels. It was a big nothing burger that was used to save political face through an attempt for both sides of the congressional aisle to pretend they are doing something about the border.
To be honest, that is still more appealing than the alternative. I know which of the two last administrations I prefer.
Andddd shadowbanned already...
you're not allowed to consistently build threads that discuss Trump favorably. thought you would've learned that by now Mr. Isaiah "The Addict" >.>
Look at all these tipsy old men fighting in the comments over something a woman said on a Saturday evening.
Honestly, fair. Probably need to not bother taking the bait.
amen, plenty of other cooler shit going on
du plessis v adesanya
CJI
ADCC
swell from ernesto
give it a rest guys, everyone commenting here already has their mind made up and isn't going to convince anyone, feels like so much wasted energy
Yea let’s continue to let the border be wide fucking open, who cares there’s UFC to watch
so what's the point of this post?
Weekly Trump supporter circle jerk on WSO
As a foreigner seeing the debate above, i wonder if both sides actually wanted to listen to each other then trying to discuss what could be done rather that pointing fingers about each side short-comings.
I might be naive but can't both sides just focus on the issue and not revert to ad-hominem attacks or quoting clearly biased opinion of talking heads?
Actually, it isn't a "both sides" issue. It's a conservative/Republican issue. Democrats proposed one of the most stringent border security bills in living history earlier this year - but it was voted down by Republicans at the behest of Mr Trump, lest it let Mr Biden claim a "win" on anything.
Democrats passed a bill which they fundamentally don't agree with, but which seemed to be in the best interests of the country and which reflected the apparent will of a majority of voters. It was buried in order to help the career of one man. That isn't "both sides". And it's about time we stop pretending that it is.
What's with people posting politics and relationship advice questions on here. This is wallstreetoasis not reddit
To be fair, it’s the off topic forum. This is where that stuff would go.
The difference over the past 5 or so years is that now there are posters who purely exist to post on the off topic forum. It isn’t a place for people to talk about random stuff after actually contributing in the on-topic forums anymore. They’re just full time WSO redditors.
Yea I only read ot lol there’s good insight here on rando life topics although reddit likely gives a wider variety of opinions
You've never heard about PPE (Politics Philosophy and Economics)? My mentor in college (Phil Lader - former US Ambassador to UK) said if you want to know about the world, study PPE. If you're going to invest in a country, you need to know the PPE. It affects the markets, the value of currencies and the stability of nations.
Except this has nothing to do with economic policy you're just talking shit about Kamala lol. Either way I hadn't known there was an off-topic category so I don't blame you for posting it, but please don't act like you posted this to have a political philosophy and economics discussion
Property, plant, & equipment?
I'm not on reddit... are you?
Sounds like you should get on there I'm sure you'll get plenty of advice on your Nashville girl
I can’t believe she is actually going to win. Would be impressive if the media turned her from one of the least popular VPs of all time into president.
haven’t heard her speak about policy yet, at all
She doesn't need to. People are voting on identity, not policy or even competence. I'm not saying I like it. I absolutely do not like it. But here we are.
Yes, we are aligned there
Win or lose, can’t wait for the Trump saga to end. Hopefully the Republican Party can revert to normalcy instead of the MAGA lunacy
I believe if he's got about another 2 loses at the elections before expiring
Eh, not wrong. And I say that voting for Trump. For me it's more a vote against Kamala and Walz than a vote for Trump. I wanted to see a robust primary and see someone like DeSantis, Vivek, or Rand Paul, or on the Dem side RFK. I like a number of the MAGA policies but not the self-sabotage, bad hires, and all the excuses.
Don’t write her off just yet, she is out looking for “root causes” of (illegal) immigration. Once she finds those the true work can begin and we can be unburdened by what was.
After Afghanistan, COVID mandates, sex change surgeries on underage minors who cannot provide informed consent, mass illegal immigration, I'm honestly embarrassed for the state of our country that ~50% are considering this lunatic lady. Primary voters rightfully kicked her to the curb in 2020 and now we're supposed to believe she is a serious person? No thanks.
It's funny, because aside from allowing trans people rights, all of this applies to Mr Trump equally well. It was his Afghanistan deal. To the extent you choose to blame a sitting POTUS for the things that go wrong during their Administration, Mr Trump is responsible for COVID. And there was mass illegal immigration under Mr Trump, as well.
I know facts are tough, but try a little harder.
You and I both know that if the Afghanistan collapse happened under Trump, and Trump instead of Biden blew up a random civilian family to seem like a tough guy after the Abbey Gate bombing, we'd be on impeachment round number 50. Instead we don't even have a discussion on what went wrong on America's longest war, because people like yourself would rather not discuss these things. If CNN or the NY Times doesn't bring attention to it, in the liberal mind, it doesn't exist.
Yes Trump should have fired Fauci, which is why I've publicly said on here I'd rather have had DeSantis or RFK, but Trump was not president in 2021-2022 when governments were trying to coerce people into vaccines and booster shots.
Trump was the one who committed us to leaving Afghanistan and he didn't do anything regarding the border or transgender surgeries.
Politics on wso...are we serious bruh
The guy tweeting is obviously a republican/right winger but he’s just reposting Harris’s words. She has no border policy at best and her actions suggest it’s just an open border
https://x.com/CollinRugg/status/1823119173398229441?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1823119173398229441%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=
Side note, link embedding on this site is an absolute joke lol
I assume this is a troll comment? The most stringent border bill passed in modern history was just voted down earlier this year at the behest of Mr Trump. He's literally advocating for an open border.
In every sense, Mrs Harris is correct. What Mr Trump "ran on" means nothing compared to what he did, and is doing
That is like saying quantitive easing is the best solution to an over heated asset bubble. Just because something is self described as being something doesn't make it so.
Also since you seem suddenly be a stickler for HOW the legislative process works, that bill was by its very structure unconstitutional. In fact ANY omnibus spending and legislative package is unconstitutional.
This comparison doesn't make sense. There was general agreement on both sides of the aisle that this was a bill which would have been applauded as a tough border bill if proposed by a Republican. The whole reason it was voted down is because it was a tough border bill. That was made explicit at the time. Mr Trump wants chaos at the border because it increases his chances at the ballot box - which is well in keeping with his normal MO, which is to sell the country and every person in it down the river for the slightest personal advantage. Republicans got exactly what they wanted, but if it might help Democrats then it's not palatable. Compare that to the Safer Communities Act, in which Democrats supported a bill which was more aligned with "their" priorities even though it was proposed by a Republican. Because liberals understand that being in government means crafting policy that helps people in general, and not using the government to enrich one man (or shield him from legal liability).
Well, unfortunately for you, the noted scholar of Constitutional law, that doesn't seem to be the prevailing view on either side of the aisle. And seeing as we've had omnibus spending bills since (checks notes) 1950, I'd say that whether you think it's Constitutional or not is unimportant for the purpose of this conversation. It's a widely used and widely accepted form of legislation, and it was not voted down because Republicans think omnibus bills are unconstitutional. It was explicitly voted down because Mr Trump thinks that allowing more illegal immigrants into the country will help his electoral chances.
Again, I'm not some mouth-breathing conservative who is going to nod and drool at whatever silly point you make. I understand that you can't do better, because like most conservative politics over the last decade or so the actual meat of what's going on is completely indefensible and projection and attack are all you have, but at least do better than this.
For the Harris supporters - would be really interested to hear your thoughts on her initial economic plans and pretty widespread granting of citizenship. Not trying to pot stir, legitimately curious.
That would imply that they think about those things and aren't just blindly pulling the blue lever.
Trump had leaders scared to f with us. It wasn’t a coincidence that we weren’t on the verge of WW3 while he was in office. He did more than anyone else would have ever tried to do on the border and his rhetoric alone and support for ICE deterred illegals from walking on thru.
Trump helped build the nyc skyline, they have tried to erase his past. Oprah was a good friend of his as well as TONS of top Dems. Jesse Jackson was giving him awards for supporting the black community. Now they act like they never knew him.
kamala is a third tier educated assclown with zero leadership ability - 100% puppet.
What? he cozied up to dictators and had constant love fests with Putin and Kim Jong Un.
And yet they didn’t invade and raise hell like now? Wake up.
also that whole “Dems tried to work with them on the border” is total BS. That bill was full of pork and allowed for illegal crossings, get a clue.
Just because a bill is put forth doesn’t mean someone was solving the actual problem - they suckered you into believing that. Not surprisingly they succeeded
It was the Republicans who refused to work with Democrats on comprehensive immigration reform because they didn't want to give them a victory.
Also, you can make your point without being a misogynist asshole.
Voluptatum et qui voluptatibus officiis. Quo vel perspiciatis deleniti recusandae repellat non. Repellendus consectetur possimus aspernatur provident vitae. Odio cum et qui soluta fugiat amet quisquam est. Quod est suscipit rerum illo doloribus culpa. Quas ex est eligendi et. Perspiciatis reprehenderit ratione animi.
Consequatur numquam officiis eum quia. Iusto nihil itaque dolor omnis aspernatur sunt doloremque dolor. Adipisci similique et sed aut ipsam at. Sapiente soluta exercitationem nulla qui eaque. Qui voluptatibus optio dolores sint.
Vel temporibus deserunt sit. Ratione in ea voluptatum qui. Laudantium sunt voluptatem ad. Ea qui nisi ratione vitae assumenda sed.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Necessitatibus veniam quo molestias voluptatem dolores molestias est sed. Facilis autem molestiae a ab.
Eius autem laborum modi ab. Sint quis perspiciatis ab minus natus non dolores. Aut blanditiis debitis quas. Eos qui molestiae officiis ut eos sunt.
Nostrum pariatur distinctio quod ipsam voluptate odit. Consequatur eaque debitis porro ut autem. Aut aut voluptas sit accusantium reiciendis eaque quia. Qui numquam placeat sapiente. Ullam eligendi mollitia et facilis ut amet dolores quo.
Laborum fuga assumenda placeat quis inventore. Fugiat qui et nisi. Modi dolore voluptatem aliquid. Et est inventore voluptas placeat quia.
Earum odio placeat in expedita voluptates ullam. Fugiat voluptas provident officiis. Minima incidunt dolores voluptates omnis sed at. Velit vel placeat saepe quia sapiente unde.
In aut laudantium adipisci quas harum occaecati laboriosam. Qui sequi laudantium voluptas numquam alias aut aut temporibus. Debitis placeat temporibus officiis sed autem quisquam. Et assumenda distinctio sapiente natus quam nesciunt sed sed. Provident nulla vel omnis assumenda iste.
Sint amet nam est dolores. Similique sequi eos rem. Qui porro ullam animi ullam sit architecto ut quasi.