When people say that they want politicians that can unite both sides, Vance isn’t what they had in mind. He does bring unity though; no one likes him.
When people say that they want politicians that can unite both sides, Vance isn’t what they had in mind. He does bring unity though; no one likes him.
We need a candidate speed dating kind of event with him and Ted Cruz. We need to know who can repulse the most people in 3 minutes or less.
When people say that they want politicians that can unite both sides, Vance isn’t what they had in mind. He does bring unity though; no one likes him.
We need a candidate speed dating kind of event with him and Ted Cruz. We need to know who can repulse the most people in 3 minutes or less.
JD Vance missed the vote to extend the child tax credit - which his republican colleagues shot down.
OMG, Vance gives trump credit for the prisoner swap/release:
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/01/world/video/jd-vance-prisoner-swap-russia-trump-digvid
What a real piece of sh*t.
OMG, Vance gives trump credit for the prisoner swap/release:
https://www.cnn.com/…-russia-trump-digvid
What a real piece of sh*t.
Trump hasn’t even thought of that con yet.
OMG, Vance gives trump credit for the prisoner swap/release:
https://www.cnn.com/…-russia-trump-digvid
What a real piece of sh*t.
Trump hasn’t even thought of that con yet.
What I love/hate about this crap, is seeing how long it takes for the lunatic fringe (including on this board) to repeat this garbage.
“The bad actors are cleaning house before Trump gets back in office.â€
Guarantee they repeat that. And they’ll ignore that Whelan was detained for about two years of Trump’s term.
OMG, Vance gives trump credit for the prisoner swap/release:
https://www.cnn.com/…-russia-trump-digvid
What a real piece of sh*t.
If Trump had anything to do with it, then this probably wouldn’t be a headline:
Donald Trump presses for details on US prisoner swap with Russia (thehill.com)
Vance is just slavishly praising his master, and it will appeal to the mouth-breathing masses that adore Trump.
JD Vance fun fax, courtesy of The Onion: Who Is Trump’s VP Pick J.D. Vance?
When Scanned At Vet, Microchip Identifies Owner As: Peter Thiel
Higher taxes on non-breeders as well: Vance argued for higher tax rate on childless Americans in 2021 interview
It’s basically just the Child Tax Credit which is entirely reasonable.
Why do people think it’s ok to basically just lie about opposing candidates?
Yeah I think what he is going for is trying to develop policy ideas that promote people having kids, which is a fine and normal policy objective to have given our decreasing birth rate, but the way he speaks about it and goes about trying to implement that policy goal is very poor.
Both parties essentially want more people to have children because they listen to the economists and we could be in for a major shock if we drop below replacement levels for a few generations (What some european and asian countries are facing down now.) Dems want to make it easier for parents to keep living their lives while raising children (i.e. child tax credit, universal pre-k, daycare funding, etc.) while Reps seem to want to force as many children to be born without the extra govt help that people are saying they need (i.e. abortion and contraception bans.) To be fair to JD, in presenting this policy and the voting policy idea its more carrot than stick in getting americans to bare more children, but again, the way he talks about it puts me off.
One can arrive at the idea that people with more kids get more leverage in a democratic society via the left or the right. After all kids are one of the last constituencies to not have the vote. Why are disenfrancised.? Maybe kids as young as 12 or even younger should be able to vote given all the old boomers who are consuming so many resources. Maybe their parents should be enabled to vote on their behalf.
An article published by deputy Prime Minister of Canada about giving kids the vote back when she was a reporter
The more I think about it, the more it makes sense to give kids the right to vote on issues like property taxes and other things related to school funding.
Higher taxes on non-breeders as well: Vance argued for higher tax rate on childless Americans in 2021 interview
It’s basically just the Child Tax Credit which is entirely reasonable.
Why do people think it’s ok to basically just lie about opposing candidates?
Yeah I think what he is going for is trying to develop policy ideas that promote people having kids, which is a fine and normal policy objective to have given our decreasing birth rate, but the way he speaks about it and goes about trying to implement that policy goal is very poor.
Both parties essentially want more people to have children because they listen to the economists and we could be in for a major shock if we drop below replacement levels for a few generations (What some european and asian countries are facing down now.) Dems want to make it easier for parents to keep living their lives while raising children (i.e. child tax credit, universal pre-k, daycare funding, etc.) while Reps seem to want to force as many children to be born without the extra govt help that people are saying they need (i.e. abortion and contraception bans.) To be fair to JD, in presenting this policy and the voting policy idea its more carrot than stick in getting americans to bare more children, but again, the way he talks about it puts me off.
One can arrive at the idea that people with more kids get more leverage in a democratic society via the left or the right. After all kids are one of the last constituencies to not have the vote. Why are disenfrancised.? Maybe kids as young as 12 or even younger should be able to vote given all the old boomers who are consuming so many resources. Maybe their parents should be enabled to vote on their behalf.
An article published by deputy Prime Minister of Canada about giving kids the vote back when she was a reporter
The more I think about it, the more it makes sense to give kids the right to vote on issues like property taxes and other things related to school funding.
So people who don’t use the resources but pay for them have less say? No.
Higher taxes on non-breeders as well: Vance argued for higher tax rate on childless Americans in 2021 interview
It’s basically just the Child Tax Credit which is entirely reasonable.
Why do people think it’s ok to basically just lie about opposing candidates?
Yeah I think what he is going for is trying to develop policy ideas that promote people having kids, which is a fine and normal policy objective to have given our decreasing birth rate, but the way he speaks about it and goes about trying to implement that policy goal is very poor.
Both parties essentially want more people to have children because they listen to the economists and we could be in for a major shock if we drop below replacement levels for a few generations (What some european and asian countries are facing down now.) Dems want to make it easier for parents to keep living their lives while raising children (i.e. child tax credit, universal pre-k, daycare funding, etc.) while Reps seem to want to force as many children to be born without the extra govt help that people are saying they need (i.e. abortion and contraception bans.) To be fair to JD, in presenting this policy and the voting policy idea its more carrot than stick in getting americans to bare more children, but again, the way he talks about it puts me off.
One can arrive at the idea that people with more kids get more leverage in a democratic society via the left or the right. After all kids are one of the last constituencies to not have the vote. Why are disenfrancised.? Maybe kids as young as 12 or even younger should be able to vote given all the old boomers who are consuming so many resources. Maybe their parents should be enabled to vote on their behalf.
An article published by deputy Prime Minister of Canada about giving kids the vote back when she was a reporter
The more I think about it, the more it makes sense to give kids the right to vote on issues like property taxes and other things related to school funding.
So people who don’t use the resources but pay for them have less say? No.
The premise of your response is wrong… Everyone benefits and uses the resource of an educated population. But even if it was true, is JD Vance ok with the outcome that kids could vote to increase taxes? I’m not sure he’s going to like the outcome.
Higher taxes on non-breeders as well: Vance argued for higher tax rate on childless Americans in 2021 interview
It’s basically just the Child Tax Credit which is entirely reasonable.
Why do people think it’s ok to basically just lie about opposing candidates?
Yeah I think what he is going for is trying to develop policy ideas that promote people having kids, which is a fine and normal policy objective to have given our decreasing birth rate, but the way he speaks about it and goes about trying to implement that policy goal is very poor.
Both parties essentially want more people to have children because they listen to the economists and we could be in for a major shock if we drop below replacement levels for a few generations (What some european and asian countries are facing down now.) Dems want to make it easier for parents to keep living their lives while raising children (i.e. child tax credit, universal pre-k, daycare funding, etc.) while Reps seem to want to force as many children to be born without the extra govt help that people are saying they need (i.e. abortion and contraception bans.) To be fair to JD, in presenting this policy and the voting policy idea its more carrot than stick in getting americans to bare more children, but again, the way he talks about it puts me off.
One can arrive at the idea that people with more kids get more leverage in a democratic society via the left or the right. After all kids are one of the last constituencies to not have the vote. Why are disenfrancised.? Maybe kids as young as 12 or even younger should be able to vote given all the old boomers who are consuming so many resources. Maybe their parents should be enabled to vote on their behalf.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/...dren/article9479166/
An article published by deputy Prime Minister of Canada about giving kids the vote back when she was a reporter
The more I think about it, the more it makes sense to give kids the right to vote on issues like property taxes and other things related to school funding.
So people who don’t use the resources but pay for them have less say? No.
The premise of your response is wrong… Everyone benefits and uses the resource of an educated population. But even if it was true, is JD Vance ok with the outcome that kids could vote to increase taxes? I’m not sure he’s going to like the outcome.
Do you really want people like JD Vance targeting kids for their votes? You think that would go well?
Higher taxes on non-breeders as well: Vance argued for higher tax rate on childless Americans in 2021 interview
It’s basically just the Child Tax Credit which is entirely reasonable.
Why do people think it’s ok to basically just lie about opposing candidates?
Yeah I think what he is going for is trying to develop policy ideas that promote people having kids, which is a fine and normal policy objective to have given our decreasing birth rate, but the way he speaks about it and goes about trying to implement that policy goal is very poor.
Both parties essentially want more people to have children because they listen to the economists and we could be in for a major shock if we drop below replacement levels for a few generations (What some european and asian countries are facing down now.) Dems want to make it easier for parents to keep living their lives while raising children (i.e. child tax credit, universal pre-k, daycare funding, etc.) while Reps seem to want to force as many children to be born without the extra govt help that people are saying they need (i.e. abortion and contraception bans.) To be fair to JD, in presenting this policy and the voting policy idea its more carrot than stick in getting americans to bare more children, but again, the way he talks about it puts me off.
One can arrive at the idea that people with more kids get more leverage in a democratic society via the left or the right. After all kids are one of the last constituencies to not have the vote. Why are disenfrancised.? Maybe kids as young as 12 or even younger should be able to vote given all the old boomers who are consuming so many resources. Maybe their parents should be enabled to vote on their behalf.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/...dren/article9479166/
An article published by deputy Prime Minister of Canada about giving kids the vote back when she was a reporter
The more I think about it, the more it makes sense to give kids the right to vote on issues like property taxes and other things related to school funding.
So people who don’t use the resources but pay for them have less say? No.
The premise of your response is wrong… Everyone benefits and uses the resource of an educated population. But even if it was true, is JD Vance ok with the outcome that kids could vote to increase taxes? I’m not sure he’s going to like the outcome.
Do you really want people like JD Vance targeting kids for their votes? You think that would go well?
Better school funding, higher education funding, solving the student loan crisis, contraceptives, less military funding… I can think of a lot of issues that JD doesn’t want kids voting on.
What issues would JD Vance be able to get over the hump if he was able to appeal to the U-18 electotate?
What issues would JD Vance be able to get over the hump if he was able to appeal to the U-18 electotate?
The issues are less important than the inevitable mess that would be generated by politicians and lobbies being free and encouraged to target kids to get their votes.
Changed his name multiple times, eyeliner, likes to dress in drag…You got something to tell us J.D.? Don’t worry, we will not judge.
What issues would JD Vance be able to get over the hump if he was able to appeal to the U-18 electotate?
The issues are less important than the inevitable mess that would be generated by politicians and lobbies being free and encouraged to target kids to get their votes.
True, but what the western world is seeing now is the targeting of malleable and gullible adults, who have easily triggered prejudices, via SM. And to be clear I think that is going on on both sides, and it’s happening in a range of western developed nations.
So the mess is in reality one we already have. But yes, it would certainly be compounded by adding in kids.
Changed his name multiple times, eyeliner, likes to dress in drag…You got something to tell us J.D.? Don’t worry, we will not judge.
It would be irresponsible of us not to come up with drag names to go with this picture. Shay Dee Vance? Anita Loveseat?
Changed his name multiple times, eyeliner, likes to dress in drag…You got something to tell us J.D.? Don’t worry, we will not judge.
It would be irresponsible of us not to come up with drag names to go with this picture. Shay Dee Vance? Anita Loveseat?
Sofa Loren?
Changed his name multiple times, eyeliner, likes to dress in drag…You got something to tell us J.D.? Don’t worry, we will not judge.
It would be irresponsible of us not to come up with drag names to go with this picture. Shay Dee Vance? Anita Loveseat?
Sofa Loren?
Linda Loveseat?
Changed his name multiple times, eyeliner, likes to dress in drag…You got something to tell us J.D.? Don’t worry, we will not judge.
It would be irresponsible of us not to come up with drag names to go with this picture. Shay Dee Vance? Anita Loveseat?
Sofa Loren?
Linda Loveseat?
Sally ChesterField