Highmark

I think a second term a President is far more likely to stand their ground than when trying to win re-election.

That's a cop out answer. We wouldn't have to send either. Let Europe handle their own mess.

Wanting and the ability to get cuts is a different reality. I will say this again....IMHO Trumps most significant failure in the WH was not shutting down the govt to get better budget and border deals. https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/trumps-2021-budget-would-cut-16-trillion-from-low-income-programs https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/commentary/trump-budget-cuts-size-federal-government-bolder-reforms-needed

Who in their right mind would buy a used EV within a few years of the battery warranty expiring.

Aren't you good with sending money to Ukraine?

Biden's actually the silent generation.

Ah yes the deficit hawk who actually loves big spending.

In the long run you pay. Eventually everything becomes a charge or finds it way into the OH rates which are passed on to customers. Business' eventually "bake them in" to calculating what to charge. Yeah its just like that.

Yes they make everyone pay for it but to act like its free is being pretty obtuse to how corporations work. Very little in life is actually "free."

Just because its not on your bill doesn't mean you're not being charged for it.

Ford and Tesla are sitting on thousands and thousands of unsold units. Bohica can suck EV's off all he wants the reality is they are not becoming as popular as quickly as the left wants them too. They still are a niche vehicle. When considering vehicle ownership cost lets add in the billions and billions govt is spending on charging stations. Then add in the cost of green energy production like wind and solar to charge them because that's the end goal. When you look at all costs EV's are not cheaper to run.

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTLm77evB/

Well at least you're on top of things. I think you search out my posts to respond. That's hilarious.

No I just don't go into every hyperlink in an article.

Which I didn't find the need to so I wasn't commenting on or posting the view's article.

Another moron who can't follow links.

Again not comparable. Hillary did it too and it cost her the election in 2016.

There is nothing about the view in the first link.....the one I quoted. Its just what news sites do to get people to more of their content. Jesus the stupid is really strong today. https://www.salon.com/2024/04/22/a-harbinger-of-whats-to-come-new-poll-shows-rfk-jrs-campaign-could-sink/

main·ly /ˈmānlē/ adverb more than anything else. "he is mainly concerned with fiction" for the most part. Not even a comparison who goes after who's supporters more.

It was from your link jackass.

The findings do contradict the results of other national polls that show a bigger third-party vote would hurt Biden more than Trump.

Difference is Trump mainly goes after and insults Biden. Biden insults Trumps voters. Big, big difference.

Ah yes you're from the just do something crowd no matter how shitty the bill is. Expulsion authority trigger The key provision of the bill would allow the president to expel immigrants regardless of the viability of their legal rights to remain in the United States if average daily encounters at the southwest border hit 4,000 in a week (about 120,000 in a month) or 8,500 in any single day. This includes people who apply to enter legally at ports of entry. Since March 2021, the daily average for a month has always exceeded 4,000. Expulsions would be mandatory if the daily average for a week exceeded 5,000, or 8,500 in a single day, and expulsions would have to continue until the rate declined for two weeks to a daily average of less than 3,000 (a pace of 90,000 for a month) if the 4,000 threshold was used or 3,750 (112,500 for a month) if the 5,000 threshold was used. Under this provision, expulsions would have been mandatory almost continuously since March 2021.

Dude I fucking listened to him when the bill was introduced. He wasn't being completely honest about the entire bill. The $118 billion (money we don't have) tied to foreign aide was a non-starter for me to begin with. Don't you claim to be the deficit hawk on here.

Because it gave them billions more to grow....every govt agency loves that. I read up on the legislation dude. It was a shit sandwich. Lets not forget it was also tied to $118 billion in foreign aide spending. Money we don't have. https://scalise.house.gov/press-releases/House-Republican-Leadership-Statement-on-Senate-Immigration-Bill#:~:text=“Among its many flaws%2C the,to include critical asylum reforms. “House Republicans oppose the Senate immigration bill because it fails in every policy area needed to secure our border and would actually incentivize more illegal immigration. “Among its many flaws, the bill expands work authorizations for illegal aliens while failing to include critical asylum reforms. Even worse, its language allowing illegals to be ‘released from physical custody’ would effectively endorse the Biden ‘catch and release’ policy. “The so-called ‘shutdown’ authority in the bill is anything but, riddled with loopholes that grant far too much discretionary authority to Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas – who has proven he will exploit every measure possible, in defiance of the law, to keep the border open. “The bill also fails to adequately stop the President’s abuse of parole authority and provides for taxpayer funds to fly and house illegal immigrants in hotels through the FEMA Shelter and Services Program. “Because President Biden has refused to utilize his broad executive authority to end the border catastrophe that he has created, the House led nine months ago with the passage of the Secure the Border Act (H.R. 2). That bill contains the necessary components to actually stem the flow of illegals and end the present crisis. The Senate must take it up immediately. “America’s sovereignty is at stake. “Any consideration of this Senate bill in its current form is a waste of time. It is DEAD on arrival in the House. We encourage the U.S. Senate to reject it.”