Election implications. Doesn’t help Trump IMO
HondoBros? True?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-health-202/2019/11/06/the-health-202-mediciaid-work-requirements-were-defeated-at-the-ballot-box-last-night/5dc1bd3888e0fa10ffd20b7b/
Comments
-
I think it's awfully warm out for November 2020. Bedsides, Trump wants to be the first president ever to be impeached then reelected. He will do anything he can to make this happen.MikeDamone said:For all those who think Trump will be re-elected with no problems, think again. State elections in Virginia and Kentucky show that the dependents of the Deep State do not want to have to work for benefits such as Medicare even when the costs are rising. They don't even want to have to work at all for getting these "free" benefits. Shows you where the dependent mindset lays. The 2020 elections will be difficult to win.
HondoBros? True?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-health-202/2019/11/06/the-health-202-mediciaid-work-requirements-were-defeated-at-the-ballot-box-last-night/5dc1bd3888e0fa10ffd20b7b/ -
What if we made it a requirement to vote that a citizen cannot current be receiving transfer payments at either the federal, state or local level?
-
Or take it a step further. Only land owners can vote. MAGAYellowSnow said:What if we made it a requirement to vote that a citizen cannot current be receiving transfer payments at either the federal, state or local level?
-
I'm good with that, as long as we still allow female land owners to vote too.MikeDamone said:
Or take it a step further. Only land owners can vote. MAGAYellowSnow said:What if we made it a requirement to vote that a citizen cannot current be receiving transfer payments at either the federal, state or local level?
-
I like where this thread is going...time for the landowner class to rise up!
-
Why? A female would never own land unless a man gave it to her. Seems like that would just fuck everything up.YellowSnow said:
I'm good with that, as long as we still allow female land owners to vote too.MikeDamone said:
Or take it a step further. Only land owners can vote. MAGAYellowSnow said:What if we made it a requirement to vote that a citizen cannot current be receiving transfer payments at either the federal, state or local level?
-
There's a lot of smart, successful, high earning women out there these days. We want them voting.MikeDamone said:
Why? A female would never own land unless a man gave it to her. Seems like that would just fuck everything up.YellowSnow said:
I'm good with that, as long as we still allow female land owners to vote too.MikeDamone said:
Or take it a step further. Only land owners can vote. MAGAYellowSnow said:What if we made it a requirement to vote that a citizen cannot current be receiving transfer payments at either the federal, state or local level?
Oh, I'd also add public sector employees to my list. Sorry @Sledog but we can't have the government unions electing the folks that negotiate their contracts. I'm sure you'll understand. -
Nah, we need to go back to men only. This shit is getting out of hand. They can run for office, but not vote. I think that is a fair compromise.YellowSnow said:
There's a lot of smart, successful, high earning women out there these days. We want them voting.MikeDamone said:
Why? A female would never own land unless a man gave it to her. Seems like that would just fuck everything up.YellowSnow said:
I'm good with that, as long as we still allow female land owners to vote too.MikeDamone said:
Or take it a step further. Only land owners can vote. MAGAYellowSnow said:What if we made it a requirement to vote that a citizen cannot current be receiving transfer payments at either the federal, state or local level?
Oh, I'd also add public sector employees to my list. Sorry @Sledog but we can't have the government unions electing the folks that negotiate their contracts. I'm sure you'll understand. -
I'll have to chew on it a while.MikeDamone said:
Nah, we need to go back to men only. This shit is getting out of hand. They can run for office, but not vote. I think that is a fair compromise.YellowSnow said:
There's a lot of smart, successful, high earning women out there these days. We want them voting.MikeDamone said:
Why? A female would never own land unless a man gave it to her. Seems like that would just fuck everything up.YellowSnow said:
I'm good with that, as long as we still allow female land owners to vote too.MikeDamone said:
Or take it a step further. Only land owners can vote. MAGAYellowSnow said:What if we made it a requirement to vote that a citizen cannot current be receiving transfer payments at either the federal, state or local level?
Oh, I'd also add public sector employees to my list. Sorry @Sledog but we can't have the government unions electing the folks that negotiate their contracts. I'm sure you'll understand. -
Ok, I will agree to this, if you agree to making every recipient of government aid have to row 1000 M on the Concept II per $1.00 received. Again, the rowing machines will be hooked up to the power grid at discussed.MikeDamone said:
Nah, we need to go back to men only. This shit is getting out of hand. They can run for office, but not vote. I think that is a fair compromise.YellowSnow said:
There's a lot of smart, successful, high earning women out there these days. We want them voting.MikeDamone said:
Why? A female would never own land unless a man gave it to her. Seems like that would just fuck everything up.YellowSnow said:
I'm good with that, as long as we still allow female land owners to vote too.MikeDamone said:
Or take it a step further. Only land owners can vote. MAGAYellowSnow said:What if we made it a requirement to vote that a citizen cannot current be receiving transfer payments at either the federal, state or local level?
Oh, I'd also add public sector employees to my list. Sorry @Sledog but we can't have the government unions electing the folks that negotiate their contracts. I'm sure you'll understand.
