2024 vote could bring electoral college distortions to the forefront: The system empowers a sliver of the U.S. population in a diminishing number of battleground states.

[I_M4_AU 7,838]

@Leftfieldwe are not going to agree and the EC is here to stay even if *most* people agree it should change.  Why is that?  Because it must be amended and that does not happen just because of a poll of what most Republicans and Democrats want to see.

It is the way the government was set up.  Deal with it.

[Leftfield 2,601]

38 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

It is the way the government was set up.  Deal with it.

Question: how are things supposed to change if they're not discussed? This is an open forum....there are others reading who may not know the history of the Electoral College. My original post explaining some of it was not specifically aimed at you.

[I_M4_AU 7,838]

1 minute ago, Leftfield said:

Question: how are things supposed to change if they're not discussed? This is an open forum....there are others reading who may not know the history of the Electoral College. My original post explaining some of it was not specifically aimed at you.

They change by honest conversation that involves our elected officials.  

[AUFAN78 3,897]

12 hours ago, homersapien said:

We're talking about objective measurements of assessing the national economy.

And I asked you What objective indicator satisfies the family whose wages remain stagnant yet their cost of good and services have increased by $300-$400 per month? And I was being generous and lowballed the figures. Moody's estimated in August that families spent $709 more per month than just two years ago. Apparently, you simply cannot answer the question.

12 hours ago, homersapien said:

The status of any particular family isn't relevant.  In fact, it's rather stupid to call out such an example as "proof" of how poorly the economy is doing.

The Moody's report wasn't for a single family King weasel. 

12 hours ago, homersapien said:

For every such family there is another family that is doing just fine. Wages and employment are up compared to a the last few years.

Perhaps you are unaware of the economic makeup of American families? The share of adults who said they were worse off financially than a year earlier rose to 35 percent, the highest level since the question was first asked in 2014.

More adults experienced spending increases than income increases. Forty percent of adults said their family’s monthly spending increased in 2022 compared with the prior year, while 33 percent said their monthly income increased. While some adults saw both their spending and their income increase, 23 percent of adults said that their spending had increased but their income had not.

12 hours ago, homersapien said:

You are just "thinking" like a typical MAGA - stupidly.  You folks have taken delusion to whole new levels.

I was quoting from a Moody's Report. Call it MAGA if you must. Typical of your obfuscating nonsense. 

[homersapien 11,373]

12 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

And I asked you What objective indicator satisfies the family whose wages remain stagnant yet their cost of good and serdevices have increased by $300-$400 per month? And I was being generous and lowballed the figures. Moody's estimated in August that families spent $709 more per month than just two years ago. Apparently, you simply cannot answer the question.

 

What a BS, weaseling response.  Talk about obfuscation!

You clearly refuted the idea that - because all economic indicators are better - the economy has improved.

That is what this "debate" is about.  What are the defining facts (indicators) regarding the state of the economy?

Those indicators do not support your contention the economy is worse - presumably because Biben is POTUS - so you simply say they are irrelevant because they don't support your political narrative.

But the facts don't support that argument. Throwing up the example some families are poor and/or struggling does not refute the basic facts of an improved economy. 

Apparently, you don't understand anything about how the economy is actually measured.  (Hint: It's not by personal anecdotes.)

Apparently, you have yet to recognize the basic fact that "life is not fair".  Many families suffer - many through no fault of their own (such as severe health issues, accidents, etc.) others due to decisions that didn't pan out.

Unfortunately for them, that in no way cancels out the reality of an improved economy nor the reality that the population as a whole benefits from an improved economy.

Sure, as a general statement, we may be paying more for some things.  But as a general statement, wages and jobs have increased. And some things - such as gas for example - we are paying less.

So if you are concerned about people that are falling behind  , then focus on ways you - or our government - can improve their lot. (I suggest Democrats are inherently more likely to do that than Republicans.)

Meanwhile, I'll cherry pick some examples of families whose income or net wealth has improved to demonstrate how the economy is better, not to mention those who have gotten new jobs.

Your argument (that indicators are moot) is all too typical of MAGA, science-free, subjective reasoning instead of objective thinking.  Classic even.

 

 

 

Edited December 31, 2023 by homersapien

[homersapien 11,373]

https://www.bea.gov/news/glance

Gross Domestic Product (Third Estimate), Corporate Profits (Revised Estimate), and GDP by Industry, Third Quarter 2023

Q3 2023 (3rd)	+4.9%
Q2 2023	+2.1%

Real gross domestic product (GDP) increased at an annual rate of 4.9 percent in the third quarter of 2023, according to the “third” estimate. In the second quarter, real GDP increased 2.1 percent. The increase in the third quarter primarily reflected increases in consumer spending and inventory investment. Imports, which are a subtraction in the calculation of GDP, increased.

Profits increased 3.4 percent at a quarterly rate in the third quarter after increasing 0.2 percent in the second quarter.

 

Personal Income by County and Metropolitan Area, 2022

In 2022, personal income, in current dollars, increased in 1,964 counties, decreased in 1,107, and was unchanged in 43. Personal income increased 2.1 percent in the metropolitan portion of the United States and 1.3 percent in the nonmetropolitan portion."

 

Personal Consumption Expenditures by State, 2022

US PCE growth

+9.2%

Nationally, personal consumption expenditures (PCE), in current dollars, increased 9.2 percent in 2022 after increasing 12.9 percent in 2021. PCE increased in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, with the percent change ranging from 11.8 percent in Idaho to 6.4 percent in Louisiana.

Edited January 8 by homersapien

[AUFAN78 3,897]

8 hours ago, homersapien said:

What a BS, weaseling response.  Talk about obfuscation!

Homey, you earned the moniker King Weasel fair and square. And there is simply no one competing with your obfuscation. Congrats!

 

8 hours ago, homersapien said:

You clearly refuted the idea that - because all economic indicators are better - the economy has improved.

That is what this "debate" is about.  What are the defining facts (indicators) regarding the state of the economy?

Those indicators do not support your contention the economy is worse - presumably because Biben is POTUS - so you simply say they are irrelevant because they don't support your political narrative.

But the facts don't support that argument. Throwing up the example some families are poor and/or struggling does not refute the basic facts of an improved economy. 

Apparently, you don't understand anything about how the economy is actually measured.  (Hint: It's not by personal anecdotes.)

.Clearly a lie and thankfully in print for all to see. You summarized that I did not believe in economic indicators and asked me to clarify if that is what I believed? I said no. 

I asked you how people in lower economic classes struggling in this economy squared with the aforementioned indicators? A question you've yet to answer other than to say it was stupid to bring them up in a conversation about the economy. This wasn't your only ignorant response btw. 

8 hours ago, homersapien said:

Apparently, you have yet to recognize the basic fact that "life is not fair".  Many families suffer - many through no fault of their own (such as severe health issues, accidents, etc.) others due to decisions that didn't pan out.

Unfortunately for them, that in no way cancels out the reality of an improved economy nor the reality that the population as a whole benefits from an improved economy.

Sure, as a general statement, we may be paying more for some things.  But as a general statement, wages and jobs have increased. And some things - such as gas for example - we are paying less.

So if you are concerned about people that are falling behind  , then focus on ways you - or our government - can improve their lot. (I suggest Democrats are inherently more likely to do that than Republicans.)

Meanwhile, I'll cherry pick some examples of families whose income or net wealth has improved to demonstrate how the economy is better, not to mention those who have gotten new jobs.

Your argument (that indicators are moot) is all too typical of MAGA, science-free, subjective reasoning instead of objective thinking.  Classic even.

Great! More classic Homey obfuscation.

Well, at least you got one thing right. Wages are up for some and yes there are more jobs. 

Might want to check your gas claims:

 

Clearly Americans,  particularly those I mentioned in lower income levels are struggling in this economy. I just read a dozen reports stating the same. I leave just one for your consideration:

https://www.suffolk.edu/news-features/news/2023/09/14/14/51/sbs-usat-econ-poll-2023#:~:text=Despite a robust job market,percentages that use words such

If Moody's was MAGA then surely the U.S. Energy Information Administration and Suffolk University are too right?  

 

[Aufan59 62]

12 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

Clearly Americans,  particularly those I mentioned in lower income levels are struggling in this economy. I just read a dozen reports stating the same. I leave just one for your consideration:

I tend to agree, but they will struggle in any economy.  Capital will always tend to accumulate at the top.  The only way lower income levels will improve is through policy - some sort of redistribution.  

[AUFAN78 3,897]

20 minutes ago, Aufan59 said:

I tend to agree, but they will struggle in any economy.  Capital will always tend to accumulate at the top.  The only way lower income levels will improve is through policy - some sort of redistribution.  

I understand the premise, but I can assure you underserved communities and even middle income families feel $709. Most were working on thin margins to begin with and this added burden is devastating. Just do a Google search and read the stories., look at the surveys, etc. I did so last night and they are never-ending. Probably a better option is to go serve in the community and see it first hand. It will change your life.  Happy New Year! 

[Aufan59 62]

6 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

I understand the premise, but I can assure you underserved communities and even middle income families feel $709. Most were working on thin margins to begin with and this added burden is devastating. Just do a Google search and read the stories., look at the surveys, etc. I did so last night and they are never-ending. Probably a better option is to go serve in the community and see it first hand. It will change your life.  Happy New Year! 

I’m agreeing with you.  A ‘good economy’ doesn’t necessarily benefit those on the low end.

 

The poor - those without capital -won’t see most of the benefits of a booming economy without some intervention.  If the goal is to enrich the less fortunate, it needs to be done through redistribution efforts, whether through tax law, social programs or other means.

Edited January 1 by Aufan59

[homersapien 11,373]

On 12/31/2023 at 10:00 PM, AUFAN78 said:

Homey, you earned the moniker King Weasel fair and square. And there is simply no one competing with your obfuscation. Congrats!

 

.Clearly a lie and thankfully in print for all to see. You summarized that I did not believe in economic indicators and asked me to clarify if that is what I believed? I said no. 

I asked you how people in lower economic classes struggling in this economy squared with the aforementioned indicators? A question you've yet to answer other than to say it was stupid to bring them up in a conversation about the economy. This wasn't your only ignorant response btw. 

Great! More classic Homey obfuscation.

Well, at least you got one thing right. Wages are up for some and yes there are more jobs. 

Might want to check your gas claims:

 

Clearly Americans,  particularly those I mentioned in lower income levels are struggling in this economy. I just read a dozen reports stating the same. I leave just one for your consideration:

https://www.suffolk.edu/news-features/news/2023/09/14/14/51/sbs-usat-econ-poll-2023#:~:text=Despite a robust job market,percentages that use words such

If Moody's was MAGA then surely the U.S. Energy Information Administration and Suffolk University are too right?  

 

Fine, have it your way.  The economy has done nothing under Biden's presidency except get worse. 

All of the Federal agencies responsible for gathering the data on economic indicators are either wrong - or just lying.  All the news you hear to the contrary is fake.

And anyone simply pointing out these (fake) indicators is obfuscating the real truth, which is based on anecdotes.  Thanks for sorting that out for me.

But take heart!  Trump plans to clean out all these professionals while he is still in the "dictator" phase of his new presidency.  He has promised to replace them with syncopathic partisans that will serve his narrative and keep MAGAs like you happy.

So, enjoy your misery, relief is on the way.

[AUFAN78 3,897]

22 hours ago, homersapien said:

Fine, have it your way.  The economy has done nothing under Biden's presidency except get worse. 

All of the Federal agencies responsible for gathering the data on economic indicators are either wrong - or just lying.  All the news you hear to the contrary is fake.

And anyone simply pointing out these (fake) indicators is obfuscating the real truth, which is based on anecdotes.  Thanks for sorting that out for me.

Good grief dude. No one has stated that other than in your mind when you attempted to assign that mindset to me!

You asked if I believed that and I said NO!

But having worked with the less fortunate, I asked how these indicators you mentioned helped them? You still cannot answer something so simple. The point is to remember their situation when proclaiming a good economy for all. I know, I know you heard it or read it on MSM. I get it, but it isn't always relevant. Perhaps in your economic situation or mine, but not for all. Just remember that.

22 hours ago, homersapien said:

But take heart!  Trump plans to clean out all these professionals while he is still in the "dictator" phase of his new presidency.  He has promised to replace them with syncopathic partisans that will serve his narrative and keep MAGAs like you happy.

So, enjoy your misery, relief is on the way.

Don't be a puppet. The hole you are digging is close to 6 feet. No need being miserable. Take a chill pill, relax and enjoy life. It's going to be fine. And Happy New Year!

Edited January 3 by AUFAN78

[homersapien 11,373]

On 1/2/2024 at 8:54 PM, AUFAN78 said:

Good grief dude. No one has stated that other than in your mind when you attempted to assign that mindset to me!

You asked if I believed that and I said NO!

But having worked with the less fortunate, I asked how these indicators you mentioned helped them? You still cannot answer something so simple. The point is to remember their situation when proclaiming a good economy for all. I know, I know you heard it or read it on MSM. I get it, but it isn't always relevant. Perhaps in your economic situation or mine, but not for all. Just remember that.

Don't be a puppet. The hole you are digging is close to 6 feet. No need being miserable. Take a chill pill, relax and enjoy life. It's going to be fine. And Happy New Year!

So to summarize, the economy is "bad" regardless of the statistical indicators, because some people are poor and struggling.

Got it.  

Edited January 4 by homersapien

[auburnatl1 4,920]

20 hours ago, homersapien said:

So to summarize, the economy is "bad" regardless of the statistical indicators, because some people are poor and struggling.

Got it.  

Candidly any president can only have a minor impact on the economy. Infrastructure projects, tariffs, the deficit, ect. .   The fed has a much much bigger impact. 

That being said, when people stop trusting news sources, then institutions, then voting results, then finally even statistics - you’ve reached a place where nothing can be debated or resolved.  On this site or in Congress. Because there are no facts. Not even friggin math. Negativity becomes cynicism which becomes conspiracies which becomes perpetual paranoia. This is why now more than ever this country needs a unifier and not an ideologue. 

[I_M4_AU 7,838]

9 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

This is why now more than ever this country needs a unifier and not an ideologue. 

Who is that?  Don’t tell me who isn’t, who is?

[auburnatl1 4,920]

20 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Who is that?  Don’t tell me who isn’t, who is?

Biden and Trump are both polling at 40% favorability. Say that 3 times. We’re arguing which girl is the more hideous every single day. If a candidate doesn’t have at least +50% favorability (let’s start with a low bar) they’re probably not going to unify. Its just kinda math.

Just as a candidate concept - ie manchin. Nobody would love him but most would accept him over the current options.

Edited January 5 by auburnatl1

[I_M4_AU 7,838]

28 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

Biden and Trump are both polling at 40% favorability. Say that 3 times. We’re arguing which girl is the more hideous every single day. If a candidate doesn’t have at least +50% favorability (let’s start with a low bar) they’re probably not going to unify. Its just kinda math.

Just as a candidate concept - ie manchin. Nobody would love him but most would accept him over the current options.

I would agree, but I would be willing to bet the Dems won’t let him on the ballot similar to J Kennedy Jr.

It seems to be locked on both sides.

[auburnatl1 4,920]

9 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I would agree, but I would be willing to bet the Dems won’t let him on the ballot similar to J Kennedy Jr.

It seems to be locked on both sides.

I refuse to believe that the country is so screwed up that we’ll tolerate 2 options that most despise. Solve the problem. I would be interested if @TexasTiger or @homersapien could accept a moderate (obviously purely hypothetical la la land) or our are we that grumpy and  ideologically dug in. If so, let the who’s the ugliest debates continue.

 

[TexasTiger 12,876]

53 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

I refuse to believe that the country is so screwed up that we’ll tolerate 2 options that most despise. Solve the problem. I would be interested if @TexasTiger or @homersapien could accept a moderate (obviously purely hypothetical la la land) or our are we that grumpy and  ideologically dug in. If so, let the who’s the ugliest debates continue.

 

I’d be thrilled with a true centrist- prefer it. But these Q Republicans who believe John John is alive and waiting in the wings need some help. 😉

[I_M4_AU 7,838]

1 hour ago, auburnatl1 said:

I refuse to believe that the country is so screwed up that we’ll tolerate 2 options that most despise. Solve the problem. I would be interested if @TexasTiger or @homersapien could accept a moderate (obviously purely hypothetical la la land) or our are we that grumpy and  ideologically dug in. If so, let the who’s the ugliest debates continue.

 

Four states have moved to make only Biden as the Dem choice on thier ballot.  It’s not a Q Republican thing, whatever that is.

 

Like I say; locked in at least on one side, so far.

[auburnatl1 4,920]

20 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

I’d be thrilled with a true centrist- prefer it. But these Q Republicans who believe John John is alive and waiting in the wings need some help. 😉

Can’t fix Q Republicans or Defund Dems. Poking fun at crazy is fine as a hobby but part of the problem is our fixation with the others sides crazy factions and not owning up to our own.  

I know, I know - but the other sides crazier. 

[homersapien 11,373]

On 1/5/2024 at 12:37 PM, auburnatl1 said:

Candidly any president can only have a minor impact on the economy. Infrastructure projects, tariffs, the deficit, ect. .   The fed has a much much bigger impact. 

That being said, when people stop trusting news sources, then institutions, then voting results, then finally even statistics - you’ve reached a place where nothing can be debated or resolved.  On this site or in Congress. Because there are no facts. Not even friggin math. Negativity becomes cynicism which bIess conspiracies which becomes perpetual paranoia. This is why now more than ever this country needs a unifier and not an ideologue. 

I agree totally with your first paragraph.  And what effects a president - or his party - have on the economy such as inappropriate tax cuts - or raises - are lagging indicators.

I was simply responding to the assertion the economy is bad, which was an assertion clearly made for partisan reasons while ignoring objective statistics. If Trump were currently president, the same poster would be "trumpeting" the recovering economy.

 

Edited January 8 by homersapien

[jj3jordan 2,053]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

I agree totally with your first paragraph.  And what effects a president - or his party - have on the economy such as inappropriate tax cuts or raises are lagging.

I was simply responding to the assertion the economy is bad, which was an assertion clearly made for partisan reasons while ignoring objective statistics. If Trump were currently president, the same poster would be "trumpeting" the recovering economy.

 

If Trump were currently president the economy would not need to recover. We would have low unemployment still, lower gas prices, lower food prices, lower mortgage rates, lower illegal immigration, lower military involvement, 13 more marines, XXXX$$$$$Billion in military hardware at our disposal, no vaccine mandate decimating morale and readiness plus no lawsuit because of it, and no Xi telling POTUS that China was inevitably taking Taiwan with absolutely no response or pushback. It would be great.

[auburnatl1 4,920]

17 minutes ago, jj3jordan said:

If Trump were currently president the economy would not need to recover. We would have low unemployment still, lower gas prices, lower food prices, lower mortgage rates, lower illegal immigration, lower military involvement, 13 more marines, XXXX$$$$$Billion in military hardware at our disposal, no vaccine mandate decimating morale and readiness plus no lawsuit because of it, and no Xi telling POTUS that China was inevitably taking Taiwan with absolutely no response or pushback. It would be great.

I agree Biden’s been a mess but dear lord. Sounds like trumps years were a friggin Kum ba yah utopia. Boy time have been kind to what we remember about what he accomplished and his actual abilities. I also remember no wall, Republicans steadily losing ground,  deficits exploding, gallows, injecting bleach, glorifying Putin, and other moments to be proud of. How did that whole swamp draining thing go?

[jj3jordan 2,053]

3 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

I agree Biden’s been a mess but dear lord. Sounds like trumps years were a friggin Kum ba yah utopia. Boy time have been kind to what we remember about what he accomplished and his actual abilities. I also remember no wall, Republicans steadily losing ground,  deficits exploding, gallows, injecting bleach, glorifying Putin, and other moments to be proud of. How did that whole swamp draining thing go?

The wall was  hindered by democrats federal judge shopping and getting wall construction stopped. Agree republicans lost ground. Primarily because they refused to work with Trump. Not a problem democrats ever have. They always get in line.  Also agree on spending although nobody outspent Obama and Biden, and Trump had to spend to salvage the state of the country during the height of Covid, and then handed Biden the “vaccine” which Biden subsequently used as a weapon against his subjects. Nobody ever glorified Putin. Trump said he was a strong leader. That is truth. Not glorification. A lot of establishment and never trump republicans quit so good riddance.  Def swamp still needs draining.