I am, yes. The exceptions would be cases like Chrysler (back in the Iacocca days...small investment with big payoff, mainly in terms of jobs). I could play devil's advocate on this, but I actually think a greater point of discussion is around exactly this concept. First, let's all agree with it, for the sake of discussion if nothing else. But where liberals and conservatives disagree is on how it is achieved. Liberals are in favor of the government being heavily involved in bringing this about, conservatives are more of the view that if people are left alone, this is brought about by individual actions, and that having the government involved detracts from the goal. (this is more of the fiscal conservative view, social conservatives would differ). This is most true for economic issues. One of the things Hillary emphasized in her speech (which overall I thought was pretty good) was the continuing meme of the Democratic party that all this could be done if we just taxed the rich more. Great talking point, the problem is that it is patently false. This video explains it best. A bit dated now, but that just makes the premise even less true, as our debt is just that much bigger. What this means is that these plans are not, then, paid for, and we are just adding to our ever increasing debt. Minimum wage is another example. Raising the minimum wage sounds great, but those advocating it never talk about the inevitable corresponding job loss--companies ARE going to cut jobs as wages rise. So, most of those workers will get more money, but a good number of them, millions likely, are going to be out of a job because of it. The recent situation with the planned Walmart expansion into the DC area demonstrates this. The local government there enticed Walmart to build 3 stores in impoverished areas in DC, but than added in laws requiring much higher minimum wages and higher health care coverage. WalMart ran the numbers, realized none of these stores would then make money, and cancelled the project. Those who simply deny this will happen are simply denying reality.
Did you follow any of the DNC, or her speech, or ANY of her speeches, ever? She absolutely follows a belief system, one that indicates government is the means for solving all these problems. She wouldn't listen for very long, if at all, to any indicating that is not the case.
I also believe Sarah Palin's kids and grandkids were/are off-limits. Fortunately there was more than enough material to work with with Sarah Palin...
Look at all that unity!!!!! <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Onto greener pastures! (literally). SO proud of everyone who walked out of that room tonight! <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DNCWalkOut?src=hash">#DNCWalkOut</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DemExit?src=hash">#DemExit</a> <a href="https://t.co/PNKFDtLuyH">pic.twitter.com/PNKFDtLuyH</a></p>— Natalie (@Natooshka318) <a href="https://twitter.com/Natooshka318/status/758163011341287424">July 27, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The DNC and mainstream media are looking for actors to fill out empty Bernie seats at the convention. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DemExit?src=hash">#DemExit</a> <a href="https://t.co/bdr8gDFkIJ">pic.twitter.com/bdr8gDFkIJ</a></p>— PRIYANKA (@chepriyanka) <a href="https://twitter.com/chepriyanka/status/758345319595839488">July 27, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics optics I wonder what Hillary will do to address this after the elections. She'd clearly need that vote for midterms.
snopes take: http://www.snopes.com/dnc-hiring-actors-via-craigslist-to-replace-delegates/ I think it's actually pretty funny. Hits both Trump's hired support, and the DNCs email leak.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/06R-6s3NSRc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> <iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QsyPzHIgpn0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Yeah, I imagine these are hella hard to get into and have all kinds of waiting lists and implied donation levels. Like some volunteer opportunities: some corporate golf tourneys for example, that you have to explicitly pay to work just because of the networking value.
But you just knew someone would peel it off their facebook or google+ feed and post it here. Surprised Trump didn't tweet about it yet...
Um, because, she sang at the 2016 Democratic National Convention. You know, the subject of this thread. But I know, you probably a fan of Taylor Swift. Or perhaps a fan of RNC speaker Antonio Sabata... not that there is anything wrong with that. :grin:
Interesting headline and take by Fox News: in an article headlined: "GENERALS BATTLE: Ex-Obama brass rip each other over Trump, Clinton", you'd sorta expect that the two Generals were arguing with each other. But instead, its simply General Flynn, noted Trump supporter, VP candidate, Fox news talking head, and someone with hurt fweelings when he was dismissed from his job, takes a shot at Gen. Allen for supporting Clinton. Do all Trump supporters act so butt hurt all the time? http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/07/29/battle-generals-flynn-blasts-allen-for-clinton-endorsement.html
Yeah, craig's list. Despite the fact that they have all of Russia's internet hacking at their disposal to support the GOP and Putin's stooge, you guys still kind of suck at this. THough htere is an apparent right wing tendency to fall for grifts and scams - look at any commercial break during Fox News.
Both conventions are TV shows produced to encourage voting for the candidates. So, if DNC did prepare for a portion of Bernie delegates walking out by hiring seat fillers while Trump just allowed the convention space to look empty without planning or preparation, then it's points to Hillary for being competent in running a media operations.
There are also twice as many Democrat delegates so it would definitely factor in and make the DNC be more full.
