Democrats take the house
-
-
Doesn't say anything at all about falling victim to the recount law. First you had to assume that they lost by more than 1% and there was more than 1% mishandled votes, second he have to assume that they are calling for a recount in the first place. He fell victim to the same thing that every other politician that loses an election falls victim to.
But hey I guess it's a win for the unions ?. A loss for the working men and women of Wisconsin. ?
WSS
It's actually a win for the working people of Wisconsin WSS. Andit mentions in the 2nd paragraph about how he changed the recount rules. Karma.
It's actually a win for the working people of Wisconsin WSS. Andit mentions in the 2nd paragraph about how he changed the recount rules. Karma.
Again it's just my opinion and I know we disagree about how good unions are for modern-day workforces. That aside I don't see anything to make me think that he's demanding a recount or that there's evidence that more than 1% of the vote was crooked. Of course there are Democrats involved so...
?
WSS
-
-
As opposed to the last two years? Or for that matter the last 20?
Clearly you haven't been paying attention..
-
Both political parties got good news yesterday, but the real winner was America.
With record turnout and sky-high participation, we saw an engaged, plugged-in democratic process at work.
Today, it's time to come together as Americans and work toward solutions that benefit all!
-
Both political parties got good news yesterday, but the real winner was America.
With record turnout and sky-high participation, we saw an engaged, plugged-in democratic process at work.
Today, it's time to come together as Americans and work toward solutions that benefit all!
Both political parties got good news yesterday, but the real winner was America.
With record turnout and sky-high participation, we saw an engaged, plugged-in democratic process at work.
Today, it's time to come together as Americans and work toward solutions that benefit all!
Stuart
Ivanka just being nice.
It was not good news for democrats and all those thirsting for a "Blue Wave".
This was a huge victory. All the never Trumpers in the Senate are gone..outa here!
Trump right up there with Reagan:
The most House seats ever lost by a president’s party in power was Obama in 2010. He lost 63. Next was Bill Clinton in 1994. He lost 52. In 1958, Eisenhower lost 48, as did Ford and Nixon in 1974. They lost 48.
Lyndon Johnson in ’66, lost 47. Harry Truman in ’46 lost 45 seats. George W. Bush in 2006 lost 30. In 1950, Harry Truman lost 29. Reagan, in ’82, lost 26 seats, and in 2016 Trump is at 27 .In the Senate everyone Obama campaigned for lost.
9 out of the 11 that Trump campaigned for won.
-
-
Once America watches the dems own the house for the next few? years, they will rebound back to reality.
Except the radical kids in college and many of the poor. They want their free ride, their imposed utopian dream world of
socialism.
I wish they would start requiring Real American and Real World history to be taught again.
Once America watches the dems own the house for the next few? years, they will rebound back to reality.
Except the radical kids in college and many of the poor. They want their free ride, their imposed utopian dream world of
socialism.
I wish they would start requiring Real American and Real World history to be taught again.
I prefer Road Rules...
-
I missed cals little rant post before about those damn college kids and poor people.
Top notch stuff. Grade A comedy.
Sometimes I forget how radicalized Diffy Q's made me
-
-
according to Cal I'm a real American because I voted at 630
june 30th? or did you mean 6:30 ? AM ? PM ?
read up on communication.
-
I guess you missed how the last one overwhelmingly passed then...?
ah, just now catching up, busy day yesterday - I guess you missed that I was referring to the incoming dem house? I was referring to the dem senate in the next few years. Of course it passed before the dems took the house - it was going to pass anyways. You watch the next time the military budget is up from the dem senate.
-
I missed cals little rant post before about those damn college kids and poor people.
Top notch stuff. Grade A comedy.
Sometimes I forget how radicalized Diffy Q's made me
I missed cals little rant post before about those damn college kids and poor people.
Top notch stuff. Grade A comedy.
Sometimes I forget how radicalized Diffy Q's made me
well, you aren't smart enough to be radicalized, you just don't believe in anything - that's your birdbrain schtick.
-
I guess you missed how the last one overwhelmingly passed then...?
ah, just now catching up, busy day yesterday - I guess you missed that I was referring to the incoming dem house? I was referring to the dem senate in the next few years. Of course it passed before the dems took the house - it was going to pass anyways. You watch the next time the military budget is up from the dem senate.
ah, just now catching up, busy day yesterday - I guess you missed that I was referring to the incoming dem house? I was referring to the dem senate in the next few years. Of course it passed before the dems took the house - it was going to pass anyways. You watch the next time the military budget is up from the dem senate.
Yes, I'll watch. they'll pass it overwhelmingly again because they're every bit as fiscally irresponsible as the GOP claims they aren't.
Same same, old boy.
-
ah, just now catching up, busy day yesterday - I guess you missed that I was referring to the incoming dem house? I was referring to the dem senate in the next few years. Of course it passed before the dems took the house - it was going to pass anyways. You watch the next time the military budget is up from the dem senate.
Yes, I'll watch. they'll pass it overwhelmingly again because they're every bit as fiscally irresponsible as the GOP claims they aren't.
Same same, old boy.
Yes, I'll watch. they'll pass it overwhelmingly again because they're every bit as fiscally irresponsible as the GOP claims they aren't. Same same, old boy.
Oh, Y'EAH? well, could be....
but cutting our military budget to add more to the dynamically growing welfare/unearned benefits/dems buying votes isn't helping, and just cutting the military budget isn't going to help either.
-
Yes, I'll watch. they'll pass it overwhelmingly again because they're every bit as fiscally irresponsible as the GOP claims they aren't. Same same, old boy.
Oh, Y'EAH? well, could be....
but cutting our military budget to add more to the dynamically growing welfare/unearned benefits/dems buying votes isn't helping, and just cutting the military budget isn't going to help either.
Oh, Y'EAH? well, could be....
but cutting our military budget to add more to the dynamically growing welfare/unearned benefits/dems buying votes isn't helping, and just cutting the military budget isn't going to help either.
Brilliant. Because if I say we've burned a ton of unnecessary money on an overinflated military budget including projects like the one we awarded Lockheed Martin - you know, the F35's that burn through money - 1.33b well over the budget - that MUST mean it goes to those damn welfare queens in Mississippi, huh?
Seriously, man. Use your head. You can be capable of good ideas when you care to.
-
Oh, Y'EAH? well, could be....
but cutting our military budget to add more to the dynamically growing welfare/unearned benefits/dems buying votes isn't helping, and just cutting the military budget isn't going to help either.
Brilliant. Because if I say we've burned a ton of unnecessary money on an overinflated military budget including projects like the one we awarded Lockheed Martin - you know, the F35's that burn through money - 1.33b well over the budget - that MUST mean it goes to those damn welfare queens in Mississippi, huh?
Seriously, man. Use your head. You can be capable of good ideas when you care to.
Brilliant. Because if I say we've burned a ton of unnecessary money on an overinflated military budget including projects like the one we awarded Lockheed Martin - you know, the F35's that burn through money - 1.33b well over the budget - that MUST mean it goes to those damn welfare queens in Mississippi, huh?
Seriously, man. Use your head. You can be capable of good ideas when you care to.
okie dokey - will do.
Why Democrats Voted Against A Military Pay Raise | Speaker.gov
May 18, 2015 - Increasing troop pay and benefits. Funding our ... Democrats voted against the defense bill because they want more domestic spending. As The ...Far sadder:A final effort by Senate Republicans to halt cuts to pensions of military retirees failed late Tuesday, after Democrats blocked an amendment to the controversial budget bill.
The two-year budget agreement, which cleared a key test vote earlier in the day, was expected to get a final vote no later than Wednesday.
Ahead of the final vote, Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., tried unsuccessfully to use a parliamentary tactic to force a vote on the amendment, which he wrote to undo the cuts for military retirees.
A provision in the already House-passed bill would cut retirement benefits for military retirees by $6 billion over 10 years.
Sessions wanted to instead eliminate an estimated $4.2 billion in annual spending by reining in an IRS credit that illegal immigrants have claimed.
He and fellow senators argued the bill unfairly sticks veterans and other military retirees with the cost of new spending.
“It’s not correct, and it should not happen,” Sessions said on the floor.
"By blocking my amendment, they voted to cut pensions for wounded warriors," he said afterwards. "Senators in this chamber have many valid ideas for replacing these pension cuts, including my proposal to close the tax welfare loophole for illegal filers, and all deserved a fair and open hearing. But they were denied.”
Sessions’ office claimed the vote Tuesday to block the amendment was a vote to "cut military pensions instead of cutting welfare for illegal immigrants."
-
Ryan hits Democrats for holding the military 'hostage' over immigration ...
Jan 18, 2018 - "The defense budget is being held hostage for DACA, which is not a deadline ... Specifically, he pointed to long Navy work hours, high percentages of planes that can't fly because of maintenance issues and cuts in the size of the Army. .... We have been in unending wars since 2001 and are adding more ... -
Oh, Y'EAH? well, could be....
but cutting our military budget to add more to the dynamically growing welfare/unearned benefits/dems buying votes isn't helping, and just cutting the military budget isn't going to help either.
Brilliant. Because if I say we've burned a ton of unnecessary money on an overinflated military budget including projects like the one we awarded Lockheed Martin - you know, the F35's that burn through money - 1.33b well over the budget - that MUST mean it goes to those damn welfare queens in Mississippi, huh?
Seriously, man. Use your head. You can be capable of good ideas when you care to.
Brilliant. Because if I say we've burned a ton of unnecessary money on an overinflated military budget including projects like the one we awarded Lockheed Martin - you know, the F35's that burn through money - 1.33b well over the budget - that MUST mean it goes to those damn welfare queens in Mississippi, huh?
Seriously, man. Use your head. You can be capable of good ideas when you care to.
Come, on, Man ! I was in the military. I've read plenty in the past about $200 toilet seats... seen waste like crazy. Read plenty about it in the past. One time, I think it was Charleston AFB, S. Carolina? A commander had a major inspection coming up, so he ordered jeeps, new typewriters, etc etc etc, buried underground. I would hope the military would have been donating all the food that gets left over - to food banks, homeless shelters, etc. all over our country. The F35 - way, way too expensive.
But state of the art super-technology costs a lot. Over years, btw, what does NOT go over budget, eh?
Belgium reportedly picks F-35 for future fighter jet - Defense News
Oct 22, 2018 - WASHINGTON and LIÈGE, Belgium — Belgium appears poised to select Lockheed Martin's F-35 over the Eurofighter Typhoon as its ...Oct 12, 2018 - The U.S. Navy, Air Force and Marines — as well as 11 international partners who participated in the program — grounded all F-35 fighters on ...Easiest aircraft I've ever flown': Taking the F-35 for a spin - and a fight ...
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/.../f35-fighter-jet-pilot-flying-what-it-s-like-1...Oct 25, 2018 - In the second of a three-part series on the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter, ... Lockheed Martin's F-35 chief test pilot Paul Hattendorf in the Sockpit of an F-35B. ..... Get the news that matters in your inbox every morning!Oct 25, 2018 - In the first of a three-part series on the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter, Channel NewsAsia's Aqil Haziq Mahmud visited Lockheed Martin's .
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login