Chasing Summer’s Headlines
- Thread starter ILisBest
- Start date
Too bad none were in his cabinet except Buttigieg and he is more talented than any around Trump. Oh I forgot, it is not his brightness that bothers you, it is the fact he is gay.
My stepson is gay, genius. His biological father is gone, so I treat him as my own. We have a great relationship. You are on a real roll there Stonedax.
Every time the subject of negative feelings about race or negative feelings about Sexual orientation one of you always have one in the family. That on its own doesn't provide proof of your attitudes. Look at the pictures you posted ridiculing those of mixed gender identity. Why did you make fun of Buttigieg, he is super bright and qualified.
Stop it. You know Biden wasn’t running the county. The guy was probably completely unaware of where he was after a certain time of day.
You said “Biden and the cabinet”. You can’t possibly think Biden was making any crucial decisions.
Pretty sad knowing we were sending that elderly man into important meetings. The people around him were complicit. But ya, we should trust that they were capable.
The recently departed Train, Jeff, and "John Kay" pine for the days of Romney & McCain. Losing big, but with "class".
read://https_skeshel.substack.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fskeshel.substack.com%2Fp%2Fwhat-would-the-electoral-map-look%3Futm_source%3Dsubstack%26publication_id%3D798984%26post_id%3D164364133%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_content%3Dshare%26utm_campaign%3Demail-share%26triggerShare%3Dtrue%26isFreemail%3Dtrue%26r%3Dqsto3%26triedRedirect%3Dtrue
These self-proclaimed “anti-Trump conservatives” pine for the days of old, when Republicans were supposedly a dominant electoral force. The only trouble is, I can’t find any indication of those days in which this electoral force included a powerful president bringing real solutions since the 1980s, when Ronald Rea1gan was in charge, and even he had to deal with Democrats running the legislative branch most of the time. “Dubya” had both chambers for six years and squandered it, and there were a couple midterm surges in the Obama years that did jack squat. Here, neocons, let’s go back to the culmination point with Mitt Romney, the Gingrich-dubbed “Massachusetts Moderate,” at the helm for the GOP against an historically weak incumbent (Obama) in 2012:
20 years after George H.W. Bush was dusted off by Bill Clinton, transitioning the country from the Reagan Revolution and the Cold War-oriented politics of the 1980s, Romney snatched defeat from the jaws of victory and mustered up (checks notes)…206 electoral votes. He could have won Trump’s specialty trio of Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin and still come up 18 electoral votes short of the winning recipe.
Every time a member of the GOP old guard tells you how bad Trump is, the first thing out of your mouth should be that Mitt Romney couldn’t even win Florida (Trump +13.1%), Iowa (Trump +13.2%), or Ohio (Trump +11.2%); with that as reality, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin are pipe dreams. The only advantage of Romney, at least in Trump’s first two election runs, was that he offended the suburban affluent GOP voter base less, and therefore ran up higher margins in Texas, Arizona, and Georgia. Well, he won all three of those easily and look how the national race ended up. Now that Hispanic voters are warming up, it looks like Texas and Arizona are coming back where they should be.
Believe it or not, Romney’s performance was an improvement over John McCain’s from four years prior, when he couldn’t even carry North Carolina or Indiana (yes, the Indiana that backed Trump by 19.0% last fall). My current assessment is that any generic GOP candidate today, including any of the expected top names for 2028 (Vance, Rubio, Noem), should begin forecasts with 235 electoral votes (all of Trump’s certified 2020 states, which includes North Carolina). This means Florida, Ohio, and Iowa are now solid Republican states.
I still think, however, that only Trump or the closest thing to him can carry the big three (Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin) in a presidential race, and given current registration patternts, I think Vance is well positioned to win them in 2028, especially if the working-class agenda pays off (hello, “One Big Beautiful Bill”) and we can achieve meaningful reforms to solve the election corruption crisis in America. I think a Haley-type candidate would lose Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin by roughly five points each.
This, my friends, is the electoral impact of the Trumpian working-class revolution. It gave us all the standard Republican states, a host of new ones we don’t even think about anymore (Iowa, Ohio, Florida, plus the Rust Belt), and has drawn several to the cusp of flips, such as New Jersey, New Mexico, and Minnesota.
read://https_skeshel.substack.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fskeshel.substack.com%2Fp%2Fwhat-would-the-electoral-map-look%3Futm_source%3Dsubstack%26publication_id%3D798984%26post_id%3D164364133%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_content%3Dshare%26utm_campaign%3Demail-share%26triggerShare%3Dtrue%26isFreemail%3Dtrue%26r%3Dqsto3%26triedRedirect%3Dtrue
What Would the Electoral Map Look Like if the Trump Revolution Never Happened?
Democrats were working on the one-two punch of trade and demographic change, and only one candidate could stop it - and he did. For now…
If you like maps, this piece is just for you. Political animals, especially the kind who oppose the current peaceful ideological revolution within the United States, count on voters to have short memories and forget things that happened not all that long ago. Take Joe Walsh and Adam Kinzinger, two of the biggest morons on this platform, who are raking in massive subscription cash by screeching about “Orange Man Bad” 24/7 as prime examples. Walsh once demanded President Obama build moats filled with alligators to discourage illegal border crossings; now, he’s a raving lunatic clamoring to be loved by the left and criticizing every breath President Trump takes.These self-proclaimed “anti-Trump conservatives” pine for the days of old, when Republicans were supposedly a dominant electoral force. The only trouble is, I can’t find any indication of those days in which this electoral force included a powerful president bringing real solutions since the 1980s, when Ronald Rea1gan was in charge, and even he had to deal with Democrats running the legislative branch most of the time. “Dubya” had both chambers for six years and squandered it, and there were a couple midterm surges in the Obama years that did jack squat. Here, neocons, let’s go back to the culmination point with Mitt Romney, the Gingrich-dubbed “Massachusetts Moderate,” at the helm for the GOP against an historically weak incumbent (Obama) in 2012:
20 years after George H.W. Bush was dusted off by Bill Clinton, transitioning the country from the Reagan Revolution and the Cold War-oriented politics of the 1980s, Romney snatched defeat from the jaws of victory and mustered up (checks notes)…206 electoral votes. He could have won Trump’s specialty trio of Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin and still come up 18 electoral votes short of the winning recipe.
Every time a member of the GOP old guard tells you how bad Trump is, the first thing out of your mouth should be that Mitt Romney couldn’t even win Florida (Trump +13.1%), Iowa (Trump +13.2%), or Ohio (Trump +11.2%); with that as reality, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin are pipe dreams. The only advantage of Romney, at least in Trump’s first two election runs, was that he offended the suburban affluent GOP voter base less, and therefore ran up higher margins in Texas, Arizona, and Georgia. Well, he won all three of those easily and look how the national race ended up. Now that Hispanic voters are warming up, it looks like Texas and Arizona are coming back where they should be.
Believe it or not, Romney’s performance was an improvement over John McCain’s from four years prior, when he couldn’t even carry North Carolina or Indiana (yes, the Indiana that backed Trump by 19.0% last fall). My current assessment is that any generic GOP candidate today, including any of the expected top names for 2028 (Vance, Rubio, Noem), should begin forecasts with 235 electoral votes (all of Trump’s certified 2020 states, which includes North Carolina). This means Florida, Ohio, and Iowa are now solid Republican states.
I still think, however, that only Trump or the closest thing to him can carry the big three (Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin) in a presidential race, and given current registration patternts, I think Vance is well positioned to win them in 2028, especially if the working-class agenda pays off (hello, “One Big Beautiful Bill”) and we can achieve meaningful reforms to solve the election corruption crisis in America. I think a Haley-type candidate would lose Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin by roughly five points each.
This, my friends, is the electoral impact of the Trumpian working-class revolution. It gave us all the standard Republican states, a host of new ones we don’t even think about anymore (Iowa, Ohio, Florida, plus the Rust Belt), and has drawn several to the cusp of flips, such as New Jersey, New Mexico, and Minnesota.
Buttigieg reminds me of your standard leftwing professor from academia. He is a polished speaker that did well in school. He was not a good transportation secretary and I felt he mostly mailed it in. He was chosen for that position based on him being a gay liberal. That's it. That was his qualification. Whoever was running the Biden WH mostly picked people on diversity, rather than qualifications.
My attitude towards the gay community is very simple. I judge each person on their merit. My second home is in Key West and I love it there. It happens to have a very large gay community. That doesn't bother me and why would it? I think you make poor assumptions based on how you feel towards others. That is just a guess. Maybe it is what your news source tells you to think? I am really not sure.
Last edited:
Benz is former state dept. Expert in cybersecurity. Not an idiot. If you want to see what one looks like, go find a mirror and look into it.
What’s “amuse”ing is how you can’t actually address the subject at hand, which is Bill Ackman’s words. Dumb af on your part.
Buttigieg was completely unqualified. Can you name any major accomplishment of Buttigieg that was something other than taking FMLA? He wasn’t popular as mayor of South Bend either. Pothole Pete. 103,000 in population and he was running for President. LOL.
Last edited:
How many years past 70 do you live in Denmark ?
Jake is one thing primarily, not a racist, BUT a LIER !
wait, you think Trump is fit to be president? Justify the crap continuously coming from his mouth. Let’s limit it to Oval Office Embarrassment !
Hate to tell you brainiacs, but the optimal retirement age in US to Maximize SS is 70 .
I've told you of what I used to do on midnights in the NJSP.
Chase down cars driven at excessive speeds, usually over 100 MPH !
A high percentage of these driver's turned out to be drunk !
But I parked the Troop Car in spots that were protected from those IDIOT DRUNKS ! Behind huge concrete bridge abutments, on closed entry ramps, or other SAFE areas.
FIRST rule in Police MV stops, PROTECT yourself from the car you stopped or oncoming cars !
It's just a ticket !
I have been collecting SS since 62 , but still working. = much more than Max SS $.
Pothole was so bright that he got caught by media being driven into DC in a HUGE SUV !.
Then he was photographed as he put on his bike helmet and was handed his bike for his 1 block "green commute !"
He’s certainly more capable than Biden was. Biden couldn’t sit down for an interview that wasn’t heavily edited. He fell multiple times.
Anyone who isn’t incredibly biased knows Trump is more fit right now than Biden was during his Presidency.
Whether you think it was Obama, Jill, or someone else….the Dems are going to pay for what they did. Was it worth losing all credibility and trustworthiness for a 3rd Obama term? Seems unlikely considering it resulted in more Trump. They have no one to blame but themselves.
Trophy wives, Alphonse Capone pictures of the Congo , you are not listening to him .
The Republicans need to wrap some things up before next November, otherwise Dems won’t pay and we will be back to America last and phony impeachments after the mid-terms.
Biden looked for a dead person in a crowd. A person he just recently heard had died. Please stop.
We all said he was gone and were mocked for it. Now the media is finally admitting how bad it was.
Anyone who has lived with a family member with dementia saw this years ago. I mentioned it a few times. Really sad what they did to him.
Last edited:
I love it when you lecture us and don't consider all of the factors. May want to read this...
The average life expectancy for an American male is about 76 years, according to recent data. Deciding when to start taking Social Security (SS) benefits depends on factors like your health, financial needs, and whether you’re still working, but we can break it down based on maximizing benefits for the average lifespan.
- Full Retirement Age (FRA): For most people born after 1960, FRA is 67. At FRA, you get your full benefit amount.
- Early Benefits (Age 62): You can start SS at 62, but your benefit is reduced by about 30% compared to FRA. For example, if your FRA benefit is $1,000/month, you’d get ~$700/month at 62.
- Delayed Benefits (Up to Age 70): Waiting past FRA increases your benefit by 8% per year. At 70, your benefit could be ~24% higher than at FRA (e.g., $1,240/month for a $1,000 FRA benefit).
If you live to 76, the total benefits received depend on when you start:
- Start at 62: You get 14 years of payments (168 months). At $700/month, that’s ~$117,600 total.
- Start at FRA (67): You get 9 years of payments (108 months). At $1,000/month, that’s ~$108,000 total.
- Start at 70: You get 6 years of payments (72 months). At $1,240/month, that’s ~$89,280 total.
- Pros of Starting Early: More cash flow sooner, especially if you need it or have health concerns.
- Cons: Smaller monthly checks for life, and if you work before FRA, earnings above a certain limit ($22,320 in 2025) reduce benefits temporarily.
- Pros of Waiting: Higher monthly payments, which matter more if you live longer than 76 or need to support a spouse.
- Health and Family History: If you’re in poor health or expect a shorter lifespan, starting at 62 maximizes benefits. If you’re healthy and expect to live past 80, waiting until 70 often makes sense (break-even point is typically around 80-82).
- Financial Needs: If you need income now, 62 may be better. If you have savings or other income, delaying could be wiser.
- Spousal Benefits: If married, your choice affects your spouse’s survivor benefits. Delaying increases their potential benefit.
For the average American male lifespan of 76, starting Social Security at 62 generally maximizes total benefits, assuming no major health or financial constraints. However, if you’re healthy, have other income, or want to optimize for a spouse, consider delaying to 67 or 70. Use the SSA’s online tools (ssa.gov) to estimate your specific benefits and run personalized scenarios.
Last edited:
So stonedax doesn’t have a proper grasp on the facts? Whodathunkit?
The question will be if any of these euro countries do anything serious about the issue, like sending them back from whence they came. They are not refugees.
