The Frankish Reich

Again, applying normal rules of grammar to an aged (and apparently dyslexic) man: The antecedent to "there will be a bloodbath" was "if I'm not elected." As a doctor, what would you make of a medical report phrased in this manner?

Serious question: why does it need protection? https://corporate.ford.com/operations/locations/global-plants.html https://gmauthority.com/blog/gm/gm-manufacturing/

JD has found that the path to the nomination as VP is to continue in the role of a smart man playing a dumb man.

The full quote, in context, for anyone who cares to read it: "Let me tell you something, to China, if you're listening, President Xi, and you and I are friends, but he understands the way I deal, those big monster car manufacturing plants that you're building in Mexico right now. And you think you're going to get that, you're going to not hire Americans and you're going to sell the cars us, no. We're going to put a 100% tariff on every single car that comes across the line and you're not going to be able to sell those cars if I get elected. Now if I don't get elected, it's gonna be a bloodbath for the whole — that's gonna be the least of it. It's going to be a bloodbath for the country. That will be the least of it." Of course, it's Trump speaking, not writing, and it's chock full of the asides and self-interruptions that characterize his speeches. I understand that many people find this type of speaking effective, at least from Trump. I'm not one of them, but I get that it is different than written communication or the delivery of well-organized thoughts. But here's the thing: if we apply normal rules of deciphering communication, he's saying: - If I'm not elected, it will be a bloodbath for the whole [cuts himself off, but in context can only mean to say "U.S. auto industry." Nothing else would make sense here] - Interrupts that thought to say mean "no, not just for the whole U.S. auto industry," and replaces that thought with "that's gonna be the least of it." So if we apply the normal rules of interpretation, he is saying the impact on the U.S. auto industry is "gonna be the least of it," and the impact of him not getting elected is gonna be a whole lot worse in other aspects: - "It's going to be a bloodbath for the country. That [note: this must be referring again to the impact on the U.S. auto industry; nothing else would make sense] will be the least of it." So if we treat Trump like any other speaker, the "bloodbath" obviously refers to something other than the impact on the U.S. auto industry. So it is fair to say that he's predicting some other kind of bloodbath. Hey, maybe it's U.S. troops overseas or something. Whatever. But that's not Trump's "explanation." That explanation amounts to "the bloodbath would be to the U.S. auto industry." Which simply doesn't make sense based on my exquisitely careful parsing of his words. There's the possibility that this is just an ill-meaning elderly man with difficulty expressing his thoughts clearly, but of course Trump supporters reject this. So we are left with that now-old canard: Trump's critics take him literally but not seriously; Trump's supporters take him seriously but not literally." In other words: Trump is saying something that literally refers to some other type of "bloodbath." But his supporters are hearing something else. What else that may be, I don't know. That's where that whole dog whistle thing comes from. It isn't just made up out of whole cloth.

I can get a really good 75 inch TV for about $500 today. Viva Free Trade!

Another bs Twitter post. Average price of a gallon of gas today: $3.467 "Tiff" has a car with a 32 gallon tank? Maybe she lives in California (why would she if it's a liberal failed state?). I guess that brings her down to a 23 gallon tank. Stop driving a Ford F-250 super duty truck, Tiff. And then the bottled water!! Get a filter and a Stanley cup, girl. You're behind the times. But you can get a 12 pack of Arrowhead at Walmart for $3.68 today. You look like a big girl, so get 3. That's $11.04. And then there's vegetables! OMG. Eat your broccoli, girl. $1.74/lb at Walmart. Why not get 7 pounds to last you the week? That's $12.18. Leaves you only about $107 to get that fish. So why not go for the gold? Wild caught fresh salmon. Just bought some at Whole Foods. $17.98/lb. So get 6 pounds and you can eat almost a pound of fresh-grilled salmon every day of the week. Just keep posting this nonsense, and I'll keep you up to date on my shopping tips.

I just looked back to see what he's said about tariffs since he first came down that escalator in 2015. Good luck finding any consistency. He just throws out numbers: ten percent! thirty-five percent! as high a tariff on them as they put on us, plus ten percent! I understand campaign rhetoric, but at some time it has to translate into policy if you are going to, you know, actually govern. And you'll never get that from Trump. You'll get "you implemented my policy but you should have known that it wouldn't work ... you're fired."

Laffer was always more of a self-promoter than thinker. There was a core idea (that originated with others, despite being called The Laffer Curve) that was obviously correct: there is some marginal rate of taxation at which tax collections actually begin to fall because ultra-high marginal tax rates discourage productivity. So yeah, let's keep that principle in mind, and also keep in mind that the point of progressive taxation should not be to maximize government tax collections. But that's about all there is to it. And with respect to tariffs: well, Laffer is consistent there, and so he's never thought substituting tariffs for other forms of taxes will work any better.

So you're just kind of a little bit of a socialist.

100% tariff on all auto imports! Last year, 59% of U.S. car sales were imported from abroad. How would you like to pay a cool $50,000 more on a new Audi? OK, so maybe just Mexican imports? Oh, let's just violate the US-CAN-MEX (new NAFTA treaty) and start a nice little trade war. That's the big beautiful future Trump wants for you and me. Oh, but that wouldn't cause U.S.-produced auto prices to go up, you say? Well, then you failed Economics. Meanwhile, Trump is starting to think about his new administration. He doesn't like Jerome Powell at the Fed anymore (he appointed him, but of course, that's Trump for you). He kind of likes Arthur Laffer of Reagan "Laffer Curve" supply side fame and pseudo-economist Stephen Moore of former Wall Street Journal editorial fame. Let's see what they have to say about tariffs, shall we? https://www.wsj.com/economy/trump-economic-advisers-float-three-names-for-fed-chair-e3b694d8?mod=hp_lead_pos2 Moore and Laffer co-founded a group called the Committee to Unleash Prosperity along with Steve Forbes, the chairman of Forbes Media. The group advocates for a stable dollar, low taxes, low or no tariffs, limited spending and the repeal of many regulations. Good to see Trump is still a stable genius "effin' moron" as one of his former Cabinet members said. Tariffs are taxes on the American consumer. He is talking about a ridiculously confiscatory tax on U.S. auto sales that would distort the market and cause a collapse in new auto sales. And meanwhile, he is talking about appointing Reaganites who devoted their careers to advocating against such taxes. So all you Trumpies tell me: tariffs are good now? It's now o.k. to love those taxes? How high is too high? Why stop at automobiles? Why not ban imports of all consumer goods?

Out of context? IT IS PRECISELY WHAT HE SAID. A 100% tax on all imported vehicles. So here's the mindless Trump defender's stance: - Trump was speaking about the U.S. auto industry facing a "bloodbath" if he isn't elected and his tariff isn't imposed. - People who say he was talking about a civil war-type bloodbath were therefore taking him out of context - Yet I am apparently also taking him out of context for saying the supposedly in-context comments about a 100% tariff are somehow also out of context. Trump supporter logic in full display.

Let's all ignore the unequivocal, undisputed stupidity of the statement: Trump promises a 100% tariff on all imported automobiles. Let's make buying a new vehicle much, much more expensive for Americans. That'll reduce inflation!

So ... when did your socialist Boogeyman first rear his ugly head? You tell me. And how exactly did the Bolsheviks and Maoists divide those wonderful happy countries that they took over?

Example, Ben? The Soviet Union? China? The Tsar and the Emperor suddenly "divided" the previously unified people?

It would cost more than that. But he could very well be willing to take a 1-year deal to play for a contender. He'd be worth it.

I looked at this until the paywall stopped me. I'd seen enough. Stupid, idiotic drivel. Oooh, look at Nevada! Clark County (Las Vegas) "controls" the state! Yeah, and it comprises 72% of the Nevada's population. Shocking how that works!

It is apparently something called International Day to Combat ISLAMOPHOBIA. Not International Day to Combat Antisemitism. For similar reasons, I don't expect Biden to issue a proclamation tomorrow honoring the wonderful contributions of Italian Americans.

Exactly. Unheard of. Has any VP ever (since Jefferson, when the VP was separately elected) disavowed the President he served under?

I would guess that a very small percentage of Americans know what pizzagate was. I would guess that a very high percentage of PPP posters know what it was, and that an even higher percentage of rightist PPP posters thought (maybe even still think!) that there may have been something to it. I know their guru DR thought that; I asked him.

The first video says it all. It was Trump's policy to avoid testing for COVID to keep the reported case numbers low.

That one catch made it all worthwhile. And with that ... goodbye, Mr. Sherfield. That was one to remember.

Living in CO, I see all of the Broncos games. Simmons isn't what he was 3 years ago. But he's still really good. Kind of what Poyer was in his Bills' prime. He would be a fantastic addition to this D, and would fit in well with where the Bills are in the competitive cycle (i.e., ready to win now). I can't think of any better FA signing.

Leave aside for a moment the Nazi stuff, and the histrionics of the SPLC. Posobiec was the leading publicizer of the batshit bonkers Pizzagate conspiracy. Has he ever disavowed that or otherwise explained why he would have promoted such nonsense? If there is a reasonable explanation (and I can't imagine one, but obviously my imagination is not as vivid as Pizzagate Jack's), I haven't heard it. Unless and until we do, there is no reason for anyone to repost his tweets.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/14/politics/kfile-gop-nominee-north-carolina-public-schools-michele-morrow-executing-democrats/index.html Example: Anyone NOT afraid of engaging on the facts would respond to why this nut - and official GOP nominee for state-wide office - shouldn't be considered a QAnon adherent. Morrow also promoted QAnon slogans and tweeted that the actor Jim Carrey was “… likely searching for adrenochrome” – a reference to a conspiracy theory shared by QAnon believers that celebrities harvest and drink the blood of children to prolong their own lives. Media Matters, a left-leaning publication, was first to report the QAnon tweets. All together, Morrow tweeted “WWG1WGA” – the slogan that stands for “where we go one, we go all” and is commonly associated with the QAnon conspiracy – more than seven times in 2020.

This is what I'm talking about. Yes, I HAVE found more evidence of QAnon adherents in the social media feeds favored by some people here. Not to mention in some of the candidates for office. If it isn't QAnon, you tell me what explains some of the bizarro beliefs I've pointed out here. But it's easier to post and run under the guise of "ignoring" your critics. Another nonsensical post by an aging lab tech.