Former Trump supporter says she was 'brainwashed'

[craigsters]

https://youtu.be/IceLYoRnjAI


https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2023/07/06/pam-hemphill-donald-trump-january-6-brainwashed-ac360-vpx.cnn

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And QAnon is a foreign q-tip company

[hum猫]

ok

[crunchyfrog]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Dom:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Out Of Bubblegum:

Yes it will. They have always actively tried to make happen all the bad things you mention. No one has ever accused them of trying to make America better for the little guy. The only thing they do is pretend to cut taxes. The cuts mostly go to the top 2%.

Many of these people think America is doing way worse than it actually is, as in it's some "deindustrialized" hell-hole.

Meanwhile, the country is actually doing relatively well, it made excellent recovery from COVID crisis. More startups than before, low unemployment, and better education and career opportunities today. And once the effects of the infrastructure bill and green investments come into effect, this positive circle will only multiply.

Also, what deserves attention is the fact that Biden's fiscal year budget for 2024 lowers after-tax income by an average of $2300 a year. And that average is measured by the fact that there are far more people living in low-income conditions than high-income conditions - so in other words, it is targeted reduction for low and middle income households. I'm waiting for someone to say that this $2300 reduction is wrong because it's being implemented by Biden. I can feel it.

Well it kind of is and isn't.

The fact is some people are doing well and on paper it looks good.

But you have a MASSIVE class divide that's ever widening. The rich did VERY well out of COVID but the poorer end did worse.

You have people who obviously can't afford healthcare. You have people that have to work more than one job to survive. You have people who cannot afford to buy houses. You have people who are one small misfortune away from bankrupt (around 45% of the whole country according to data).

So yes and no.

[Ulfrinn]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Out Of Bubblegum:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Jesus:

The US has been almost completely deindustrialized. While we have "innovation" and useless tech startups, these giant corporations operate on socialism and it's harsh capitalism for the rest of us. Peoples lives are ruined when a family member gets sick, unions are slowly dying and job security is non-existent. The average American is swimming in debt and living a life of financial slavery being taken advantage of by usury. Democrats will never get anything close to universal healthcare in this country

and it won't be red team stopping them.

It will be them towing the party line. Business as usual. You're drunk on the progressive kool-aid. They've sold you a pipedream. I wish I had your optimism lol

Yes it will. They have always actively tried to make happen all the bad things you mention. No one has ever accused them of trying to make America better for the little guy. The only thing they do is pretend to cut taxes. The cuts mostly go to the top 2%.

And what about the other side. What have they done to make America better for the little guy?

[crunchyfrog]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ulfrinn:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Out Of Bubblegum:

Yes it will. They have always actively tried to make happen all the bad things you mention. No one has ever accused them of trying to make America better for the little guy. The only thing they do is pretend to cut taxes. The cuts mostly go to the top 2%.

And what about the other side. What have they done to make America better for the little guy?

Neither will in the US because both are funded by the rich and ONLY bring about policies that benefit those rich people.

It will never change until money is removed from US politics.

[Ulfrinn]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von crunchyfrog:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ulfrinn:

And what about the other side. What have they done to make America better for the little guy?

Neither will in the US because both are funded by the rich and ONLY bring about policies that benefit those rich people.

It will never change until money is removed from US politics.

If you truly believe both parties are controlled by corporate interests, such as those of the military industrial complex, or big pharma, tell me, how would the controlled corporate media treat certain outliers outside of those spheres of influence?

[crunchyfrog]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ulfrinn:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von crunchyfrog:

Neither will in the US because both are funded by the rich and ONLY bring about policies that benefit those rich people.

It will never change until money is removed from US politics.

If you truly believe both parties are controlled by corporate interests, such as those of the military industrial complex, or big pharma, tell me, how would the controlled corporate media treat certain outliers outside of those spheres of influence?

That makes zero sense.

They both demonstrably are controlle by rich people (I never said big pharme particularly or any such group). They both offer tax breaks to the rich. Simples.

That is clearly demonstrable across the whole country.

[Ulfrinn]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von crunchyfrog:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ulfrinn:

If you truly believe both parties are controlled by corporate interests, such as those of the military industrial complex, or big pharma, tell me, how would the controlled corporate media treat certain outliers outside of those spheres of influence?

That makes zero sense.

They both demonstrably are controlle by rich people (I never said big pharme particularly or any such group). They both offer tax breaks to the rich. Simples.

That is clearly demonstrable across the whole country.

It makes perfect sense to anyone fluent in English. You don't have to say big pharma, but they're one of the major controlling forces in politics. As are the corporations who manufacture military weapons. Those two groups spend the most in US election. You can toss energy corporations in there too.

These groups also make up some of the biggest advertisers in major media outlets. Meaning, they get to control the narrative you see and hear on TV. So a simple question is, what do you think media is going to say or do about anyone who is a threat to the power of these corporate interests?

[Chaosolous]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von crunchyfrog:

It will never change until money is removed from US politics.

If we removed money from politics I don't think anyone would run anymore.

[crunchyfrog]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ulfrinn:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von crunchyfrog:

That makes zero sense.

They both demonstrably are controlle by rich people (I never said big pharme particularly or any such group). They both offer tax breaks to the rich. Simples.

That is clearly demonstrable across the whole country.

It makes perfect sense to anyone fluent in English. You don't have to say big pharma, but they're one of the major controlling forces in politics. As are the corporations who manufacture military weapons. Those two groups spend the most in US election. You can toss energy corporations in there too.

These groups also make up some of the biggest advertisers in major media outlets. Meaning, they get to control the narrative you see and hear on TV. So a simple question is, what do you think media is going to say or do about anyone who is a threat to the power of these corporate interests?

Simple - I don't care because I never made that point.

All I stated was that both parties do only the interests of the rich. That's clearly demosntrable. I don't know why you are making a non sequitur by saying something something press.

I don't know nor care.

[crunchyfrog]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Chaosolous:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von crunchyfrog:

It will never change until money is removed from US politics.

If we removed money from politics I don't think anyone would run anymore.

Obviously - or rather you'd get people who ran who wanted to actually work for people.

Remember, before the Carter regime the US used to operate this way and clearly people were in power then were they not?

[Ulfrinn]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von crunchyfrog:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ulfrinn:

It makes perfect sense to anyone fluent in English. You don't have to say big pharma, but they're one of the major controlling forces in politics. As are the corporations who manufacture military weapons. Those two groups spend the most in US election. You can toss energy corporations in there too.

These groups also make up some of the biggest advertisers in major media outlets. Meaning, they get to control the narrative you see and hear on TV. So a simple question is, what do you think media is going to say or do about anyone who is a threat to the power of these corporate interests?

Simple - I don't care because I never made that point.

All I stated was that both parties do only the interests of the rich. That's clearly demosntrable. I don't know why you are making a non sequitur by saying something something press.

I don't know nor care.

You don't think those corporations have major influence in US politics? Well then, who are these big bad corporations you think are putting too much money into politics?

[crunchyfrog]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ulfrinn:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von crunchyfrog:

Simple - I don't care because I never made that point.

All I stated was that both parties do only the interests of the rich. That's clearly demosntrable. I don't know why you are making a non sequitur by saying something something press.

I don't know nor care.

You don't think those corporations have major influence in US politics? Well then, who are these big bad corporations you think are putting too much money into politics?

Again I never said that at all.

If you can't hold a proper conversation then I don't want to deal with you, sorry.

[Ulfrinn]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von crunchyfrog:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ulfrinn:

You don't think those corporations have major influence in US politics? Well then, who are these big bad corporations you think are putting too much money into politics?

Again I never said that at all.

If you can't hold a proper conversation then I don't want to deal with you, sorry.

You said there's too much money in politics, and mentioned "rich people" but those "rich people" all own corporations. It's how they got rich. If you can't follow common sense then maybe you're the one who should back out. Unless you're making up "rich people" to be a faceless boogieman that makes sensationalized fear mongering easy for you, it shouldn't be too hard to name a few names.

So tell me, all this "money in politics" where does it come from? From whom?

[crunchyfrog]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ulfrinn:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von crunchyfrog:

Again I never said that at all.

If you can't hold a proper conversation then I don't want to deal with you, sorry.

You said there's too much money in politics, and mentioned "rich people" but those "rich people" all own corporations. It's how they got rich. If you can't follow common sense then maybe you're the one who should back out. Unless you're making up "rich people" to be a faceless boogieman that makes sensationalized fear mongering easy for you, it shouldn't be too hard to name a few names.

So tell me, all this "money in politics" where does it come from? From whom?

Cool, demonstrate how all rich people own corporations.

Then demonstrate how rich people MUST be doing things that suit their corporations and not their personal pleasures?

You're conflating things I haven't said because they can be different.

[Ulfrinn]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von crunchyfrog:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ulfrinn:

You said there's too much money in politics, and mentioned "rich people" but those "rich people" all own corporations. It's how they got rich. If you can't follow common sense then maybe you're the one who should back out. Unless you're making up "rich people" to be a faceless boogieman that makes sensationalized fear mongering easy for you, it shouldn't be too hard to name a few names.

So tell me, all this "money in politics" where does it come from? From whom?

Cool, demonstrate how all rich people own corporations.

Then demonstrate how rich people MUST be doing things that suit their corporations and not their personal pleasures?

You're conflating things I haven't said because they can be different.

How many of those "rich people" can you name that don't own corporations. You seem awfully adamant in defending corporations by trying to obfuscate from the reality that "the rich" and corporations are very closely linked. It seems to me like you just say "the rich" without context in an attempt to give your sensationalist argument more weight, without having any actual meaning because unless you can actually explain who these "rich" people you are putting too much money into our elections, your argument is as thin as air.

And I hate to break it to you, but those rich people use their corporations to fund those "personal pleasures." The more money their corporations make, the more they make, the more they fund those "personal pleasures." This isn't some secret or conspiracy theory. Billionaires are billionaires because they own profitable corporations. Be it energy, like oil, banking, pharmaceutical, weapons. Behind every billionaire is a corporation.