Jump to content

stanpapi

MotownSports Fan
  • Content Count

    10,430
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

stanpapi last won the day on November 24 2018

stanpapi had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

331 Excellent

About stanpapi

  • Rank
    MotownSports Fan
  • Birthday 02/14/1970

Converted

  • Location
    USA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It's just not worth it when you don't even read my post.
  2. I'm not married to rassumssen at all. Find another poll that uses likely voters. they are the only ones that matter.
  3. He didn't need to raise the concern, because at the time the tax bill was voted on, paygo was in force. Literally right after the tax bill passed (the same week), they voted to suspend paygo, which would have required cuts to medicare. Paul objected to that waiver of paygo but it passed anyway.
  4. No, I support listening to people's logic before labeling them. After hearing him and others talk about it, I agree with Paul- I don't support signing off on unending, unknown spending until 2092 with no cap until some sort of discussion about fiscal restraint happens. There's a way to pass this for a number of years and then revisit it again. That takes care of them without a never ending, out of control cost. That won't happen though- his amendment is going to get voted down anyway and the bill will pass as is.
  5. He does it on every bill that comes forward, not just this one. You act like this is the only one he's ever raised the deficit issue on. He literally does it all the time.
  6. Rasmussen is the only poller of likely voters, which are really the only ones that matter. They have his job performance approval at 50%. If he's at 50% with likely voters now, there very well could be a destruction...but for the republicans.
  7. The senator is simply trying to maintain the current deficit level and not sign an open ended bill with no ceiling in terms of what the ultimate cost might be (in fact, there is no number in it at all). A compromise might be to fund it for 3-5 years and revisit it, which he suggested.
  8. He's awesome. I agree, this guy is fantastic. Go listen to his take on more than a feeling by Boston....I've never heard anyone else hit those notes.
  9. So you define a guy who wants a spending offset somewhere else instead of increasing the deficit as a coward? You think a guy who doesn't want an open ended (no dollar amount) spending bill until 2092 is a coward? Why wouldn't we put a number in the bill and reassess it in 5 years if needed?
  10. I remember when the entire board laughed at mitt romney for suggesting russia was a problem.....
  11. There's the video clip. Curiously, I hear no mention of Russia in it.
  12. Hey, how'd that work out for Al?
  13. Don't worry, it will happen in 2025. You just have to be patient.
  14. no, but make no mistake, willie did not win in the transaction.
×
×
  • Create New...