Jump to content

Kalbear

Members
  • Posts

    58,105
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kalbear

  1. They've demonstrated repeatedly a favoritism towards corporations, the rich, and individual property owners over government reach. Oh no, this court making a purely partisan ruling that overrules a prior sound ruling, that would NEVER happen with this SCOTUS
  2. I'm not talking about that specifically; I'm talking about the state seizing large amounts of property. Plus this SCOTUS has shown zero fucks given about prior decisions. Also, also, per above, the candidate being a POTUS or potential one puts in some real interesting side decisions that are possible.
  3. Yeah, you're wrong. When it comes to having to actually forfeit assets it becomes a lot harder than it is seizing cash.
  4. You'd be wrong, I think; SCOTUS could jump in quickly if necessary, especially if the government was being very aggressive in seizing properties.
  5. Ish? When you get that level of involvement I suspect SCOTUS will get involved, and shockingly they may have a much different viewpoint on private property rights for individuals vs the government. This is again both true and false; they have a lot of levers at their disposal but they also have significant barriers - the least of which is not having a ton of resources to devote to a long legal battle. The government settles all the time - look at what happened with the Sacklers as a good example.
  6. Not really. It might make it harder to settle, but it still is the problem of the collector when they're owed that much money. It also has issues similar to TikTok - if the buyers know that the assets need to be sold then seizing them and selling them won't get as much money as they were valued at previously. You see this with all sorts of settlements in the real world, and I expect we'll see that here too - a reduction in the amount in favor of getting it. Alternately you could have Trump just decide to fight everything forever, because that's a good way to fund everything else.
  7. Not really. It's because they got more money when he was POTUS. Again, you fundamentally misunderstand his appeal - it is either emotional (for his base) or transactional (for those who aren't decided). The idea that he's this amazing businessman and that's what he's running on now was barely true in 2016; it's definitely not true now. That's fair, and that's already happening to some extent, but I doubt it'll affect Trump's success personally.
  8. You misunderstand on a lot of levels. Trump's power is derived from people liking him. He has successfully framed all of this as attacks by corrupt enemies and can easily explain it away. The perception for a civil trial is not going to cause him any real issues. Mostly, however, I'm talking about the actual problems this is going to cause him. The idea that his properties and assets are going to be seized is a beautiful fantasy that I'm sure people can happily get off on, but it isn't going to actually happen. Why? Because when you owe someone $454 million it isn't your problem, it becomes theirs. They don't want to have to put liens on property and seize assets because that is going to be even more litigation and problems and hassle, and they'll likely not see that money, like, ever. They'll either settle for pennies on the dollar or they'll balk and give him more time. Possibly both.
  9. Oh no! I'm sure that this will be the end of Donny Trumparino
  10. Almost no one will care. It won't be important until years down the road anyway.
  11. Yeah, the famous battle of mosul having no troops on the ground to deal with isis. Don't let pesky things like facts get in the way of your fantasies
  12. I don't see any good thing about that trade. At that level just keep him or cut him. Keeping is better anyway - if Caleb Williams doesn't work out you have another option. I get that if you know he ain't the answer you should get something but holy hell, something named Sam Howell got more value.
  13. Not at the rates that they had covid, and are still acquiring covid. The number of hospitalizations for covid is still somewhere between 5-10x what the rate of flu is. So yeah, lots of people have flu, and we certainly haven't been taking long viral conditions seriously enough, but that doesn't mean (like you implied) that we should stop taking it actually seriously.
  14. That is a remarkable paraphrase; what they're saying is that long covid is not particularly different than other long-term massive debilitating effects from other viruses. It's not unique to COVID specifically, but it absolutely is real and given the amount of people who are getting covid it should still be taken seriously.
  15. Nope, they're just Christians. If you always dismiss the Christians who do bad as no true Christians you'll never fix the problems y'all face.
  16. It really does. It looks so bright and shiny and beautiful, like just another Marvel movie. I do think the Crow could be told and retold if people wanted to, but that? Adds nothing and forgets everything that was good about it.
  17. These are all amazing: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/03/14/kate-middleton-princess-explanation-literature-satire/?utm_campaign=wp_follow_alexandra_petri&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_alexandrapetri&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3d11ea5%2F65f33a55715ef2295fc521b2%2F5972e372ae7e8a1cf4b1d8ff%2F3%2F23%2F65f33a55715ef2295fc521b2
  18. As the prophecy has foretold, Joe Flacco is going to the Colts. Finally Jace's prayers have been answered.
  19. Ukrainian lack of ammo and capabilities are becoming more acute and more dangerous: https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-march-13-2024
  20. Look man, I don't do that kind of stuff for free That's what my onlyfans is for. (seriously, a church parking lot is what you consider kinky? Do you also refer to their parts as 'thingys'?)
  21. Alternately you're so plain you make yogurt taste spicy
  22. I did, but I didn't read all of the subsequent ones. Entirely my mistake. I think you're right - that is where I disagree. Because the election in 2020 was not about the economy; it was about Trump and what he represented. The economy was not what motivated folks in Georgia and Arizona to vote for Biden, IMO, at least not in the levels that we saw. And I think that the economy is vaguely okay enough that it won't be the main reason people vote in this election. It's not great, it's not terrible, it's 3.6 Roentgens. It's not like 2008.
  23. You said he should run on the Biden economy. I'm sorry if I interpreted that as you saying that he should run on it as a central message. Hopefully you can understand my confusion. And while I appreciate your interpretation of what I said that's not what I meant; I am saying don't make it a central message or even a main message, any more than you should make immigration a main message - because people view Trump as better on both. If you make the election about the economy or about immigration you'll lose. That doesn't mean you can't ever talk about it, but you shouldn't go out of your way to emphasize it - at least not without having some real action to showcase or some real success (like, say a rate drop) to talk to. If you want to frame it as being positive about it when you need to talk to by all means, sure! But if you're going to go around and talk about the successes of the economy? I just don't think people are feeling that, especially the ones that you need to turn out. I think that the uptick in confidence is fine but it isn't going to be enough, and Biden is underwater on both the economy and things in general that I doubt it'll help him. I also suspect that the people who are swayable on the economy are more likely to come around to Biden regardless - they're likely ones who aren't happy about things but are getting better about it, and they were already probably doing okay to begin with. But those young folks? They aren't going to feel better about a slight change in inflation or a slight wage growth enough to counteract their malaise of voting. That's not going to fix how they view Gaza or Ukraine or the student loan promises or the climate promises or banning TikTok or the court system that wasn't acted on or the slow walking of Trump's charges or the idea that getting Biden in would, well, get rid of Trump. And maybe you're right - maybe they're impossible to get. In which case Biden is either fucked or has to hope that the economy is going to get way better. But my bet is that you can get at least enough of them...if you get them to really hate Trump.
  24. You really can't because of those supply lines. You're basically betting on being able to hold it with whatever you're carrying. And you're dealing with a fixed position that has no built defenses and is cut off from most of whatever cover and firepower you have. Raiding might work, but holding? Not likely.
×
×
  • Create New...