JD Vance Catch-all | “we have to destroy the universities in this country”

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 933
  • Views: 23K
  • Politics 
Bigs23 said:
It’s a blatantly racist comment.
Click to expand...
He is likely a Charles Murray devotee

www.splcenter.org

Charles Murray

Charles Murray, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, has become one of the most influential social scientists in America, using racist pseudoscience and misleading statistics to argue that social inequality is caused by the genetic inferiority of the black and Latino communities, women...
www.splcenter.org www.splcenter.org
 
Calheel said:
As you point out, childless couples already pay a higher tax rate (effectively). Increasing their marginal rate is not economically different than giving additional tax breaks to couples with kids (which happened during Covid and which Biden was pushing to make permanent). Our tax code very much discriminates against childless couples.
Click to expand...
Not to mention that workers with children by definition are forced to take more time from work while their childless coworkers take up the slack, particularly working mothers.

I don't have an iota of a problem with that but saying the people without kids aren't pulling their fair share somehow is complete bullshit
 
wmheel1287 said:
I read exactly what you said and vehemently disagree with the characterization. I am not contending that only I am more likely to vote for what's best for the future. I am contending that overall childless people are far more likely to vote for solid future policy. That is my lived experience and I believe it to be true.

I find it to be those with children who are often more absorbed in the here and now. The voucher/charter school movement in NC is the perfect embodiment of this. Who is killing public schools in NC? It's primarily those with public school aged children and those who had children who have already finished public schools. Who is fighting tooth and nail to save the public school system and fund it appropriately? It's primarily people who don't have children. I think there are lots of reasons for that but mostly the people with children in schools now don't want to wait for the investment to pay off. They want whatever they think might be the best outcome for the handful of years their kids are in school now.
Click to expand...
OK. I can't tell you that you are wrong. I don't have any real information here. I very much doubt that it is "primarily" people without children who are fighting to save the public school system, but I take your point. All along, I haven't been advocating for this plan; I've just been arguing that it isn't as ludicrous as it might seem at first.
 
www.nbcnews.com

The inside story of how Trump chose JD Vance as his running mate

Once a critic, Vance repositioned himself as a faithful ally eager to defend Trump on TV, carry a torch for a younger generation of MAGA figures and fight for voters in the Midwest.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com

The inside story of how Trump chose JD Vance as his running mate​

Once a critic, Vance repositioned himself as a faithful ally eager to defend Trump on TV, carry a torch for a younger generation of MAGA figures and fight for voters in the Midwest.

"... The conversation quickly turned tense when the former president indicated that he was leaning toward Doug Burgum, until recently the largely unknown governor of North Dakota — but someone whose low-maintenance, no-drama personality would never threaten to outshine Trump.


That’s when Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump chimed in.

“Don Jr. and Eric went bats--- crazy: ‘Why would you do something so stupid? He [Burgum] offers us nothing,’” a longtime Republican operative familiar with the discussion told NBC News.

“They were basically all like ‘JD, JD, JD,’” the operative said. ..."

----
Throwing the sons under the JD bus, apparently.

I'll have to go find it, but I recall a quote from Don Jr. in the last month or so where he said he didn't want to be in charge of personnel decisions, he just wanted a veto right to cull out the insufficiently loyal.
 
Ddseddse said:
I vehemently oppose giving extra votes to parents of children. If you're bound and determined to solve that problem, then it should be done by increasing the voting power of voting age youths relative to the olds (like me)
Click to expand...
I agree. There are multiple ways of implementing the idea. Vance, unsurprisingly, chose the worst. The other alternatives, as you have noted, include lowering the voting age and increasing vote share of younger people. They all have downsides. It's unclear if this is a problem that requires a solution. Anyway . . . .
 
(cont'd)
"... In choosing Vance, Trump made a different calculation than he did in 2016 and leaned fully into his MAGA base. Back then, he looked to his daughter and her husband — the more establishment-friendly Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner — for strategic advice. This time, his red meat-throwing sons have a more central role. And instead of going with a longtime traditional Republican like Mike Pence, Trump chose the MAGA warrior Vance. ..."

----
LOL, did Javanka write this piece for NBC?

Donald Trump GIF by State of the Union address 2018
 
Calheel said:
As you point out, childless couples already pay a higher tax rate (effectively). Increasing their marginal rate is not economically different than giving additional tax breaks to couples with kids (which happened during Covid and which Biden was pushing to make permanent). Our tax code very much discriminates against childless couples.
Click to expand...
You know better than this. Increasing a marginal rate is economically very different than creating deductions or credits. I'm not sure it's correct to say that the tax code discriminates against childless couples. For that, you'd have to know whether there are positive externalities from child-rearing. I suspect there are.
 
Hope I am not getting off topic
In the 90s/early 2000s I had three kids go through Chapel Hill Carrboro schools Of course bunches of Profs and RTP folks were parents so the AP blah blah was taken care of..The "white Guilt libs " ( I am being descriptive not judgemental ) made sure the lower end kids had attention-resources etc
It was the parents of the kids "in the middle" who felt like their kids were an afterthought...And I suppose they were "political attention -wise"
 
CFordUNC said:
Click to expand...

The "MAGA/Vance is weird" part of the interview is also fantastic. This was my first time hearing Walz speak, and he's definitely bringing a fresh approach to Democratic messaging. Let me see if I can find that other half of the interview...

EDIT: Here we go:

 
CFordUNC said:
How legitimately concerned should I be that Trump can jettison Vance from the ticket?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure it would even matter. VP candidates don't usually bring much to a ticket. Mostly they bring vibes. Well, he already brought the vibes. I don't think that Trump can run away from that, even if he were to replace Vance.

Also, now that the convention has passed, it becomes considerably more difficult to replace Vance. They would likely have to take another vote of delegates, which might or might not be easy depending on whether their term has expired. Plus, they might have already submitted the candidate names to various states, which right now is probably quite easy to fix but gets harder in a little while.

In other words, I do not think Vance gets removed. It would also potentially alienate the Silicon Valley folks whose money was the reason Vance was picked in the first place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top