It appears Biden ain't all there

[FreeAndClear]

@Samm

@FreeAndClear

2.2 trillion dollars. Whose signature was on it. I forget

You say that like you think that was a good thing for the economy.

That was a good thing for the economy. trump and a Republican held senate believed it was too.

[WuWei]

“Will be”?

Has it happened? If so, I’ll read it.

[FreeAndClear]

@WuWei

“Will be”?

Has it happened? If so, I’ll read it.

Not just will be. He was. He shaped policy that was replete with targeted tarrifs. This was when the gop was against them.

[WuWei]

@FreeAndClear

@WuWei

“Will be”?

Has it happened? If so, I’ll read it.

Not just will be. He was. He shaped policy that was replete with targeted tarrifs. This was when the gop was against them.

OK, I’ll read it. I’ll need some evidence that it is in execution.

[Samm]

@FreeAndClear

@WuWei

@FreeAndClear

Yes.

…

And you are putting all that on Trump?

No. I am not.

Then why the reminder of whose signature was on it?

[Guvnah]

@FreeAndClear

No it doesn’t have 100 threads.

Oh. Sorry. That was a colloquialism. But nice deflection.

“More than one.” (Or more than a dozen.)

You run with you “one thread.” And your partisan blinders.

[FreeAndClear]

Because it’s his signature. Something about the buck and stopping somewhere. He pushed for it too but no much as with any spending it’s not all on him

[WuWei]

Did you read that “article”? If so, how?

China’s going to eat our lunch? Come on, man,” Mr Biden scoffed. “I mean, you know, they’re not bad folks, folks. But guess what? They’re not competition for us.” He was speaking in May 2019. Tempered by his contest with Donald Trump, who tried to rally support by highlighting the threat posed by China, Mr Biden now avoids such words. But as president, will his policy towards China be very different from Mr Trump’s? He has yet to spell out his plans, but he will throw fewer wild punches.

You joshing me?

[FreeAndClear]

@Guvnah

@FreeAndClear

No it doesn’t have 100 threads.

Oh. Sorry. That was a colloquialism. But nice deflection.

“More than one.” (Or more than a dozen.)

You run with you “one thread.” And your partisan blinders.

If i locate the remaining threads I’ll post them too mine was a colloquialism as well. Now that we are having real fun.

I know that you were obviously just throwing a number. I get that. There weren’t a dozen threads on it either. Posts i am sure. Threads nope.

[WuWei]

@FreeAndClear

Because it’s his signature. Something about the buck and stopping somewhere. He pushed for it too but no much as with any spending it’s not all on him

$2T

And Brandon is tripling it.

[FreeAndClear]

@WuWei

Did you read that “article”? If so, how?

China’s going to eat our lunch? Come on, man,” Mr Biden scoffed. “I mean, you know, they’re not bad folks, folks. But guess what? They’re not competition for us.” He was speaking in May 2019. Tempered by his contest with Donald Trump, who tried to rally support by highlighting the threat posed by China, Mr Biden now avoids such words. But as president, will his policy towards China be very different from Mr Trump’s? He has yet to spell out his plans, but he will throw fewer wild punches.

You joshing me?

I am not joshing you. I’ll find his speech when Obama put him at the head of the China U.S. relations back in the day. I posted it before. It included punishing tarrifs.

[Samm]

@FreeAndClear

@Samm

@FreeAndClear

2.2 trillion dollars. Whose signature was on it. I forget

You say that like you think that was a good thing for the economy.

That was a good thing for the economy. trump and a Republican held senate believed it was too.

Short term gain, long term misery.

I’m not a Republican nor a Trumpster. I am free to think for myself.

[FreeAndClear]

@Samm

@FreeAndClear

@Samm

@FreeAndClear

2.2 trillion dollars. Whose signature was on it. I forget

You say that like you think that was a good thing for the economy.

That was a good thing for the economy. trump and a Republican held senate believed it was too.

Short term gain, long term misery.

The short term gain of a stable Wall Street mhmm right. Just amazing

[WuWei]

@FreeAndClear

I am not joshing you. I’ll find his speech when Obama put him at the head of the China U.S. relations back in the day. I posted it before. It included punishing tarrifs.

How did you read that article?

[WuWei]

@FreeAndClear

The short term gain of a stable Wall Street mhmm right. Just amazing

Short term?

Do you have any idea how much immiseration that saved? How do you think the Great Resignation is happening?

People are retiring at 55!

[Samm]

@FreeAndClear

Because it’s his signature. Something about the buck and stopping somewhere. He pushed for it too but no much as with any spending it’s not all on him

If you weren’t putting it all on Trump, it wouldn’t have been necessary to point it out. Methinks your subconscious is contradicting your words.

[FreeAndClear]

@Samm

@FreeAndClear

Because it’s his signature. Something about the buck and stopping somewhere. He pushed for it too but no much as with any spending it’s not all on him

If you weren’t putting it all on Trump, it wouldn’t have been necessary to point it out. Methinks your subconscious is contradicting your words.

I am not going to hedge every post. I have explained my position sufficiently. That’s how discussion works

[Samm]

@FreeAndClear

@Samm

@FreeAndClear

@Samm

@FreeAndClear

2.2 trillion dollars. Whose signature was on it. I forget

You say that like you think that was a good thing for the economy.

That was a good thing for the economy. trump and a Republican held senate believed it was too.

Short term gain, long term misery.

The short term gain of a stable Wall Street mhmm right. Just amazing

What about the long term misery part of that? Do you expect to die before it gets really bad?

[WuWei]

@FreeAndClear

@Samm

@FreeAndClear

Because it’s his signature. Something about the buck and stopping somewhere. He pushed for it too but no much as with any spending it’s not all on him

If you weren’t putting it all on Trump, it wouldn’t have been necessary to point it out. Methinks your subconscious is contradicting your words.

I am not going to hedge every post. I have explained my position sufficiently. That’s how discussion works

Not really. That’s how a manifesto works.

[Samm]

@FreeAndClear

@Samm

@FreeAndClear

Because it’s his signature. Something about the buck and stopping somewhere. He pushed for it too but no much as with any spending it’s not all on him

If you weren’t putting it all on Trump, it wouldn’t have been necessary to point it out. Methinks your subconscious is contradicting your words.

I am not going to hedge every post. I have explained my position sufficiently. That’s how discussion works

Yes. And undoubtedly your not too subtle subconscious feelings will continue to be exposed as well.