Arizona Republican Party used the Big Lie to raise money from their dummy constituents

Author: IwantRooseveltagain

Posts

Total: 105
#91
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 12,797
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
How is PPP not a bailout? It’s giving businesses money to keep from going bankrupt. That accounted for about 2 trillion of the 5 trillion spent for Covid relief bills in 2020. Trump also did tax breaks for businesses even if they laid off workers. Half a trillion went to the Federal Reserve to lend to corporations at near zero interest rates. The 600 billion went to the unemployed. 250 billion went to aid state and local governments to pay their employees.
So let me get this straight, you oppose PPP? You’re too the left of 100% of Democrats Lmfaoo.

“Stimulus bills approved by Congress beginning in 2020 unleashed the largest flood of federal money into the United States economy in recorded history. Roughly $5 trillion went to households, mom-and-pop shops, restaurants, airlines, hospitals, local governments, schools and other institutions around the country grappling with the blow inflicted by Covid-19”
You’re more left than 100% of Democrats, congratulations. See ya on Election Day
Topic's author
#92
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@ILikePie5
So let me get this straight, you oppose PPP? 
Where did I say I oppose the bailout? The bailout was necessitated when Trump botched the response to Covid.

I’m a supporter of Federal action like the way Roosevelt initiated a strong response to the depression. What I oppose is hypocrite Republicans who call bailouts by Obama socialism, but love them when they come from Trump.

How elitist do you have to be to not appreciate a tax cut when you see one. But oh wait let’s look at Joe. What happened to raising taxes on the rich like Dems have promised for decades.
A $100 tax cut for the poor and a million for millionaires is not a tax cut I would support. Only dummies would - and millionaires. And even with zero support from Republicans, Biden got some tax increases on the rich under the Inflation Reduction Act. Why don’t you know this? It just happened in August.


Topic's author
#93
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@ILikePie5
You literally lack zero knowledge about the budgeting process lol. There’s a reason why social security and other entitlements are set to become I solvent. I don’t have to say anything cause Joe and Obama never raised taxes on the rich like they said they would.
Again your response has nothing to do with Trump’s 2 trillion dollar deficit . On top of that your grammar is I trocious.

Your comment about Obama and Biden is wrong. Obama repealed some of the Bush tax cuts for millionaires. Biden raised taxes on the wealthy in the IRA.

You are a dummy. Lol

#94
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,081
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ILikePie5
On top of that your grammar is I trocious.

You just got smoked son.
Topic's author
#95
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@ILikePie5
See ya on Election Day
The only way Republicans win is if it’s rigged. That’s the only way. Republicans cheat.

Topic's author
#96
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,155
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@ILikePie5
The third stimulus bill was not needed dumbass. I will see you on Election Day Mr. Troll
Oh I see, Trump’s 8 trillion in deficit spending was just right. It was only Baden’s spending that caused inflation. Got it. If you try to vote multiple times you will be arrested loser.

#97
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,081
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
The only way Republicans win is if it’s rigged. That’s the only way. Republicans cheat.
That sounds like a threat to Democracy. Better call Merrick.
#98
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 12,797
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Greyparrot
That sounds like a threat to Democracy. Better call Merrick.
I think it’s Stacey Abram’s burner account
#99
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 4,304
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@ILikePie5
Still waiting on that analysis.
#100
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 12,797
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Double_R
Still waiting on that analysis.
I mean it’s pretty clear what I mean. If you can’t understand, then that’s on you. I will see you on Election Day
#101
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 4,304
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@ILikePie5
I certainly understand, you made an argument because it felt right to you, and then when asked to back it up with actual facts you can’t.
#102
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 12,797
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Double_R
I certainly understand, you made an argument because it felt right to you, and then when asked to back it up with actual facts you can’t.
Fine. I’ll humor you.

Let’s assume Manchin had 1000 volunteers in West Virginia. What would be the value of those volunteers in Texas? Let’s assumed each volunteer goes door knocking. They hit about 10 houses an hour for 3 hours a day. That’s 30,000 contacts a day. Now let’s say they do phone banking for 2 hours with about 30 contacts per hour. That’s 60,000 voter contacts. So let’s see. That adds up to about 90,000 contacts a day. Let’s assume about half of those are GOP/not possible to contact. Still about 45,000. Beto lost by about 215,000. In 5 days he would’ve made those contacts. 

Keep in mind these numbers are rather conservative. Even with these conservative numbers, if Beto used his strategy of getting in contact with voters in even Ruby red counties and lowering the margins, he could’ve easily picked up the voters over 2 months. You’re welcome to create a spreadsheet and change the math.
#103
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 4,304
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@ILikePie5
I didn’t ask for made up numbers with assumed premises. You claimed the democrats chose Joe Manchin over Beto. You then backed up that statement by claiming that if they used their resources towards Beto instead of Joe then they would have ended up with Beto instead. In doing so you failed to explain:

A) How much money are we actually talking about, given that campaigns have their own money raised by their own donors. You act as if the DNC can just come in and take Manchin’s funds and hand them over to Beto. It doesn’t work that way.

B) What evidence you have that Texas voters would have either came out to vote for Beto instead of staying home because of this

C) How this little Monday morning quarterback exercise, even if you could substantiate every piece of it, logically supports your original claim. 

All three of these is needed for your claim to have any merit worthy of debating. You have none.
#104
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 12,797
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Double_R
I didn’t ask for made up numbers with assumed premises.
They’re not made up. They extremely conservative numbers used to estimate the impact of volunteers.

You claimed the democrats chose Joe Manchin over Beto. You then backed up that statement by claiming that if they used their resources towards Beto instead of Joe then they would have ended up with Beto instead. In doing so you failed to explain:
Incorrect, I said they could’ve diverted some of the resources they spent on Manchin to Beto. Resources include money, volunteers, campaign consultants.

A) How much money are we actually talking about, given that campaigns have their own money raised by their own donors. You act as if the DNC can just come in and take Manchin’s funds and hand them over to Beto. It doesn’t work that way.
If you understood Campaign Finance Law you’d know the party cannot take money from the campaign. I will give you the numbers though. The Senate Majority PAC spent about 12.5 million in WV that they could’ve spent in Texas


B) What evidence you have that Texas voters would have either came out to vote for Beto instead of staying home because of this
It was a D+8 environment. Texas is a massive state in case you didn’t know. Beto did par with Hispanics compared to Hillary. If Beto had volunteers door knocking constantly, in every county, he definitely would’ve gotten the votes. Hold voter registrations at high schools too. There are so many ways. I’m literally in Texas lol. Just moving Hispanics 8% to the left in South Texas likely would’ve done it for Beto. Hell, even more door knocking in Collin and Denton would’ve made it closer.

C) How this little Monday morning quarterback exercise, even if you could substantiate every piece of it, logically supports your original claim. 
I just showed you a more efficient use of resources in ground game, media, and solidification of the base.

All three of these is needed for your claim to have any merit worthy of debating. You have none.
I thought they were obvious, but it’s my mistake for ignoring the fact that I’m a Texas
#105
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 4,304
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@ILikePie5
Beto did par with Hispanics compared to Hillary. If Beto had volunteers door knocking constantly, in every county, he definitely would’ve gotten the votes. Hold voter registrations at high schools too. There are so many ways. I’m literally in Texas lol. Just moving Hispanics 8% to the left in South Texas likely would’ve done it for Beto.
So to recap:

A) 12.5 million. Thank you.

B) ‘It’s just obvious’. Well no, it’s actually not.

C) The most important part; no attempt at an answer.

Disagreeing with the democrats strategically does not = they chose to lose. And it’s even worse when you’re doing it years later with all of the exit data to pick apart.

Winning a senate seat in Texas was always going to be an uphill battle so putting any money there in the first place was always risky. In retrospect, they would have been better off diverting all of their available resources from Texas to any of the other close states in that cycle. Does that mean they chose to lose those races as well? We can do this all day, which is why it’s stupid to claim that they “chose” anything. Show me your posts at the time talking about how incompetently they were spending their resources before the mid terms and then you can talk, till then it’s all just propagandistic nonsense.