Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 348: Trump Stumped by Massive Dumps

(+) Yeah! (+)

Of votes, of course!

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1333068258862370819

---

Heavily approved
---

A+ topic title.

---

Brings new meaning to hes running
---

Speaking of massive dumps

NYC absentees finally came in and brought Biden's national lead from 4.0 to 4.4!

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1333903504004571142
https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1333905142882689027

---

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/results-house.html

---

https://twitter.com/BrendanKeefe/status/1333884246277189633?s=09

---

https://twitter.com/johnjharwood/status/1333909947042701316?s=21

Who could have possibly seen this shit coming

---

Thread with more details:

https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1333920592312086529?s=21

Notably, this has been under investigation since this summer and yet was not Comeyd!

---

Not_an_Owl posted...

A+ topic title.

---

I was very proud of myself, but he really did set it up himself...!

---

that clip is also great. "BIG MASSIVE DUMPS" combined with maria bartiromo's facial expression is amazing.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

https://twitter.com/johnjharwood/status/1333909947042701316?s=21

Who could have possibly seen this shit coming

Clinton making her move finally!?!?!?!? /s

---

Xeybozn asked...

Does Trump legally have to announce a 2024 run before he can ask his followers to give him more money for it or something? I don't really understand what he gets by declaring his candidacy so soon.

Campaign finance laws say yes, if he wants to spend those donations on a Presidential run

I guess if he doesnt want to run he could just establish himself as a charity so his loyalists could just give him money for him to use personally
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Campaign finance laws say yes, if he wants to spend those donations on a Presidential run

I guess if he doesnt want to run he could just establish himself as a charity so his loyalists could just give him money for him to use personally

That would be pretty amazing. Our first billionaire president accepting donations from working class people to make himself richer. I think he should go for it.

---

I mean Trump has apparently already scammed $170 million off of his followers since the election off of claims of "massive voter fraud"

(I've gotta wonder if a solid legal case could be made that this fundraising is, itself, fraud)

---

I mean as of now, the small print on his donation request/demand emails have 75% of it going to a PAC he set up and the remaining 25% going to the RNC.

Given what Colbert showed you could do with PACs back in... 2012, was it? I just kind of assume that PAC money is going to end up mostly pocketed to try and desperately shore up his dire personal financial situation.

---

What is so dire about his personal situation? Lol

---

xp1337 posted...

I mean as of now, the small print on his donation request/demand emails have 75% of it going to a PAC he set up and the remaining 25% going to the RNC.

Given what Colbert showed you could do with PACs back in... 2012, was it? I just kind of assume that PAC money is going to end up mostly pocketed to try and desperately shore up his dire personal financial situation.

True, but some of the money is still going towards this obviously ridiculous legal effort. If it could be proven that they knew that there was no fraud on the scale they allege I think it still might be (financial) fraud.

---

Corrik7 posted...

What is so dire about his personal situation? Lol

He has hundreds of millions (maybe just tens of millions?) of dollars in loans that are about to come due, and now that he is no longer President the IRS will make a final decision on their audit of the massive tax refunds he took during the Great Recession, which he might also be forced to partly pay back.

---

Yesmar_ posted...

He has hundreds of millions (maybe just tens of millions?) of dollars in loans that are about to come due, and now that he is no longer President the IRS will make a final decision on their audit of the massive tax refunds he took during the Great Recession, which he might also be forced to partly pay back.

Okay? And what makes you think someone with a networth of billions can't pay his loans?

The news has told you repeatedly how he had a credit on his tax returns. It is a loophole. Not illegal.

This sounds like wishful thinking. Trump is still rich as fuck. He will still abuse bankruptcies on properties where it makes sense, tax codes, and etc to remain rich. He isn't in dire financial situation. The USA loopholes are in need of disrepair nothing more. The dude literally forgoed over a million dollars as president in income. And will get the wild presidential perks for life now out of office.

He has tons of money and assets out the ass. He is another rich person. He isn't in any sort of financial direness.

---

Trump is now threatening to veto the NDAA... over fucking Section 230 (which has absolutely nothing to do with the NDAA)

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1333965375839621120

---

Also absolutely disgusting that he doubled down in replying to to the GA election guy describing death threats that people had received due to Trump's fraud allegations:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1333975991518187521

---

Some other shit

https://twitter.com/jrrosswrites/status/1333851756820836356
https://twitter.com/UrbanAchievr/status/1333985412017254402

---

Profiles in cowardice: Ron Johnson

https://twitter.com/Timodc/status/1334107542855720960

---

shit
https://twitter.com/jrrosswrites/status/1333851756820836356

If she's the former attorney, does she even have standing? What's the purpose of this, even ignoring its outright stupidity?

---

https://www.wpr.org/assembly-gops-covid-19-plan-would-send-teachers-back-school-state-workers-back-offices

Wisconsin Republicans are the worst

---

Well thats dumb. I was thinking it was something related to getting students back to schools which I think is appropriate given how detrimental online school is to lower income groups, but it looks like it is getting ...teachers back to school to teach.... so if they were teaching an online school they would still have to be there?

the hell?

---

This part also tells me that they want to force students back to in person learning, not matter what. Schools don't have that kind of money. The reason we're doing virtual learning is because if my wife gets COVID, she's probably dead. Wisconsin Republicans are fighting to kill more people.

• Require school boards to pay parents $371 to each student's parent if they provide virtual instruction.

---

RaidenGarai posted...

This part also tells me that they want to force students back to in person learning, not matter what. Schools don't have that kind of money. The reason we're doing virtual learning is because if my wife gets COVID, she's probably dead. Wisconsin Republicans are fighting to kill more people.

* Require school boards to pay parents $371 to each student's parent if they provide virtual instruction.

My spouse is a teacher. Most of the virtual school students are learning absolutely nothing, its a big problem.

I dont think thats the right solution, but I have no problems not offering virtual schools for the most part. Need more money to hire more teachers because there are huge problems, but virtual schools isnt the way to go

---

RaidenGarai posted...

This part also tells me that they want to force students back to in person learning, not matter what. Schools don't have that kind of money. The reason we're doing virtual learning is because if my wife gets COVID, she's probably dead. Wisconsin Republicans are fighting to kill more people.

* Require school boards to pay parents $371 to each student's parent if they provide virtual instruction.

Wrong. Schools are provided money for each student that attends. It is why a lot of schools were/are upset people were going to virtual schools instead of staying in district because they lose that funding. With students not in schools, the costs are lower. They can easily afford to provide a small chunk of the money given to the district for each student back to the parent. This money would go to providing the children with lunch's and internet costs if needed.

The school for my brother and sister already does this on their own. They get sent a check to cover lunch's which is actually higher than the amount here. It's like 2.6180. (actually not that far off).

Still love how you acted like you were a republican or centrist and you sit here and try to make Republicans into evil entities over and over. Heaven forbid Republicans want to ensure children eat and have internet access out of a small amount of what schools provide districts per child.

---

masterplum posted...

My spouse is a teacher. Most of the virtual school students are learning absolutely nothing, its a big problem.

I dont think thats the right solution, but I have no problems not offering virtual schools for the most part. Need more money to hire more teachers because there are huge problems, but virtual schools isnt the way to go

The school we're at is a Flex one, they've always done part virtual and part in person. I can't speak to everywhere obviously, but this place does really well with virtual options, but they're also used to doing it. I'd imagine it would be a lot harder for teachers who are used to in person instruction though. I think the choice of virtual vs. in person should be up to the parents though, not to the government.

Corrik7 posted...

Wrong. Schools are provided money for each student that attends. It is why a lot of schools were/are upset people were going to virtual schools instead of staying in district because they lose that funding. With students not in schools, the costs are lower. They can easily afford to provide a small chunk of the money given to the district for each student back to the parent. This money would go to providing the children with lunch's and internet costs if needed.

The school for my brother and sister already does this on their own. They get sent a check to cover lunch's which is actually higher than the amount here. It's like 2.6180. (actually not that far off).

Still love how you acted like you were a republican or centrist and you sit here and try to make Republicans into evil entities over and over. Heaven forbid Republicans want to ensure children eat and have internet access out of a small amount of what schools provide districts per child.

I don't know how any of that works around here, so I could very well be wrong, and maybe it's not as bad as I'm thinking it is.

I don't know what other districts do, but ours has a meal order form that gets mailed (postal or email), and they offer free breakfast and lunch to all children 18 and under in the community. So maybe that's a bigger issue in some places, but it's not part of the problem in my particular district.

As far as the centrist thing, prior to Trump's gross mishandling of covid I said that I would likely vote Trump over Bernie, and that caused a bunch of people to jump all over my ass. I do fall in the political center, but I'm having a very hard time going along with anything Republicans do, considering I disagree strongly with how Trump has handled pretty much everything in the last year. The parties silence on things speaks volumes to me, and instead of moving more to the right as I get older, I'm getting pushed back to the left like I was in college. Even if my political beliefs are in the center, I can't support what the Republican party has become under Trump and I will continue voting straight Democrat until I feel differently.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Still love how you acted like you were a republican or centrist and you sit here and try to make Republicans into evil entities over and over. Heaven forbid Republicans want to ensure children eat and have internet access out of a small amount of what schools provide districts per child.

lmao imagine making this post

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

lmao imagine making this post

It's the post that should be made.

---

RaidenGarai posted...

The school we're at is a Flex one, they've always done part virtual and part in person. I can't speak to everywhere obviously, but this place does really well with virtual options, but they're also used to doing it. I'd imagine it would be a lot harder for teachers who are used to in person instruction though. I think the choice of virtual vs. in person should be up to the parents though, not to the government.

I don't know how any of that works around here, so I could very well be wrong, and maybe it's not as bad as I'm thinking it is.

I don't know what other districts do, but ours has a meal order form that gets mailed (postal or email), and they offer free breakfast and lunch to all children 18 and under in the community. So maybe that's a bigger issue in some places, but it's not part of the problem in my particular district.

As far as the centrist thing, prior to Trump's gross mishandling of covid I said that I would likely vote Trump over Bernie, and that caused a bunch of people to jump all over my ass. I do fall in the political center, but I'm having a very hard time going along with anything Republicans do, considering I disagree strongly with how Trump has handled pretty much everything in the last year. The parties silence on things speaks volumes to me, and instead of moving more to the right as I get older, I'm getting pushed back to the left like I was in college. Even if my political beliefs are in the center, I can't support what the Republican party has become under Trump and I will continue voting straight Democrat until I feel differently.

Schools get something in my area (the number differs per school in each area but it's still a number of some sort) like 19k per student who attends in funding.

Schools lose that funding if a student instead enrolls in say PA Cyber instead of doing virtual in district. Schools hate that. PA Cyber sends you an entire new computer and pays for your online the entire time enrolled out of this funding they now receive instead if you choose there.

Schools that are not functioning in class have reduced costs which schools should not probably just bank to offset past budgets but should release in part back to the community.

Every school provides lunches and breakfast programs to kids but they are unwieldy and in some cases coronavirus risks themselves. We have cycled between pick up lines in schools and then bus stop deliveries. Etc. None really work that great.

Providing money back to the students to get their own food and lunches is good. Or if needed for online. Or if it helps even just a little a parent who cannot work now because their child needs watched or someone has to watch them.

The school's service in which it is provided money by the state is not being met, so why should they keep all the money if not in school meeting it? Why can't they help the student? If you think your school doesn't have this amount, you are wrong. It's a small chunk of what is provided to them.

---

corrik's describing the NYC school system financials pretty well there too, i'd assume this is the standard. will differ on amount on specifics but it's typical for it to be paid per student attending and the type of student. student has an IEP? get paid more. there's a few other roles that change too, like the number of teachers you need to have or the number of paras you can have; if there's multiple schools in the building this will affect staffing of security, food, and janitors. schools being closed cuts paychecks, funding, and i do wonder where the extra money is going instead, though they're fully aware that cuts are coming.

a check to cover lunches or internet would be pretty nice, i'm not sure we do that but we do offer free food and extend it by giving free food to adults after hours too - really nice program. hell, give students a subscription to udemy or something too while you're at it because they sure as fuck ain't learning anything right now. gonna have at least 2 years of an utter joke of an education. if you're gonna be inept at online education at least throw in a contract for companies that specialize in this because it ain't working.

this is all ignoring the rest of the topic around schools and just the money side/some gripes with the busted nature of online right now, there's other elements that have pros and cons (e.g., its use as a babysitting tool vs. getting a stronger relationship with your children) that are gonna make the future really weird.

---

Jesus Christ, that's what the Wisconsin GOP put out after 8 months? Fuck them.

---

It varies from area to area but here the lunch program is great. Tuesday and Thursday is contactless pick up and you get a ton of food per kid. We get half gallon jugs of milk, multiple cups of cereal, hamburgers, taco kits, snacks, etc. Way more than we need.

We werent doing it at first but they send out a message asking more parents to do it because they had a lot of food going to waste. Its been great here, but Im sure there are other school districts where it sucks.

---

https://twitter.com/jackcalifano/status/1333933608638185473

el oh el

---

Corrik7 posted...

Schools get something in my area (the number differs per school in each area but it's still a number of some sort) like 19k per student who attends in funding.

Schools lose that funding if a student instead enrolls in say PA Cyber instead of doing virtual in district. Schools hate that. PA Cyber sends you an entire new computer and pays for your online the entire time enrolled out of this funding they now receive instead if you choose there.

Schools that are not functioning in class have reduced costs which schools should not probably just bank to offset past budgets but should release in part back to the community.

Every school provides lunches and breakfast programs to kids but they are unwieldy and in some cases coronavirus risks themselves. We have cycled between pick up lines in schools and then bus stop deliveries. Etc. None really work that great.

Providing money back to the students to get their own food and lunches is good. Or if needed for online. Or if it helps even just a little a parent who cannot work now because their child needs watched or someone has to watch them.

The school's service in which it is provided money by the state is not being met, so why should they keep all the money if not in school meeting it? Why can't they help the student? If you think your school doesn't have this amount, you are wrong. It's a small chunk of what is provided to them.

I have no idea if these details are similar to how it works in Wisconsin and my district in particular, but I haven't heard any issues with the food pickup at least (the town I live in is only about 11,500 people, so it might just be a smaller area. We have 1 elementary school, and one high school, plus the Flex academy for half virtual and half in person. The meals here are free, you just have to order ahead and pick them up contact free. Having internet could be an issue though. I believe most people do based on the amount of satellite dishes I see installed on houses around here (I figure if they have satellite TV, they probably have internet too), but that's obviously just a guess. Each district seems to have a different setup from what I'm seeing, so it's probably better in some, and worse in others. Either way, giant clusterfuck and it sucks that this is our reality right now.

As far as what the board does here, they give parents the choice to do full in person or full virtual (unless you're in the Flex academy), and you have to choose which one you're moving forward with every 9 weeks, and once you make that choice you can't change it until that 9 weeks is up. The virtual option for non-flex students is apparently pretty simple though. They're not connected all day, and it seems more like something that would only work for families with one parent home all day.

---

DeepsPraw posted...

https://twitter.com/jackcalifano/status/1333933608638185473

el oh el

Obama has never had a snappy slogan ever, nope
---

me, a year ago: how come Obama is so quiet and staying out of politics?
me, now: how come Obama won't stop dropping his hot takes about politics?

(I'm kidding btw, I know it's because he has a book out now)

Edit: I incorrectly used "hot take", most of Obama's takes are pretty room temperature

---

Obama isn't afraid of Trump hearing what he's saying and doing the opposite anymore. A year ago, Obama could have said the most sensible, obvious thing, and Trump would have reflexively done the opposite.

---

DeepsPraw posted...

https://twitter.com/jackcalifano/status/1333933608638185473

el oh el

I came here to post this exact tweet.

God he sucks, remember when we thought he was young and hip? Every excerpt Ive seen from his new book is just old man yelling shit

---

Suprak the Stud posted...

It varies from area to area but here the lunch program is great. Tuesday and Thursday is contactless pick up and you get a ton of food per kid. We get half gallon jugs of milk, multiple cups of cereal, hamburgers, taco kits, snacks, etc. Way more than we need.

We werent doing it at first but they send out a message asking more parents to do it because they had a lot of food going to waste. Its been great here, but Im sure there are other school districts where it sucks.

Our sucks. It's basically an uncrustable and a small child's milk. It's not worth the trip to the school tbqh. And I live 2 minutes from it.

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

I came here to post this exact tweet.

God he sucks, remember when we thought he was young and hip? Every excerpt Ive seen from his new book is just old man yelling shit

There is a difference between meaningless, feel good slogans like "Yes We Can" or "Hope & Change", to which people can attribute any positives they want, and more pointed slogans like "Defund the Police" or "Abolish the Police" which are both far more specific and require a lot more nuance to get people onboard with them. Think about how often we've had to explain what "Defund the Police" really means, when on the surface level, it sounds really bad to a lot of voters.

---

Stimulus Update.

So, the White House offered 1.93 Trillion to Pelosi before the election. The House remained adamant on 2.2 Trillion or major concessions down the line. Whether the Senate would have passed this or not (probably would have if forced to them), the buck would have been on them regardless at this point.

So, anyways, where are we now?

Bipartisan Senate Offer. 900 Billion

https://twitter.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1333759472683126787

Mitch McConnell's counter offer. 333 billion.

https://twitter.com/byHeatherLong/status/1333877379362672642

Where does Pelosi stand?

https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1334217145547448320

908 Billion.

Pelosi literally negotiated herself down to 900 billion from 3.4 trillion dollars, while an offer for 1.93 Trillion existed.

Master Negotiator for sure...

Also, Trump reportedly won't sign off on the bipartisan senate deal because Romney and Collins and such proposed it.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Stimulus Update.

So, the White House offered 1.93 Trillion to Pelosi before the election. The House remained adamant on 2.2 Trillion or major concessions down the line. Whether the Senate would have passed this or not (probably would have if forced to them), the buck would have been on them regardless at this point.

So, anyways, where are we now?

Bipartisan Senate Offer. 900 Billion

https://twitter.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1333759472683126787

Mitch McConnell's counter offer. 333 billion.

https://twitter.com/byHeatherLong/status/1333877379362672642

Where does Pelosi stand?

https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1334217145547448320

908 Billion.

Pelosi literally negotiated herself down to 900 billion from 3.4 trillion dollars, while an offer for 1.93 Trillion existed.

Master Negotiator for sure...

Also, Trump reportedly won't sign off on the bipartisan senate deal because Romney and Collins and such proposed it.

Pelosi bet the farm on a Democratic clean sweep at the election. Either that, or she didn't want a stimulus before the election precisely because it would help Trump.

---

I mean, the guy is the most popular Democrat in the country and won more electoral votes than any Dem since 1996.

There's a reason why Joe Biden can win the presidential election but people like Susan Collins can trail significantly in all polling heading into election day and still win comfortably.

---

"Defund the police" IS a bad slogan.

Not so much because of the idea behind it, but because this election has proven that the country is full of idiots and dickwads that don't want to actually take the time to understand nuance in anything.

---