PAC-10-BEAR said:SBGold said:
It's ridiculous, the personal attacks I have seen from the right on OT today, from calling people MASSWIPES, dumb, lacking intelligence, etc.
Wags voted for Kamala.
SBGold said:
Now you're trolling
SBGold said:
It's ridiculous, the personal attacks I have seen from the right on OT today, from calling people MASSWIPES, dumb, lacking intelligence, etc.
Hell, when Kirk died I wrote things that were not sympathetic to the assassination and I got banned a few days for a political belief. Did not attack here, gave an opinion that many adopt now as a reasonable conclusion worth debating.
The way these posts are prosecuted here is very skewed to the right.
concordtom said:
There are some seriously weird people here. Mentally disturbed.
But then, who among us should cast the first stone?
CA governor candidate Eric Swalwell’s secret erotic poetry is uncovered: ‘Kissing till veins exploded’ https://t.co/FPALsSVNGU pic.twitter.com/iPtfBWvzOx
— New York Post (@nypost) February 16, 2026
Aunburdened said:PAC-10-BEAR said:SBGold said:
It's ridiculous, the personal attacks I have seen from the right on OT today, from calling people MASSWIPES, dumb, lacking intelligence, etc.
Wags voted for Kamala.
Who got murdered twice, once in the 2020 Democratic primary and again in the 2024 Presidential election.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23315825/51494218.jpg)
BearlySane88 said:
Clearly there are people here who agree with me. I know that might be tough for you to accept but my views aren't that wild. 77 million people voted with me.
Aunburdened said:CA governor candidate Eric Swalwell’s secret erotic poetry is uncovered: ‘Kissing till veins exploded’ https://t.co/FPALsSVNGU pic.twitter.com/iPtfBWvzOx
— New York Post (@nypost) February 16, 2026
DiabloWags said:
That's a great question Bearister!
My very first President that I voted for was Ronald Reagan while an undergrad at CAL in 1980.
I also voted for him again in 1984 while living in NYC and voted for Obama in 2008 when back in CA.
I've never been a Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren supporter.
Quite the contrary . . . and my posts here clearly prove that.
And yet I've been repeatedly called lefty here by one particular poster over the last several months who is "new" to OT.
I too, wonder what "qualifies" as being a lefty.
DiabloWags said:
Agreed 100%
I have found that the people who invariably get involved in heavily partisan "Us vs Them" narratives are usually those that don't even begin to understand actual policy let along basic fundamentals that drive policy. I've seen this happen over and over again on social media, especially with those that never made it to college.
For example, we've seen it here when it comes to tariffs.
The fact that foreign manufacturers are not deploying capital to set-up shop and "reshore" in the United States tells you that Trump's tariffs are NOT WORKING. - - - A 15% tariff on the EU isn't prohibitive.
The CEO's of GM, Ford, and Chrysler have even gone on record as saying as much.
They all chimed in about how Trump pulled a TACO and they had wished the tariffs were MUCH HIGHER in order to be effective.
Never mind that a 50% tariff on aluminum is hurting American auto manufacturers like Ford or that it takes 28 years for a copper mine (another 50% tariff) to come online. If you truly want to speed up mining investment, then simply cut the RED TAPE. Don't impose tariffs that simply act as a TAX.
I was told by someone here that Trump's tariffs weren't designed to protect Ford.
This was someone who also had posted that "foreign countries directly pay the tariffs"
If you have no understanding of basic fundamentals (like how a Ford F-150 uses 700 lbs of aluminum to be built), then it most likely means that you won't be understanding the policy that is involved.
Never mind that our own NY Federal Reserve says that Americans are paying 90% of the tariffs.
Who Is Paying for the 2025 U.S. Tariffs? - Liberty Street Economics
Never mind that the Trump Tariffs were designed with the intent of bolstering American industry and protecting National Security.
It says so right here on the White House website:
Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Addresses the Threat to National Security from Imports of Medium and Heavy-Duty Vehicles, Parts, and Buses The White House
DiabloWags said:
"Trade Wars are so Easy to Win!" - - - DJT
oski003 said:
Trump tariffs are not meant to help Ford. I am sorry that you hopelessly believe they are so much so that you have to quote that as some sort of dig. Do better.
DiabloWags said:oski003 said:
Trump tariffs are not meant to help Ford. I am sorry that you hopelessly believe they are so much so that you have to quote that as some sort of dig. Do better.
I still disagree.
How does the following not help Ford?
Ford And GM's Heavy Truck Tariff Wish Granted By Trump Admin
Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Addresses the Threat to National Security from Imports of Medium and Heavy-Duty Vehicles, Parts, and Buses The White House
DiabloWags said:
And for some strange reason, you still haven't answered my question from our previous conversation about who Trump's tariffs are designed to PROTECT.
You keep talking about how they weren't designed to protect vehicle manufacturers like Ford, but you conveniently ignore who these tariffs are designed to PROTECT.
It's puzzling why you are unable to answer this.
It's a very simple question.
oski003 said:DiabloWags said:
And for some strange reason, you still haven't answered my question from our previous conversation about who Trump's tariffs are designed to PROTECT.
You keep talking about how they weren't designed to protect vehicle manufacturers like Ford, but you conveniently ignore who these tariffs are designed to PROTECT.
It's puzzling why you are unable to answer this.
It's a very simple question.
The aluminum tariff is designed to grow domestic aluminum production, which I said a few days ago. Thanks for asking and allowing me to answer you again.
DiabloWags said:oski003 said:DiabloWags said:
And for some strange reason, you still haven't answered my question from our previous conversation about who Trump's tariffs are designed to PROTECT.
You keep talking about how they weren't designed to protect vehicle manufacturers like Ford, but you conveniently ignore who these tariffs are designed to PROTECT.
It's puzzling why you are unable to answer this.
It's a very simple question.
The aluminum tariff is designed to grow domestic aluminum production, which I said a few days ago. Thanks for asking and allowing me to answer you again.
Sadly your answer is still wrong.
The White House cast the tariffs as a crackdown on subsidized metals coming out of China that flooded global markets and the administration argues put U.S. producers out of business.
Imposed under section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, these levies rest on firmer legal ground than the broader April 2 tariffs, whose basis in the International Emergency Economic Powers Act is now being questioned in U.S. courts.
Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Increases Section 232 Tariffs on Steel and Aluminum The White House
RESTORING FAIRNESS TO STEEL AND ALUMINUM MARKETS:
"President Trump is taking action to end unfair trade practices and the global dumping of steel and aluminum.
Foreign nations have been flooding the United States market with cheap steel and aluminum, often subsidized by their governments.
A report from the first Trump Administration found that steel import levels and global excess were weakening our domestic economy and threatening to impair national security.
The report found that excess production and capacity has been a major factor in the decline of domestic aluminum production."
https://share.google/2mNnJNTy0gndCyMBJ
Thanks for finally answering and allowing me to correct you. You're welcome.
oski003 said:DiabloWags said:oski003 said:DiabloWags said:
And for some strange reason, you still haven't answered my question from our previous conversation about who Trump's tariffs are designed to PROTECT.
You keep talking about how they weren't designed to protect vehicle manufacturers like Ford, but you conveniently ignore who these tariffs are designed to PROTECT.
It's puzzling why you are unable to answer this.
It's a very simple question.
The aluminum tariff is designed to grow domestic aluminum production, which I said a few days ago. Thanks for asking and allowing me to answer you again.
Sadly your answer is still wrong.
The White House cast the tariffs as a crackdown on subsidized metals coming out of China that flooded global markets and the administration argues put U.S. producers out of business.
Imposed under section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, these levies rest on firmer legal ground than the broader April 2 tariffs, whose basis in the International Emergency Economic Powers Act is now being questioned in U.S. courts.
Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Increases Section 232 Tariffs on Steel and Aluminum The White House
RESTORING FAIRNESS TO STEEL AND ALUMINUM MARKETS:
"President Trump is taking action to end unfair trade practices and the global dumping of steel and aluminum.
Foreign nations have been flooding the United States market with cheap steel and aluminum, often subsidized by their governments.
A report from the first Trump Administration found that steel import levels and global excess were weakening our domestic economy and threatening to impair national security.
The report found that excess production and capacity has been a major factor in the decline of domestic aluminum production."
https://share.google/2mNnJNTy0gndCyMBJ
Thanks for finally answering and allowing me to correct you. You're welcome.
Interesting, especially when YOU state,
"A report from the first Trump Administration found that steel import levels and global excess were weakening our domestic economy and threatening to impair national security."
Sounds like increasing domestic production is part of that. Thanks for obtusely supporting my argument. I am glad that you aren't agreeing with th pigheaded dude who kept whining about tariffs not helping Ford as they supposedly were intended.
DiabloWags said:
Funny how stating FACTS about tariffs and basing my post on a declaration by the White House is childish. That's absurd.
Unlike you, I'm able to refrain from name calling.
Do better.
Please respect the rules of the forum.
If you cant reply to my posts without your repeated name calling, I would strongly suggest ignoring my posts.
