Nelson he has seniority in the Congress and tons of favors built up why the hell would a rational person vote for Scott he would come in with nothing especially if they want to say keep offshore drilling from Florida Nelson can just call in his markers in his back pocket and say nope, Scott wouldn't have that power.
I actually live in the U.K. just take a big interest in US politics considering I go there every so often, I have people I know in Florida though, I’ve seen more saying they’re voting for Gillum over DeSantis, than Nelson over Scott that’s for sure. I think the senate race is a pure toss up, the governors a tilt towards Gillum. How would I vote? Probably for Nelson and Gillum
A friend of mine was on a flight with him recently and said he's basically senile. He's at the age where the staff is actually playing senator, while Nelson is out to lunch.
That still doesn't remove him as a senior Senator with a whole bunch of old favors built up and he can function enough to function enough, if he is unfit for office medically o psychologically its not been an issue yet why didn't anyone bring this up during the campaign. My dad bless him is 83 and as some issues due to his age and he can still function well day to day and he has some issues mentally but he's all there. And all members of Congress lean heavily on their staff to do things the matter of government is so complex no man could read and keep up with all the demands that is why they all have large staffs.
This is literally how most people in the UK see Reagan because of spitting image Shouldn't have canned laughter Americans must have added it for their market.
The above is exactly why he needs to be voted out. It's the basic corruption of seniority, and the fact that incumbents are hard to get out of office. Nelson needs to retire. Any Senator/Congressman over age 70 should. (and I include the President). Nelson has been in Washington since 1979 (a few terms in the House before he won the Senate in 2000)
Might want to look at this. http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/another-anti-gunner-exposed.544944/
No they didn’t, but they used to live in the U.K. too and the U.K. is much more left wing than the US, religion and ethics aren’t a factor really over here, and guns are not even mentioned over here they are seen as taboo. I think it’s just the fact that Scott is too right wing for them. Personally, I think guns should be ok as long as there’s an extensive background check on the person buying them. Knives are a big problem over here though. Instead of guns there’s knives
Surprisingly 70% of brits support an increase in tax for services over here so that probably wouldn’t surprise me.
Yeah because like here they won't have their own taxes increased, how self serving. Brits in favour of higher income tax on country's wealthiest, poll finds A return to the 50p income-tax rate for those earning over £150,000 is supported by 77 per cent https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/income-tax-raise-backed-brits-poll-a7636846.html
It’s one of them things, you agree with it until it happens to you. Wealthy paying more is also supported over here like you said. Our centre left party (Labour) propose to raise tax from 40 to 45% for the top earning 5%
Of course welcome the the left wing. I want all these things and I don't want to have to pay for them. Make that guy over there pay for them because it's not fair he has more than I have. The history of this country is that if you want more tax revenue from the higher incomes which actually create and run businesses you don't keep socking them with higher and higher tax rates. We collect double the capital gains tax revenues and the Bush43 15% rate than the Clinton 29% rate. Four times the reconciliations which is a measure of economic activity and growth. Every time the Republicans have cut tax rates the higher earners end up paying not only more in tax revenue but a bigger share of the tax burden. So what is the purpose of raising tax rates on the highest earners if it results in less tax revenue?
