• Xenforo Cloud is upgrading us to version 2.3.8 on Monday February 16th, 2026 at 12:00 AM PST. Expect a temporary downtime during this process. More info here

Elections Nancy Pelosi won’t seek reelection

Jesus-about fucking time this old bitch went away. What a cunt she is. This is where I would normally go on and on about how corrupt she is raking in tens of millions during her time as an inside trader. How she benefited from her position for twenty terms-I could go on forever about her and other corrupt pieces of shit in congress and government
 
avenue94 said:
If you want that, you'd have to massively increase salaries across every level of politics. Working in government is a pretty significant pay cut for most people compared to private sector.
Click to expand...

maybe but wouldn’t it be worth it to have normal people running the government vs the already affluent politicians or people in it just to manipulate finance?

Or are you claiming it’s not possible due to human greed?
 
USA!USA! said:
maybe but wouldn’t it be worth it to have normal people running the government vs the already affluent politicians or people in it just to manipulate finance?

Or are you claiming it’s not possible due to human greed?
Click to expand...
I don't have an issue with paying more to incentive lower income people to run. Having said that, I'd prefer above average intelligence and above average qualified people for congress. It's a very senior role.

Like people think most members of congess start there. It's the opposite and the pinnacle of the career after slogging away in way shittier elections and offices. And that's where voters get touchy, paying city council or state legislatures a lot of money.
 
deviake said:
gif.gif
Click to expand...

The only Washington you can trust. ;)
 
Surprised they didn’t just duct tape some popsicle sticks into her pant suit and wheel her around like Feinstein at the end.
 
This will be devastating to the congressional trade trackers. She's made a lot of informed trades....
 
Siver! said:
Term limits seem less useful than age limits.

But I suppose you should ultimately have both.
Click to expand...
No term or age limits because the people who’d have to vote them in are the ones who’d lose power -- these fuckin' "wovles" ain't gonna just pass on the buffet.

I also mean sure, her husband might be a great trader and watcher of stocks -- could be one of the best in the world, props to him -- together, they are consistently they are both the best of the best -- better than fuckin' walstreet itself levels of best.

No way in 4 decades would they ever have betrayed the trust of the people or anything though -- nahhh completely straight and narrow.

The numbers I can find just suggest returns 2-3 times to even more than the market in given years.

Not strange at all!
 
avenue94 said:
I don't have an issue with paying more to incentive lower income people to run. Having said that, I'd prefer above average intelligence and above average qualified people for congress. It's a very senior role.
Click to expand...

Trying to understand your reasoning.. so you think all people who have very high income are more qualified and intelligent than those who do not? While I think that is true in some cases, that is a very, very blanket generalization lol
 
No further need for Nancy's (or Madd MackSeen's) congressional US Aids fund diversion.

Nancy and Chuck's alleged "poo poo Pull-Oh-See" 0nlyFans Scat Site nets them millions.
 
USA!USA! said:
Trying to understand your reasoning.. so you think all people who have very high income are more qualified and intelligent than those who do not? While I think that is true in some cases, that is a very, very blanket generalization lol
Click to expand...
Where did I say that? I think you're misreading the post. My comment on qualifications and intelligence was not related to income.
 
Good. Should have happened a long ass time ago. Now phase all the old timers out. Age limits. Term limits. No more career politicians.
 
avenue94 said:
Where did I say that? I think you're misreading the post. My comment on qualifications and intelligence was not related to income.
Click to expand...

I read it as you don't mind paying more to incentivize lower income people, but you'd prefer intelligent and qualified people (as if lower income people are not).

Maybe a miscommunication.
 
USA!USA! said:
I read it as you don't mind paying more to incentivize lower income people, but you'd prefer intelligent and qualified people (as if lower income people are not).

Maybe a miscommunication.
Click to expand...
Ya, those were two separate thoughts. (Was replying on phone).

I just meant you probably don't want congress full of literal average Joe's for the same reason C suite isn't literal average Joe's. It's a tough job and more comparable to a director or VP at most companies.
 
nonoob said:
No further need for Nancy's (or Madd MackSeen's) congressional US Aids fund diversion.

Nancy and Chuck's alleged "poo poo Pull-Oh-See" 0nlyFans Scat Site nets them millions.
Click to expand...
What the fuck did I just read?
 
I’ll take a Nancy over AOC any day

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,281,914
Messages
58,402,354
Members
176,028
Latest member
zainbando99

Share this page

Back
Top