"I answered your question about what my evidence is, so what else do you want?"

I'm seeing it now: "Ryuu's post with the most recent swing state polls is the evidence. Harris leads in Michigan in all polls; within the margin of error, but it's a lead nonetheless. You made the claim that Michigan is lost for the Democrats and you have yet to provide any evidence; a nationwide poll doesn't qualify as evidence." Misunderstanding on my part: It read as though you were trying to say that actually *I'm* the one who denies polls b/c if you look at them, Harris is winning...yet I said it was "joever" (though it should be noted this response I added afterwards).

We're on the same page again...and I think my response here may explain why I even got confused in the first place: Why would we be looking at election polling data to determine the popularity of enforcing a ceasefire in the Middle East, as opposed to the polls which literally ask a series of point-blank questions solely focused on it? If you're skeptical of the poll I linked, you can (a.) pull up other polls from non-partisan organizations, or (b.) examine the techniques they utilized as a means to reduce extraneous variables and thereby avoid incorrect solutions. I know you specifically mentioned wording-of-the-question bias, but it should be noted the explicit questions which were asked are what I explicitly quoted: "is providing too much aid to Israel", and "support putting restrictions on US military aid to Israel". The poll asks many questions, so if you are looking for different answers, here's a link to the poll again.

Additionally, the results of the poll I'm fixated on are specifically from the non-Republican participants. Those people are not coming to Harris in any situation: It only makes sense to focus on legitimate people who may vote for or against in Harris in response to a ceasefire agreement, not hardliners who are adament in their opposition of Harris.

It's okay LurkerJ, we'll get you your meds. 

Runa216 you have to be off your meds not to believe this lol.

CHARLESTON, S.C. (WCIV) — Local International Longshormen's Association workers said the port strike is over, Kenneth Riley with Local 1422 said to News 4.

Riley, the international vice president of the ILA and ILA Local 1422 member, claimed the dockworkers got the automation language and significant pay raises included in the contract.

The full contract details weren't immediately made available to News 4.

Sources: Striking port workers to return to work Friday as negotiators reach an agreement on wages | CNN Business

That was a quick strike

First of all, if you have something to say to me, I'm right here... 

Second, I said nothing about polling error. I said something about issue framing. I said something about the limits of US' power over Israel. I also said something about the impact of counter pressure. I also said something about the impact of consequences of your proposed actions. 

America is broken. Hundreds of billions spent on foreign wars but ya can't clean up you own house. I get more saddened for the US every passing year.

i'm not responding to every comment. If a comment doesn't need a response, or if it's content is so absurd that I don't take it seriously enough to provide a response, then you don't get a response. Your comment fell in the latter category for the reason which should be obvious from my response to RolStoppable: You argued that polls cannot be trust b/c wording-of-the-question bias. No poll sets itself as a picture-perfect representation of society, though it should give us an idea as to what people are thinking. (p.s. war in the middle east = inflated gas prices. This is the last thing Biden/Harris need in October. Ceasefire would avoid all of this...)

The yearly budget of FEMA is approximately $30b. $640m being spent on migrants didn't bankrupt FEMA. Disasters are just expensive. This is just more "blame immigrants for everything" propaganda. 

This is also something that happens with some regularity, because when major disasters hit, they are expensive. Here are some stories about FEMA running out of funds in previous years:

2023: FEMA forced to restrict disaster spending because of low funds - POLITICO

2017: FEMA could run out of cash this weekend | CNN Politics

2011: FEMA funding running short after Irene (youtube.com)

If Congress wants to give FEMA more money, all they need to do is give FEMA more money. It isn't complex, it's just politics. 

Strike Two:

That still isn't what I said. 

I find it quite amusing that you call my comment absurd yet you can't seem to grasp what it actually said. 

Republicans have refused to do anything with the budget for the past two years while in charge of the House.  We probably shouldn't be building houses right on the sand that are going to be destroyed again one day, but we still will.  Project 2025, which is Trumps big agenda plans to gut FEMA making it worthless.