Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
For the last time, Trump hasn’t made the economy any better
 Quote:
By Matt O'Brien August 7 at 2:53 PM

(Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images)
Kayleigh McEnany, who used to be a Trump propagandist on CNN before becoming one on the Pravda-esque Trump TV, thinks the fact that we've added more than 1 million jobs since Trump took office shows that he has “clearly steered the economy back in the right direction.”

What she forgot to mention, though, is that this is slightly worse than things were at the end of President Barack Obama's term. That's right: The economy added an average of 181,000 jobs a month in Obama's last six months in office compared to an average of 179,000 a month in President Trump's first six months. That's a statistically insignificant difference — and a negative one at that — which shows that Trump hasn't made a diffference on the economy. And why would he have? He hasn't cut taxes or increased infrastructure spending or done anything else that would meaningfully boost GDP. (Going golfing and tweeting #MAGA a lot don't count.)...


Despite the headline I'm sure it won't be the last time. Sad how some celebrate less just because it's a republican in the WH.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29


Washington Post is the source that is Pravda. They blatantly colluded with the Hillary Clinton campaign, even ASKING HER PERMISSION to run a story during the campaign. And is blatantly an anti-Trump propaganda wing of the DNC, airing every half-baked rumor and blatant lie in their attempt to destroy Trump at the bidding of their DNC masters.

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Maybe we can agree they're not Hannity. Reguardless of how you feel about the WP or anybody else that dares to be critical of rump, what did they get wrong? Trump's "real news" about his first 6 months ignores Obama's why?


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29

Over and over, the Washington Post and New York Times have alleged things about Trump that have proven to be false.

CNN just a few weeks ago was forced in disgrace to fire three employees over blatantly false allegations about Scaramucci.

As I said, e-mails have revealed the WP and other papers have suppressed stories and polls that favored Trump or would have damaged Hillary Clinton in the 2016 campaign.
Recent media studies have shown that the major (liberal) news networks have given over 90% negative coverage to the Trump administration. Unparalleled bias. What else is there to say?


  • from Do Racists have lower IQ's...

    Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.

    EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29



WASHINGTON POST TAKES ANTI-TRUMP BIAS TO A NEW LEVEL

 Quote:
he mainstream press loves to tell readers that it can be trusted because it employs professional journalists backed by layers of editors. Oh, and they're all unbiased.

So how to explain a recent Washington Post headline, which manages both to misrepresent its own poll and expose the ridiculous extent to which its reporters and editors will go to bash President-elect Donald Trump?

The story is about a Washington Post/ABC News poll that asks, among other things, whether Trump should sell his business to avoid any possible conflicts of interest while president.

Trump has taken steps to avoid these conflicts, although not to the satisfaction of some in the media — many of whom probably wouldn't be satisfied no matter what Trump did.

What did the poll find? It found that most (52%) think the steps Trump has taken are enough to "separate Trump's business interests from his obligations as president." On the other hand, only 42% said that Trump should sell his business.

It would seem that the news here is that most people think Trump has done enough to avoid conflicts of interest involving his company. The Post's poll is in keeping with others that found little public support for the notion that Trump should sell his business to be president.

So what's the Washington Post's headline about its own poll?

"More than 4 in 10 say Trump should sell his businesses — but even more say he shouldn't, poll finds"

Say what? That incredibly awkward and lengthy headline seems designed to put the most negative spin possible on the results.

"More than 4 in 10"! That sounds bad. How many readers stopped there, before trying to understand what exactly the rest of the headline, which comes after the dash, meant?

What's more, the length of the headline means that only the first part is likely to get picked up by those who want to direct traffic to the story, or in search results, as you can see nearby.

The story itself, at least, is more fair. "The poll finds 52% of those surveyed say Trump's decision to hand over control of his businesses to his adult sons and another executive 'is enough' to separate his business interests from his obligations as president."

But even here, the writer puts a negative spin on the results, saying "a somewhat smaller share, 42%, say Trump should sell his business outright." A 10-point spread is not "somewhat smaller." And this spread is even bigger if you count those who had opinion on the matter, since it means that 58% either say he shouldn't sell his business or don't care one way or another.

What's more, the Post doesn't point out to readers that 66% of Democrats surveyed say Trump should sell his business. In contrast, just 81% of Republicans and 56% of independents said Trump shouldn't.

In other words, Democrats are far out of the mainstream on this question, which is just another way of saying that Democrats deeply loathe and distrust Trump. But you'd never know that reading the Post story, since you have to dig down into the poll itself to discover the partisan breakdown.

The Daily Caller, a conservative news site, wrote the proper headline for this story: "Majority Of Voters Support Trump's Business Decision, Poll Finds."

Simple, direct, and as it turns out, unbiased.

If readers can't count on a major newspaper to fairly represent the results of its own Trump poll, why should they trust them to report anything else about Trump in an unbiased way?

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Is there anything in the article you allege to be not true WB? Trump even acknowledged Obama's economic numbers back than. He called it a bubble back than, lol. The truth is the economic figures are good but not as good as Obama's.


Fair play!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Bumped for WB who I guess just is now making shit up.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Is there anything in the article you allege to be not true WB? Trump even acknowledged Obama's economic numbers back than. He called it a bubble back than, lol. The truth is the economic figures are good but not as good as Obama's.


Trump acknowledged that Obama had 2% or less growth in all of his 8 years?
Acknowledged that Obama accumulated 10 trillion in new debt in 8 years, more than any president, more than all previous presidents COMBINED?
"WB making shit up" is apparently WB citing the absolute facts:
The economy is up to 3.4% annual growth in just Trump's first 8 months, higher than ANY of Obama's entire 8 years.
The stock market is up 25% since Trump was elected.
Unemployment and disability are down, the rises in disability and food stamps during Obama's 8 years completely reversed because there are now jobs for these people.
Unemployment is the lowest since 2001.
Manufacturing has risen to the highest since 2004.
Illegal border crossings are down 78% since Trump took office.

What exactly is "made up"?

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29



 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy, 8-12-2017


Complete List of President Trump’s Major Accomplishments in His First Six Months


 Quote:


STOCK MARKET

In President Trump’s first six months since the election and since his inauguration the US Stock Markets are at record highs and millions of Americans are benefitting in their retirement savings accounts.

* The DOW daily closing stock market average has risen 18% since the election on November 8th. (On November 9th the DOW closed at 18,332 – yesterday on July 19th the DOW closed at 21,641 for another all time stock market closing high).

* Since the election the DOW has set a new all time closing high one out of every four days the market is open!
* Since the Inauguration on January 20th the DOW is up 9%. (It was at 19,827 at January 20th.)
* The DOW took just 66 days to climb from 19,000 to above 21,000, the fastest 2,000 point run ever. The DOW closed above 19,000 for the first time on November 22nd and closed above 21,000 on March 1st.
* The DOW closed above 20,000 on January 25th and the March 1st rally matched the fastest-ever 1,000 point increase in the DOW at 24 days.
* On February 28th President Trump matched President Reagan’s 1987 record for most continuous closing high trading days when the DOW reached a new high for its 12th day in a row!
* The S&P 500 and the NASDAQ have both set new all-time highs during this period.
* The US Stock Market gained $4 trillion in wealth since Trump was elected!
* The S&P 500 also broke $20 Trillion for the first time in its history.


NATIONAL DEBT

As of today, the US Debt has decreased under President Trump since his inauguration by (-$103) Billion. (President Obama increased the US debt in his first 6 months more than $974 Billion or nearly $1 Trillion.) The difference between Presidents Trump and Obama is more than $1 Trillion.


JOBS

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics President Trump added a projected 1,027,000 jobs in his first six months (January through June 2017.) President Obama on the other hand lost more than 3,826,000 million jobs in his first six months.


UNEMPLOYMENT

Also according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics the unemployment rate since President Trump’s inauguration decreased from 4.8% to 4.4% (January through June 2017). The unemployment rate in January 2017 was 4.8% and by June it was down to 4.4%. Unemployment under President Obama on the other hand moved in the opposite direction. In his first six months as President the US unemployment rate increased each month from 7.8% in January 2009 to 9.5% by June of 2009.


INFLATION

As noted earlier this week, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics the US inflation rate decreased to an eight month low in June to 1.6%. This is in part due to President Trump’s energy policies that are helping average Americans with cheaper gas and electricity.


HOUSING SALES

Housing sales are red-hot in the US right now. In 2011, houses for sale were on the market an average 84 days. This year, it’s just 45 days.

According to the US Census Bureau, there were nearly twice as many US housing sales in the past couple of months as there were under President Obama in 2009 during the same time period. (The annualized housing sales rate for May 2017 is reported at 610,000 where in 2009 this amount was only 376,000.)


DECREASE IN REGULATIONS

One of the first things that President Trump did in office was to reduce the number or burdensome regulations put in place during the Obama era. In January President Trump signed his 2 for 1 executive order mandating that for every new regulation, two regulations needed to be revoked. Even far left Politico notes that significant new federal regulations since Trump’s inauguration have slowed to an almost total halt.

Regulations cost Americans and American companies money to implement and maintain. Reducing or halting regulations allows companies to spend their money on more prudent money making areas.


OTHER ACCOMPLISHMENTS

The US Manufacturing Index soared to a 33 year high in President Trump’s first six months which was the best number since 1983 under President Reagan.

The Federal Reserve has increased interest rates three times since President Trump was elected into office in November. The Fed increased interest rates only once in Obama’s 8 Years prior to the increase after President Trumps winning the election in November.

Illegal immigration is down almost 70% under President Trump.

NATO announced Allied spending is up $10 Billion because of President Trump.

After being nominated by President Trump, Constitutionalist Judge Neil Gorsuch was confirmed and sworn in as Supreme Court Justice in early April.

The President has signed around 150 executive orders, memoranda and proclamations as of July 19th, including:

* Dismantling Obama’s climate change initiatives.
* Travel bans for individuals from a select number of countries embroiled in terrorist atrocities.
* Enforcing regulatory reform.
* Protecting Law enforcement.
* Mandating for every new regulation to eliminate two.
* Defeating ISIS.
* Rebuilding the military.
* Building a border wall.
* Cutting funding for sanctuary cities.
* Approving pipelines.
* Reducing regulations on manufacturers.
* Placing a hiring freeze on federal employees.
* Exiting the US from the TPP.

President Trump and his beautiful family visited leaders around the world. In his first foreign trip as President he went to Saudi Arabia and gave one of the most historic speeches in US history. The President implored the Muslim leaders of 50 countries to get rid of terrorists in their countries and “drive them out“. No world leader had ever done this!

As a result, the President sided with the leaders of these countries including Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan against terrorism, ISIS and Iran.

In addition to all this, the President has met with many foreign leaders from across the globe on numerous trips and he invited others to his place in Florida, Mar-a-Lago, including Xi from China, Abe from Japan, etc.

The President also pointed out numerous times that the MSM (Main Stream Media) reports only on a made up Russia conspiracy story and ignores these accomplishments. These actions are making the majority of Americans aware of the tremendous bias and falsehoods emanating from the media in the US and abroad. This too is another major Trump accomplishment.

And let’s not forget that the President unloaded on CNN with arguably the greatest tweet by any man ever in early July –





IN SUMMARY

President Trump is doing all he can for the American people and as a result the economy is on fire with the stock market reaching new all time highs once every four days! In nearly every economic category the US economy is improving under President Trump. In addition, President Trump has implemented numerous executive actions that he promised he would do when running for office. The US is in much better shape in only six months. Americans have hope again due to the real changes this President instituted from the economy to immigration.

There is still much to do but President Trump is showing that he is doing all he can to Make America Great Again.





Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
Is there anything in the article you allege to be not true WB? Trump even acknowledged Obama's economic numbers back than. He called it a bubble back than, lol. The truth is the economic figures are good but not as good as Obama's.


Trump acknowledged that Obama had 2% or less growth in all of his 8 years?
Acknowledged that Obama accumulated 10 trillion in new debt in 8 years, more than any president, more than all previous presidents COMBINED?
"WB making shit up" is apparently WB citing the absolute facts:
The economy is up to 3.4% annual growth in just Trump's first 8 months, higher than ANY of Obama's entire 8 years.
The stock market is up 25% since Trump was elected.
Unemployment and disability are down, the rises in disability and food stamps during Obama's 8 years completely reversed because there are now jobs for these people.
Unemployment is the lowest since 2001.
Manufacturing has risen to the highest since 2004.
Illegal border crossings are down 78% since Trump took office.

What exactly is "made up"?


Did Obama leave office with an economy that was already booming? Yep and if you reread the WP article it was actually doing a bit better. I suspect Trump will not be handing the next President an economy better than what he inherited but Obama certainly did.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster
15000+ posts
Offline
terrible podcaster
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
vis-à-vis the economy:

the. president. does. not. do. things.

any president.

please stop.


go.

ᴚ ᴀ ᴐ ᴋ ᴊ ᴌ ᴧ
ಠ_ಠ
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29


It seems pretty clear not only to me, but to all in the business-reporting media but blatant DNC-spokespieces, that Trump is advocating a decrease in regulations and taxes that is pro-business, and that has resulted in 3.4% growth in the U.S. economy, in barely his first 6 months, something Obama never achieved in 8 entire years.

Not since Ronald Reagan's turnaround in policy in 1982/1983 have I ever seen a similar complete reversal and growth of the economy, that is clearly a direct result of implemented policy.

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
If you ignore all the growth that happened sure. This thread starts with a comparison of Obama's last quarter to Trump's first. Trump's isn't bad but it's not as high as Obama's. And if wages don't grow and Trumcare ends up being more expensive with less coverage I think the GOP isn't going to retain it's majority with just white nationalism.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29


That's such B.S., M E M.

3.4% growth in Trump's first 8 months, is clearly higher than 2% growth, at best, in any of Obama's 8 years.

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
For the last time, Trump hasn’t made the economy any better
 Quote:
By Matt O'Brien August 7 at 2:53 PM

(Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images)
Kayleigh McEnany, who used to be a Trump propagandist on CNN before becoming one on the Pravda-esque Trump TV, thinks the fact that we've added more than 1 million jobs since Trump took office shows that he has “clearly steered the economy back in the right direction.”

What she forgot to mention, though, is that this is slightly worse than things were at the end of President Barack Obama's term. That's right: The economy added an average of 181,000 jobs a month in Obama's last six months in office compared to an average of 179,000 a month in President Trump's first six months. That's a statistically insignificant difference — and a negative one at that — which shows that Trump hasn't made a diffference on the economy. And why would he have? He hasn't cut taxes or increased infrastructure spending or done anything else that would meaningfully boost GDP. (Going golfing and tweeting #MAGA a lot don't count.)...


Despite the headline I'm sure it won't be the last time. Sad how some celebrate less just because it's a republican in the WH.


Fair play!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29


Because the Washington Post has always been so fair in their reporting on Trump.
I'm SO SURE they'd never slant the news against Trump, or selectively omit news that reflects favorably on Trump!

Except they have a long history of partisanly trying to destroy Trump.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Was there a particular issue with what I posted WB? Just accusing a source of being partisan doesn't actually challenge what was in the article. And would you really be okay if a dem President went after the free press like Trump has? Trump lies a lot and it's the press's job to report it.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29


I listed multiple examples where the Washington Post partisanly and deliberately got the story wrong in reporting about Trump and his administration.

And that, regardless of Washington Post propaganda, unemployment, consumer confidence, manufacturing jobs, annual U.S. growth, black employment and other economic measures are cited as having the best numbers since 2004, 2001, 1999. Years that FAR precede Obama's term. Rendering the propaganda that the numbers were better under Obama measurably false.
Period.


Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
Ultimately Washington Post's "Fact Check" (i.e., liberal W Post reporters who clearly voted for Obama and Hillary) say "You can't give credit to one president" and that gives Trump two "FactCheck" Pinnochios from the outset. BUT THEN THEY SPEND THE WHOLE ARTICLE ARGUING THAT ONE PRESIDENT, BARACK OBAMA, IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TRUMP'S FIRST YEAR OF ECONOMIC GROWTH!

Hypocritical much?

The stock market rose immediately after Trump's Nov 2016 election in anticipation of what Trump would enact as president in his economic policy: de-regulation, lower taxes, and abolishing Obamacare (or at least abolishing the individual mandate, and penalties for opting out).
When you average the numbers over those years, averaging the worst years of job loss with the inevitable years of growth after the Great Recession bottomed out, Obama did not out-perform Trump. The Washington Post "FactCheck", liberal Obama/Hillary voter reporters all, found a context where they could manipulate the numbers to promote their side and bash Trump. But only in that narrow context.
2009 -5,068,000
2010 +1,061,000
2011 +2,091,000
2012 +2,142,000
2013 +2,302,000
2014 +2,998,000
2015 +2,713,000
2016 +2,240,000
Average of those 8 years: 1,309,000 jobs annually.

Trump's first year out the gate, not including December 2017:
1,700,000

Annual GDP growth average under Obama:
Never reached 3%.
Annual growth under Trump:
3.3%

I could go through each of these measures showing the smoke and mirrors used by the W Post ("FactCheck") to pump up Obama to be something he wasn't.

When W. Bush took office, you blamed W. Bush for a recession that began in the economic slowdown the last year Bill Clinton was in office, and reached the third quarter of negative economic growth to officially meet the defined criteria of a recession within days of when W. Bush was inaugurated. But there you blamed Bush, not his Democrat predecessor.

When the economy tanked under Obama, you blamed W. Bush for the policy that preceded it.
Now that the economy is booming under Trump, you allege that Obama's policy is what is causing Trump's success, despite a 180-degree turn of the economic ship under Trump's administration! This is not a continuation of Obama policy, this is a full rejection of it! A rejection of Obama that moves the economy in a less bureaucratic, more pro-business, more pro-growth direction.


Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
You may have noticed that most of the Obama years were over 1,700,000. That is not a 180 degree turn as you try to spin it. As pointed out at the beginning of this thread there wasn't a Trump bump. He inherited a growing economy like Bush did with Clinton. The only 180 degree turn is your reaction to the stock market now that it isn't a democrat in power.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
You may have noticed that most of the Obama years were over 1,700,000. That is not a 180 degree turn as you try to spin it. As pointed out at the beginning of this thread there wasn't a Trump bump. He inherited a growing economy like Bush did with Clinton. The only 180 degree turn is your reaction to the stock market now that it isn't a democrat in power.


Are you hallucinating?
As I just said above, the economy was declining in the last year of Bill Clinton, and almost the day George W. Bush was inaugurated, stats were released that the nation had its third consecutive quarter of negative economic growth, meeting the official criteria for a recession. Since Bush was in office for days, and not for 3 quarters, he cannot be blamed for the RECESSION HE INHERITED.

As I also laid out regarding Trump, his policy IS a 180-degree turn from Obama's statist, big government, anti-capitalist policy. Polar opposite Obama, with Trump cutting regulation and lowering taxes, encouraging businesses to bring factories and jobs back to the United States. That is certainly NOT a continuation of what Obama was doing.
And like Reagan in 1981-1982, it will take a while to see the full benefit of Trump's 180-degree turn of the economic ship. Even so, we are already seeing 3.3% growth, and there was never one year of Obama's 8 years that the economy reached 3%. Trump has already done that, EVEN WITH the destruction to the economy caused by 5 devastating hurricanes to the U.S. in the tens of billions each. If not for that, Trump's policy would have already reached 4% annual growth.

Obama's policy created false "growth" by creating $10 trillion in new federal debt over his 8 year term, more than all previous presidents combined. And printing over 3 trillion in new currency (there was only 800 billion in printed currency when Obama took office), more than quadrupling the money supply. It was a smoke and mirrors presidency.
But if you're an Alinsky-trained cultural Marxist revolutionary, that kind of policy that sets up the U.S. for self-destruction that kills jobs and makes tens of millions more dependent on the federal government (and therefore perfect statist Democrat voters) makes perfect sense. Likewise Hillary Clinton, another Alinsky-trained cultural Marxist revolutionary.

Deception is at the core of planning for these and other Democrats. Obamacare, for example, was designed to fail, to collapse. And coincidentally, to collapse in 2017. Hillary Clinton was supposed to win in Nov 2016, and she would have then bailed out the planned healthcare collapse and declared socialized medicine (i.e., "single payer") to replace it. Not because it accidentally failed, but precisely because it was designed to fail from the very outset.
Likewise "fast and furious", designed by Democrats to smear gun retailers and justify a crackdown on gun retailers, but the true facts were exposed and blew up in their face. Another Democrat deception.
The names Hillary Clinton, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, and Donna Brazille are all likewise self-explanatory examples of Democrat deception, in the scandals synonymous with their names and Wikipedia listings.
Likewise Al Franken.
Chuck Schumer.
Harry Reid.
Nancy Pelosi.
Dick Durbin.
>>>ALL<<<< the Democrat leadership!

Aided and abetted by anti-American puppetmasters like George Soros and new Washington Post owner/billionaire Jeff Bezos. These Democrats and their benefactors are globalists and cultural Marxists whose shared goals are destruction of U.S. sovereignty, and absorption of the U.S. into the global system, and a contempt for the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law in achieving those ends.



  • from Do Racists have lower IQ's...

    Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.

    EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
The last quarter of Clinton's presidency the economy grew 2.1 percent . Clinton's economic expansion lasted his whole time as President. And the record growth happened without adding to the deficit by giving the very wealthiest a big tax cut. The recession that happened 2001 was one of the most shallow ones ever. It probably wouldn't have even registered as one if 9/11 hadn't happened. Bush's second recession was one of the worst recessions we've had.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29

That's not what I remember. The liberal media were screaming Armageddon (to borrow a recent Nancy Pelosi phrase) from the moment W. Bush took office. The media attacke and attacked and undermined Bush his first 8 months. Then when 9-11-2001 happened, they held back for 6 months or so, to not look like the unpatriotic deceitful scum they truly are. As soon as the first Democrat thought it was safe to attack W. Bush again, the entire DNC and their liberal media brethren unleashed on Bush all over again. I didn't even vote for Bussh in 2000 (I did in 2004), but it offended me the onesidedness of it, and how they (like with Trump now) did their damnedest to destroy his presidency in the womb.

And by the way, Wikipedia clearly disagrees with you that Bush created the 2001 recession:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_policy_of_the_George_W._Bush_administration

 Quote:
During his first term (2001–2004), President Bush sought and obtained Congressional approval for the Bush tax cuts, which mainly comprised the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA) and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (JGTRRA). These acts decreased many income tax rates, reduced the capital gains tax, increased the child tax credit and eliminated the so-called "marriage penalty", and were set to expire in 2010, while increasing federal deficits by an estimated 1.5% to 2.0% GDP each year.[1] Among the many stated rationales for the large income tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 was the 2001 recession, which followed the bursting of the Dot-com bubble in late 2000 and early 2001. [Further, some influential conservatives such as Alan Greenspan believed that the nearly $5 trillion in budget surpluses forecast by the CBO for the 2002-2011 period should be given back to taxpayers rather than used to pay down the national debt.


Regarding the later Great Recession in Bush's second term, that again was scapegoated entirely on Bush and the Republicans by a deceitful media in full collusion with the Democrat leadership. As I've cited before, even a leftist journalist like Naomi Klein on C-Span said that was a deception, that both parties shared blame for the circumstances that created the mortgage bubble and the subprime crisis, and failure to create regulation that would have prevented it. And she further said that if primary blame were to be heaped on one party or the other, the primary blame would go to the Democrats.

How many dozens of times have I cited that.

Further, I also cited how Republicans throughout the Bush years leading up to 2008 pushed for stricter lending standards, and fanatics like Barney Frank and Maxine Waters and Alcee Hastings, and John Conyers and Keith Ellison basically called the Republicans mean and racist and "hate the poor" for wanting to reign in lending standards. And not wanting to be perceived as mean or racist, republicans ultimately let it drop, until it reached crisis proportions.

I've previously shown YouTube footage of Democrat House members demonizing Republicans for trying to do the responsible thing. I've previously posted a Fox News report from 2007 (who else would report the inconvenient facts?) that showed all the Republican attempts to legislate stricter lending standards to avert a crisis.

And I further showed Rep Barney Frank assuring everyone that Fannie Mae was "perfectly sound" financially, and stable going forward. What he assured, right up to the day it collapsed. Fannie Mae was a huge donor to Barack Obama, the official they donated the most to. Fannie Mae's head was Franklin Raines, who was coincidentally part of Obama's Vice Presidential Selection Committee, that selected Joseph Biden. And now Biden wants to run for President in 2020. The ties, the corruption, run very deep on the Democrat side.

But yeah, sure, against the facts, it's all George W. Bush's fault.


  • from Do Racists have lower IQ's...

    Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.

    EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
I didn't say it was all his fault but I think it's also silly of you to try to place more blame on Barney Frank than Bush. And I would suggest reviewing some of the economic data during Obama and Clinton's terms in office if you really care about the facts.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29


Specifically what?

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
I didn't say it was all his fault but I think it's also silly of you to try to place more blame on Barney Frank than Bush. And I would suggest reviewing some of the economic data during Obama and Clinton's terms in office if you really care about the facts.


Specifically what?

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
You can look at the quarterlies in general and see how the economy has been over the decades. You also had a recent post on black unemployment hitting a low but even with what you posted it showed that it was steadily dropping prior to Trump becoming President. As a partisan you want to give Trump credit for something that had been dropping all along. He obviously didn't have anything to do with it steadily dropping before he got into office.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29


What I saw of the quarterly indicators under Obama is while the "Great Recession" and TARP bailout happened under W. Bush in Oct 2008, the stock market and other indicators then tanked even worse when Obama was elected. It continued to go down and down over his first year or so, and when both the stock market and unemployment finally went incredibly low (5 million lost jobs in one year) the economy inevitably, in spite of Obama, inevitably had to go up and recover slightly.

But again, the U.S. economy never reached 3% annual growth during any of the 8 years of Obama's presidency. It is the weakest economic recovery since the Great Depression.

Conversely, when Trump was elected, you saw an immediate jump in the stock market and other economic indicators, even before he took office, due to the anticipated pro-business/pro-growth policies Trump campaigned on. Promises he has kept, and is resolved to still implement.

Under Obama, it was said that we would have to accept 5% unemployment as the new normal for decades going forward. Trump has already brought it down to a fraction above 4%. In his first year.

Again, ALL the precedents for the economy are at numbers that have not been seen since 2004, 2001, 1999. Those benchmark lows precede Obama's presidency, so clearly Obama did not have lower numbers than those under Trump's presidency. Obviously. Clearly. Unquestionably. Quantifiably.


Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Yeah but it was headed towards 3% growth under Obama. In fact Trump's response about the economy getting better while Obama was in office was to call it a bubble. And what you said while Obama was in office about the stock market still holds true now that it's Trump. If wages don't go up in those depressed areas Trump will lose voters.


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29

But it DIDN'T under Obama!
And I don't see a steady growth pattern that it would have, if Frau Hitlery had won the election and continued his economic policy.

Nothing in Obama's "punish the rich" economic policy and war on fossil feul industries was pro-business or pro-growth. I again say whatever rise in Obama's 8 years was IN SPITE OF Obama, not because of him.

The illusion of any growth whatsoever came from when Obama quadrupled the printing of dollars (i.e., "quantitative easing") from 800 billion in existing currency to 4.5 trillion. And with a further $ 10 TRILLION borrowing in treasury bills, used deficit spending to fill the gap of growth that wasn't happening, at tremendous cost generating the slightest illusion of growth.

That and crony capitalism where Obama gave huge no-bid contracts to companies he selected as winners who would succeed, such as Solyndra, and GE (in GE, Geoffrey Immelt one of his political backers.) And ACORN. All friends of Barack, allies politically.

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,965
Likes: 29


Trump economic advisor Larry Kudlow was on Fox News this morning, and with humor de-bunked the flawed logic of the Democrats' "Trump is taking credit for Obama's economic recovery" narrative.


Kudlow points out that Obama's economic team while in office and after Trump was inaugurated held firm to the "new normal" being 1% to 2% economic growth, that it was impossible to grow beyond that rate.

Trump took office with the determined goal of 4% or higher growth.
As a result of Trump's economic policies and slashing of crippling regulation, Trump achieved almost 4% growth his first year, and even higher this year.
Enter the lying Democrat narrative: It's only because of 8 years of steady economic growth under Obama that the economy is doing so well. So credit for growth under Trump really belongs to Obama.

Kudlow points out: If the Obama economic team didn't believe 4% could be achieved, and 4% wasn't even a possibility in their projections, how can they take credit for 4% growth, when it was ONLY TRUMP POLICY that envisioned 4% growth, and enacted new policy to achieve it?


Similarly the 97% defeat of ISIS in Iraq. The Obama team had limited rules of engagement that were actually getting U.S. soldiers killed, and making limited gains.
When Trump became president, Trump immediately lifted those restrictions, freed our military to do their jobs, and in a short time ISIS was 97% destroyed.


Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Trump lags behind his predecessors on economic growth

It's easy to understand how Trump and his toadies hate the press because it debunks all the self serving lies and exaggerations.


Fair play!
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Offline
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
The Brookings Institute is a liberal think tank, not "the press."

Unless that was your admission that the press is also essentially a liberal think tank at this point

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Sorry you are correct on your nitpick about the institute not being the press. You however are wrong about treating the press as the enemy of the people.


Fair play!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
On Fox today I saw Wallace bring up the fact that job creation under Obama's last 19 months was actually higher than Trump's first 19 months. Interesting what with all the spending going on under "conservative " control.


Fair play!
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5