Page 106 of 272 FirstFirst ... 65696104105106107108116156206 ... LastLast
Results 1,576 to 1,590 of 4072

Thread: Had enough yet

  1. #1576
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,919
    Quote Originally Posted by OutsidetheBox View Post
    The facts clearly show that some economic indicators aren't doing as well under Trump. You're not arguing the numbers I presented because they're true and you know it.

    In regards to Sanders, he advocates for socialism and not embracing Obama's policies because he is far more socialist then Obama. But that really has nothing to do with what we're discussing.

    Again, facts: under Obama's term unemployment went from 10% down to 4.7% (black unemployment from 16.8 to 7.8) This trend has continued under Trump and no one is disputing that. Sure, the economy has continued to improve under Trump but it's not like he came into office with some big mess on his hands that he magically cleaned up.
    Spot on regarding arguing the numbers. Here is another interesting video on the economy:

    https://youtu.be/90Otn4ybb-0

    What is interesting is why none of the Dem presidential candidates made mention of this, nor the Democratic Party itself. At least we are now hearing both sides of the story and will have an opportunity to ferret out the truth.

    What was most interesting in this video (at least to me) is hearing that 50-60% of Americans are invested in the stock market through their 401-k.

  2. #1577
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,304
    Quote Originally Posted by OutsidetheBox View Post
    The facts clearly show that some economic indicators aren't doing as well under Trump. You're not arguing the numbers I presented because they're true and you know it.
    Nah, my post really did not concern the faithful use of statistics, aka, lying with numbers.

    My post dealt with the propaganized use of select numbers...

    Quote Originally Posted by mark blazejewski View Post
    This propaganda is almost as unbelievable as "Russia Collusion"...
    ...so it is your initial post that...

    Quote Originally Posted by OutsidetheBox View Post
    ... has nothing to do with what we're discussing.

    But, since I did reply to your to comments, in congruent to the intent of my post, I will say you can rely on your numbers and that's fine for your advocacy; both sides throw that garbage out there.

    But please do not suggest that my support and preference for the Trump economy is based on some sort of unsupported sycophantic attachment.

    I prefer to digest a full picture and acknowledge trends, rather than cling to the perhaps manipulated, selectively recognized, regurgitated statistical bureaucratic vomit you are dispensing.

    And, it is just not me with that standard:

    "...63% of the public backs Trump's handling of the economy..."

    https://markets.businessinsider.com/...0-2-1028873604

    But to play on your field, I offer in support of the trend(s) which I do embrace:

    (1) Obama's 2009-2016 policies resulted in one of the slowest economic recoveries in history.

    (2) Trump's unemployment numbers are at a 50 year low-period.

    (3) The pay of American workers has grown at more than 3% per year, and such numbers have not been present since the so-called Great Recession.

    (4) Consumer confidence has consistently grown under Trump.

    (5) Business confidence has consistently grown under Trump.

    (6) There has been a significant drop of Americans on food stamps; and

    (7) In the first thirty months of the Trump administration, manufacturing jobs increased by 314,000 OVERObama.

    But, if you want to say that Obama deserves kudos for not entirely destroying the economy with regulations and the ACA mandates, and left some semblance of capitalism left standing, knock yourself out.

    Ergo, you need to get on that soap box and talk-up Crazy Uncle Joe, you know the guy who proudly proclaimed that train-wreck ACA a "Big F***in' deal."

    I'll bet Obamacare actually helped manufacturing and job creation, eh?

    I seem to recall that many of those great jobs under Obama were part time thingies, but what do I know?
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; February 18th, 2020 at 03:13 PM.
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  3. #1578
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,919
    Spot on in response, Mark.

    The numbers can be massaged to present positives for both sides. In politics, that is especially true and expected. Obama, not the candidates or his party set this refute in motion. There is sure to be a ****storm to follow and that is a good thing in my mind.

    I do have difficulty in seeing how the Dems can use the data to their advantage.

    Enough of the Trump hate movement BS. Time to focus rationally and civilly on what is in the best interests of the country.

    Looking forward to the upcoming Democratic debate with Bloomberg involved.

  4. #1579
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,304
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    The numbers can be massaged to present positives for both sides.
    Exactly Lee, both sides are shameless in their manipulative hyperbole.

    Consider this:

    Without agreeing with everything written in this article, Governor Reagan outed the manipulation of the September, 1980 Producer Price Index figures to support the Carter re-election campaign:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/archi...-16d0db5ca547/

    The 1980 voting public's apparent conclusion perhaps was based on its perception of its own economic condition, especially when compared to the economic world that President Ford handed to Jimmy Carter on January 20, 1977.

    Indeed, the public's manifest reaction on November 4, 1980 may have very well been a convulsive response to Reagan's allegation of "statistics" manipulation, and his closing comments at the end of the October 28, 1980 debate in Cleveland, which asked a very simple question "Are you better off than you were four years ago?"

    When comparing Obama's record, and assessing what the Democrats are offering, when Trump asks that same question this year, I wonder how that will work out for the Leftees?
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; February 18th, 2020 at 05:32 PM.
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  5. #1580
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    10,873
    Nearly 95% of all new jobs during Obama era were part-time, or contract

    Investing.com -- A new study by economists from Harvard and Princeton indicates that 94% of the 10 million new jobs created during the Obama era were temporary positions.

    The study shows that the jobs were temporary, contract positions, or part-time "gig" jobs in a variety of fields.

    Female workers suffered most heavily in this economy, as work in traditionally feminine fields, like education and medicine, declined during the era.

    The research by economists Lawrence Katz of Harvard University and Alan Krueger at Princeton University shows that the proportion of workers throughout the U.S., during the Obama era, who were working in these kinds of temporary jobs, increased from 10.7% of the population to 15.8%



    https://www.investing.com/news/econo...KelmNXole2yqeA
    #Dems play musical chairs + patronage and nepotism = entitlement !

  6. #1581
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,304
    Quote Originally Posted by 4248 View Post
    Nearly 95% of all new jobs during Obama era were part-time, or contract

    Investing.com -- A new study by economists from Harvard and Princeton indicates that 94% of the 10 million new jobs created during the Obama era were temporary positions.

    The study shows that the jobs were temporary, contract positions, or part-time "gig" jobs in a variety of fields.

    Female workers suffered most heavily in this economy, as work in traditionally feminine fields, like education and medicine, declined during the era.

    The research by economists Lawrence Katz of Harvard University and Alan Krueger at Princeton University shows that the proportion of workers throughout the U.S., during the Obama era, who were working in these kinds of temporary jobs, increased from 10.7% of the population to 15.8%



    https://www.investing.com/news/econo...KelmNXole2yqeA
    Yep, you are correct 4248.

    Also, with respect to manufacturing jobs, this seems worthy of a read...

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckde.../#8b9c9c62677b
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  7. #1582
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,304
    The Main Stream Media seems to be bitching about Trump commuting the sentence of Governor Blagojevich...

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/rod-blagojevichs-sentence-commuted-what-to-know-about-former-illinois-governors-case

    ...yet shrugged and at times appeared to support President Obama's 2017 decision to pardon TERRORIST Oscar Lopez Rivera...

    https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/president-obamas-pardon-oscar-lopez-rivera-trades-terrorist-votes

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/st...k-obama-214685
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  8. #1583
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,304
    Quote Originally Posted by OutsidetheBox View Post
    In regards to Sanders, he advocates for socialism and not embracing Obama's policies because he is far more socialist then Obama.
    I do admire your candid assessment that both Sanders and Obama are Socialists, but that one is just more Socialist than the other.

    Quote Originally Posted by OutsidetheBox View Post
    But that really has nothing to do with what we're discussing.
    No, perhaps it is embarrassing, but not irrelevant, just my opinion of course.

    These 2008 comments by Bernie Sanders seem to confirm their kindred spirits...

    "I plan to play a very active role," Sanders said of endorsing Obama, according to an interview in the June 5, 2008 Burlington Free Press. "I will do everything I can to see that he is elected president."
    Wow, a choice between Socialism with a possible Biden extension of the Obama administration, and Uber Socialism with a Sanders administration.

    Get a date for the Saturday night party dances, and then take it home to your one room apartment, eh comrade?
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; February 19th, 2020 at 12:59 AM.
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  9. #1584
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,919
    The Justice Department pushed back Tuesday night at multiple reports claiming Attorney General William Barr told people close to him he's considering stepping down over President Trump's tweets, days after Barr admitted that Trump's tweeting made it "'impossible for me to do my job."

    "Addressing Beltway rumors: The Attorney General has no plans to resign," DOJ spokeswoman Kerri Kupec tweeted.

    Trump, too, assured reporters he stood behind his attorney general, despite the criticisms. "I have total confidence in my attorney general," Trump told reporters earlier Tuesday. "I do make his job harder. I do agree on that. ... We have a great attorney general and he's working very hard."


    Some of Trump’s closest Whitehouse friends supposedly put this information out there (wink, wink).

    Trump should keep his mouth shut, but honestly, the left and the media is so easy to bait. We shall see.

    Bloomberg, the apologetic flip-flopper on the debate floor tonight. The attack dogs are sharpening their fangs.
    Last edited by Lee Chowaniec; February 19th, 2020 at 01:28 AM.

  10. #1585
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,304
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    Some of Trump’s closest Whitehouse friends supposedly put this information out there (wink, wink).
    This entire controversy, replete with scripted resignations, recalls the early days and the showboat horseshlt with Sally Yates.

    Imagine that, an Attorney General hearing the thoughts and opinions of the President. Why do the names Harry Daugherty, Herbert Brownell, Robert Kennedy, John Mitchell, Janet Rino, and Eric Holder pop into my mind?

    In any event, I am open to the possibility that in anticipation of possible Durham prosecutions, the President and the A.G. must appear to have a "strained" relationship, and that such a public display of tension is a necessary.

    If Trump wanted to avoid such a controversy, he would just pick-up the telephone, just sayin'.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    Trump should keep his mouth shut...
    I agree.

    After Impeachment, I would do my job while pointing to the Left's obsession with trying to pin something on Trump; its feckless investigation efforts at the nation's expense, and its insane agenda for the future.

    But, Trump is Trump.
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  11. #1586
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,919
    Who won last night’s debate?

    IMHO, no one! How embarrassing!

    The pundits and liberal media will pick their favorites from a bunch of Democratic lemons while attempting to influence voters in the upcoming primaries to defeat Trump, the existential threat to everything.

    Money can’t fix stupid!

    Viewers were made dizzy from all the spinning on the stage. The cleaning staff were overcome by the **** they had to clean up!

    There must be a smile on Trumps face; the supposed polarizing Liar-King! LAMO.

    We are so screwed!

  12. #1587
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,304
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    Who won last night’s debate?
    Donald Trump won that debate.

    I was struck by the anger and hypocrisy evident on the stage.

    Warren overtly, and Klobuchar more subtly, played the gender card against Bloomberg and Buttiteig respectively.

    Bloomberg called Sanders a "millionaire socialist," and both Sanders and Biden chided Bloomberg about transparency concerning his tax returns.

    Instead of engaging a three-year wish hunt to bring down Trump, perhaps the Democrats should have cleaned their own dirty house.
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  13. #1588
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,304
    JUST MUSING...

    What a mess.

    Bloomberg's debate performance was pathetic.

    The real possibility of a dyed-in-the-wool Socialist as the Democrat standard bearer.

    Unfortunately for the Democrats, it looks as if this might come down to a Sanders-Bloomberg primary contest.

    On February 5, I wrote of Mitt Romney's possible motive for his Impeachment vote...

    Maybe a deal with the Democrat Party in the event of a deadlocked Democrat Convention?
    Also, HRC said she would never say never to running as a VP candidate.

    Hmmm, a Romney-Clinton ticket reported out of a brokered convention?

    Or, since many Republican power holders are still "Never Trumpers," perhaps a Romney-Clinton third party ticket?

    Sounds nuts sure , but who would ever think Trump could win, and the Democrats may actually be nominateinga card-carrying Socialist?
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  14. #1589
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,919
    One can only hope!

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elect...cid=spartandhp

    Sanders, he said, would prioritize ideological purity and pie-in-the-sky policy proposals, while doing nothing to remedy the country's political divisions.

    Buttigieg cast Sanders, a self-identified democratic socialist, as deeply out of touch with a broad swath of Democratic primary voters - and of voters who will decide whether Trump gets a second term in November.

    "Sen. Sanders sees capitalism as the root of all evil. He'd go beyond reform and reorder the economy in ways most Democrats, let alone most Americans, don't support," Buttigieg said. "Sen. Sanders's revolution has the tenor of combat, division and polarization, a vision where whoever wins the day, nothing will change the toxic tone of our politics."

    Buttigieg hinted Saturday that the detente toward Sanders is at an end.

  15. #1590
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,919
    Go Bernie!

    I mean, just leave the race! Not my America, not this old guy's vision of what America should become

    40 years in politics, no major accomplishments, his math doesn't add up to pay for all that free stuff, congress will never agree to his grandiose socialist agenda, and we should consider him a viable candidate? Beat Trump, I think not!

    The debate should be titled: Shameless in Carolina.

    Speaking of shameless: Chuck Schumer politicizing the Coronavirus pandemic.
    Last edited by Lee Chowaniec; February 26th, 2020 at 01:47 AM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 90 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 90 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •