$8 Trillion In Four Years

[petro]

It took Donald Trump only four years to run up $8 trillion in debt. Half the time it took Obama.

I'm tellin' ya. The man hates being second to anyone.

Donald Trump: Has US debt fallen since the president took office?

Reality Check looks at a number of President Trump's claims on the economy.

www.bbc.com

On 20 January 2017, the date of the president's inauguration, the total outstanding public debt was $19.95tn (£15.2tn).

https://www.usdebtclock.org/

All approved by the House of Representatives and that bitch Nancy wants more.

Wow, the ignorance of posters here knows no bounds. No, the House does not "approve" jackshit when it comes to spending bills. They PROPOSE them. Damn, they not teach Civics in the schools you morons attended? The Senate "approves" them, and sends them to the president, who also "approves" them by signing the freakin bills. The Senate, they could stop those spending bills in their tracks, much like they have the corona virus stimulus bills the Democratic house has sent them. And the President, well all by his damn lonesome, he can "disapprove" them. Yep, just refuse to sign them. Not that freakin hard.

To be honest, if you don't know these basic concepts of how the Federal government works you probably need to quit wasting your time, and everyone else's, posting on a freaking messageboard. Maybe you could spend some time trying to pull your head out of your ass.

“All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills.”
— U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 7, clause 1

Congress—and in particular, the House of Representatives—is invested with the “power of the purse,” the ability to tax and spend public money for the national government.

Quit wasting my time idiot.
BTW, Nancy is still "proposing" more debt.

 

[Winston]

The House has been under Republican control 10 out of the last 13 two year terms and the House controls the purse strings.

Senate also get to vote on spending?

They get to vote, but spending bills must originate in the House. Senate, Republican controlled 8 out of the last 13

You keep changing your story.
Are you sure now?

WTF are you talking about. Congress normally means the House, 10 out of 13 under Republican control. Senate, 8 out of 13. The 13 refers to the two year term. You do realize there are elections every two years, right. Oh well, maybe not. All the House, and one third of the senate, turns over every two years. See, six divided by two, equals three. And whoof, that just went right over your head. All spending bills must originate in the House. I am quite sure this is news to you. But the point is you can't blame Democrats for the increase in spending. Doing so shows reveals more ignorance than anything else.

But the point is you can't blame Democrats for the increase in spending.

Why? Because you said so?

Because budget bills never go to conference?

DURR

One of two things. Either the Republican senate is a bunch of pussies and they can't defend lower spending while in Conference, or either they don't give two shits about the deficit and go ahead and approve the spending. And then we come to the president. Did he lose his veto pen? Attempting to blame all spending on Democrats is ignorance at best, and straight up head up your ass partisan blindness at worst. I am going with the partisan blindness.

 

[Winston]

The House has been under Republican control 10 out of the last 13 two year terms and the House controls the purse strings.

Senate also get to vote on spending?

They get to vote, but spending bills must originate in the House. Senate, Republican controlled 8 out of the last 13

You keep changing your story.
Are you sure now?

WTF are you talking about. Congress normally means the House, 10 out of 13 under Republican control. Senate, 8 out of 13. The 13 refers to the two year term. You do realize there are elections every two years, right. Oh well, maybe not. All the House, and one third of the senate, turns over every two years. See, six divided by two, equals three. And whoof, that just went right over your head. All spending bills must originate in the House. I am quite sure this is news to you. But the point is you can't blame Democrats for the increase in spending. Doing so shows reveals more ignorance than anything else.

But the point is you can't blame Democrats for the increase in spending.

Why? Because you said so?

Because budget bills never go to conference?

DURR

Wow, you always double down on stupid. Posting the Constitution to me, what a joke. I told you what it said several posts ago. The House proposes, the Senate APPROVES or disapproves. And the president, while he can veto. If the Senate approves, and the president doesn't veto, then it is hard as hell for me to accept it was just the fault of the House. In fact, that is precisely why the Constitution structured appropriations in exactly that manner.

 

[WTH_Progs?]

And yet conservatives are voting for Trump as I type.

Cuz we're not fucking idiots

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The House has been under Republican control 10 out of the last 13 two year terms and the House controls the purse strings.

Senate also get to vote on spending?

They get to vote, but spending bills must originate in the House. Senate, Republican controlled 8 out of the last 13

You keep changing your story.
Are you sure now?

WTF are you talking about. Congress normally means the House, 10 out of 13 under Republican control. Senate, 8 out of 13. The 13 refers to the two year term. You do realize there are elections every two years, right. Oh well, maybe not. All the House, and one third of the senate, turns over every two years. See, six divided by two, equals three. And whoof, that just went right over your head. All spending bills must originate in the House. I am quite sure this is news to you. But the point is you can't blame Democrats for the increase in spending. Doing so shows reveals more ignorance than anything else.

But the point is you can't blame Democrats for the increase in spending.

Why? Because you said so?

Because budget bills never go to conference?

DURR

One of two things. Either the Republican senate is a bunch of pussies and they can't defend lower spending while in Conference, or either they don't give two shits about the deficit and go ahead and approve the spending. And then we come to the president. Did he lose his veto pen? Attempting to blame all spending on Democrats is ignorance at best, and straight up head up your ass partisan blindness at worst. I am going with the partisan blindness.

Attempting to blame all spending on Democrats

All? Who said that? Link?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The House has been under Republican control 10 out of the last 13 two year terms and the House controls the purse strings.

Senate also get to vote on spending?

They get to vote, but spending bills must originate in the House. Senate, Republican controlled 8 out of the last 13

You keep changing your story.
Are you sure now?

WTF are you talking about. Congress normally means the House, 10 out of 13 under Republican control. Senate, 8 out of 13. The 13 refers to the two year term. You do realize there are elections every two years, right. Oh well, maybe not. All the House, and one third of the senate, turns over every two years. See, six divided by two, equals three. And whoof, that just went right over your head. All spending bills must originate in the House. I am quite sure this is news to you. But the point is you can't blame Democrats for the increase in spending. Doing so shows reveals more ignorance than anything else.

But the point is you can't blame Democrats for the increase in spending.

Why? Because you said so?

Because budget bills never go to conference?

DURR

Wow, you always double down on stupid. Posting the Constitution to me, what a joke. I told you what it said several posts ago. The House proposes, the Senate APPROVES or disapproves. And the president, while he can veto. If the Senate approves, and the president doesn't veto, then it is hard as hell for me to accept it was just the fault of the House. In fact, that is precisely why the Constitution structured appropriations in exactly that manner.

The House proposes, the Senate APPROVES or disapproves.

And sometimes, they go to conference. Moron.

 

[Winston]

The House has been under Republican control 10 out of the last 13 two year terms and the House controls the purse strings.

Senate also get to vote on spending?

They get to vote, but spending bills must originate in the House. Senate, Republican controlled 8 out of the last 13

You keep changing your story.
Are you sure now?

WTF are you talking about. Congress normally means the House, 10 out of 13 under Republican control. Senate, 8 out of 13. The 13 refers to the two year term. You do realize there are elections every two years, right. Oh well, maybe not. All the House, and one third of the senate, turns over every two years. See, six divided by two, equals three. And whoof, that just went right over your head. All spending bills must originate in the House. I am quite sure this is news to you. But the point is you can't blame Democrats for the increase in spending. Doing so shows reveals more ignorance than anything else.

But the point is you can't blame Democrats for the increase in spending.

Why? Because you said so?

Because budget bills never go to conference?

DURR

Wow, you always double down on stupid. Posting the Constitution to me, what a joke. I told you what it said several posts ago. The House proposes, the Senate APPROVES or disapproves. And the president, while he can veto. If the Senate approves, and the president doesn't veto, then it is hard as hell for me to accept it was just the fault of the House. In fact, that is precisely why the Constitution structured appropriations in exactly that manner.

The House proposes, the Senate APPROVES or disapproves.

And sometimes, they go to conference. Moron.

Wow, you really like that conference thing. I mean perhaps you missed the part where I said that if they went to conference and the Senate couldn't curtail the spending the Senate was a bunch of pussies. But what I didn't say is that if they went to conference the Senate is just as responsible for the spending as the House. I mean how difficult is that to understand? The Senate signed off on the damn spending. They are responsible, I would argue more responsible, than the House. They APPROVED the damn shit. I mean I could go to my boss and I could propose all kinds of crazy ass shit. If the boss approves it, and that crazy ass shit results in some major disaster, who the hell is going to get the blame? I mean I can see it now, well he proposed it. While the corporate wheel in the suit goes, and you approved it, YOUR FIRED. I mean can you dipshits try and face reality.

 

[Dogbiscuit]

I hear the details being hashed out and argued, but I havent heard talks about the way the public see things.
You might not find it relevant in this thread, but regardless of facts, Public sentiment is a powerful tool, is it not ?
Not to portray ones true intentions, by a distraction in the public eye, is pure deception.
Based on several of your comments, I sometimes wonder about the political chess games these politicians play with our future.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The House has been under Republican control 10 out of the last 13 two year terms and the House controls the purse strings.

Senate also get to vote on spending?

They get to vote, but spending bills must originate in the House. Senate, Republican controlled 8 out of the last 13

You keep changing your story.
Are you sure now?

WTF are you talking about. Congress normally means the House, 10 out of 13 under Republican control. Senate, 8 out of 13. The 13 refers to the two year term. You do realize there are elections every two years, right. Oh well, maybe not. All the House, and one third of the senate, turns over every two years. See, six divided by two, equals three. And whoof, that just went right over your head. All spending bills must originate in the House. I am quite sure this is news to you. But the point is you can't blame Democrats for the increase in spending. Doing so shows reveals more ignorance than anything else.

But the point is you can't blame Democrats for the increase in spending.

Why? Because you said so?

Because budget bills never go to conference?

DURR

Wow, you always double down on stupid. Posting the Constitution to me, what a joke. I told you what it said several posts ago. The House proposes, the Senate APPROVES or disapproves. And the president, while he can veto. If the Senate approves, and the president doesn't veto, then it is hard as hell for me to accept it was just the fault of the House. In fact, that is precisely why the Constitution structured appropriations in exactly that manner.

The House proposes, the Senate APPROVES or disapproves.

And sometimes, they go to conference. Moron.

Wow, you really like that conference thing. I mean perhaps you missed the part where I said that if they went to conference and the Senate couldn't curtail the spending the Senate was a bunch of pussies. But what I didn't say is that if they went to conference the Senate is just as responsible for the spending as the House. I mean how difficult is that to understand? The Senate signed off on the damn spending. They are responsible, I would argue more responsible, than the House. They APPROVED the damn shit. I mean I could go to my boss and I could propose all kinds of crazy ass shit. If the boss approves it, and that crazy ass shit results in some major disaster, who the hell is going to get the blame? I mean I can see it now, well he proposed it. While the corporate wheel in the suit goes, and you approved it, YOUR FIRED. I mean can you dipshits try and face reality.

Wow, you really like that conference thing.

Only because both Senate and House have to agree on a bill before a final vote.

But what I didn't say is that if they went to conference the Senate is just as responsible for the spending as the House.

Why not? Be specific.

 

[Billiejeens]

And yet conservatives are voting for Trump as I type.

ABSOFUCKINGLUTELY

 

[Billiejeens]

Trump allowed the coronavirus to run rampant, so he owns the cost of that mistake.

How?

(Here's where we discovery your authoritarian statist side)

Everyone knows how. He blew it off. He called it a hoax. He pretended it would magically go away all by itself in April. He went golfing and to rallies while the death count was soaring. He was totally asleep at the switch.

He owns every penny of that negligence.

All factually false.