To the NeverTrumpers....

[Boss]

You are funny. You can have a surplus in Oct, Nov and Dec and still end up adding to the debt for the year. But at the end of the year you still have the budget balanced. It's a very simple concept.

Who did better with the debt, Reagan with his tax cuts, or Clinton with tax increases? Who had more economic growth?

Look... you can't say you have a surplus or balanced the budget if the debt at the end of the year is more than the debt at the end of the previous year. It's a very simple concept called MATH.

 

[Brain357]

Lets see, Reagan and Bush give tax breaks and the debt increases dramatically. Clinton increases taxes, the economy grows faster than either Reagan or Bush, and it leads to a balanced budget. Who is the crazy one to think it's a good idea for Trump to give tax breaks? It should be obvious what worked better.

Economists who look at the plans of both say Hillary is more fiscally responsible. What don't you get?

What is happening is, you're being dishonest. I'm not going to just keep repeating the same thing over and over again. I gave you the official Treasury Department link where you can go see for yourself that Clinton never ran a surplus and never balanced the budget. I also gave you the link where you can see that Reagan's tax cuts generated (almost doubled) more tax revenues.

And the economy didn't grow under Clinton until he lowered taxes after giving us the largest tax increase in history.

You are being dishonest and are completely in denial.
Donald Trump’s economics are an unmitigated disaster

 

[Boss]

I guess you missed this:

A new analysis estimates Hillary Clinton’s tax and spending proposals would have a relatively modest effect on the national debt, while Donald Trump’s fiscal plans would sharply boost deficits and the debt over the next decade.

Well a new analysis estimates that you're retarded and in need of a mental institution. I don't really give a shit about your left-wing liberal propaganda. The same exact morons predicted Reagan's tax cuts would explode the national debt... they didn't. The tax cuts generated the longest period of peacetime prosperity in history and tax revenues increased. The national debt did increase but it was due to spending that Democrats refused to cut.

 

[Brain357]

You are funny. You can have a surplus in Oct, Nov and Dec and still end up adding to the debt for the year. But at the end of the year you still have the budget balanced. It's a very simple concept.

Who did better with the debt, Reagan with his tax cuts, or Clinton with tax increases? Who had more economic growth?

Look... you can't say you have a surplus or balanced the budget if the debt at the end of the year is more than the debt at the end of the previous year. It's a very simple concept called MATH.

Yes you can have a surplus at the end of the year and still add to the debt. It's very simple math.

 

[Brain357]

I guess you missed this:

A new analysis estimates Hillary Clinton’s tax and spending proposals would have a relatively modest effect on the national debt, while Donald Trump’s fiscal plans would sharply boost deficits and the debt over the next decade.

Well a new analysis estimates that you're retarded and in need of a mental institution. I don't really give a shit about your left-wing liberal propaganda. The same exact morons predicted Reagan's tax cuts would explode the national debt... they didn't. The tax cuts generated the longest period of peacetime prosperity in history and tax revenues increased. The national debt did increase but it was due to spending that Democrats refused to cut.

Yes Reagan did explode the debt. Your link shows that it tripled.

 

[Boss]

You are being dishonest and are completely in denial.

I'll let the smart people decide. I gave you the links to the Treasury Dept. website and challenged you to show me the year where we reduced the national debt... you never did show us that. You started yammering about how we can somehow increase the national debt but we ran a surplus.

 

[Boss]

Yes you can have a surplus at the end of the year and still add to the debt. It's very simple math.

Try that with your checking account and see if your bank agrees. Dummy!

 

[Boss]

Yes Reagan did explode the debt. Your link shows that it tripled.

It was not because of his tax cuts.

 

[Brain357]

Yes Reagan did explode the debt. Your link shows that it tripled.

It was not because of his tax cuts.

He tripled the debt. That is exploding the debt. That is a worse record than Obama.

 

[Brain357]

Yes you can have a surplus at the end of the year and still add to the debt. It's very simple math.

Try that with your checking account and see if your bank agrees. Dummy!

It is very simple math. Jan-Aug you increase your debt. Sept-Dec you run a surplus. Debt for the year goes up, but you still now have a surplus.

 

[Boss]

Yes you can have a surplus at the end of the year and still add to the debt. It's very simple math.

Try that with your checking account and see if your bank agrees. Dummy!

It is very simple math. Jan-Aug you increase your debt. Sept-Dec you run a surplus. Debt for the year goes up, but you still now have a surplus.

No, you still have a debt for the year. Budgets are done by the year not by the month. Show the year where Bill Clinton reduced the national debt!

 

[Boss]

He tripled the debt. That is exploding the debt. That is a worse record than Obama.

No... Obama increased the national debt more than all previous presidents combined.

 

[Boss]

Yes you can have a surplus at the end of the year and still add to the debt. It's very simple math.

Reminds me of my uncle who had a gambling problem. He would lose $10,000 before winning $200 and somehow, he figured he was up $200!

You keep saying "It's very simple math" but it's not very simple math, it's just a LIE... a flat out, in denial, LIE. If you end the year with more debt than you began the year with, you've not run a surplus, you've run a deficit. That IS the math... there is no other math.

 

[Brain357]

Yes you can have a surplus at the end of the year and still add to the debt. It's very simple math.

Try that with your checking account and see if your bank agrees. Dummy!

It is very simple math. Jan-Aug you increase your debt. Sept-Dec you run a surplus. Debt for the year goes up, but you still now have a surplus.

No, you still have a debt for the year. Budgets are done by the year not by the month. Show the year where Bill Clinton reduced the national debt!

I didn't say he had. But he did have a surplus at the end of the year. Reagan tripled the debt. You can't seriously be claiming Reagans policies were more fiscally responsible than Clinton.

 

[Brain357]

He tripled the debt. That is exploding the debt. That is a worse record than Obama.

No... Obama increased the national debt more than all previous presidents combined.

He didn't triple the debt. Reagan did that. Yes it has increased more in $, but it's a much bigger economy now.

 

[Boss]

He tripled the debt. That is exploding the debt.

I didn't claim Reagan didn't increase the debt. I said his tax cuts didn't increase the debt because the tax cuts resulted in increased tax revenue. It was spending that increased the debt, not the tax cuts.

 

[Boss]

I didn't say he had. But he did have a surplus at the end of the year. Reagan tripled the debt. You can't seriously be claiming Reagans policies were more fiscally responsible than Clinton.

No. He. Didn't.

If the national debt was greater than the year before, there was no surplus!

Reagan's policies were fine... it was the runaway spending by Democrats in Congress that ran the debt up.... not Reagan. He wanted to cut spending but they wouldn't hear of it... he had to go along with the Democrat majority in Congress. The argument was over his tax policy... his tax cut didn't contribute to the debt because it generated more tax revenues.

The Clinton "fiscal responsibility" you're crowing about was the result of counting the Social Security Trust Fund (our retirement nest egg) in the General Budget. Even WITH that, he STILL didn't run a surplus!

 

[Brain357]

He tripled the debt. That is exploding the debt.

I didn't claim Reagan didn't increase the debt. I said his tax cuts didn't increase the debt because the tax cuts resulted in increased tax revenue. It was spending that increased the debt, not the tax cuts.

Tax cuts don't increase revenue. We learned that with Bush. It was the growth that increased revenue and Clinton had stronger growth with a tax increase.

Like I said, I want to balance the budget and pay down debt. Of the two candidates the choice is clearly Hillary. The tax cut policies have been a disaster for the debt and that is trumps plan. Economists agree he would add more to the debt.

 

[Brain357]

I didn't say he had. But he did have a surplus at the end of the year. Reagan tripled the debt. You can't seriously be claiming Reagans policies were more fiscally responsible than Clinton.

No. He. Didn't.

If the national debt was greater than the year before, there was no surplus!

Reagan's policies were fine... it was the runaway spending by Democrats in Congress that ran the debt up.... not Reagan. He wanted to cut spending but they wouldn't hear of it... he had to go along with the Democrat majority in Congress. The argument was over his tax policy... his tax cut didn't contribute to the debt because it generated more tax revenues.

The Clinton "fiscal responsibility" you're crowing about was the result of counting the Social Security Trust Fund (our retirement nest egg) in the General Budget. Even WITH that, he STILL didn't run a surplus!

He sure didn't triple the debt. It is obvious Clinton was far more fiscally responsible.

 

[hunarcy]

Okay, I get it... really, I do! I have probably been as critical of Trump as any Conservative here. I don't like some of his policy ideas, I think they would be terrible for America and I absolutely abhor his obnoxious Alt-Right supporters. I think he is a terrible Christian role model, he is petty and vindictive, he says some awful and nasty things to people, he doesn't convey contrition or humility and he seems to think he never does anything wrong. He is an arrogant smart ass who has no regard for those who oppose him or even question him critically... So I totally get what you don't like about him.

That said, I hear many of the NeverTrumpers rail on and on about what a catastrophe a Clinton presidency would be and how we cannot elect this woman president! But the thing is... this is a binary choice... if he doesn't win, she does win! Is this not being comprehended or something? I listen to people like Glenn Beck and Ben Shapiro go on and on for 45 minutes ranting about how awful Hillary Clinton is... how absolutely deplorable she is and how much of a nightmare it would be for her to win the election... but they're not going to vote for Trump.

So what do they think is going to happen? Because, the scenario where neither of them win is not going to happen. As much as we may wish that to be a reality in this universe, it's just not going to turn out that way. Trump will win or Hillary will win. You need to decide which one you want to win the least and vote for the other one. I'm still on the fence, I think it will be terrible for either one to win but I realize one of them is going to win. My inner-debate is whether it is worse for Trump to win or worse for Hillary to win. I'm still flipping that horrible pancake over and over but I am leaning toward voting for Trump.... just because she is so horribly corrupt and I fear, a danger to our republic. Her running mate is such a total nutball he makes Bernie look rational.

Trump, for all his faults, has said some things that I agree with. His strong position on dealing with illegal immigration is in line with my viewpoint. Whether he can pull it off or not, what he is saying he will do is a positive to me. It's better than what we've gotten from any Republican or Democrat yet. He also has some great plans for education and returning it to the states... something I've advocated for years and no Republican or Democrat has even been willing to address. He says he plans to cut corporate tax rates.. .again, something I've long advocated and support. So just on those things alone, I find myself more in line with Trump than Hillary, who I totally oppose on everything.

We are less than a week away, and I understand you have your principles but it's time to really think about this and set aside personality differences. If you had rather cling to your principles and see Hillary elected, that's fine... I understand completely. But don't bitch and complain that Hillary cannot be elected because THAT is precisely what is going to happen if Trump doesn't win.

It isn't a binary choice. Vote for someone with integrity...Jill Stein.