Trump supporters: What do you think of this post?

[jc456]

He was correct, those jobs have not come back. We have created other jobs, but those jobs have not come back. Carrier is still making their stuff in Mexico and not Indy

1,000 new manufacturing jobs a month because of trump lol

Poor liberals hahaha

It hurts I know!

The point is that you can't prove that Trump created those jobs, just like you can't prove Obama created any jobs.

It's all political bullshit from every direction.

.

Beside the fact many businesses came out absolutely said they have future planned investment in America because of trump? Interesting

But, did they, or were they just running a PR line to keep the heat off of them?

I would be glad to look at hard numbers, if you have them.

Again, I am not saying that actions done to improve the environment for employers does NOT have a positive effect. I am only saying that it is difficult to actually prove. Don't mistake my reservations for denials.



.

I think looking at facts as a TDS might cause you to look like a fool on here lol

remember shovel ready jobs by obammy, never a one. stop, what? yep. all a ploy.

The Reason That Shovel Ready Stimulus Didn't Work Is That There Wasn't Any Stimulus

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The point is that you can't prove that Trump created those jobs, just like you can't prove Obama created any jobs.

It's all political bullshit from every direction.

.

sure we can, we can tie a direct line to the EO's that shut down restrictions and closed the tax gate on new money. Yes, yes we can.

That is certainly proof that employers got more money. Do you have any evidence showing that was the cause of them announcing new jobs?

That's the problem. It's correlation verse causation. A president can do things to make the economic environment more employer friendly, but we cannot prove direct cause and effect.

For the record, I do believe that lower taxes and few regulations/restrictions create more jobs or better paying jobs. It's just hard to prove.

That's like trying to prove that vitamin C improves health. We all know that the lack of vitamin C causes "scurvy" but we can't prove that increasing intake has any substantial health benefit. We only have correlation. But, you and I both know that good vitamin C intake is probably good for one's health.

.

well sure, they shook hands with the president and told him they would build here. auto manufacturers all had something to say, the tariffs are another reason. I named for you why, money came back into the country, because of trump's policy, and dude, that is just a fact.

And, that is all great. It improved the environment for employers.

All I am saying is that an actual, direct effect is difficult to prove.

Don't read more into that statement than you need.

.

it's called correlation. It counts, trump did a,b,c and companies followed a,b,c. one doesn't need to know the actual numbers, just that private business that was stagnant since 2008 suddenly created jobs, serious jobs, high salary jobs that hadn't been created since 2008, and they followed trump's policy moves. they didn't follow obammy's .

I don't disagree with you, but back to the OP.

Obama took unemployment over 10%. It skyrocketed under him during his first two years. Conversely, unemployment has steadily declined under President Trump's first two years.

That was a steady decline in unemployment for 8 straight years. The data in the picture does not paint the full picture.

Yes, Obama had 7 1/4 straight years of falling unemployment.

But, before the sub-prime crash, it was a 5%+-. It took Obama 6 full years to get back to where Bush had the economy before the crash?
(I am not asking that question as a blame-game for Obama. I don't think he did anything special to improve the economy or unemployment. It simply improved because Americans are fucking bad ass at business and we did that without any government bullshit.).

Likewise, Trump has "continued the trend" of decreasing unemployment.

It was already decreasing. So, big deal?

I think some of Trump's policies have improved conditions, but THE DATA ABOVE only shows that Trump continued what Obama was already doing.

Do you see the problem with the data above? It's not complete. Based on that chart, nobody can claim anything.

.

 

[jc456]

sure we can, we can tie a direct line to the EO's that shut down restrictions and closed the tax gate on new money. Yes, yes we can.

That is certainly proof that employers got more money. Do you have any evidence showing that was the cause of them announcing new jobs?

That's the problem. It's correlation verse causation. A president can do things to make the economic environment more employer friendly, but we cannot prove direct cause and effect.

For the record, I do believe that lower taxes and few regulations/restrictions create more jobs or better paying jobs. It's just hard to prove.

That's like trying to prove that vitamin C improves health. We all know that the lack of vitamin C causes "scurvy" but we can't prove that increasing intake has any substantial health benefit. We only have correlation. But, you and I both know that good vitamin C intake is probably good for one's health.

.

well sure, they shook hands with the president and told him they would build here. auto manufacturers all had something to say, the tariffs are another reason. I named for you why, money came back into the country, because of trump's policy, and dude, that is just a fact.

And, that is all great. It improved the environment for employers.

All I am saying is that an actual, direct effect is difficult to prove.

Don't read more into that statement than you need.

.

it's called correlation. It counts, trump did a,b,c and companies followed a,b,c. one doesn't need to know the actual numbers, just that private business that was stagnant since 2008 suddenly created jobs, serious jobs, high salary jobs that hadn't been created since 2008, and they followed trump's policy moves. they didn't follow obammy's .

I don't disagree with you, but back to the OP.

Obama took unemployment over 10%. It skyrocketed under him during his first two years. Conversely, unemployment has steadily declined under President Trump's first two years.

That was a steady decline in unemployment for 8 straight years. The data in the picture does not paint the full picture.

Yes, Obama had 7 1/4 straight years of falling unemployment.

But, before the sub-prime crash, it was a 5%+-. It took Obama 6 full years to get back to where Bush had the economy before the crash?
(I am not asking that question as a blame-game for Obama. I don't think he did anything special to improve the economy or unemployment. It simply improved because Americans are fucking bad ass at business and we did that without any government bullshit.).

Likewise, Trump has "continued the trend" of decreasing unemployment.

It was already decreasing. So, big deal?

I think some of Trump's policies have improved conditions, but THE DATA ABOVE only shows that Trump continued what Obama was already doing.

Do you see the problem with the data above? It's not complete. Based on that chart, nobody can claim anything.

.

well it was the type of job and salary. that's what the big deal was and is. people who wanted to work for their income worked two jobs to make what their one job lost was making. Guess what, trump brought back those salaries.. just a fact!!! those working two jobs, left those two jobs and took the new higher salary job to get back their personal lives and still earn the living they wanted.

The unemployment numbers can't capture that aspect.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I think looking at facts as a TDS might cause you to look like a fool on here lol

C'mon, dude.

I have been anything but a Trump hater.

He pissed me off when he gave in to Democrats and signed a huge spending bill without getting more border security, and he appears to be going back on his pledge to never sign another bill like that again with this new proposed FedZilla spending monster.

Other than that, and a few criticisms about the structure of some (very few) of Trump's tweets, I have been anything but critical. Check my post history.

.

 

[WTH_Progs?]

Thanks for replying.
So now you agree that these people are doing business...excellent!

Yes they are, and they were doing business long before Trump took office

Nope!

Liar

You lie.
Real Estate was dead under Obama.

Uh, no. It crashed and burned before he became president. It turned around while he was president.

WRONG.............The bottom dropped on Obama's watch. Partially because we didn't have confidence in our POTUS.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

1,000 new manufacturing jobs a month because of trump lol

Poor liberals hahaha

It hurts I know!

The point is that you can't prove that Trump created those jobs, just like you can't prove Obama created any jobs.

It's all political bullshit from every direction.

.

Beside the fact many businesses came out absolutely said they have future planned investment in America because of trump? Interesting

But, did they, or were they just running a PR line to keep the heat off of them?

I would be glad to look at hard numbers, if you have them.

Again, I am not saying that actions done to improve the environment for employers does NOT have a positive effect. I am only saying that it is difficult to actually prove. Don't mistake my reservations for denials.



.

I think looking at facts as a TDS might cause you to look like a fool on here lol

remember shovel ready jobs by obammy, never a one. stop, what? yep. all a ploy.

The Reason That Shovel Ready Stimulus Didn't Work Is That There Wasn't Any Stimulus

Yes. That was complete bullshit.

It was a pathetically poor disguised artificial band-aid that was really payment to political supporters, like all these greasy politicians do.

.

 

[Jitss617]

I think looking at facts as a TDS might cause you to look like a fool on here lol

C'mon, dude.

I have been anything but a Trump hater.

He pissed me off when he gave in to Democrats and signed a huge spending bill without getting more border security, and he appears to be going back on his pledge to never sign another bill like that again with this new proposed FedZilla spending monster.

Other than that, and a few criticisms about the structure of some (very few) of Trump's tweets, I have been anything but critical. Check my post history.

.

Every serious economist says trump policy is what’s driving the economy. Sorry buddy.. if you ever get hired as a economist I’ll look out for your opinion

 

[jc456]

The point is that you can't prove that Trump created those jobs, just like you can't prove Obama created any jobs.

It's all political bullshit from every direction.

.

Beside the fact many businesses came out absolutely said they have future planned investment in America because of trump? Interesting

But, did they, or were they just running a PR line to keep the heat off of them?

I would be glad to look at hard numbers, if you have them.

Again, I am not saying that actions done to improve the environment for employers does NOT have a positive effect. I am only saying that it is difficult to actually prove. Don't mistake my reservations for denials.



.

I think looking at facts as a TDS might cause you to look like a fool on here lol

remember shovel ready jobs by obammy, never a one. stop, what? yep. all a ploy.

The Reason That Shovel Ready Stimulus Didn't Work Is That There Wasn't Any Stimulus

Yes. That was complete bullshit.

It was a pathetically poor disguised artificial band-aid that was really payment to political supporters, like all these greasy politicians do.

.

and today they all point to the shovel ready jobs scam and say that's where obammy created jobs. bullfkingshit.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

That is certainly proof that employers got more money. Do you have any evidence showing that was the cause of them announcing new jobs?

That's the problem. It's correlation verse causation. A president can do things to make the economic environment more employer friendly, but we cannot prove direct cause and effect.

For the record, I do believe that lower taxes and few regulations/restrictions create more jobs or better paying jobs. It's just hard to prove.

That's like trying to prove that vitamin C improves health. We all know that the lack of vitamin C causes "scurvy" but we can't prove that increasing intake has any substantial health benefit. We only have correlation. But, you and I both know that good vitamin C intake is probably good for one's health.

.

well sure, they shook hands with the president and told him they would build here. auto manufacturers all had something to say, the tariffs are another reason. I named for you why, money came back into the country, because of trump's policy, and dude, that is just a fact.

And, that is all great. It improved the environment for employers.

All I am saying is that an actual, direct effect is difficult to prove.

Don't read more into that statement than you need.

.

it's called correlation. It counts, trump did a,b,c and companies followed a,b,c. one doesn't need to know the actual numbers, just that private business that was stagnant since 2008 suddenly created jobs, serious jobs, high salary jobs that hadn't been created since 2008, and they followed trump's policy moves. they didn't follow obammy's .

I don't disagree with you, but back to the OP.

Obama took unemployment over 10%. It skyrocketed under him during his first two years. Conversely, unemployment has steadily declined under President Trump's first two years.

That was a steady decline in unemployment for 8 straight years. The data in the picture does not paint the full picture.

Yes, Obama had 7 1/4 straight years of falling unemployment.

But, before the sub-prime crash, it was a 5%+-. It took Obama 6 full years to get back to where Bush had the economy before the crash?
(I am not asking that question as a blame-game for Obama. I don't think he did anything special to improve the economy or unemployment. It simply improved because Americans are fucking bad ass at business and we did that without any government bullshit.).

Likewise, Trump has "continued the trend" of decreasing unemployment.

It was already decreasing. So, big deal?

I think some of Trump's policies have improved conditions, but THE DATA ABOVE only shows that Trump continued what Obama was already doing.

Do you see the problem with the data above? It's not complete. Based on that chart, nobody can claim anything.

.

well it was the type of job and salary. that's what the big deal was and is. people who wanted to work for their income worked two jobs to make what their one job lost was making. Guess what, trump brought back those salaries.. just a fact!!! those working two jobs, left those two jobs and took the new higher salary job to get back their personal lives and still earn the living they wanted.

The unemployment numbers can't capture that aspect.

I agree that unemployment numbers can't capture that aspect.

I believe that was the point of the OP.

But, in comes the perpetually defensive, assuming the OP meant anything but the numbers being inconclusive.

.

 

[Indeependent]

well sure, they shook hands with the president and told him they would build here. auto manufacturers all had something to say, the tariffs are another reason. I named for you why, money came back into the country, because of trump's policy, and dude, that is just a fact.

And, that is all great. It improved the environment for employers.

All I am saying is that an actual, direct effect is difficult to prove.

Don't read more into that statement than you need.

.

it's called correlation. It counts, trump did a,b,c and companies followed a,b,c. one doesn't need to know the actual numbers, just that private business that was stagnant since 2008 suddenly created jobs, serious jobs, high salary jobs that hadn't been created since 2008, and they followed trump's policy moves. they didn't follow obammy's .

I don't disagree with you, but back to the OP.

Obama took unemployment over 10%. It skyrocketed under him during his first two years. Conversely, unemployment has steadily declined under President Trump's first two years.

That was a steady decline in unemployment for 8 straight years. The data in the picture does not paint the full picture.

Yes, Obama had 7 1/4 straight years of falling unemployment.

But, before the sub-prime crash, it was a 5%+-. It took Obama 6 full years to get back to where Bush had the economy before the crash?
(I am not asking that question as a blame-game for Obama. I don't think he did anything special to improve the economy or unemployment. It simply improved because Americans are fucking bad ass at business and we did that without any government bullshit.).

Likewise, Trump has "continued the trend" of decreasing unemployment.

It was already decreasing. So, big deal?

I think some of Trump's policies have improved conditions, but THE DATA ABOVE only shows that Trump continued what Obama was already doing.

Do you see the problem with the data above? It's not complete. Based on that chart, nobody can claim anything.

.

well it was the type of job and salary. that's what the big deal was and is. people who wanted to work for their income worked two jobs to make what their one job lost was making. Guess what, trump brought back those salaries.. just a fact!!! those working two jobs, left those two jobs and took the new higher salary job to get back their personal lives and still earn the living they wanted.

The unemployment numbers can't capture that aspect.

I agree that unemployment numbers can't capture that aspect.

I believe that was the point of the OP.

But, in comes the perpetually defensive, assuming the OP meant anything but the numbers being inconclusive.

.

It’s obvious you don’t know mac.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I think looking at facts as a TDS might cause you to look like a fool on here lol

C'mon, dude.

I have been anything but a Trump hater.

He pissed me off when he gave in to Democrats and signed a huge spending bill without getting more border security, and he appears to be going back on his pledge to never sign another bill like that again with this new proposed FedZilla spending monster.

Other than that, and a few criticisms about the structure of some (very few) of Trump's tweets, I have been anything but critical. Check my post history.

.

Every serious economist says trump policy is what’s driving the economy. Sorry buddy.. if you ever get hired as a economist I’ll look out for your opinion

Who is saying it and what policy?

Don't assume that I disagree with you.

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

And, that is all great. It improved the environment for employers.

All I am saying is that an actual, direct effect is difficult to prove.

Don't read more into that statement than you need.

.

it's called correlation. It counts, trump did a,b,c and companies followed a,b,c. one doesn't need to know the actual numbers, just that private business that was stagnant since 2008 suddenly created jobs, serious jobs, high salary jobs that hadn't been created since 2008, and they followed trump's policy moves. they didn't follow obammy's .

I don't disagree with you, but back to the OP.

Obama took unemployment over 10%. It skyrocketed under him during his first two years. Conversely, unemployment has steadily declined under President Trump's first two years.

That was a steady decline in unemployment for 8 straight years. The data in the picture does not paint the full picture.

Yes, Obama had 7 1/4 straight years of falling unemployment.

But, before the sub-prime crash, it was a 5%+-. It took Obama 6 full years to get back to where Bush had the economy before the crash?
(I am not asking that question as a blame-game for Obama. I don't think he did anything special to improve the economy or unemployment. It simply improved because Americans are fucking bad ass at business and we did that without any government bullshit.).

Likewise, Trump has "continued the trend" of decreasing unemployment.

It was already decreasing. So, big deal?

I think some of Trump's policies have improved conditions, but THE DATA ABOVE only shows that Trump continued what Obama was already doing.

Do you see the problem with the data above? It's not complete. Based on that chart, nobody can claim anything.

.

well it was the type of job and salary. that's what the big deal was and is. people who wanted to work for their income worked two jobs to make what their one job lost was making. Guess what, trump brought back those salaries.. just a fact!!! those working two jobs, left those two jobs and took the new higher salary job to get back their personal lives and still earn the living they wanted.

The unemployment numbers can't capture that aspect.

I agree that unemployment numbers can't capture that aspect.

I believe that was the point of the OP.

But, in comes the perpetually defensive, assuming the OP meant anything but the numbers being inconclusive.

.

It’s obvious you don’t know mac.

I guess not, but I asked him about it earlier in the thread.

He is constantly exposing "wingers" on their unsupported partisan claims. That's what this appeared to be, at least from my perspective.

.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Where the hell do these Libs live?

Dunno. I live in reality. You should try it sometime. Do you build things? I do. All that bullshit above are talking points from the Orange Virus. "Businesses are getting bigger" is another meaningless statement. Tariffs are making existing steel companies more money, but they aren't turning out a 'ton' of new jobs. The examples thrown out are the airline and military industries, conveniently leaving out the thousands of other manufacturing industries affected.

Trump's steel tariffs create big profits but few new jobs (Reuters)

From the article:
The Commerce Department said in a statement to Reuters that tariffs will help the Sedalia plant and 12 other steel projects create about 3,405 jobs. That’s a 2.4 percent gain industry wide, according to the American Iron and Steel Institute.​

2.4% growth in an industry is piss poor by any standard. Many of these plants already use automation that drastically reduces the need for labor anyway. The good news is automation in manufacturing creates new industries because CNC machines don't program themselves (yet). The hard fact is that with automation there simply won't be many assembly jobs in manufacturing in the future. It's how I know these Cult45 talking points are pure emotion driven horse shit.

 

[jc456]

well sure, they shook hands with the president and told him they would build here. auto manufacturers all had something to say, the tariffs are another reason. I named for you why, money came back into the country, because of trump's policy, and dude, that is just a fact.

And, that is all great. It improved the environment for employers.

All I am saying is that an actual, direct effect is difficult to prove.

Don't read more into that statement than you need.

.

it's called correlation. It counts, trump did a,b,c and companies followed a,b,c. one doesn't need to know the actual numbers, just that private business that was stagnant since 2008 suddenly created jobs, serious jobs, high salary jobs that hadn't been created since 2008, and they followed trump's policy moves. they didn't follow obammy's .

I don't disagree with you, but back to the OP.

Obama took unemployment over 10%. It skyrocketed under him during his first two years. Conversely, unemployment has steadily declined under President Trump's first two years.

That was a steady decline in unemployment for 8 straight years. The data in the picture does not paint the full picture.

Yes, Obama had 7 1/4 straight years of falling unemployment.

But, before the sub-prime crash, it was a 5%+-. It took Obama 6 full years to get back to where Bush had the economy before the crash?
(I am not asking that question as a blame-game for Obama. I don't think he did anything special to improve the economy or unemployment. It simply improved because Americans are fucking bad ass at business and we did that without any government bullshit.).

Likewise, Trump has "continued the trend" of decreasing unemployment.

It was already decreasing. So, big deal?

I think some of Trump's policies have improved conditions, but THE DATA ABOVE only shows that Trump continued what Obama was already doing.

Do you see the problem with the data above? It's not complete. Based on that chart, nobody can claim anything.

.

well it was the type of job and salary. that's what the big deal was and is. people who wanted to work for their income worked two jobs to make what their one job lost was making. Guess what, trump brought back those salaries.. just a fact!!! those working two jobs, left those two jobs and took the new higher salary job to get back their personal lives and still earn the living they wanted.

The unemployment numbers can't capture that aspect.

I agree that unemployment numbers can't capture that aspect.

I believe that was the point of the OP.

But, in comes the perpetually defensive, assuming the OP meant anything but the numbers being inconclusive.

.

they are actually useless. it was pointed out in other's posts. That's why the thread is entirely useless, it does not represent reality.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

And, that is all great. It improved the environment for employers.

All I am saying is that an actual, direct effect is difficult to prove.

Don't read more into that statement than you need.

.

it's called correlation. It counts, trump did a,b,c and companies followed a,b,c. one doesn't need to know the actual numbers, just that private business that was stagnant since 2008 suddenly created jobs, serious jobs, high salary jobs that hadn't been created since 2008, and they followed trump's policy moves. they didn't follow obammy's .

I don't disagree with you, but back to the OP.

Obama took unemployment over 10%. It skyrocketed under him during his first two years. Conversely, unemployment has steadily declined under President Trump's first two years.

That was a steady decline in unemployment for 8 straight years. The data in the picture does not paint the full picture.

Yes, Obama had 7 1/4 straight years of falling unemployment.

But, before the sub-prime crash, it was a 5%+-. It took Obama 6 full years to get back to where Bush had the economy before the crash?
(I am not asking that question as a blame-game for Obama. I don't think he did anything special to improve the economy or unemployment. It simply improved because Americans are fucking bad ass at business and we did that without any government bullshit.).

Likewise, Trump has "continued the trend" of decreasing unemployment.

It was already decreasing. So, big deal?

I think some of Trump's policies have improved conditions, but THE DATA ABOVE only shows that Trump continued what Obama was already doing.

Do you see the problem with the data above? It's not complete. Based on that chart, nobody can claim anything.

.

well it was the type of job and salary. that's what the big deal was and is. people who wanted to work for their income worked two jobs to make what their one job lost was making. Guess what, trump brought back those salaries.. just a fact!!! those working two jobs, left those two jobs and took the new higher salary job to get back their personal lives and still earn the living they wanted.

The unemployment numbers can't capture that aspect.

I agree that unemployment numbers can't capture that aspect.

I believe that was the point of the OP.

But, in comes the perpetually defensive, assuming the OP meant anything but the numbers being inconclusive.

.

they are actually useless. it was pointed out in other's posts. That's why the thread is entirely useless, it does not represent reality.

Which is why I think Mac started this thread solely to expose partisan wingers. They will jump to defend a position they assume Mac took in posting it, which they clearly did here.

.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Jesus. What a cluster-fuck.

I just see a bunch of tribal retards refusing to address the topic, falling over themselves trying to defend each other.

 

[Mac1958]

it's called correlation. It counts, trump did a,b,c and companies followed a,b,c. one doesn't need to know the actual numbers, just that private business that was stagnant since 2008 suddenly created jobs, serious jobs, high salary jobs that hadn't been created since 2008, and they followed trump's policy moves. they didn't follow obammy's .

I don't disagree with you, but back to the OP.

Obama took unemployment over 10%. It skyrocketed under him during his first two years. Conversely, unemployment has steadily declined under President Trump's first two years.

That was a steady decline in unemployment for 8 straight years. The data in the picture does not paint the full picture.

Yes, Obama had 7 1/4 straight years of falling unemployment.

But, before the sub-prime crash, it was a 5%+-. It took Obama 6 full years to get back to where Bush had the economy before the crash?
(I am not asking that question as a blame-game for Obama. I don't think he did anything special to improve the economy or unemployment. It simply improved because Americans are fucking bad ass at business and we did that without any government bullshit.).

Likewise, Trump has "continued the trend" of decreasing unemployment.

It was already decreasing. So, big deal?

I think some of Trump's policies have improved conditions, but THE DATA ABOVE only shows that Trump continued what Obama was already doing.

Do you see the problem with the data above? It's not complete. Based on that chart, nobody can claim anything.

.

well it was the type of job and salary. that's what the big deal was and is. people who wanted to work for their income worked two jobs to make what their one job lost was making. Guess what, trump brought back those salaries.. just a fact!!! those working two jobs, left those two jobs and took the new higher salary job to get back their personal lives and still earn the living they wanted.

The unemployment numbers can't capture that aspect.

I agree that unemployment numbers can't capture that aspect.

I believe that was the point of the OP.

But, in comes the perpetually defensive, assuming the OP meant anything but the numbers being inconclusive.

.

they are actually useless. it was pointed out in other's posts. That's why the thread is entirely useless, it does not represent reality.

Which is why I think Mac started this thread solely to expose partisan wingers. They will jump to defend a position they assume Mac took in posting it, which they clearly did here.

.

It's why they get so angry.

All they have to do is provide a clear, intelligent, informed, thoughtful answer.

Instead, they go drama queen. That tells you all you need to know.
.

 

[jc456]

I don't disagree with you, but back to the OP.

That was a steady decline in unemployment for 8 straight years. The data in the picture does not paint the full picture.

Yes, Obama had 7 1/4 straight years of falling unemployment.

But, before the sub-prime crash, it was a 5%+-. It took Obama 6 full years to get back to where Bush had the economy before the crash?
(I am not asking that question as a blame-game for Obama. I don't think he did anything special to improve the economy or unemployment. It simply improved because Americans are fucking bad ass at business and we did that without any government bullshit.).

Likewise, Trump has "continued the trend" of decreasing unemployment.

It was already decreasing. So, big deal?

I think some of Trump's policies have improved conditions, but THE DATA ABOVE only shows that Trump continued what Obama was already doing.

Do you see the problem with the data above? It's not complete. Based on that chart, nobody can claim anything.

.

well it was the type of job and salary. that's what the big deal was and is. people who wanted to work for their income worked two jobs to make what their one job lost was making. Guess what, trump brought back those salaries.. just a fact!!! those working two jobs, left those two jobs and took the new higher salary job to get back their personal lives and still earn the living they wanted.

The unemployment numbers can't capture that aspect.

I agree that unemployment numbers can't capture that aspect.

I believe that was the point of the OP.

But, in comes the perpetually defensive, assuming the OP meant anything but the numbers being inconclusive.

.

they are actually useless. it was pointed out in other's posts. That's why the thread is entirely useless, it does not represent reality.

Which is why I think Mac started this thread solely to expose partisan wingers. They will jump to defend a position they assume Mac took in posting it, which they clearly did here.

.

It's why they get so angry.

All they have to do is provide a clear, intelligent, informed, thoughtful answer.

Instead, they go drama queen. That tells you all you need to know.
.

your term angry is amazing to me. simply pointing to something like it's meat for a tiger and saying go get it is what you're supposing. that isn't what happened at all. I will bet you that most all of the repubs in here will agree unemployment came down under obammy, how could one not? What they know is that the salaries underneath those figures were for shit. so those numbers don't mean what you suppose they do, and it's been pointed out. In here!!! so, not sure what you're watching, but I didn't see tigers swarming red meat as you intended.

 

[Mac1958]

well it was the type of job and salary. that's what the big deal was and is. people who wanted to work for their income worked two jobs to make what their one job lost was making. Guess what, trump brought back those salaries.. just a fact!!! those working two jobs, left those two jobs and took the new higher salary job to get back their personal lives and still earn the living they wanted.

The unemployment numbers can't capture that aspect.

I agree that unemployment numbers can't capture that aspect.

I believe that was the point of the OP.

But, in comes the perpetually defensive, assuming the OP meant anything but the numbers being inconclusive.

.

they are actually useless. it was pointed out in other's posts. That's why the thread is entirely useless, it does not represent reality.

Which is why I think Mac started this thread solely to expose partisan wingers. They will jump to defend a position they assume Mac took in posting it, which they clearly did here.

.

It's why they get so angry.

All they have to do is provide a clear, intelligent, informed, thoughtful answer.

Instead, they go drama queen. That tells you all you need to know.
.

your term angry is amazing to me. simply pointing to something like it's meat for a tiger and saying go get it is what you're supposing. that isn't what happened at all. I will bet you that most all of the repubs in here will agree unemployment came down under obammy, how could one not? What they know is that the salaries underneath those figures were for shit. so those numbers don't mean what you suppose they do, and it's been pointed out. In here!!! so, not sure what you're watching, but I didn't see tigers swarming red meat as you intended.

If you don't see people going drama queen, making this all about me, the personal insults and name-calling, then we exist in different universes.

Well, I already know we exist in different universes, truth be told.
.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This is a post from another thread.

In all seriousness, I'd like to know what you think of it. Please be as complete in your response as you would like. I have provided a chart of the unemployment rate below for your reference.

Thanks.

Obama took unemployment over 10%. It skyrocketed under him during his first two years. Conversely, unemployment has steadily declined under President Trump's first two years.

I think that Marianne Williamson will be the dem nominee