We, The Conservative Savages, Must Confess

[PoliticalChic]

Who voted for these.......Republicans or fools????



And, on those bases, they reward their candidates:

“Record number of women elected to the House”
Record number of women elected to the House - CNNPolitics


“In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers” In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers


“Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections”
Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections


Pretty smart basis for selecting leaders, huh??????

LOL...those links have NOTHING to do with answering my question (though I guess you think they do).

I will ask you again, where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that liberals vote for people based on factors other than where they stand on the issues?

Who votes based on skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology?

Not Republicans, you dope.

You typed:

'You....Liberals/Progressives....vote for the most superficial of characteristics and most absurd of characteristics.

Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.
Clearly smarter than savages or conservatives, huh?'


So I will ask you yet again,

where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that liberals vote for people based on factors other than where they stand on the issues?

I an truly pleased to have forced you to pretend that that which is clearly and evidently the truth.....

....you dolts vote for skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology while the other side votes for policies and achievement.


You've been exposed.....and embarrassed.

So I will ask you yet again,

where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that liberals vote for people based on factors other than where they stand on the issues?

BTW - I have never voted for a Rep or a Dem...I am an indy.

From time to time one runes into a juvenile who substitutes vulgarity for veracity....you....who pretends not to know what is patently obvious to all and everyone.

That is...Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.



And, on those bases, they reward their candidates:

“Record number of women elected to the House”
Record number of women elected to the House - CNNPolitics


“In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers” In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers


“Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections”
Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections


Pretty smart basis for selecting leaders, huh??????







How about you provide your explanation for the above selections.

Republicans?

Rightwingers?

Conservatives?



Let's hear it, dunce.

 

[jknowgood]

The economy was booming before trump got elected . Why would you give Big tax cuts to Big biz and the wealthy at this time?? You play that card when the economy is faltering and needs a boost.

Now what you have is ballooning deficits at a time where you could’ve done something about them .

Obama's own words, he told us to get used to it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The economy was booming before trump got elected . Why would you give Big tax cuts to Big biz and the wealthy at this time?? You play that card when the economy is faltering and needs a boost.

Now what you have is ballooning deficits at a time where you could’ve done something about them .

View attachment 230784
Obama's own words, he told us to get used to it.

And.....it's worth repeating: Timmy's post was an example of Rule #1:
Rule #1
Every argument from Democrats and Liberals is a misrepresentation, a fabrication, or a bald-faced lie.





This is the Liberal bald-faced lie: "The economy was booming before trump got elected ."



This is the truth:

“Growth had been so worrisomely slow throughout Obama's two terms in office that journalists started warning about "secular stagnation." They said the country was in a period of long, sustained, slow growth resulting from slow population and productivity growth.

In August 2016, the Times declared that "the underlying reality of low growth will haunt whoever wins the White House."

Predictions of Slow Growth

The next month, CBS News reported that "with U.S. economic growth stuck in low gear for several years, it's leading many economists to worry that the country has entered a prolonged period where any expansion will be weaker than it has been in the past."

In short, there was no upward trajectory to the economy on anyone's radar when Trump took office.” Economic Boom: Media Rewrite History To Credit Obama Instead Of Trump






Of course, even when it is revealed.....they will never apologize for the lies.

 

[McRocket]

LOL...those links have NOTHING to do with answering my question (though I guess you think they do).

I will ask you again, where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that liberals vote for people based on factors other than where they stand on the issues?

Who votes based on skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology?

Not Republicans, you dope.

You typed:

'You....Liberals/Progressives....vote for the most superficial of characteristics and most absurd of characteristics.

Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.
Clearly smarter than savages or conservatives, huh?'


So I will ask you yet again,

where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that liberals vote for people based on factors other than where they stand on the issues?

I an truly pleased to have forced you to pretend that that which is clearly and evidently the truth.....

....you dolts vote for skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology while the other side votes for policies and achievement.


You've been exposed.....and embarrassed.

So I will ask you yet again,

where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that liberals vote for people based on factors other than where they stand on the issues?

BTW - I have never voted for a Rep or a Dem...I am an indy.

From time to time one runes into a juvenile who substitutes vulgarity for veracity....you....who pretends not to know what is patently obvious to all and everyone.

That is...Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.



And, on those bases, they reward their candidates:

“Record number of women elected to the House”
Record number of women elected to the House - CNNPolitics


“In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers” In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers


“Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections”
Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections


Pretty smart basis for selecting leaders, huh??????







How about you provide your explanation for the above selections.

Republicans?

Rightwingers?

Conservatives?



Let's hear it, dunce.

LOL...those links have NOTHING to do with answering my question (though I guess you think they do).

I will ask you again, where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that liberals vote for people based on factors other than where they stand on the issues?

Who votes based on skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology?

Not Republicans, you dope.

You typed:

'You....Liberals/Progressives....vote for the most superficial of characteristics and most absurd of characteristics.

Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.
Clearly smarter than savages or conservatives, huh?'


So I will ask you yet again,

where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that liberals vote for people based on factors other than where they stand on the issues?

I an truly pleased to have forced you to pretend that that which is clearly and evidently the truth.....

....you dolts vote for skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology while the other side votes for policies and achievement.


You've been exposed.....and embarrassed.

So I will ask you yet again,

where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that liberals vote for people based on factors other than where they stand on the issues?

BTW - I have never voted for a Rep or a Dem...I am an indy.

From time to time one runes into a juvenile who substitutes vulgarity for veracity....you....who pretends not to know what is patently obvious to all and everyone.

That is...Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.



And, on those bases, they reward their candidates:

“Record number of women elected to the House”
Record number of women elected to the House - CNNPolitics


“In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers” In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers


“Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections”
Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections


Pretty smart basis for selecting leaders, huh??????







How about you provide your explanation for the above selections.

Republicans?

Rightwingers?

Conservatives?



Let's hear it, dunce.

You stupid Trumpbot...I asked you umpteen times and you refused to answer. And then you said 'Your obfuscation has been exposed.....

...be gone, child.'

We, The Conservative Savages, Must Confess

Now you want to talk about it again.

Make up your mind, you Trumpbot moron.


But, in case you now want to answer...here is the question (simple enough even for you):

Do liberals vote for people primarily on where they stand on the issues?

True or false?

I will accept NO OTHER ANSWER except 'True' or 'False'. And if I do not see 'True' or 'False in the first word of your reply - I will ignore the rest of it.

 

[Votto]

1.According to google, savage means “(chiefly in historical or literary contexts) a member of a people regarded as primitive and uncivilized.”

I know our Liberal/Progressive pals certainly agree with that definition.

And, judging by the definitive compendium of savages, “The Golden Bough,” by Sir James Frazer, I can see that there is a basis for that view….and in certain ways, it fits conservatives, and those of us on the Right.

While, at first, you Liberals may agree totally......well, read on.




2.In his spectacularly well researched book, Frazer writes about the relationship of savages to their king….”kings [chiefs, leaders] have been expected to regulate the course of nature for the good of their people…blamed for the failure of the crops…a popularity in proportion to the ability to give rain to their people…”
Frazer, ‘ThGolden Bough,’ p. 111-114

Sooo…..like conservatives, savages judge leaders by what they can bring to the table….not by their physical or sexual characteristics.
Bizarre, huh?




3.We, conservatives and savages have that same view, but you more advanced, civilized Liberals/Progressives/Democrats…..you honor failure, and injury to the body politic.

a.“Team Obama: Sorry, America, the ‘new normal’ may be here to stay
The good times may be over for good. In a speech to the Economic Club of New York yesterday, US Treasury Secretary Jack Lew said the US GDP growth rate, adjusted for inflation, is now projected to run a little above 2% a year.”
Team Obama: Sorry, America, the 'new normal' may be here to stay - AEI


Then, along came Trump….


b.“U.S. households are back to their free spending ways, with the strength of May’s retail sales figures implying that second-quarter real consumption growth (and GDP growth for that matter) will now be more than 4% annualized.

With the benefit of the tax cuts, strong employment growth and a slow acceleration in hourly wage growth, consumption growth should remain strong going into the second half of this year,” Paul Ashworth, chief U.S. economist at Capital Economics told MarketWatch.” US economy on track for 4% GDP growth?


c. Each point, by the way, means approximately $3 trillion and 10 million jobs,” @POTUS says https://cbsn.ws/2JZ4YIt
CBS News on Twitter





One can only wonder at how you on the Left became so smart, so….advanced.

Savages was the term given the American Indian before they were exterminated.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Who votes based on skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology?

Not Republicans, you dope.

You typed:

'You....Liberals/Progressives....vote for the most superficial of characteristics and most absurd of characteristics.

Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.
Clearly smarter than savages or conservatives, huh?'


So I will ask you yet again,

where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that liberals vote for people based on factors other than where they stand on the issues?

I an truly pleased to have forced you to pretend that that which is clearly and evidently the truth.....

....you dolts vote for skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology while the other side votes for policies and achievement.


You've been exposed.....and embarrassed.

So I will ask you yet again,

where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that liberals vote for people based on factors other than where they stand on the issues?

BTW - I have never voted for a Rep or a Dem...I am an indy.

From time to time one runes into a juvenile who substitutes vulgarity for veracity....you....who pretends not to know what is patently obvious to all and everyone.

That is...Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.



And, on those bases, they reward their candidates:

“Record number of women elected to the House”
Record number of women elected to the House - CNNPolitics


“In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers” In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers


“Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections”
Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections


Pretty smart basis for selecting leaders, huh??????







How about you provide your explanation for the above selections.

Republicans?

Rightwingers?

Conservatives?



Let's hear it, dunce.

Who votes based on skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology?

Not Republicans, you dope.

You typed:

'You....Liberals/Progressives....vote for the most superficial of characteristics and most absurd of characteristics.

Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.
Clearly smarter than savages or conservatives, huh?'


So I will ask you yet again,

where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that liberals vote for people based on factors other than where they stand on the issues?

I an truly pleased to have forced you to pretend that that which is clearly and evidently the truth.....

....you dolts vote for skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology while the other side votes for policies and achievement.


You've been exposed.....and embarrassed.

So I will ask you yet again,

where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that liberals vote for people based on factors other than where they stand on the issues?

BTW - I have never voted for a Rep or a Dem...I am an indy.

From time to time one runes into a juvenile who substitutes vulgarity for veracity....you....who pretends not to know what is patently obvious to all and everyone.

That is...Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.



And, on those bases, they reward their candidates:

“Record number of women elected to the House”
Record number of women elected to the House - CNNPolitics


“In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers” In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers


“Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections”
Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections


Pretty smart basis for selecting leaders, huh??????







How about you provide your explanation for the above selections.

Republicans?

Rightwingers?

Conservatives?



Let's hear it, dunce.

You stupid Trumpbot...I asked you umpteen times and you refused to answer. And then you said 'Your obfuscation has been exposed.....

...be gone, child.'

We, The Conservative Savages, Must Confess

Now you want to talk about it again.

Make up your mind, you Trumpbot moron.


But, in case you now want to answer...here is the question (simple enough even for you):

Do liberals vote for people primarily on where they stand on the issues?

True or false?

I will accept NO OTHER ANSWER except 'True' or 'False'. And if I do not see 'True' or 'False in the first word of your reply - I will ignore the rest of it.

Now, now.....don't slither off with your tail between your legs......


Try to answer:

That is...Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.



And, on those bases, they reward their candidates:

“Record number of women elected to the House”
Record number of women elected to the House - CNNPolitics


“In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers” In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers


“Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections”
Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections


Pretty smart basis for selecting leaders, huh??????







How about you provide your explanation for the above selections.

Republicans?

Rightwingers?

Conservatives?



Let's hear it, dunce.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1.According to google, savage means “(chiefly in historical or literary contexts) a member of a people regarded as primitive and uncivilized.”

I know our Liberal/Progressive pals certainly agree with that definition.

And, judging by the definitive compendium of savages, “The Golden Bough,” by Sir James Frazer, I can see that there is a basis for that view….and in certain ways, it fits conservatives, and those of us on the Right.

While, at first, you Liberals may agree totally......well, read on.




2.In his spectacularly well researched book, Frazer writes about the relationship of savages to their king….”kings [chiefs, leaders] have been expected to regulate the course of nature for the good of their people…blamed for the failure of the crops…a popularity in proportion to the ability to give rain to their people…”
Frazer, ‘ThGolden Bough,’ p. 111-114

Sooo…..like conservatives, savages judge leaders by what they can bring to the table….not by their physical or sexual characteristics.
Bizarre, huh?




3.We, conservatives and savages have that same view, but you more advanced, civilized Liberals/Progressives/Democrats…..you honor failure, and injury to the body politic.

a.“Team Obama: Sorry, America, the ‘new normal’ may be here to stay
The good times may be over for good. In a speech to the Economic Club of New York yesterday, US Treasury Secretary Jack Lew said the US GDP growth rate, adjusted for inflation, is now projected to run a little above 2% a year.”
Team Obama: Sorry, America, the 'new normal' may be here to stay - AEI


Then, along came Trump….


b.“U.S. households are back to their free spending ways, with the strength of May’s retail sales figures implying that second-quarter real consumption growth (and GDP growth for that matter) will now be more than 4% annualized.

With the benefit of the tax cuts, strong employment growth and a slow acceleration in hourly wage growth, consumption growth should remain strong going into the second half of this year,” Paul Ashworth, chief U.S. economist at Capital Economics told MarketWatch.” US economy on track for 4% GDP growth?


c. Each point, by the way, means approximately $3 trillion and 10 million jobs,” @POTUS says https://cbsn.ws/2JZ4YIt
CBS News on Twitter





One can only wonder at how you on the Left became so smart, so….advanced.

Savages was the term given the American Indian before they were exterminated.

James Frazer's magnum opus covers savages worldwide, and throughout history.

It is from this that I gathered the examples that said 'savages' chose leaders based on their ability to aid and advance their tribes, societies, peoples...




We conservatives are very much like savages in this respect: it is the accomplishments of our king, leader, chief….President….that we value.

Frazer writes this about the people, savages, of Sierra Leone:
“It is expected of him that he should cause the earth to bring forth abundantly, the people to be healthy, war to be driven far away, and witchcraft to be kept in abeyance.” Op. Cit., p. 230

Get that? He is expected to have policies that redound positively on his people.

This is the comparison I draw:

.Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.



And you say....what?

 

[McRocket]

Now

Your first word was not 'True' or 'False'.

So...

Do liberals vote for people primarily on where they stand on the issues?

True or false?

I will accept NO OTHER ANSWER except 'True' or 'False'.

And if I do not see 'True' or 'False in the first word of your reply - I will ignore the rest of it.

 

[McRocket]

We conservatives are very much like savages

'savage
[sav-ij]
See more synonyms for savage on Thesaurus.com
adjective

1. fierce, ferocious, or cruel; untamed:savage beasts.
2. uncivilized; barbarous:savage tribes.
3. enraged or furiously angry, as a person.'

the definition of savages

Well, most cons are not, IMO.

But I agree that you could fit the definition.

You seem mentally disturbed, melodramatic and enraged at Democrats.

Might I suggest:

Have a nice day.

 

[PoliticalChic]

We conservatives are very much like savages

'savage
[sav-ij]
See more synonyms for savage on Thesaurus.com
adjective

1. fierce, ferocious, or cruel; untamed:savage beasts.
2. uncivilized; barbarous:savage tribes.
3. enraged or furiously angry, as a person.'

the definition of savages

Well, most cons are not, IMO.

But I agree that you could fit the definition.

And I certainly agree....having proven same.....that Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.



And, on those bases, they reward their candidates:

“Record number of women elected to the House”
Record number of women elected to the House - CNNPolitics


“In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers” In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers


“Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections”
Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections


Pretty smart basis for selecting leaders, huh??????





You can run, but you can't hide.
So saith the Brown Bomber.

 

[McRocket]

We conservatives are very much like savages

'savage
[sav-ij]
See more synonyms for savage on Thesaurus.com
adjective

1. fierce, ferocious, or cruel; untamed:savage beasts.
2. uncivilized; barbarous:savage tribes.
3. enraged or furiously angry, as a person.'

the definition of savages

Well, most cons are not, IMO.

But I agree that you could fit the definition.

And I certainly agree....having proven same.....that Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.



And, on those bases, they reward their candidates:

“Record number of women elected to the House”
Record number of women elected to the House - CNNPolitics


“In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers” In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers


“Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections”
Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections


Pretty smart basis for selecting leaders, huh??????





You can run, but you can't hide.
So saith the Brown Bomber.

Nope - read none of that.

Once again....

'savage
[sav-ij]
See more synonyms for savage on Thesaurus.com
adjective

1. fierce, ferocious, or cruel; untamed:savage beasts.
2. uncivilized; barbarous:savage tribes.
3. enraged or furiously angry, as a person.'

the definition of savages

Well, most cons are not, IMO.

But I agree that you could fit the definition.

You seem mentally disturbed, melodramatic and enraged at Democrats.

Might I suggest:

Have a nice day.

 

[PoliticalChic]

We conservatives are very much like savages

'savage
[sav-ij]
See more synonyms for savage on Thesaurus.com
adjective

1. fierce, ferocious, or cruel; untamed:savage beasts.
2. uncivilized; barbarous:savage tribes.
3. enraged or furiously angry, as a person.'

the definition of savages

Well, most cons are not, IMO.

But I agree that you could fit the definition.

And I certainly agree....having proven same.....that Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.



And, on those bases, they reward their candidates:

“Record number of women elected to the House”
Record number of women elected to the House - CNNPolitics


“In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers” In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers


“Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections”
Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections


Pretty smart basis for selecting leaders, huh??????





You can run, but you can't hide.
So saith the Brown Bomber.

Nope - read none of that.

Once again....

'savage
[sav-ij]
See more synonyms for savage on Thesaurus.com
adjective

1. fierce, ferocious, or cruel; untamed:savage beasts.
2. uncivilized; barbarous:savage tribes.
3. enraged or furiously angry, as a person.'

the definition of savages

Well, most cons are not, IMO.

But I agree that you could fit the definition.

You seem mentally disturbed, melodramatic and enraged at Democrats.

Might I suggest:

Have a nice day.

I see you'd like to sidestep the issue........my having proven same.....that Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.



Still running...and trying to hide.

 

[Timmy]

You keep avoiding the challenge . Just like I said . You pull stories from the depths of the worst recession in decades . You cherry pick.

Obama pulled us out of that and trump is reaping the benefits . Go ahead and compare Obama’s end to trumps beginning .

You like to pretend the economy was in the gutter until trump showed up . Not true .

This Obama?????


“Growth had been so worrisomely slow throughout Obama's two terms in office that journalists started warning about "secular stagnation." They said the country was in a period of long, sustained, slow growth resulting from slow population and productivity growth.

In August 2016, the Times declared that "the underlying reality of low growth will haunt whoever wins the White House."

Predictions of Slow Growth

The next month, CBS News reported that "with U.S. economic growth stuck in low gear for several years, it's leading many economists to worry that the country has entered a prolonged period where any expansion will be weaker than it has been in the past."

In short, there was no upward trajectory to the economy on anyone's radar when Trump took office.”
Economic Boom: Media Rewrite History To Credit Obama Instead Of Trump





Did you want the five dozen examples of Obama failures?????


Say the word.




(Psssst.....you have some of Obama's shoe polish on your tongue.
Tissue?)

No. I just want one example . Pick an ecomonic indicator . Just pick it and I’ll do the research . I’ll come back with actual numbers and not opinion pieces .

"The stronger the economy gets under President Trump, the more desperate his critics are to hand credit over to Obama. Even if that entails changing the past.


...the economy was stagnating in 2016 after the weakest recovery from a recession since the Great Depression.


In fact, The New York Times itself described Obama's economy this way in August 2016: "For three quarters in a row, the growth rate of the economy has hovered around a mere 1%. In the last quarter of 2015 and the first quarter of 2016, the economy expanded at feeble annual rates of 0.9% and 0.8%, respectively. The initial reading for the second quarter of this year, released on Friday, was a disappointing 1.2%."


...GDP growth decelerated in each of the last three quarters of 2016."

And on January 27, 2017, after the government reported that GDP growth for all 2016 was a mere 1.6% — the weakest in five years —"

Economic Boom: Media Rewrite History To Credit Obama Instead Of Trump





Don't forget.....75 more waiting.

Like I said . Opinion pieces . PICK AN ECONOMIC INDICATOR!!!!!

Your choice . There’s a bunch of standard indicators to choose from .

The numbers are 'opinions'????



"The stronger the economy gets under President Trump, the more desperate his critics are to hand credit over to Obama. Even if that entails changing the past.


...the economy was stagnating in 2016 after the weakest recovery from a recession since the Great Depression.


In fact, The New York Times itself described Obama's economy this way in August 2016: "For three quarters in a row, the growth rate of the economy has hovered around a mere 1%. In the last quarter of 2015 and the first quarter of 2016, the economy expanded at feeble annual rates of 0.9% and 0.8%, respectively. The initial reading for the second quarter of this year, released on Friday, was a disappointing 1.2%."


...GDP growth decelerated in each of the last three quarters of 2016."

And on January 27, 2017, after the government reported that GDP growth for all 2016 was a mere 1.6% — the weakest in five years —"

Economic Boom: Media Rewrite History To Credit Obama Instead Of Trump




Got a dictionary?

How many time are you going to avoid the question?


Pick an indicator and we will compare obama years into trumps .

 

[georgephillip]

Know what, Morons Are Governing America?

"Paul Robin Krugman (/ˈkrʊɡmən/ (listen) KRUUG-mən;[1][2] born February 28, 1953)[3] is an American economist who is currently Distinguished Professor of Economics at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, and a columnist for The New York Times.[4]

"In 2008, Krugman was awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his contributions to New Trade Theory and New Economic Geography.[5]

"The Prize Committee cited Krugman's work explaining the patterns of international trade and the geographic distribution of economic activity, by examining the effects of economies of scale and of consumer preferences for diverse goods and services.[6]

"Krugman was previously a professor of economics at MIT, and later at Princeton University. He retired from Princeton in June 2015, and holds the title of professor emeritus there."

Paul Krugman - Wikipedia

Perhaps you can conjure some more fiction revealing when Trump last taught Economics at MIT or Princeton?

Economist Paul Krugman predicts a 'global recession with no end in sight' if Trump wins



Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman predicts a "global recession with no end in sight" if Donald Trump is elected president:

Economist Paul Krugman predicts a 'global recession with no end in sight' if Trump wins




If Trump thinks he can get more than 3% economic growth, he's dreaming
Over the past decade, the economy has grown at an average of about 2% a year. The Congressional Budget Office forecasts an annual average of about 1.9% well into the next decade.

The U.S. hasn't had sustained real annual growth (that is, over inflation) of better than 3% since the 1990s, with a brief spurt in 2004 and 2005. Making up the difference from 2% to more than 3% looks like a pipe dream.


If Trump thinks he can get more than 3% economic growth, he's dreaming
“President Trump would be the biggest threat to the U.S. economy” President Trump would be the biggest threat to the U.S. economy


MORON ALERT: Krugman Compares Terrorism To Being Hit By A Drunk Driver
MORON ALERT: Krugman Compares Terrorism To Being Hit By A Drunk Driver



Paul Krugman's Hypocrisy: Now The Deficit Matters
Paul Krugman's Hypocrisy: Now The Deficit Matters




Ben Shapiro

September 7, 2015 ·

When Paul Krugman agrees with you, you know you don't understand economics. http://t.co/a63ql7xdOl

Ben Shapiro
Paul Krugman messed up his tax reform analysis, unsurprisingly
Paul Krugman messed up his tax reform analysis, unsurprisingly

Your link:

"Under any circumstances, putting an irresponsible, ignorant man who takes his advice from all the wrong people in charge of the nation with the world's most important economy would be very bad news.

"What makes it especially bad right now, however, is the fundamentally fragile state much of the world is still in, 8 years after the great financial crisis. [The New York Times]"

Trump's economy has had the benefit of massive tax cuts and fiscal stimulus for its first two years, not to mention Republican control of both houses of congress.

Krugman's analysis may prove correct over the next two years, assuming Trump manages to stay out of prison before 2020.

Donald Trump’s Favorite Drug Trafficker and Other Unsung Scandals of the Presidency From Hell

So.....whose economy do you choose.....Obama's or Trump'??????

Since I'm retired and living on a fixed (SSI and SSA) income of about $900 a month, I find little difference between Obama's and Trump's economy.

Inflation, while low by historical standards, is having a greater impact on my monthly budget than any other factor.

How about you?

"...., I find little difference between Obama's and Trump's economy."


Perhaps you can help me with this.....are you a fool or a liar????


Obama:

1... in today’s recovery — the slowest in the modern era going back to 1947 — private capital investment has lagged badly. ... so has the jobs situation, with 92 million dropping out of the workforce altogether. A labor-participation rate of 62.8% and an employment-to-population rate of 58% are historic lows indicative of the anemic jobs recovery. Big Business Swings Behind a Mantra of Growth - The New York Sun


2. Tavis Smiley: 'Black People Will Have Lost Ground in Every Single Economic Indicator' Under Obama
Tavis Smiley: 'Black People Will Have Lost Ground in Every Single Economic Indicator' Under Obama

["BET Founder: Trump’s economy bringing black workers back into the workforce"

BET Founder: Trump's economy bringing black workers back into the workforce]




3. . "Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession
. ...the Census Bureau's Current Population Survey ....indicate that the real (inflation-adjusted) median annual household income in America has fallen by 4.4 percent during the "recovery," after having fallen by 1.8 during the recession.
Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession


4. . In a stunning Tuesday report, Gallup CEO and Chairman Jim Clifton revealed that “for the first time in 35 years, American business deaths now outnumber business births.”Clifton says for the past six years since 2008, employer business startups have fallen below the business failure rate, spurring what he calls “an underground earthquake” that only stands to worsen as lagging U.S. Census data becomes available.
“Let’s get one thing clear: This economy is never truly coming back unless we reverse the birth and death trends of American businesses,” writes Clifton."Economic Death Spiral: More American Businesses Dying Than Starting - Breitbart


5. "Surprise: U.S. Economic Data Have Been the World's Most Disappointing
It's not only the just-released University of Michigan consumer confidence report and February retail sales on Thursday that surprised economists and investors with another dose of underwhelming news. Overall, U.S. economic data have been falling short of prognosticators' expectations by the most in six years." Surprise: U.S. Economic Data Have Been the World's Most Disappointing

6. . "That basic math is why middle class incomes have been in decline under Obama. The Census Bureau reports that since Obama became President 7 years ago, real median household income has fallen by $1,300 a year. Heritage Foundation Chief Economist Steve Moore explained in testimony before the Ways and Means Committee, “At 2 percent growth the economy doesn’t spin off enough jobs to increase wages, and tax revenues grow much too slowly to balance the budget.”
The recession officially ended more than 6 years ago. Wages and incomes have always grown in recoveries, not declined. Moreover, the American historical record is the deeper the recession, the stronger the recovery. The economy is supposed to boom in a recovery to catch up with its long term economic growth trendline. But over 6 years after the recession ended, that still has not happened. Instead, what we have gotten under President Obama is the worst recovery from a recession since the Great Depression." Realizing The Super Bowl Of American Economic Growth



7. "Even if you leave out the first quarter of 2009—when the recession that started in December 2007 was still ongoing--President Barack Obama has presided over the lowest average first-quarter GDP growth of any president who has served since 1947, which is the earliest year for which the Bureau of Economic Analysis has calculated quarterly GDP growth. " http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/terence...-obama-has-lowest-average-1stq-gdp-growth-any


8. The Obama Administration is aggressively exploiting regulation to achieve its policy agenda, issuing 157 new major rules at a cost to Americans approaching $73 billion annually....twice the annual average of his predecessor George W. Bush. And much more regulation is on the way, with another 125 major rules on the Administration’s to-do list, including dozens linked to the Dodd–Frank financial regulation law and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare. Red Tape Rising: Five Years of Regulatory Expansion


9. . "...take-home pay for many American workers has effectively fallen since the economic recovery began in 2009, according to a new study by an advocacy group that is to be released on Thursday.

The declines were greatest for the lowest-paid workers in sectors where hiring has been strong — home health care, food preparation and retailing — even though wages were already below average to begin with in those service industries.

“Stagnant wages are a problem for everyone at this point, but the imbalance in the economy has become more pronounced since the recession,”..." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/03/b...rkers-see-biggest-drop-in-paychecks.html?_r=0


10. . "Obamacare health insurance co-ops surged past the $1 billion mark in losses this week, making history of sorts.The insolvencies, totaling $1.36 billion, mean that the co-ops have burned through more than half of the original $2 billion appropriatedin 2010 for the program under the Affordable Care Act. The funds were loaned to the start-up co-ops in 2012 and were to be repaid in 15 years, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which manages Obamacare.


...13 of the 23 federally-financed Obamacare co-ops have officially failed in only two years. Most are in the process of default as insurance regulators attempt to pay customer’s medical bills, cover medical providers and pay other creditors.
Obamacare Co-Op Mess Causes $1.3 Billion In Losses


11. Obama is the first President never to have had a year of 3% or better economic growth: "... annual growth during Obama’s “recovery” has never topped 3%. By comparison, it never fell below 3% during the Reagan recovery. And in the nine years following the 1990-91 recession, GDP grew faster than 3% in all but two. Heck, even Jimmy Carter had some strong growth years." President Obama's Growth Gap Hits $1.31 Trillion | Investor's Business Daily

a. "The years since 2007 have been a macroeconomic disaster for the United States of a magnitude unprecedented since the Great Depression." Obama: Always Wrong, Never In Doubt

b. ".... first president since Hoover to never have a single year above 3% GDP growth."Hedge fund billionaire calls Obama economy 'amazing'



12. ".... calculating how much the debt increased during Obama's two terms. On January 20, 2009, when he was sworn in, the debt was $10.626 trillion. On January 20, 2017, it was $19.947 trillion. That's why most people say Obama added $9 trillion to the debt, more than any other president."
How Much Did Obama Add to the Nation's Debt?


13. "The Tipping Point: Most Americans No Longer Are Middle Class

December 9, 2015

A just-released analysis of government data shows that as of 2015, middle-income households have become the minority.


And middle-income Americans not only have shrunk as a share of the population but have fallen further behind financially, with their median income down 4 percent compared with the year 2000, Pew said."

The Tipping Point: Most Americans No Longer Are Middle Class



14. “Last week the Commerce Department released its third revision for fourth-quarter 2016 gross domestic product. The number came in at a paltry 2.1 percent, meaning that growth during President Obama’s final year in office — the end of an “Error of Hope” — landed with a big thud at just 1.6 percent.” https://nypost.com/2017/04/01/obama-was-terrible-for-economic-growth/

Please explain what you find celebratory about the following:

"'If you take a look at President Obama’s second term, he was adding 217,000 jobs,' says Betsey Stevenson, an economist at the University of Michigan who served as chief economist at the Labor Department under Barack Obama.

"'And since Trump assumed the presidency, he’s been adding 189,000 jobs per month. I’d say those are roughly around the same ballpark. But I don’t think Trump should be bragging that he’s somehow doing something that President Obama wasn’t doing.'"

The truth about the Trump economy

Here's a bonus question: how many of those jobs created by Trump AND Obama pay a living wage?

 

[PoliticalChic]

This Obama?????


“Growth had been so worrisomely slow throughout Obama's two terms in office that journalists started warning about "secular stagnation." They said the country was in a period of long, sustained, slow growth resulting from slow population and productivity growth.

In August 2016, the Times declared that "the underlying reality of low growth will haunt whoever wins the White House."

Predictions of Slow Growth

The next month, CBS News reported that "with U.S. economic growth stuck in low gear for several years, it's leading many economists to worry that the country has entered a prolonged period where any expansion will be weaker than it has been in the past."

In short, there was no upward trajectory to the economy on anyone's radar when Trump took office.”
Economic Boom: Media Rewrite History To Credit Obama Instead Of Trump





Did you want the five dozen examples of Obama failures?????


Say the word.




(Psssst.....you have some of Obama's shoe polish on your tongue.
Tissue?)

No. I just want one example . Pick an ecomonic indicator . Just pick it and I’ll do the research . I’ll come back with actual numbers and not opinion pieces .

"The stronger the economy gets under President Trump, the more desperate his critics are to hand credit over to Obama. Even if that entails changing the past.


...the economy was stagnating in 2016 after the weakest recovery from a recession since the Great Depression.


In fact, The New York Times itself described Obama's economy this way in August 2016: "For three quarters in a row, the growth rate of the economy has hovered around a mere 1%. In the last quarter of 2015 and the first quarter of 2016, the economy expanded at feeble annual rates of 0.9% and 0.8%, respectively. The initial reading for the second quarter of this year, released on Friday, was a disappointing 1.2%."


...GDP growth decelerated in each of the last three quarters of 2016."

And on January 27, 2017, after the government reported that GDP growth for all 2016 was a mere 1.6% — the weakest in five years —"

Economic Boom: Media Rewrite History To Credit Obama Instead Of Trump





Don't forget.....75 more waiting.

Like I said . Opinion pieces . PICK AN ECONOMIC INDICATOR!!!!!

Your choice . There’s a bunch of standard indicators to choose from .

The numbers are 'opinions'????



"The stronger the economy gets under President Trump, the more desperate his critics are to hand credit over to Obama. Even if that entails changing the past.


...the economy was stagnating in 2016 after the weakest recovery from a recession since the Great Depression.


In fact, The New York Times itself described Obama's economy this way in August 2016: "For three quarters in a row, the growth rate of the economy has hovered around a mere 1%. In the last quarter of 2015 and the first quarter of 2016, the economy expanded at feeble annual rates of 0.9% and 0.8%, respectively. The initial reading for the second quarter of this year, released on Friday, was a disappointing 1.2%."


...GDP growth decelerated in each of the last three quarters of 2016."

And on January 27, 2017, after the government reported that GDP growth for all 2016 was a mere 1.6% — the weakest in five years —"

Economic Boom: Media Rewrite History To Credit Obama Instead Of Trump




Got a dictionary?

How many time are you going to avoid the question?


Pick an indicator and we will compare obama years into trumps .

There is no comparison, dunce......Obama was a failure, Trump a success for the American economy.


Is that why you ignored my offer of 5 dozen examples of Obama's failures???????

 

[PoliticalChic]

Economist Paul Krugman predicts a 'global recession with no end in sight' if Trump wins



Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman predicts a "global recession with no end in sight" if Donald Trump is elected president:

Economist Paul Krugman predicts a 'global recession with no end in sight' if Trump wins




If Trump thinks he can get more than 3% economic growth, he's dreaming
Over the past decade, the economy has grown at an average of about 2% a year. The Congressional Budget Office forecasts an annual average of about 1.9% well into the next decade.

The U.S. hasn't had sustained real annual growth (that is, over inflation) of better than 3% since the 1990s, with a brief spurt in 2004 and 2005. Making up the difference from 2% to more than 3% looks like a pipe dream.


If Trump thinks he can get more than 3% economic growth, he's dreaming
“President Trump would be the biggest threat to the U.S. economy” President Trump would be the biggest threat to the U.S. economy


MORON ALERT: Krugman Compares Terrorism To Being Hit By A Drunk Driver
MORON ALERT: Krugman Compares Terrorism To Being Hit By A Drunk Driver



Paul Krugman's Hypocrisy: Now The Deficit Matters
Paul Krugman's Hypocrisy: Now The Deficit Matters




Ben Shapiro

September 7, 2015 ·

When Paul Krugman agrees with you, you know you don't understand economics. http://t.co/a63ql7xdOl

Ben Shapiro
Paul Krugman messed up his tax reform analysis, unsurprisingly
Paul Krugman messed up his tax reform analysis, unsurprisingly

Your link:

"Under any circumstances, putting an irresponsible, ignorant man who takes his advice from all the wrong people in charge of the nation with the world's most important economy would be very bad news.

"What makes it especially bad right now, however, is the fundamentally fragile state much of the world is still in, 8 years after the great financial crisis. [The New York Times]"

Trump's economy has had the benefit of massive tax cuts and fiscal stimulus for its first two years, not to mention Republican control of both houses of congress.

Krugman's analysis may prove correct over the next two years, assuming Trump manages to stay out of prison before 2020.

Donald Trump’s Favorite Drug Trafficker and Other Unsung Scandals of the Presidency From Hell

So.....whose economy do you choose.....Obama's or Trump'??????

Since I'm retired and living on a fixed (SSI and SSA) income of about $900 a month, I find little difference between Obama's and Trump's economy.

Inflation, while low by historical standards, is having a greater impact on my monthly budget than any other factor.

How about you?

"...., I find little difference between Obama's and Trump's economy."


Perhaps you can help me with this.....are you a fool or a liar????


Obama:

1... in today’s recovery — the slowest in the modern era going back to 1947 — private capital investment has lagged badly. ... so has the jobs situation, with 92 million dropping out of the workforce altogether. A labor-participation rate of 62.8% and an employment-to-population rate of 58% are historic lows indicative of the anemic jobs recovery. Big Business Swings Behind a Mantra of Growth - The New York Sun


2. Tavis Smiley: 'Black People Will Have Lost Ground in Every Single Economic Indicator' Under Obama
Tavis Smiley: 'Black People Will Have Lost Ground in Every Single Economic Indicator' Under Obama

["BET Founder: Trump’s economy bringing black workers back into the workforce"

BET Founder: Trump's economy bringing black workers back into the workforce]




3. . "Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession
. ...the Census Bureau's Current Population Survey ....indicate that the real (inflation-adjusted) median annual household income in America has fallen by 4.4 percent during the "recovery," after having fallen by 1.8 during the recession.
Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession


4. . In a stunning Tuesday report, Gallup CEO and Chairman Jim Clifton revealed that “for the first time in 35 years, American business deaths now outnumber business births.”Clifton says for the past six years since 2008, employer business startups have fallen below the business failure rate, spurring what he calls “an underground earthquake” that only stands to worsen as lagging U.S. Census data becomes available.
“Let’s get one thing clear: This economy is never truly coming back unless we reverse the birth and death trends of American businesses,” writes Clifton."Economic Death Spiral: More American Businesses Dying Than Starting - Breitbart


5. "Surprise: U.S. Economic Data Have Been the World's Most Disappointing
It's not only the just-released University of Michigan consumer confidence report and February retail sales on Thursday that surprised economists and investors with another dose of underwhelming news. Overall, U.S. economic data have been falling short of prognosticators' expectations by the most in six years." Surprise: U.S. Economic Data Have Been the World's Most Disappointing

6. . "That basic math is why middle class incomes have been in decline under Obama. The Census Bureau reports that since Obama became President 7 years ago, real median household income has fallen by $1,300 a year. Heritage Foundation Chief Economist Steve Moore explained in testimony before the Ways and Means Committee, “At 2 percent growth the economy doesn’t spin off enough jobs to increase wages, and tax revenues grow much too slowly to balance the budget.”
The recession officially ended more than 6 years ago. Wages and incomes have always grown in recoveries, not declined. Moreover, the American historical record is the deeper the recession, the stronger the recovery. The economy is supposed to boom in a recovery to catch up with its long term economic growth trendline. But over 6 years after the recession ended, that still has not happened. Instead, what we have gotten under President Obama is the worst recovery from a recession since the Great Depression." Realizing The Super Bowl Of American Economic Growth



7. "Even if you leave out the first quarter of 2009—when the recession that started in December 2007 was still ongoing--President Barack Obama has presided over the lowest average first-quarter GDP growth of any president who has served since 1947, which is the earliest year for which the Bureau of Economic Analysis has calculated quarterly GDP growth. " http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/terence...-obama-has-lowest-average-1stq-gdp-growth-any


8. The Obama Administration is aggressively exploiting regulation to achieve its policy agenda, issuing 157 new major rules at a cost to Americans approaching $73 billion annually....twice the annual average of his predecessor George W. Bush. And much more regulation is on the way, with another 125 major rules on the Administration’s to-do list, including dozens linked to the Dodd–Frank financial regulation law and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare. Red Tape Rising: Five Years of Regulatory Expansion


9. . "...take-home pay for many American workers has effectively fallen since the economic recovery began in 2009, according to a new study by an advocacy group that is to be released on Thursday.

The declines were greatest for the lowest-paid workers in sectors where hiring has been strong — home health care, food preparation and retailing — even though wages were already below average to begin with in those service industries.

“Stagnant wages are a problem for everyone at this point, but the imbalance in the economy has become more pronounced since the recession,”..." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/03/b...rkers-see-biggest-drop-in-paychecks.html?_r=0


10. . "Obamacare health insurance co-ops surged past the $1 billion mark in losses this week, making history of sorts.The insolvencies, totaling $1.36 billion, mean that the co-ops have burned through more than half of the original $2 billion appropriatedin 2010 for the program under the Affordable Care Act. The funds were loaned to the start-up co-ops in 2012 and were to be repaid in 15 years, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which manages Obamacare.


...13 of the 23 federally-financed Obamacare co-ops have officially failed in only two years. Most are in the process of default as insurance regulators attempt to pay customer’s medical bills, cover medical providers and pay other creditors.
Obamacare Co-Op Mess Causes $1.3 Billion In Losses


11. Obama is the first President never to have had a year of 3% or better economic growth: "... annual growth during Obama’s “recovery” has never topped 3%. By comparison, it never fell below 3% during the Reagan recovery. And in the nine years following the 1990-91 recession, GDP grew faster than 3% in all but two. Heck, even Jimmy Carter had some strong growth years." President Obama's Growth Gap Hits $1.31 Trillion | Investor's Business Daily

a. "The years since 2007 have been a macroeconomic disaster for the United States of a magnitude unprecedented since the Great Depression." Obama: Always Wrong, Never In Doubt

b. ".... first president since Hoover to never have a single year above 3% GDP growth."Hedge fund billionaire calls Obama economy 'amazing'



12. ".... calculating how much the debt increased during Obama's two terms. On January 20, 2009, when he was sworn in, the debt was $10.626 trillion. On January 20, 2017, it was $19.947 trillion. That's why most people say Obama added $9 trillion to the debt, more than any other president."
How Much Did Obama Add to the Nation's Debt?


13. "The Tipping Point: Most Americans No Longer Are Middle Class

December 9, 2015

A just-released analysis of government data shows that as of 2015, middle-income households have become the minority.


And middle-income Americans not only have shrunk as a share of the population but have fallen further behind financially, with their median income down 4 percent compared with the year 2000, Pew said."

The Tipping Point: Most Americans No Longer Are Middle Class



14. “Last week the Commerce Department released its third revision for fourth-quarter 2016 gross domestic product. The number came in at a paltry 2.1 percent, meaning that growth during President Obama’s final year in office — the end of an “Error of Hope” — landed with a big thud at just 1.6 percent.” https://nypost.com/2017/04/01/obama-was-terrible-for-economic-growth/

Please explain what you find celebratory about the following:

"'If you take a look at President Obama’s second term, he was adding 217,000 jobs,' says Betsey Stevenson, an economist at the University of Michigan who served as chief economist at the Labor Department under Barack Obama.

"'And since Trump assumed the presidency, he’s been adding 189,000 jobs per month. I’d say those are roughly around the same ballpark. But I don’t think Trump should be bragging that he’s somehow doing something that President Obama wasn’t doing.'"

The truth about the Trump economy

Here's a bonus question: how many of those jobs created by Trump AND Obama pay a living wage?

Let me know of any errors in the following....


...If you'd like....I can provide five dozen more gaffes and failures by Obama.

Just ask.


1... in today’s recovery — the slowest in the modern era going back to 1947 — private capital investment has lagged badly. ... so has the jobs situation, with 92 million dropping out of the workforce altogether. A labor-participation rate of 62.8% and an employment-to-population rate of 58% are historic lows indicative of the anemic jobs recovery. Big Business Swings Behind a Mantra of Growth - The New York Sun


2. Tavis Smiley: 'Black People Will Have Lost Ground in Every Single Economic Indicator' Under Obama
Tavis Smiley: 'Black People Will Have Lost Ground in Every Single Economic Indicator' Under Obama

["BET Founder: Trump’s economy bringing black workers back into the workforce"

BET Founder: Trump's economy bringing black workers back into the workforce]




3. . "Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession
. ...the Census Bureau's Current Population Survey ....indicate that the real (inflation-adjusted) median annual household income in America has fallen by 4.4 percent during the "recovery," after having fallen by 1.8 during the recession.
Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession


4. . In a stunning Tuesday report, Gallup CEO and Chairman Jim Clifton revealed that “for the first time in 35 years, American business deaths now outnumber business births.”Clifton says for the past six years since 2008, employer business startups have fallen below the business failure rate, spurring what he calls “an underground earthquake” that only stands to worsen as lagging U.S. Census data becomes available.
“Let’s get one thing clear: This economy is never truly coming back unless we reverse the birth and death trends of American businesses,” writes Clifton."Economic Death Spiral: More American Businesses Dying Than Starting - Breitbart


5. "Surprise: U.S. Economic Data Have Been the World's Most Disappointing
It's not only the just-released University of Michigan consumer confidence report and February retail sales on Thursday that surprised economists and investors with another dose of underwhelming news. Overall, U.S. economic data have been falling short of prognosticators' expectations by the most in six years." Surprise: U.S. Economic Data Have Been the World's Most Disappointing

6. . "That basic math is why middle class incomes have been in decline under Obama. The Census Bureau reports that since Obama became President 7 years ago, real median household income has fallen by $1,300 a year. Heritage Foundation Chief Economist Steve Moore explained in testimony before the Ways and Means Committee, “At 2 percent growth the economy doesn’t spin off enough jobs to increase wages, and tax revenues grow much too slowly to balance the budget.”
The recession officially ended more than 6 years ago. Wages and incomes have always grown in recoveries, not declined. Moreover, the American historical record is the deeper the recession, the stronger the recovery. The economy is supposed to boom in a recovery to catch up with its long term economic growth trendline. But over 6 years after the recession ended, that still has not happened. Instead, what we have gotten under President Obama is the worst recovery from a recession since the Great Depression." Realizing The Super Bowl Of American Economic Growth



7. "Even if you leave out the first quarter of 2009—when the recession that started in December 2007 was still ongoing--President Barack Obama has presided over the lowest average first-quarter GDP growth of any president who has served since 1947, which is the earliest year for which the Bureau of Economic Analysis has calculated quarterly GDP growth. " http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/terence...-obama-has-lowest-average-1stq-gdp-growth-any


8. The Obama Administration is aggressively exploiting regulation to achieve its policy agenda, issuing 157 new major rules at a cost to Americans approaching $73 billion annually....twice the annual average of his predecessor George W. Bush. And much more regulation is on the way, with another 125 major rules on the Administration’s to-do list, including dozens linked to the Dodd–Frank financial regulation law and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare. Red Tape Rising: Five Years of Regulatory Expansion


9. . "...take-home pay for many American workers has effectively fallen since the economic recovery began in 2009, according to a new study by an advocacy group that is to be released on Thursday.

The declines were greatest for the lowest-paid workers in sectors where hiring has been strong — home health care, food preparation and retailing — even though wages were already below average to begin with in those service industries.

“Stagnant wages are a problem for everyone at this point, but the imbalance in the economy has become more pronounced since the recession,”..." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/03/b...rkers-see-biggest-drop-in-paychecks.html?_r=0


10. . "Obamacare health insurance co-ops surged past the $1 billion mark in losses this week, making history of sorts.The insolvencies, totaling $1.36 billion, mean that the co-ops have burned through more than half of the original $2 billion appropriatedin 2010 for the program under the Affordable Care Act. The funds were loaned to the start-up co-ops in 2012 and were to be repaid in 15 years, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which manages Obamacare.


...13 of the 23 federally-financed Obamacare co-ops have officially failed in only two years. Most are in the process of default as insurance regulators attempt to pay customer’s medical bills, cover medical providers and pay other creditors.
Obamacare Co-Op Mess Causes $1.3 Billion In Losses


11. Obama is the first President never to have had a year of 3% or better economic growth: "... annual growth during Obama’s “recovery” has never topped 3%. By comparison, it never fell below 3% during the Reagan recovery. And in the nine years following the 1990-91 recession, GDP grew faster than 3% in all but two. Heck, even Jimmy Carter had some strong growth years." President Obama's Growth Gap Hits $1.31 Trillion | Investor's Business Daily

a. "The years since 2007 have been a macroeconomic disaster for the United States of a magnitude unprecedented since the Great Depression." Obama: Always Wrong, Never In Doubt

b. ".... first president since Hoover to never have a single year above 3% GDP growth."Hedge fund billionaire calls Obama economy 'amazing'



12. ".... calculating how much the debt increased during Obama's two terms. On January 20, 2009, when he was sworn in, the debt was $10.626 trillion. On January 20, 2017, it was $19.947 trillion. That's why most people say Obama added $9 trillion to the debt, more than any other president."
How Much Did Obama Add to the Nation's Debt?

13. "The Tipping Point: Most Americans No Longer Are Middle Class

December 9, 2015

A just-released analysis of government data shows that as of 2015, middle-income households have become the minority.


And middle-income Americans not only have shrunk as a share of the population but have fallen further behind financially, with their median income down 4 percent compared with the year 2000, Pew said."

The Tipping Point: Most Americans No Longer Are Middle Class


14. “Last week the Commerce Department released its third revision for fourth-quarter 2016 gross domestic product. The number came in at a paltry 2.1 percent, meaning that growth during President Obama’s final year in office — the end of an “Error of Hope” — landed with a big thud at just 1.6 percent.” https://nypost.com/2017/04/01/obama-was-terrible-for-economic-growth/

 

[georgephillip]

At least Obama lowered the deficits (though not remotely enough) after that.
Trump is doing nothing but sending them skywards with his moronic trickle-down bullshit.

Trump and Obama and all their predecessors are following a neoliberal economic policy which stands the classical interpretation of "free market" on its head:

http://store.counterpunch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Killing-The-Host_PDF_V7.pdf (P. 9)

"The original fight for free markets meant freeing them from exploitation by rent extractors: owners of land, natural resources, monopoly rights and money fortunes that provided income without corresponding work – and usually without tax liability.

"Where hereditary rental and financial revenue supported the richest aristocracies, the tax burden was shifted most heavily onto labor and industry, in addition to their rent and debt burden.

"The classical reform program of Adam Smith and his followers was to tax the income deriving from privileges that were the legacy of feudal Europe and its military conquests, and to make land, banking and monopolies publicly regulated functions.

"Today’s neoliberalism turns the word’s original meaning on its head.

"Neoliberals have re-defined 'free markets' to mean an economy free for rent-seekers, that is, 'free' of government regulation or taxation of unearned rentier income (rents and financial returns)."

 

[PoliticalChic]

Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.



And, on those bases, they reward their candidates:

“Record number of women elected to the House”
Record number of women elected to the House - CNNPolitics


“In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers” In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers


“Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections”
Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections


Pretty smart basis for selecting leaders, huh??????








Of course, the Democrats/Liberals/Progressives will sacrifice a great deal in favor of skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.

 

[McRocket]

This Obama?????


“Growth had been so worrisomely slow throughout Obama's two terms in office that journalists started warning about "secular stagnation." They said the country was in a period of long, sustained, slow growth resulting from slow population and productivity growth.

In August 2016, the Times declared that "the underlying reality of low growth will haunt whoever wins the White House."

Predictions of Slow Growth

The next month, CBS News reported that "with U.S. economic growth stuck in low gear for several years, it's leading many economists to worry that the country has entered a prolonged period where any expansion will be weaker than it has been in the past."

In short, there was no upward trajectory to the economy on anyone's radar when Trump took office.”
Economic Boom: Media Rewrite History To Credit Obama Instead Of Trump





Did you want the five dozen examples of Obama failures?????


Say the word.




(Psssst.....you have some of Obama's shoe polish on your tongue.
Tissue?)

No. I just want one example . Pick an ecomonic indicator . Just pick it and I’ll do the research . I’ll come back with actual numbers and not opinion pieces .

"The stronger the economy gets under President Trump, the more desperate his critics are to hand credit over to Obama. Even if that entails changing the past.


...the economy was stagnating in 2016 after the weakest recovery from a recession since the Great Depression.


In fact, The New York Times itself described Obama's economy this way in August 2016: "For three quarters in a row, the growth rate of the economy has hovered around a mere 1%. In the last quarter of 2015 and the first quarter of 2016, the economy expanded at feeble annual rates of 0.9% and 0.8%, respectively. The initial reading for the second quarter of this year, released on Friday, was a disappointing 1.2%."


...GDP growth decelerated in each of the last three quarters of 2016."

And on January 27, 2017, after the government reported that GDP growth for all 2016 was a mere 1.6% — the weakest in five years —"

Economic Boom: Media Rewrite History To Credit Obama Instead Of Trump





Don't forget.....75 more waiting.

Like I said . Opinion pieces . PICK AN ECONOMIC INDICATOR!!!!!

Your choice . There’s a bunch of standard indicators to choose from .

The numbers are 'opinions'????



"The stronger the economy gets under President Trump, the more desperate his critics are to hand credit over to Obama. Even if that entails changing the past.


...the economy was stagnating in 2016 after the weakest recovery from a recession since the Great Depression.


In fact, The New York Times itself described Obama's economy this way in August 2016: "For three quarters in a row, the growth rate of the economy has hovered around a mere 1%. In the last quarter of 2015 and the first quarter of 2016, the economy expanded at feeble annual rates of 0.9% and 0.8%, respectively. The initial reading for the second quarter of this year, released on Friday, was a disappointing 1.2%."


...GDP growth decelerated in each of the last three quarters of 2016."

And on January 27, 2017, after the government reported that GDP growth for all 2016 was a mere 1.6% — the weakest in five years —"

Economic Boom: Media Rewrite History To Credit Obama Instead Of Trump




Got a dictionary?

How many time are you going to avoid the question?


Pick an indicator and we will compare obama years into trumps .

She has avoided my questions - in this thread alone - at least 10 times.

I even asked her a simple 'true or false' question...hoping that would be simple enough for her.

Nope.

People like that cannot answer our questions because to do so is a gotcha moment. They know it - so they avoid it like the plague. They usually post a whole bunch of gobbledegook and/or just start insulting to try and derail the conversation away from your questions.

And she is trying both.

The only good thing about it is when they do that, they are basically admitting they have nothing. For if the question put their position in a good light - they would answer it FAST.

I have seen her type TONS of times.

 

[McRocket]

We conservatives are very much like savages

'savage
[sav-ij]
See more synonyms for savage on Thesaurus.com
adjective

1. fierce, ferocious, or cruel; untamed:savage beasts.
2. uncivilized; barbarous:savage tribes.
3. enraged or furiously angry, as a person.'

the definition of savages

Well, most cons are not, IMO.

But I agree that you could fit the definition.

And I certainly agree....having proven same.....that Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.



And, on those bases, they reward their candidates:

“Record number of women elected to the House”
Record number of women elected to the House - CNNPolitics


“In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers” In ‘Rainbow Wave,’ L.G.B.T. Candidates Are Elected in Record Numbers


“Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections”
Trans Candidates Are Poised to Make History in 2018 Elections


Pretty smart basis for selecting leaders, huh??????





You can run, but you can't hide.
So saith the Brown Bomber.

Nope - read none of that.

Once again....

'savage
[sav-ij]
See more synonyms for savage on Thesaurus.com
adjective

1. fierce, ferocious, or cruel; untamed:savage beasts.
2. uncivilized; barbarous:savage tribes.
3. enraged or furiously angry, as a person.'

the definition of savages

Well, most cons are not, IMO.

But I agree that you could fit the definition.

You seem mentally disturbed, melodramatic and enraged at Democrats.

Might I suggest:

Have a nice day.

I see you'd like to sidestep the issue........my having proven same.....that Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, judge their leaders by different standards: skin color, sexual orientation, gender, and ideology.



Still running...and trying to hide.

Do liberals vote for people primarily on where they stand on the issues?

True or false?

I will accept NO OTHER ANSWER except 'True' or 'False'. And if I do not see 'True' or 'False in the first word of your reply - I will ignore the rest of it.

Watch folks how she simply cannot blow her argument apart by answering my INCREDIBLY simple question.