Who Thinks the Economy Will Be Back to January 2020 Levels by End of October This Year?

[candycorn]

I guess you're talking about the DJIA; it climbed 149% under Obama and his supposedly anti-business regulations.

He had 8 years in which the DJIA grew in spite of Obama rather than because of Obama. Big difference. If an economy grows in spite of a President or political party’s power, it is usually over a long period of time, not short term.

Sure. So I guess the environmental restrictions had no effect on business if the DJIA climbed 149% (as it did). Right?

What did Obama do? What policies dod he pursue? His environmental restrictions and other egregious regulatory policies were met with companies reducing their workforce, cutting costs, working leaner. The DJIA growth did not accelerate until the end of Obama Reign when investors knew he could do no more harm. Cash sat on the sidelines for most of Obama’s two terms. Imagine how much better we would have been compared to 149 percent?

Introduced stability for one thing. While not flashy, it also calmed the markets which climbed steadily.

 

[Erinwltr]

I guess you're talking about the DJIA; it climbed 149% under Obama and his supposedly anti-business regulations.

He had 8 years in which the DJIA grew in spite of Obama rather than because of Obama. Big difference. If an economy grows in spite of a President or political party’s power, it is usually over a long period of time, not short term.

Sure. So I guess the environmental restrictions had no effect on business if the DJIA climbed 149% (as it did). Right?

What did Obama do? What policies dod he pursue? His environmental restrictions and other egregious regulatory policies were met with companies reducing their workforce, cutting costs, working leaner. The DJIA growth did not accelerate until the end of Obama Reign when investors knew he could do no more harm. Cash sat on the sidelines for most of Obama’s two terms. Imagine how much better we would have been compared to 149 percent?

Well, typically POTUS don't have an influence over what the markets do. But...

S&P 500 Has Performed Far Worse Under Trump Than Under Obama

Dow Industrials and Nasdaq also saw much higher growth in 2009 to 2012.

fortune.com

 

[Pete7469]

He had 8 years in which the DJIA grew in spite of Obama rather than because of Obama. Big difference. If an economy grows in spite of a President or political party’s power, it is usually over a long period of time, not short term.

They very gradual climb in the Dow was in spite of that meat puppet faggot. Americans work for prosperity and to enhance their standard of living. The moonbat messiah's 8 years was the worst I've had as far as making more money. I had to stay stuck in a job I hated because there was nothing else available. Now I've been able to expand my career path and have optimism for the future.

This is because Trump deregulated the economy and worked to secure the border.

.

 

[LeftofLeft]

I guess you're talking about the DJIA; it climbed 149% under Obama and his supposedly anti-business regulations.

He had 8 years in which the DJIA grew in spite of Obama rather than because of Obama. Big difference. If an economy grows in spite of a President or political party’s power, it is usually over a long period of time, not short term.

Sure. So I guess the environmental restrictions had no effect on business if the DJIA climbed 149% (as it did). Right?

What did Obama do? What policies dod he pursue? His environmental restrictions and other egregious regulatory policies were met with companies reducing their workforce, cutting costs, working leaner. The DJIA growth did not accelerate until the end of Obama Reign when investors knew he could do no more harm. Cash sat on the sidelines for most of Obama’s two terms. Imagine how much better we would have been compared to 149 percent?

Introduced stability for one thing. While not flashy, it also calmed the markets which climbed steadily.

Bullshit... pursuing energy policies that necessarily increase costs and the radical healthcare industry takeover did not introduce stability. It delayed recovery.

 

[LeftofLeft]

I guess you're talking about the DJIA; it climbed 149% under Obama and his supposedly anti-business regulations.

He had 8 years in which the DJIA grew in spite of Obama rather than because of Obama. Big difference. If an economy grows in spite of a President or political party’s power, it is usually over a long period of time, not short term.

Sure. So I guess the environmental restrictions had no effect on business if the DJIA climbed 149% (as it did). Right?

How will Democrats get the Economy back and how soon will they do it? My bet is they will delay and drag out the misery using the opportunity to transform the country. Democrats have no incentive to deliver on a strong economy. Democrats depends on misery to sustain power.

Like McConnell said, the goal is to make the president a one-term President. Can you blame the Democrats for employing a GOP strategy?

Your post has nothing to do with Democrats and how they handle the Economy. My post is based on the scenario of them WINNING the White House and The Hill and why they won’t push policies to improve the Economy.

He used the word Democrats in his post, so how can you claim his response has nothing to do with your post?

He is talking about the party out of power obstructing a President which is what McConnell did and is what Pelosi is doing. I am referring to when the party is in power.

Oh, thats simple. Blame the Republicans for obstructing. As for "bringing back" the economy, there isn't much the President can do unless they have the entire congress behind them.

Expect the party out of power to obstruct. We are seeing that now with Pelosi and Schumer. That said, how do you think a President telling American workers manufacturing jobs are not coming back vs. pursuing policies to try and get the jobs back is going to be received by the markets?

 

[candycorn]

I guess you're talking about the DJIA; it climbed 149% under Obama and his supposedly anti-business regulations.

He had 8 years in which the DJIA grew in spite of Obama rather than because of Obama. Big difference. If an economy grows in spite of a President or political party’s power, it is usually over a long period of time, not short term.

Sure. So I guess the environmental restrictions had no effect on business if the DJIA climbed 149% (as it did). Right?

What did Obama do? What policies dod he pursue? His environmental restrictions and other egregious regulatory policies were met with companies reducing their workforce, cutting costs, working leaner. The DJIA growth did not accelerate until the end of Obama Reign when investors knew he could do no more harm. Cash sat on the sidelines for most of Obama’s two terms. Imagine how much better we would have been compared to 149 percent?

Introduced stability for one thing. While not flashy, it also calmed the markets which climbed steadily.

Bullshit... pursuing energy policies that necessarily increase costs and the radical healthcare industry takeover did not introduce stability. It delayed recovery.

Thats one sector of the economy. If you said it hurt other hospitals...okay. I didn't see that here in Phoenix. As someone who works in the administration of a hospital--national hospital corporation (listed on the DJIA), I know that we loved the ACA. We had more profits than ever a few years back under Obama. More insured people meant more traffic. Who'd a thunk it! LOL.

 

[candycorn]

I guess you're talking about the DJIA; it climbed 149% under Obama and his supposedly anti-business regulations.

He had 8 years in which the DJIA grew in spite of Obama rather than because of Obama. Big difference. If an economy grows in spite of a President or political party’s power, it is usually over a long period of time, not short term.

Sure. So I guess the environmental restrictions had no effect on business if the DJIA climbed 149% (as it did). Right?

How will Democrats get the Economy back and how soon will they do it? My bet is they will delay and drag out the misery using the opportunity to transform the country. Democrats have no incentive to deliver on a strong economy. Democrats depends on misery to sustain power.

Like McConnell said, the goal is to make the president a one-term President. Can you blame the Democrats for employing a GOP strategy?

Your post has nothing to do with Democrats and how they handle the Economy. My post is based on the scenario of them WINNING the White House and The Hill and why they won’t push policies to improve the Economy.

He used the word Democrats in his post, so how can you claim his response has nothing to do with your post?

He is talking about the party out of power obstructing a President which is what McConnell did and is what Pelosi is doing. I am referring to when the party is in power.

Oh, thats simple. Blame the Republicans for obstructing. As for "bringing back" the economy, there isn't much the President can do unless they have the entire congress behind them.

Expect the party out of power to obstruct. We are seeing that now with Pelosi and Schumer. That said, how do you think a President telling American workers manufacturing jobs are not coming back vs. pursuing policies to try and get the jobs back is going to be received by the markets?

Depends on the vehicles you employ to bring the jobs back.

The market didn't seem to react negatively to Obama's strategy given the performance. Could it have been better? I guess. But it didn't tank under Obama as folks like you seem to want to pretend that it did.

 

[Meathead]

I think if Trump has the Ecopnomy back to Jan 2020 levels of performance, he wins the election in a cake walk.

Blowin' in the wind.

 

[LeftofLeft]

I guess you're talking about the DJIA; it climbed 149% under Obama and his supposedly anti-business regulations.

He had 8 years in which the DJIA grew in spite of Obama rather than because of Obama. Big difference. If an economy grows in spite of a President or political party’s power, it is usually over a long period of time, not short term.

Sure. So I guess the environmental restrictions had no effect on business if the DJIA climbed 149% (as it did). Right?

How will Democrats get the Economy back and how soon will they do it? My bet is they will delay and drag out the misery using the opportunity to transform the country. Democrats have no incentive to deliver on a strong economy. Democrats depends on misery to sustain power.

Like McConnell said, the goal is to make the president a one-term President. Can you blame the Democrats for employing a GOP strategy?

Your post has nothing to do with Democrats and how they handle the Economy. My post is based on the scenario of them WINNING the White House and The Hill and why they won’t push policies to improve the Economy.

He used the word Democrats in his post, so how can you claim his response has nothing to do with your post?

He is talking about the party out of power obstructing a President which is what McConnell did and is what Pelosi is doing. I am referring to when the party is in power.

Oh, thats simple. Blame the Republicans for obstructing. As for "bringing back" the economy, there isn't much the President can do unless they have the entire congress behind them.

Expect the party out of power to obstruct. We are seeing that now with Pelosi and Schumer. That said, how do you think a President telling American workers manufacturing jobs are not coming back vs. pursuing policies to try and get the jobs back is going to be received by the markets?

Depends on the vehicles you employ to bring the jobs back.

The market didn't seem to react negatively to Obama's strategy given the performance. Could it have been better? I guess. But it didn't tank under Obama as folks like you seem to want to pretend that it did.

I never said it tanked under Obama. I said he pursued policies that delayed recovery and blamed everyone else for negativity surrounding the economy... which is consistent with him given that he is the least personal accountable President in my lifetime.

 

[Erinwltr]

I guess you're talking about the DJIA; it climbed 149% under Obama and his supposedly anti-business regulations.

He had 8 years in which the DJIA grew in spite of Obama rather than because of Obama. Big difference. If an economy grows in spite of a President or political party’s power, it is usually over a long period of time, not short term.

Sure. So I guess the environmental restrictions had no effect on business if the DJIA climbed 149% (as it did). Right?

How will Democrats get the Economy back and how soon will they do it? My bet is they will delay and drag out the misery using the opportunity to transform the country. Democrats have no incentive to deliver on a strong economy. Democrats depends on misery to sustain power.

Like McConnell said, the goal is to make the president a one-term President. Can you blame the Democrats for employing a GOP strategy?

Your post has nothing to do with Democrats and how they handle the Economy. My post is based on the scenario of them WINNING the White House and The Hill and why they won’t push policies to improve the Economy.

He used the word Democrats in his post, so how can you claim his response has nothing to do with your post?

He is talking about the party out of power obstructing a President which is what McConnell did and is what Pelosi is doing. I am referring to when the party is in power.

Oh, thats simple. Blame the Republicans for obstructing. As for "bringing back" the economy, there isn't much the President can do unless they have the entire congress behind them.

Expect the party out of power to obstruct. We are seeing that now with Pelosi and Schumer. That said, how do you think a President telling American workers manufacturing jobs are not coming back vs. pursuing policies to try and get the jobs back is going to be received by the markets?

Depends on the vehicles you employ to bring the jobs back.

The market didn't seem to react negatively to Obama's strategy given the performance. Could it have been better? I guess. But it didn't tank under Obama as folks like you seem to want to pretend that it did.

I never said it tanked under Obama. I said he pursued policies that delayed recovery and blamed everyone else for negativity surrounding the economy... which is consistent with him given that he is the least personal accountable President in my lifetime.

If BHO "pursued policies that delayed recovery and blamed everyone else" then why did your 401K do so well?

 

[LeftofLeft]

I guess you're talking about the DJIA; it climbed 149% under Obama and his supposedly anti-business regulations.

He had 8 years in which the DJIA grew in spite of Obama rather than because of Obama. Big difference. If an economy grows in spite of a President or political party’s power, it is usually over a long period of time, not short term.

Sure. So I guess the environmental restrictions had no effect on business if the DJIA climbed 149% (as it did). Right?

What did Obama do? What policies dod he pursue? His environmental restrictions and other egregious regulatory policies were met with companies reducing their workforce, cutting costs, working leaner. The DJIA growth did not accelerate until the end of Obama Reign when investors knew he could do no more harm. Cash sat on the sidelines for most of Obama’s two terms. Imagine how much better we would have been compared to 149 percent?

Introduced stability for one thing. While not flashy, it also calmed the markets which climbed steadily.

Bullshit... pursuing energy policies that necessarily increase costs and the radical healthcare industry takeover did not introduce stability. It delayed recovery.

Thats one sector of the economy. If you said it hurt other hospitals...okay. I didn't see that here in Phoenix. As someone who works in the administration of a hospital--national hospital corporation (listed on the DJIA), I know that we loved the ACA. We had more profits than ever a few years back under Obama. More insured people meant more traffic. Who'd a thunk it! LOL.

Corporate cronyism was at the heart of ACA so of course you loved it. Small businesses and consumers which are the engine for the economy, not so much after they were sold a bag of shit that their healthcare costs would go down.

 

[candycorn]

I guess you're talking about the DJIA; it climbed 149% under Obama and his supposedly anti-business regulations.

He had 8 years in which the DJIA grew in spite of Obama rather than because of Obama. Big difference. If an economy grows in spite of a President or political party’s power, it is usually over a long period of time, not short term.

Sure. So I guess the environmental restrictions had no effect on business if the DJIA climbed 149% (as it did). Right?

How will Democrats get the Economy back and how soon will they do it? My bet is they will delay and drag out the misery using the opportunity to transform the country. Democrats have no incentive to deliver on a strong economy. Democrats depends on misery to sustain power.

Like McConnell said, the goal is to make the president a one-term President. Can you blame the Democrats for employing a GOP strategy?

Your post has nothing to do with Democrats and how they handle the Economy. My post is based on the scenario of them WINNING the White House and The Hill and why they won’t push policies to improve the Economy.

He used the word Democrats in his post, so how can you claim his response has nothing to do with your post?

He is talking about the party out of power obstructing a President which is what McConnell did and is what Pelosi is doing. I am referring to when the party is in power.

Oh, thats simple. Blame the Republicans for obstructing. As for "bringing back" the economy, there isn't much the President can do unless they have the entire congress behind them.

Expect the party out of power to obstruct. We are seeing that now with Pelosi and Schumer. That said, how do you think a President telling American workers manufacturing jobs are not coming back vs. pursuing policies to try and get the jobs back is going to be received by the markets?

Depends on the vehicles you employ to bring the jobs back.

The market didn't seem to react negatively to Obama's strategy given the performance. Could it have been better? I guess. But it didn't tank under Obama as folks like you seem to want to pretend that it did.

I never said it tanked under Obama. I said he pursued policies that delayed recovery and blamed everyone else for negativity surrounding the economy... which is consistent with him given that he is the least personal accountable President in my lifetime.

I would like to think you're not being serious about his not taking responsibility given the current occupant of the office but I'm afraid you're just that sick.

 

[toobfreak]

I think if Trump has the Ecopnomy back to Jan 2020 levels of performance, he wins the election in a cake walk.

Well, to be fair, isn't the DJI doing pretty well now? But that's not the whole picture. What about consumer confidence, jobs, wages? The MOOD of the average voter will affect a lot and if the virus is still lingering or comes back strong this Fall without ever a clear recovery, essentially putting the entire year in the dumper, folks won't be happy.

Of course, Trump really has little control over any of this, he can't suck viruses out of the air or make people quarantine in their homes for six months, wear masks to the bathroom, spend the entire summer in their basement, or make cops like blacks, stop riots or make states enforce laws.

Nor shall electing Biden change much of anything for the better.

But then, no one ever said the voting citizen was a particularly intelligent animal either.

 

[LeftofLeft]

I guess you're talking about the DJIA; it climbed 149% under Obama and his supposedly anti-business regulations.

He had 8 years in which the DJIA grew in spite of Obama rather than because of Obama. Big difference. If an economy grows in spite of a President or political party’s power, it is usually over a long period of time, not short term.

Sure. So I guess the environmental restrictions had no effect on business if the DJIA climbed 149% (as it did). Right?

How will Democrats get the Economy back and how soon will they do it? My bet is they will delay and drag out the misery using the opportunity to transform the country. Democrats have no incentive to deliver on a strong economy. Democrats depends on misery to sustain power.

Like McConnell said, the goal is to make the president a one-term President. Can you blame the Democrats for employing a GOP strategy?

Your post has nothing to do with Democrats and how they handle the Economy. My post is based on the scenario of them WINNING the White House and The Hill and why they won’t push policies to improve the Economy.

He used the word Democrats in his post, so how can you claim his response has nothing to do with your post?

He is talking about the party out of power obstructing a President which is what McConnell did and is what Pelosi is doing. I am referring to when the party is in power.

Oh, thats simple. Blame the Republicans for obstructing. As for "bringing back" the economy, there isn't much the President can do unless they have the entire congress behind them.

Expect the party out of power to obstruct. We are seeing that now with Pelosi and Schumer. That said, how do you think a President telling American workers manufacturing jobs are not coming back vs. pursuing policies to try and get the jobs back is going to be received by the markets?

Depends on the vehicles you employ to bring the jobs back.

The market didn't seem to react negatively to Obama's strategy given the performance. Could it have been better? I guess. But it didn't tank under Obama as folks like you seem to want to pretend that it did.

I never said it tanked under Obama. I said he pursued policies that delayed recovery and blamed everyone else for negativity surrounding the economy... which is consistent with him given that he is the least personal accountable President in my lifetime.

I would like to think you're not being serious about his not taking responsibility given the current occupant of the office but I'm afraid you're just that sick.

Trump is a blamer just like Clinton was a blamer. I’m saying Obama takes the cake given that prior to being President, he was never held accountable. He felt entitled to take credit for everything good and pass blame for everything bad.

 

[Erinwltr]

I guess you're talking about the DJIA; it climbed 149% under Obama and his supposedly anti-business regulations.

He had 8 years in which the DJIA grew in spite of Obama rather than because of Obama. Big difference. If an economy grows in spite of a President or political party’s power, it is usually over a long period of time, not short term.

Sure. So I guess the environmental restrictions had no effect on business if the DJIA climbed 149% (as it did). Right?

How will Democrats get the Economy back and how soon will they do it? My bet is they will delay and drag out the misery using the opportunity to transform the country. Democrats have no incentive to deliver on a strong economy. Democrats depends on misery to sustain power.

Like McConnell said, the goal is to make the president a one-term President. Can you blame the Democrats for employing a GOP strategy?

Your post has nothing to do with Democrats and how they handle the Economy. My post is based on the scenario of them WINNING the White House and The Hill and why they won’t push policies to improve the Economy.

He used the word Democrats in his post, so how can you claim his response has nothing to do with your post?

He is talking about the party out of power obstructing a President which is what McConnell did and is what Pelosi is doing. I am referring to when the party is in power.

Oh, thats simple. Blame the Republicans for obstructing. As for "bringing back" the economy, there isn't much the President can do unless they have the entire congress behind them.

Expect the party out of power to obstruct. We are seeing that now with Pelosi and Schumer. That said, how do you think a President telling American workers manufacturing jobs are not coming back vs. pursuing policies to try and get the jobs back is going to be received by the markets?

Depends on the vehicles you employ to bring the jobs back.

The market didn't seem to react negatively to Obama's strategy given the performance. Could it have been better? I guess. But it didn't tank under Obama as folks like you seem to want to pretend that it did.

I never said it tanked under Obama. I said he pursued policies that delayed recovery and blamed everyone else for negativity surrounding the economy... which is consistent with him given that he is the least personal accountable President in my lifetime.

I would like to think you're not being serious about his not taking responsibility given the current occupant of the office but I'm afraid you're just that sick.

I've never witnessed anybody so pissed off about making money in the market.

 

[Erinwltr]

I guess you're talking about the DJIA; it climbed 149% under Obama and his supposedly anti-business regulations.

He had 8 years in which the DJIA grew in spite of Obama rather than because of Obama. Big difference. If an economy grows in spite of a President or political party’s power, it is usually over a long period of time, not short term.

Sure. So I guess the environmental restrictions had no effect on business if the DJIA climbed 149% (as it did). Right?

How will Democrats get the Economy back and how soon will they do it? My bet is they will delay and drag out the misery using the opportunity to transform the country. Democrats have no incentive to deliver on a strong economy. Democrats depends on misery to sustain power.

Like McConnell said, the goal is to make the president a one-term President. Can you blame the Democrats for employing a GOP strategy?

Your post has nothing to do with Democrats and how they handle the Economy. My post is based on the scenario of them WINNING the White House and The Hill and why they won’t push policies to improve the Economy.

He used the word Democrats in his post, so how can you claim his response has nothing to do with your post?

He is talking about the party out of power obstructing a President which is what McConnell did and is what Pelosi is doing. I am referring to when the party is in power.

Oh, thats simple. Blame the Republicans for obstructing. As for "bringing back" the economy, there isn't much the President can do unless they have the entire congress behind them.

Expect the party out of power to obstruct. We are seeing that now with Pelosi and Schumer. That said, how do you think a President telling American workers manufacturing jobs are not coming back vs. pursuing policies to try and get the jobs back is going to be received by the markets?

Depends on the vehicles you employ to bring the jobs back.

The market didn't seem to react negatively to Obama's strategy given the performance. Could it have been better? I guess. But it didn't tank under Obama as folks like you seem to want to pretend that it did.

I never said it tanked under Obama. I said he pursued policies that delayed recovery and blamed everyone else for negativity surrounding the economy... which is consistent with him given that he is the least personal accountable President in my lifetime.

I would like to think you're not being serious about his not taking responsibility given the current occupant of the office but I'm afraid you're just that sick.

Trump is a blamer just like Clinton was a blamer. I’m saying Obama takes the cake given that prior to being President, he was never held accountable. He felt entitled to take credit for everything good and pass blame for everything bad.

Complete Horses Ass Shit. You ignore the obvious in order to defend the indefessible.

 

[Care4all]

I think if Trump has the Ecopnomy back to Jan 2020 levels of performance, he wins the election in a cake walk.

The DOW is NOT the economy.... You know that, right?

 

[Winston]

I guess you're talking about the DJIA; it climbed 149% under Obama and his supposedly anti-business regulations.

He had 8 years in which the DJIA grew in spite of Obama rather than because of Obama. Big difference. If an economy grows in spite of a President or political party’s power, it is usually over a long period of time, not short term.

Sure. So I guess the environmental restrictions had no effect on business if the DJIA climbed 149% (as it did). Right?

What did Obama do? What policies dod he pursue? His environmental restrictions and other egregious regulatory policies were met with companies reducing their workforce, cutting costs, working leaner. The DJIA growth did not accelerate until the end of Obama Reign when investors knew he could do no more harm. Cash sat on the sidelines for most of Obama’s two terms. Imagine how much better we would have been compared to 149 percent?

Introduced stability for one thing. While not flashy, it also calmed the markets which climbed steadily.

Bullshit... pursuing energy policies that necessarily increase costs and the radical healthcare industry takeover did not introduce stability. It delayed recovery.

Thats one sector of the economy. If you said it hurt other hospitals...okay. I didn't see that here in Phoenix. As someone who works in the administration of a hospital--national hospital corporation (listed on the DJIA), I know that we loved the ACA. We had more profits than ever a few years back under Obama. More insured people meant more traffic. Who'd a thunk it! LOL.

Corporate cronyism was at the heart of ACA so of course you loved it. Small businesses and consumers which are the engine for the economy, not so much after they were sold a bag of shit that their healthcare costs would go down.

Wow. Did you ever hear the old saw, better to keep thy mouth shut rather than opening it and revealing one's ignorance? The ACA had a profound positive effect on small businesses and spurred entrepreneurship. It may very well have been the engine that drove the economic recovery.

ObamaCare works wonders for small business. Don’t repeal it.

OPINION | If Congress and the Trump administration truly want to help small business, they should build on the Affordable Care Act, not repeal it.

thehill.com

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I think if Trump has the Ecopnomy back to Jan 2020 levels of performance, he wins the election in a cake walk.

Xi, Soros and the American Taliban have more cards to play to drive down the economy between now and November

 

[initforme]

Well things are opened up now so there shouldn't be an issue. The only thing different here is 90 percent of people are wearing masks and business owners are mandating masks to enter their place. That's their choice.