https://media.giphy.com/media/2dcW1Dlu2sZnW/giphy.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by natebane
Printable View
https://media.giphy.com/media/2dcW1Dlu2sZnW/giphy.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by natebane
See... This is typical of Trump and his supporters. Facts don't matter. What matters is how they 'feel' about something.Quote:
Originally Posted by handofthrawn
California and nearly ALL democrat run state recieves LESS in federal aid as a percentage of their general revenue than republican run states . California is in the bottom 10 while your red states fill the top 10.
Easy to check if you actually look before spouting.
Violent crime rates by state? California doesn't even show up in the top 10. Tennessee #1 for that one.
I don't even like California...
Heck Forbes did a article rating state economies and the same trend contines. Blue states tend to have better economies than red states. Texas is about the only one that bucks this trend and it's at 9th.
Where do you get your stats from? My guess studies put on by Democrats spread by biased media outlets like CNN. Next thing your going to tell me is that Chicago isn't violent. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Swirvin'Birds
Here's a better idea. Look it up yourself. Find a source that shows otherwise. Not hard to do. Why not enlighten yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by handofthrawn
Umm... I told you that last one was from Forbes magazine. You know, that far left liberal rag of a business magazine. Lol.
Where you getting your 'info' from? Facebook and phoxnews? The other guy gave you a Austrailian news source and you waved it away with a hand. Why should I even bother? Instead you look up the info and show me how wrong I am with sources of your own so we can see the bias you subscribe to instead.
What I can do for you is give you the link with Gingrich saying exactly what I said about violent crime rates across the nation being down being a fact and Newt replying people don't care about facts. They care about what they think or feel is the truth. He didn't care about the facts. He just wanted to contine to play to peoples emotions and facts be damned. You want that link?
Welcome to the forums I see you have two post. Yeah I am very enlightened thanks to wikileaks showing exactly how corrupt the Democrat party is. How corrupt our media is, shredding any credibility of almost every major news organizations. Just glad Trump got rid of all lobbyist in the White house and kept Carrier and Ford from moving their plants to other countries. He isn't even in office yet and he has already accomplished more then Obama.
Ah I see. Not going to look it up and give me links? Wikileaks? That Assange guy who has no alterior motives and is a hacker? He hasn't reported anything on state economies and federal aid as far as I know. Can you link it?Quote:
Originally Posted by handofthrawn
What, you think Trump is less 'dirty' in some way? Lol. Give him 4 years. ;)
No. What Trump did was corporate welfare. We are now paying that company $7,000,000 in tax breaks to keep 1,069 jobs in the state. How long? What did that actually fix? Even some republicans are having issues with the way he handled it. He got held up for ransom. Wonder which company is next in line...
Edit. Thanks for the welcome. We can disagree politically and still have a beer afterward. :)
https://media2.giphy.com/media/i5wNCqyMzY2Oc/giphy.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by handofthrawn
He doesn't even need that long, in fact he doesn't need even a millisecond. Trump has still failed to resolve, and is refusing to resolve his massive conflict of interest, namely his business "empire". So long as he doesn't put all his assets in a blind trust he is and will remain the most corrupt President in the history of the United States. And no, "tunring over" control to his children or other family members doesn't resolve this conflict of interest in any way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Swirvin'Birds
Trump isn't even taking the salary of the president. Yet your worried about him making money off being president? He deals in property mainly and you know what makes property values go up. Prosperity. So sure he will make the USA great agian which will drive property values. I am completely ok with that. Dude isn't even president and has done more then the last few presidents to try and keep factories in the USA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Elldallan
Actually speculation is what makes property value goes up, but i digress, has nothing to with topic. As for trump we can only hope for the best and following the money or the moneymen in his case is often still the best approach to take when evaluating a presidents viablity and effectiveness. So far not so good for trump IMHO.
Eh,depends on how you define corrupt. He's under no legal obligation to deal with a conflict of interest and he's never made any claims that he won't use the presidency to make himself richer (at least that I know of)Quote:
Originally Posted by Elldallan
I found the most awesome way to get a Blue Card Dem who whines and proceeds to call any Trump voter a Bigot or Racist...
POT
KETTLE
BLACK
INSTANT BLOCKAGE!
Love doing it too, because then you both know that you are right...
I'm pretty sure you just admitted you're a racist lol
...
Nice. Trump already funneled 12 million for the campaign into his personal businesses and now says he will remain the producer of his TV show while running the government...
We're screwed.
Oh and those 1,069 jobs he 'saved'? The actual number is 800 jobs with 600 still slated to goto mexico and no guarentees those 800 jobs will still be there next year. All for the cost of 7 million dollars...
You need to stop watching msnbc and take a deep breath. He isn't even president yet and has saved more jobs then Obama in the last 4 years. So it's a good start.Quote:
Originally Posted by Swirvin'Birds
He hasn't 'saved' a single job. Not 1. Do you not understand that?Quote:
Originally Posted by handofthrawn
The economy was in a big nose spin when Obama took over and it slowly recovered. You have no clue how many jobs he saved. It could have been much worse.
I get my news from all over the place. Even fox news and huffington post just to get the other sides take.
What, you think either of those 2 stories are B.S.? Pretty easy to check for yourself.
This isn't some twitter/facebook news feed like your illegals voting claim was. I'm under the impression your susceptible to fake news and never fact check anything yourself...
The Auto bailout saved 1.2 million jobs alone. You gonna give him credit for that?
Let's go into the bail outs then, one of Obamas greatest mistakes. Did you know they could have cut everyone in America a hundred thousand dollar check for the same price as they bailed out the banks. Which would have done more for the economy? As for auto bail outs they took tax payers money and immediately built plants in China and Mexico with that money. History will point to Obama being the biggest sell out and con man in the history of the USA. Right behind him will be Bush though haha.
1) 318.9 million * $100,000 is $31.89 trillion.Quote:
Originally Posted by handofthrawn
2) The closest you can get to that number is this:
http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/06/news...mulus_fits_in/
Obama was responsible for $800 billion of the $8 trillion. He wasn't even in office by the time that first pit was passed. His plan/portion of the bailout was $800 billion. The GOP appointees to the Fed and others as well as the Republicans that voted for it are on the hook for the rest (Remember, Bush was still in office and much of that money was apportioned and asked for by Republican appointees holding cabinet and/or Fed positions).Quote:
Total price tag so far: $7.2 trillion in investment and loans. That puts a lot of taxpayer money at risk. Now comes President-elect Barack Obama's economic stimulus plan, some details of which were made public on Monday. The tally is getting awfully close to $8 trillion.
3) $800 billion / 318.9 million = $2,508.62. ( Obama )
4) Bush & the GOP = $7.2 trillion / 318.9 million = $22,577.61
If you use that number, add in everything the Fed did after that, etc. you still can't get to $32 trillion you'd need for your number to be correct. You'd also have to admit that Trump & the rest of the GOP were pro bailout:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2008/09...lout-plan.html
Trump wanted the bailout and would have done it.Quote:
Now, I did not know about a $700 billion bailout, in all fairness. And I think probably, it is something — it's sad, but, probably, it's something that has to get done, because your financial system is most likely going to come to a halt if it does not. So, it is a pretty sad day for this country.
Are you less than 6 years old and have an excuse for this memory of yours?
Can you stop pulling 'facts' out of thin air, please.Quote:
Originally Posted by handofthrawn
Boy, how can I argue with someone who doesn't even realize the Auo industry bailout was already paid back by the auto industry... Sigh. Well to be fair, at least 70 of the 79 billion.Quote:
Originally Posted by handofthrawn
Bush was the guy who bailed the banking industry out.
Are you sure you haven't been talking to my husband? He was saying the same thing all the way back to the bailouts...It is true. When Bush gave the citizens of the US a TAX Bonus, people paid down their debts and it did increase spending as a result. If Obama had bailed out the people instead of the banks, then we would have been able to bail out those banks ourselves. Part of the reason they needed to be bailed is because they overspent their deposits and overextended their reach. Too big to fail really called for their failure...Quote:
Originally Posted by handofthrawn
Ugg... It was enacted by BUSH. Not Obama. Please look it up. TARP. Don't worry though, your husband is with the nearly 1/2 of Americans who also get this wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by greendragon2000
That's where fox gets their facts, so it's a little unfair to demand more from handQuote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyReid
I miss spoke fyi, I ment every tax paying household could receive a check. Not every man, woman and child. Yes Bush was behind part of it, but I believe Obama signed it into law.
Obviously you need to practice the art of trolling. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyReid
Bush enacted, Obama administered it as it was enacted in October near the end of Bush's presidency. To be fair it was a non-partison act. Both sides wanted it.Quote:
Originally Posted by handofthrawn
This past election was one massive exercise in trolling. I've had enough of it, at least for a while!Quote:
Originally Posted by handofthrawn
...
palem
as a pure outsider, and a very left leaning but more importantly very very libertarian. The reason i percieve trump won, is because it was trump vs hillary, and not trump vs literally anyone else (bernie anyone).
Hillary is a proven liar, knows about and is fine with supporting isis, corrupt as all hell, complete establishment goldman sachs money taking etc and is even worse for war with russia than trump
literally anyone else would have beaten him, the DNC needs to look at itself long and hard
Totally agree but what I find so amazing is any one of those 'faults' of Hillary are there in Trump even more so. They forgive or look the other way when it comes to Trump and crucify Hillary for less.Quote:
Originally Posted by skraz
Trump just put these Goldman/sachs guys in positions of power and paid himself and his businesses over 12 million in campaign funds... He's already made a killing and he's not even if office yet.
i do not disagree with you, im just pointing out, that putting Hillary as your candidate (even when she is your candidate via corruption against bernie sanders) is not the way to win an election.Quote:
Originally Posted by Swirvin'Birds
so are you saying we should have gone with a more vulgar and immoral candidate that can speak to the lowest common denominator of intelligence?Quote:
Originally Posted by skraz
I find it disheartening that over half the people did not vote for the party that brought us out of the greatest recession since in over 30 years and pulled us out of a foreign war that the last conservative administration got us into. I guess people who harp on Obama's increase of national debt easily forget that if not for the bail out, the American auto-industry would have collapsed as well as the American banking industry following that.
If you weight the fact that the liberal administration of the last 8 years was able to solidify the assets of every bank doing business in the US as well as add restrictions to toxic derivatives and predatory lending...AND all while nurturing the economy to record highs and lowering the unemployment rate to per-recession levels...I'd say it would be a modest trade-off.
Since Trump supporters are so sheepishly dumb that they already forgot about the greener pastures and only following the bleating of a wolf in sheep's clothing.
I didn't say that..... In fact I think and insinuated you should have gone with Bernie.... The guy Hillary was shown to **** over
skraz, 'corruption' is a strong word for Hillary's defeat of Bernie. Hillary was a party favourite, and there are certain institutional benefits to that. The Dems, unlike the GOP, have safeguards to prevent an unaligned populist outsider from coming in and hijacking the party. You can agree or disagree about the merit of having the 'superdelegates', but fundamentally the Democratic Party is a democratic organization, and the superdelegates are all either themselves elected or appointed by persons who were elected - in other words, if Democrats as a group had really wanted to change this infrastructure before the election, there was nothing stopping them.
I appreciate some of Bernie's policies, and his desire to shake up the establishment, and I admire his grassroots funding campaign, but large numbers of his supporters were political Johnny-come-latelies, who a year ago probably didn't know the word 'superdelegate' and couldn't have named the DNC chair. (As I say for general elections: If you don't vote, all you're doing is relegating your power to those who do.)
In any event, it turns out that the superdelegate support was moot. Hillary won the primary even without considering the superdelegates, in both delegate count and popular vote.
You're right that Hillary is a proven liar. She's told a number of convenient political lies. This is, sadly, ubiquitous of the system. Trump, on the other hand, comes in without the baggage of a 'political record', and yet fact-checking him is a marathon activity. Whenever he opens his mouth, he's more likely than not to say something that's provably false. And in terms of actual 'corruption', the allegations of corruption against Hillary either require some pretty speculative inferential leaps, or extend the meaning of the word past what it bears. Trump, by contrast, is well documented for payoffs to people who are investigating him, or for embezzling funds from his own charity. Not to mention that he made it pretty clear that he was going to remain tied to his own private business interests even after winning the presidency - which shouldn't be surprising, from the way he used his political stage to plug his own business. He's about to embark upon a presidency that is highly illustrative of all the very good reasons for the customary presidential 'blind trust' - not to mention all the other formal rules about avoiding conflicts of interest.
I don't like the "he would have lost to literally anyone else" attitude. He beat all the other RNC candidates and the other DNC nominees had their faults too. If Bernie had won it would have been a year of anti-socialist nonsense that the people who can't think for themselves would have eaten up with the silver spoon provided by Trump.
I wasn't particularly a fan of Clinton and she most definitely wasn't without faults, but I can't take anyone seriously who thinks Trump was the better candidate for POTUS. She's not fit to be president because she's in with Wall Street, but the actual billionaire that has even greater ties with the wealthy is better?
Meh, people are dumb and the country deserves what's coming
Quote:
Originally Posted by Palem
My suggestion for Michelle Obama's 2020 campaign slogan:
Make America Smart Again
(Okay, yeah, that'd be a loser, I'll grant. People aint got no problem with their edumacations, and would rather continue to operate under the assumption that 'belief' is the same as 'knowledge', and that facts are entirely subjective. Sooner or later, somebody's going to have to reform America's education system without telling Americans that their education system needs reforming. And people wonder why career politicians have different positions publicly and privately.)
Liberals and Democrats tears make me happy. :) Hillary Clinton was a criminal and Trump is not. Hillary Clinton was bought and paid for by Wallstreet. Trump is rich enough he can't be bought by them. I voted for a Black educated man that was worth around 500k when he went into office named Obama. He is now worth excess of 20 million dollars and who knows how much in shadow corporations. He spent a million dollars of tax payers money to fly his dog to Hawaii because his daughters missed it. He spent 3 days a week golfing on tax payers dime almost year round. Moral of my story is a average man will be bought or pushed around. Trump is only alive today because he is worth billions of dollars. Imagine if a average man ran for office and talked about tariffs or government corruption. They would end up dead like the guy who leaked the emails from the DNC. Anyways keep the tears coming I enjoy them. :)
I beg to differ, but you're the exact type of person that lead to Trump's election (i.e. people that have no regard for actual facts), so I'm not going to waste my data explaining.Quote:
Originally Posted by handofthrawn
P.s. is she locked up yet?
I like the fact that you think you voted someone into office with the moral fiber of Pope Francis but if Trump just walked into the Oval Office with (just say) $15m purse, still closely tied with all of his international and domestic businesses, then there is no reason to believe that he will not try enrich himself directly with his Executive powers and the powers of the cabinet members.Quote:
Originally Posted by handofthrawn
Trump supporters like to bash Obama for over-using his powers but never want to acknowledge that it was all for the benefit of real Americans and not for something that directly affects him. Now that there is a real threat of abuse of Presidential powers to benefit only the President and his family...its suddenly OK (most likely because he is white since a black president trying to help people in need just looks like "welfare handouts")
It just goes to show everyone how fast an IQ can drop of those who stare at all the "conflicts of interests" shrug it off as wishful thinking.