• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why I think GOPers hate Bill Clinton and Obama.

independentusa said:
When Bill Clinton took the reigns of government the previous President, Bush Sr left him a recession, which Clinton not only turned into huge economic and job growth, but got our government as close to deficit free as we have been before WWII. This did not and does not sit well for the GOPers. They constantly bring up his infidelity while passing over Trump's without a problem. So the GOP hates him for his competence and doing what they had not been able to do. Now flash forward to Obama. Many think it is because he is black that the GOP, a party that is mostly white, hates him. I don't think that is the major cause of the hate. Again when Obama took office his predecessor, this time Bush Jr, left him a recession that was so deep, it seemed like a depression. Once again the Dem president, with a hostile congress, was able to give us the economy we have today. No, Trump did not get an economy in trouble, he got a economy that was growing and accelerating even before Trump got into office. Once again the GOP hates Obama for his competence, although being black did not help. So the GOPers hate anyone from the other party who does well in office and does so by showing up their predecessors who are GOPers.
Click to expand...

we hate them because they are terrible people. Clinton raped women, banged an intern in the oval office and obama let four Americans die for votes. I could go on for pages about why I hate them. Meanwhile lefties are outraged that Trump let a black man speak his mind in the oval office.
 
AlphaOmega said:
we hate them because they are terrible people. Clinton raped women, banged an intern in the oval office and obama let four Americans die for votes. I could go on for pages about why I hate them. Meanwhile lefties are outraged that Trump let a black man speak his mind in the oval office.
Click to expand...

lol...fantasy post of the year nominee.
 
ObamacareFail said:
That is a load of half truths and outright intellectually dishonest baloney. The economic turnaround during the Clinton administration was primarily due to the dot com bubble. When that bubble burst, he left GW Bush a recession. As for the deficit reduction, the Clinton Administrations own numbers predicted increasing deficits throughout the next several years. It was the republican controlled congress who proposed a balanced budget bill before the end of Clinton's first term. Clinton vetoed the first two proposed bills and was about to veto a third until his handlers told him that if he did, he could forget about re-election. Attempting to give Clinton credit for balanced budgets is ludicrous. And it was not Bush Jr who left Obama with a deep recession, it was the democrats in congress who were responsible for the causes of the market collapse that Bush Jr warned about. And while the recession eventually ended, Obama destroyed any employment gains with Obamacare.
Click to expand...

Actually you are wrong. The Bush tax cuts came because the GOP said that the because of the good economy and the fact of lowering deficits, they estimated over a trillion dollars of surplus over the next ten years, that we should give back the money to the people rather than have the government just use the money for more spending. I like the way you try to blame everything on the a Democrat, what a load. As president, Bush could stop anything that the Dems tried to do and he did. The GOp are the ones who always want the financial industry to have its way with our economy. Look how they have now once again loosed the reins on them. And what is interesting is that Clinton raised taxes after his first year in office and the GOP screamed that it would ruin the economy. In stead it lowered the deficit and people felt like the economy was going to only get better and began to spend. We are a consumer driven economy and with people spending the economy went wild. The dot com bubble did not create 22 million jobs, the economy did well because of the spending. I have an economics degree and I watched all of this happening so I know what i am talking about. You probably watch Fox News, so you get their angle which is to always blame the Dems.
 
Blue Dog said:
Politics has been polarized for a long time. Some have opined it began during the Clinton/Gingrich feud. Both sides wanted credit for creating the surplus...
Click to expand...

I think the Clinton clan began the toxic political atmosphere, however it became particularly nasty with Senator's Reid and Schumer. That is when true bipartisanship ended.
 
Atheist 2020 said:
The Clinton's are more conservative then any Democrat president in the last 100 years. To make the Clinton's look more to the left, it pushed the Republican party to the far right were they never have been before. The Republican party has moved so far to the right it is now a true fascism government under the leadership of Trump. I would not be shocked if the Republican party would over trow the democratic government and rule as a single party and killing millions of people in the name of freedom.
Click to expand...

Such intellectual dishonesty. Are you kidding about the Clintons? On Healthcare, they attemp[ted to go even further to the left then Obama ultimately did. Hillary's plan was to push us into full socialized medicine in one fell swoop. Bill Clinton did feign to the middle after the 1994 midterms kicked his party's ass and gave control of both houses of congress to the republicans. And as for your suggestion that the republicans went to the right to the level of fascism, that's utter nonsense and an insult to those who actually lived under fascism in Europe in the WW2 era. The republicans are no further to the right then Former Democrat president and party icon John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
 
calamity said:
lol...fantasy post of the year nominee.
Click to expand...

Actually he is correct. Clinton raped Juaniata Broderack, exposed his genitals to Paula Jones and banged an intern(Monica Lewinsky) when se was not much older then his own daughter. And were you not paying attnetion when CNN lefties just days ago referred to Kanye West as a "house negroe" simply over the fact that he is friends with Trump? I have not hear any democrats or lefties on this board criticize that kind of left wing racism. Do you want to be the first?
 
ObamacareFail said:
Actually he is correct. Clinton raped Juaniata Broderack, exposed his genitals to Paula Jones and banged an intern(Monica Lewinsky) when se was not much older then his own daughter. And were you not paying attnetion when CNN lefties just days ago referred to Kanye West as a "house negroe" simply over the fact that he is friends with Trump? I have not hear any democrats or lefties on this board criticize that kind of left wing racism. Do you want to be the first?
Click to expand...

Even Ken Starr didn't believe Broderack--and, he was looking to believe anything. :roll:
 
Atheist 2020 said:
The Clinton's are more conservative then any Democrat president in the last 100 years. To make the Clinton's look more to the left, it pushed the Republican party to the far right were they never have been before. The Republican party has moved so far to the right it is now a true fascism government under the leadership of Trump. I would not be shocked if the Republican party would over trow the democratic government and rule as a single party and killing millions of people in the name of freedom.
Click to expand...

Sounds like lunacy.
 
ObamacareFail said:
Such intellectual dishonesty. Are you kidding about the Clintons? On Healthcare, they attemp[ted to go even further to the left then Obama ultimately did. Hillary's plan was to push us into full socialized medicine in one fell swoop. Bill Clinton did feign to the middle after the 1994 midterms kicked his party's ass and gave control of both houses of congress to the republicans. And as for your suggestion that the republicans went to the right to the level of fascism, that's utter nonsense and an insult to those who actually lived under fascism in Europe in the WW2 era. The republicans are no further to the right then Former Democrat president and party icon John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
Click to expand...

America First is a fascist term; Make America Great Again is a fascist term. The fascism we are in is not German or Italy, but, equal to being Spain and South America during the 1950's and into the 1970's. Study the United Fruit Company ... and study yourself, both equal to each other but one a company another is a passive fascist.
 
independentusa said:
When Bill Clinton took the reigns of government the previous President, Bush Sr left him a recession, which Clinton not only turned into huge economic and job growth, but got our government as close to deficit free as we have been before WWII. This did not and does not sit well for the GOPers. They constantly bring up his infidelity while passing over Trump's without a problem. So the GOP hates him for his competence and doing what they had not been able to do. Now flash forward to Obama. Many think it is because he is black that the GOP, a party that is mostly white, hates him. I don't think that is the major cause of the hate. Again when Obama took office his predecessor, this time Bush Jr, left him a recession that was so deep, it seemed like a depression. Once again the Dem president, with a hostile congress, was able to give us the economy we have today. No, Trump did not get an economy in trouble, he got a economy that was growing and accelerating even before Trump got into office. Once again the GOP hates Obama for his competence, although being black did not help. So the GOPers hate anyone from the other party who does well in office and does so by showing up their predecessors who are GOPers.
Click to expand...

They SHARED THIS foreign policy :


Obama grabbing ankles.jpg
 
calamity said:
Even Ken Starr didn't believe Broderack--and, he was looking to believe anything. :roll:
Click to expand...

Nice attempt at a dodge, however you fail, considering your party's claim at the onset of the accusation against Kavanaugh. Your party says: Women claiming assault should be believed. And you also are dodging my point regarding Kanye West
 
Atheist 2020 said:
America First is a fascist term; Make America Great Again is a fascist term. The fascism we are in is not German or Italy, but, equal to being Spain and South America during the 1950's and into the 1970's. Study the United Fruit Company ... and study yourself, both equal to each other but one a company another is a passive fascist.
Click to expand...

I do not want to offend, however that is the most idiotic political statement I have ever read. You are virtually suggesting that everyone who is not a globalist is a fascist. You are equating patriotism with fascism.
 
ObamacareFail said:
I do not want to offend, however that is the most idiotic political statement I have ever read. You are virtually suggesting that everyone who is not a globalist is a fascist. You are equating patriotism with fascism.
Click to expand...

Anyone that supports Trump is a fascist. Full Stop.
 
Atheist 2020 said:
America First is a fascist term; Make America Great Again is a fascist term. The fascism we are in is not German or Italy, but, equal to being Spain and South America during the 1950's and into the 1970's. Study the United Fruit Company ... and study yourself, both equal to each other but one a company another is a passive fascist.
Click to expand...
In your own way you just referred to Bill Clinton as fascist. Congratulations! He used the term decades before Trump.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
independentusa said:
When Bill Clinton took the reigns of government the previous President, Bush Sr left him a recession, which Clinton not only turned into huge economic and job growth, but got our government as close to deficit free as we have been before WWII. This did not and does not sit well for the GOPers. They constantly bring up his infidelity while passing over Trump's without a problem. So the GOP hates him for his competence and doing what they had not been able to do. Now flash forward to Obama. Many think it is because he is black that the GOP, a party that is mostly white, hates him. I don't think that is the major cause of the hate. Again when Obama took office his predecessor, this time Bush Jr, left him a recession that was so deep, it seemed like a depression. Once again the Dem president, with a hostile congress, was able to give us the economy we have today. No, Trump did not get an economy in trouble, he got a economy that was growing and accelerating even before Trump got into office. Once again the GOP hates Obama for his competence, although being black did not help. So the GOPers hate anyone from the other party who does well in office and does so by showing up their predecessors who are GOPers.
Click to expand...

If you think Clinton single-handidly turned around the government and created jobs, then you must give credit to Trump for that as well, right?
 
independentusa said:
Actually you are wrong. The Bush tax cuts came because the GOP said that the because of the good economy and the fact of lowering deficits, they estimated over a trillion dollars of surplus over the next ten years, that we should give back the money to the people rather than have the government just use the money for more spending. I like the way you try to blame everything on the a Democrat, what a load. As president, Bush could stop anything that the Dems tried to do and he did. The GOp are the ones who always want the financial industry to have its way with our economy. Look how they have now once again loosed the reins on them. And what is interesting is that Clinton raised taxes after his first year in office and the GOP screamed that it would ruin the economy. In stead it lowered the deficit and people felt like the economy was going to only get better and began to spend. We are a consumer driven economy and with people spending the economy went wild. The dot com bubble did not create 22 million jobs, the economy did well because of the spending. I have an economics degree and I watched all of this happening so I know what i am talking about. You probably watch Fox News, so you get their angle which is to always blame the Dems.
Click to expand...
To much to respond to on tapatalk. I'll correct your misconceptions tonight.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
independentusa said:
When Bill Clinton took the reigns of government the previous President, Bush Sr left him a recession, which Clinton not only turned into huge economic and job growth, but got our government as close to deficit free as we have been before WWII. This did not and does not sit well for the GOPers. They constantly bring up his infidelity while passing over Trump's without a problem. So the GOP hates him for his competence and doing what they had not been able to do. Now flash forward to Obama. Many think it is because he is black that the GOP, a party that is mostly white, hates him. I don't think that is the major cause of the hate. Again when Obama took office his predecessor, this time Bush Jr, left him a recession that was so deep, it seemed like a depression. Once again the Dem president, with a hostile congress, was able to give us the economy we have today. No, Trump did not get an economy in trouble, he got a economy that was growing and accelerating even before Trump got into office. Once again the GOP hates Obama for his competence, although being black did not help. So the GOPers hate anyone from the other party who does well in office and does so by showing up their predecessors who are GOPers.
Click to expand...

What about the GOP congress at the time?
 
independentusa said:
Actually you are wrong. The Bush tax cuts came because the GOP said that the because of the good economy and the fact of lowering deficits, they estimated over a trillion dollars of surplus over the next ten years, that we should give back the money to the people rather than have the government just use the money for more spending.
Click to expand...

To be blunt, I don't really care what the GOP said. I care what they did. I care that the tax cuts were passed into law.I understand the economic benefits from the tax cuts as well as the fact that tax cuts by three presidents, two republicans and one democrat(GW Bush, Reagan, and JFK) led to overall increases in tax revenue, not a lower revenues. You need to avoid thinking about taxes and tax revenue as a zero sum game. The increased economic activity from tax cuts in the long run creates more jobs and more income to tax. It's not rocket science. As for the lowering deficits that takes congressional will power, which is usually lacking in both parties. When congress spends roughly a dollar and a half for every new dollar of tax income, deficits tend not to shrink. I blame both parties in congress for that.



I like the way you try to blame everything on the a Democrat, what a load.
Click to expand...

You can like or dislike whatever you please. I call it as I see it regardless of party or how it may appear to you. One democrat, JFK, in regards to economics out performed Nixon a republican. Clinton benefited largely from the dot com bubble when the internet and personal computers hit the market in such a big way. And once again, it's ludicrous to give Clinton credit for lowering the deficit or creating a surplus when he vetoed the means to do so twice. His own administration's projections had the deficits going up and up and up.

As president, Bush could stop anything that the Dems tried to do and he did.
Click to expand...

I suggest that you study the "Separation of Powers" Even after the GOP regained control of congress, the GOP was still loaded with enough RINOs that Bush lacked the numbers to reign in quasi government mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.


The GOp are the ones who always want the financial industry to have its way with our economy. Look how they have now once again loosed the reins on them. And what is interesting is that Clinton raised taxes after his first year in office and the GOP screamed that it would ruin the economy. In stead it lowered the deficit and people felt like the economy was going to only get better and began to spend. We are a consumer driven economy and with people spending the economy went wild. The dot com bubble did not create 22 million jobs, the economy did well because of the spending. I have an economics degree and I watched all of this happening so I know what i am talking about.
Click to expand...

The Clinton tax increase absolutely did not lower the deficit. And I never made any claim on how many jobs the dot com bubble created, however it was massive. And I am not necessarily impressed by your economic degree as I do not know which University you earned it at. A considerable number of so-called economic professors have never spent any time in the real economic world.


You probably watch Fox News,
Click to expand...

I absolutely watch Fox News. It's not perfect, however it is the closest thing there is in 24 hour cable news to objectivity. CNN is a sick joke as is MSNBC.


so you get their angle which is to always blame the Dems.
Click to expand...

I do not blame only the dems. I blame some of the idiot RINOS in the republican party as well. I don't care for the establishment politicians in either party. I consider myself a conservative populist. I am not registered with either party and I skipped the house and senate choices on the 2016 ballot. While the republicans appear at least in part to have grown a spine since Trump was elected, I have an overall very low opinion of congress as a whole.
 
Last edited:
calamity said:
Even Ken Starr didn't believe Broderack--and, he was looking to believe anything. :roll:
Click to expand...

I do not live or die by what Ken Starr believed or did not believe. and what happened to the left's latest "all women should be believed" mantra? Juanita's story is much much more believable then Dr For's story. At least Bill Clinton has a known history of sexual assault.
 
ObamacareFail said:
I don't know about Canadian style government as the Canadians accepted a universal healthcare plan, but I otherwise agree with your points.
Click to expand...

Canada's healthcare plan was introduced over 50 years ago and the vast majority of Canadians were born after it came into force. The problem is that, like US Social Security, successive governments have failed to display the backbone necessary to significantly alter it in the ways needed in order to ensure it remains viable and serves the needs of Canadians. Bottom line, however, even for this conservative Canadian, I very much appreciate the fact my healthcare plan, while tax expensive, provides all the emergency and catastrophic coverage I will ever need and I never have a first, let alone second thought about going bankrupt or doing without essential healthcare due to personal cost constrictions.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Canada's healthcare plan was introduced over 50 years ago and the vast majority of Canadians were born after it came into force. The problem is that, like US Social Security, successive governments have failed to display the backbone necessary to significantly alter it in the ways needed in order to ensure it remains viable and serves the needs of Canadians. Bottom line, however, even for this conservative Canadian, I very much appreciate the fact my healthcare plan, while tax expensive, provides all the emergency and catastrophic coverage I will ever need and I never have a first, let alone second thought about going bankrupt or doing without essential healthcare due to personal cost constrictions.
Click to expand...
It's not only a problem with social security here, it's the same with Medicare. Both programs are over a half century old and the government still cannot make them long term viable. Any time a fix is proposed, it involves a combination of more taxes and less benefits, or raising the eligibility age. At some point in time, the taxpayers are going to say "What's the point?" To be honest, the only way to fix a government program is to privatize it and just let the government audit it. The government beauracracy are bean counters. They spend as little as possible on actual healthcare and waste the savings in administrative positions and raiding the trust fund for general spending. Canada is probably doing the same. If the USA ever ends up with a Canadian type system, it will just be allowing everyone to buy into Medicare. That system is so broken now that it can barely handle senior citizens who have been paying into it all their adult lives through payroll deduction. Putting everyone on it would blow up Medicare. I will be eligible for Medicare in two months. I have very little confidence it the programs viability.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom