• 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!

Ironic Or What?

Based on what? 1 year of results vs. 8 years of results? Stock market growth? GDP? Reduction rates of unemployment? Talk about your cherry-picked facts. Which year are you comparing to? The first Obama year? The last? One of the ones in the middle?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...22769454f82_story.html?utm_term=.f1b87d655418

"The economy grew 2.3 percent in 2017, better than the year before, but far short of what Trump is promising."

Please quote some sources for this economy that is booming now so much more than it was a year ago.

I'm willing to admit that we've only got one year in so far, but that year has been better than any of Obama's years. It doesn't matter what Trump promised, the economy is better. Funny though how you guys claim that most of the first year is is due to a previous president and then you turn right around and criticize Trump because his first year economy isn't what Trump was promising. What happened to the first year being due to a previous president? You are just showing your biased partisanship.
 
I'm willing to admit that we've only got one year in so far, but that year has been better than any of Obama's years.

Based on what metric(s)?? Because there were Obama years where GDP grew more than 2.3%, unemployment dropped more than 0.7%, etc.

It doesn't matter what Trump promised, the economy is better.

Better than what?

You have yet to provide an iota of data, a single fact, or ANYTHING resembling an argument that could be analyzed in any sort of logical fashion.

"Trump good", is the sum of your argument.

Funny though how you guys claim that most of the first year is is due to a previous president and then you turn right around and criticize Trump because his first year economy isn't what Trump was promising. What happened to the first year being due to a previous president? You are just showing your biased partisanship.

What's also funny is how even after we tell you that the first year is due to a previous president, and that Trump is going to have a hard time delivering on his promises of growth in the first year precisely because of that fact, you still think I'm criticizing Trump for not making any great improvements in the economy. Really, I'm criticizing him for being an idiot and thinking he could make any great strides in the first year. He may have set us up for greatness in the future, but these things take time to spool up, and it's just as likely that he's setting us up for an abysmal recession in a few years. You are simply unable to comprehend the level of discussion necessary in order to effectively manage a country, while being blissfully unaware of that and unwilling to learn. Whereas I can at least recognize the level of comprehension necessary and understand that I'm not up to that level, but am willing to listen to those that are.
 
22DEC17 President trump signed the “Tax Cuts & Jobs Act.” Less than thirty days later, we find our government shut, finger pointing abundanza and no one knows where the money is going to come from for veterans, troops and all other ‘non-essential’ services. My personal budget won’t stand that sort of upheaval.

If I were you, I'd dash off a strongly worded note to Shutdown Schumer.
 
Based on what metric(s)?? Because there were Obama years where GDP grew more than 2.3%, unemployment dropped more than 0.7%, etc.



Better than what?

You have yet to provide an iota of data, a single fact, or ANYTHING resembling an argument that could be analyzed in any sort of logical fashion.

"Trump good", is the sum of your argument.



What's also funny is how even after we tell you that the first year is due to a previous president, and that Trump is going to have a hard time delivering on his promises of growth in the first year precisely because of that fact, you still think I'm criticizing Trump for not making any great improvements in the economy. Really, I'm criticizing him for being an idiot and thinking he could make any great strides in the first year. He may have set us up for greatness in the future, but these things take time to spool up, and it's just as likely that he's setting us up for an abysmal recession in a few years. You are simply unable to comprehend the level of discussion necessary in order to effectively manage a country, while being blissfully unaware of that and unwilling to learn. Whereas I can at least recognize the level of comprehension necessary and understand that I'm not up to that level, but am willing to listen to those that are.

The facts are out there. You just choose to ignore them.
 
Republicans were elected in droves because voters realized that Democrats can't govern.

Bubble and bust isn't governing, it's profiteering. Republicans were elected in "droves" because the average IQ is 100 and half the people are dumber than that. I mean, how many times do you have to get burned before you stop acting like Republicans are better for the country? By what rational measure do these elitist morons continue to feel proud of debt, war and apathy to the poor? That IS their cycle and their legacy.

Maybe the Democrats are lazy, but that's only because they imagine they'll always look good compared to people who have resorted to treating Trump like a messenger from god. If I was in a competition against such glaring magical delusion I might also come to doubt the ability of the people to be rationally governed. So, maybe the crazy is a symptom of the audience as much as the performance. Either way there's enough blame to go around, but to ignore the conservative contribution to the national pathology is especially blind. It's like watching a car crash and declaring it to be a pre-ordained traffic realignment.
 
Bubble and bust isn't governing, it's profiteering. Republicans were elected in "droves" because the average IQ is 100 and half the people are dumber than that. I mean, how many times do you have to get burned before you stop acting like Republicans are better for the country? By what rational measure do these elitist morons continue to feel proud of debt, war and apathy to the poor? That IS their cycle and their legacy.

Maybe the Democrats are lazy, but that's only because they imagine they'll always look good compared to people who have resorted to treating Trump like a messenger from god. If I was in a competition against such glaring magical delusion I might also come to doubt the ability of the people to be rationally governed. So, maybe the crazy is a symptom of the audience as much as the performance. Either way there's enough blame to go around, but to ignore the conservative contribution to the national pathology is especially blind. It's like watching a car crash and declaring it to be a pre-ordained traffic realignment.

Keep on telling yourself that. If they tested the IQ's of all voters you would find that more of them are Democrats than they are Republicans. Democrats cater to the poor and uneducated, minorities, immigrants, and those on government programs and I hate to break the news to you, but these people, on average, are not rocket scientists.
 
If they tested the IQ's of all voters you would find that more of them are Democrats than they are Republicans.

Uhhh...ummm...yeah. Thanks for proving my point.
 
Back
Top Bottom