SamSpade
Well-Known Member
Nuts, then the Democrats can get 100% of the vote!
Bad News for trump from FOX News.
- Thread starter The Boss
- Start date
Nuts, then the Democrats can get 100% of the vote!
Barry's record for being wrong was quite something.
PsyOps
Pixelated
longest weakest economic recovery ever....
Let's be honest about this. Obama was handed an extremely crappy economy from Bush. No one person in our federal government can be blamed or credited for our economy condition. While leadership means nearly everything, anything our government does to affect the economy is primarily at the hands of congress. We have to stop simplifying it to solely blaming or crediting the president.
Barabbas
Active Member
I don't think he intended to be wrong.
Clearly, the reason for the slow/weak/almost non-existent recovery was intentional. It would seem the reason for the now-admitted illegal/improper "monitoring" (spying on) of President Trump was to help ensure he would not be president and Hillz would continue to intentionally slow-down/damage the US economy.
He would not be wrong if his policies, or those just as bad/damaging, were kept up.
Good point. And a sad state of affairs too.
I think most of that economy can be laid directly at Barney Franks doorstep. His idea that we’re going to give housing loans to people who have proven that they weren’t going to pay drove the price of housing through the roof. This was a direct cause of the housing bubble collapse.
PsyOps
Pixelated
I have no doubt democrats, by-and-large, are responsible for the housing/lending/banking crash. This is a great example of what happens when the government dictates how private companies operate. Of course, they shoved Obamacare down our throats, and nearly all of that was rooted in lies. Now, because democrats don't learn, but only operate on emotions, they aim to put a candidate on the ticket that calls for much, much more of this "free stuff". They see an endless well of money in tax payers.
Barabbas
Active Member
I almost always agree with your posts.
In this case, while I agree in theory, there are things that leaders do that do make a difference. For example, we know simply announcing the policy of drastically reducing regulations caused a great deal of increases in business activity, even before the reduction in regulations occurred. It was all about establishing a new culture.
PsyOps
Pixelated
I absolutely agree. We are a reactive society. The stock market rarely makes decisions based on things that actually happened; they make decisions on speculation that something might happen.
Obamacare would have never happened if congress had a GOP majority. Presidents can accomplish very little without congressional support. We can give the blame or credit (depending on how you look at it) to Obama for Obamacare, but it could have never happened without congress. A president cannot put our country at war without congressional approval. A president cannot, alone, put someone into the Supreme Court. Laws can be enacted with the super majority wiping out any ability for the president to veto, making congress even more powerful than the president. The SCOTUS can nix that law making them more powerful than congress.
Educated voters (and I don't mean people with some sort of higher education) should know where powers lay; and it really is rarely with the president.
So ,nothing to say it's wrong,.......got ya!
Yooper
Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
There are also the intentional bubbles created by folks so that they can sell (cashing out with huge profit) before it crashes. Fortunately, when all is averaged out, a rigged (at times) stock market still works for us common folk.
--- End of line (MCP)
Barabbas
Active Member
I get what you're saying, and agree.
The president currently has far too much authority. A ten page law becomes a 65 volume set of regulations. In that way, the president DOES have the authority to be the most powerful entity. Similarly, a president can launch weapons against an adversary, and act of war, and continue to do so for something like two months before Congress gets involved or has any authority to stop that president from doing so. At that point, the president could have effectively taken us to war (and, in some cases, won the war) before Congress says a legal word or has any input whatsoever.
But, longer-term actions, budgetary actions, etc., are far more the actions of Congress. I've made the comment to others that the president does not have the power of the purse, but he does in that he signed the spending bills into law. His voice is that of 2/3 of the Congress folks, because it takes that many to override what he says. However, politically, he can do nothing because then he will be stymied from doing anything about anything without the government funded. Congress owns that completely.
..................he wasn't wrong.
who ever told you that was incorrect.longest weakest economic recovery ever....
Barabbas
Active Member
Except, of course, for the entire time he's been out of office.
Unless it's pro trump of course.
Barabbas
Active Member
Unless, of course, you review the data.
............not as long as yours is.
Barabbas
Active Member
I've seen people say to ignore that, due to poll problems as well.
Straight from the GAO and Dept of Labor reports.