Reply With Quote
People vote for the guy I don't like.
Snowflake.
Snowflake.
That's my comment buddy. Not influenced by anything else tbh
Here ya go Derp, using your numbers.
Spoiler alert, you're still ing re ed
Don't worry. I'm not going to attack them like the left does to anyone with a hat, sign, or dissenting opinion.
Snowflake.
I'm sorry that really set you off.It's the only video of his I saw.
Looks like the truth isn't important to him or you.
Here ya go Derp, using your numbers.
Spoiler alert, you're still ing re ed
Before Derp tries to say I fudged the numbers:
Draw a line from 2008 to 2016. Nothing to brag about.Here ya go Derp, using your numbers.
Spoiler alert, you're still ing re ed
It would've looked like Dubya's numbers if the military meddling hadn't transitioned from full invasions to drone strikes, air strike, covert ops. So, there's a win for ya.
You were wrong.
You can't talk your way out of it.
1) It's still an increase though, which proves your original statement wrong. Do you admit your original statement about median income decreasing under Obama was wrong, or are you moving the goal posts again?
2) The line from 2008 to 2016 would still be better than the median income growth shown by your party of choice, so in that sense it's absolutely something to brag about (that'll be especially true when we see median income growth for Trump's 1st term)
3) 2017 was Obama's budget year. It was his policy, negotiating with congress, tax plan, etc., that went into the country's 2017 budget. You don't get to reassign credit for that fiscal year just because it helps your argument.
Sure, I was off by a year. Median income went up the last two years of Obama. I had rounded down the last year. Giving him 2017 is a bit weak, but if you want to see it that way, that's fine.1) It's still an increase though, which proves your original statement wrong. Do you admit your original statement about median income decreasing under Obama was wrong, or are you moving the goal posts again?
2) The line from 2008 to 2016 would still be better than the median income growth shown by your party of choice, so in that sense it's absolutely something to brag about (that'll be especially true when we see median income growth for Trump's 1st term
3) 2017 was Obama's budget year. It was his policy, negotiating with congress, tax plan, etc., that went into the country's 2017 budget. You don't get to reassign credit for that fiscal year just because it helps your argument.
A $2000 dip from 2009 to 2014 is godawful. That should never be something we just accept and make excuses for.
If you want to give Obama credit for not totally ing it up the final few years to try and set up Hillary with something, thenK.
No, you were off by two years. 2015 median income was still higher than 2008/2009.
It's not really, a president's last budget year is always the year he leaves office. 2017 was his tax plan and his budget. Trump's oligarch tax plan didn't take effect until 2018, he shouldn't get to use Obama's 2017 growth to inflate the averages for his abortion of a 1st term.
What should he have done differently? Be specific. Don't say pass a bigger stimulus package, he wanted to do that and McConnell filibustered it. I think he should have said you to McConnell and used the nuclear option.
I'm giving Obama credit for being better than conservatives are at generating income growth for working class Americans. That's it. The fact conservatives set the bar so low by destroying the income levels of middle class Americans isn't Obama's fault.If you want to give Obama credit for not totally ing it up the final few years to try and set up Hillary with something, then
Derp is actually winning by losing.
The more you engage him the more he'll post like a maniac.
I am telling you man. Trump’s supporter are ing re ed.Here ya go Derp, using your numbers.
Spoiler alert, you're still ing re ed
Here is an updated graph with added commentary so the simple folks can more easily understand:
Like Trump dumping and distancing from Steve Bannon, I found out that the forum’s conservative super-friends have stopped returning derps PMs and will no longer respond to his beacon calls for halp.
Policies have immediate effects. I have no doubt that you heard the line about slow moving parts that we all did in public education factory.
What policies did Trump put in place to contribute to the 2017 income growth? He spent most of his time in 2017 tripping over his trying to repeal Obamacare, and once it got blocked he moved on to cutting taxes for rich people in 2018. Neither one had any impact on the income growth in 2017.
The crony capitalism didn't work. Come to terms.
Well, you get what you pay for. If you can live with five years of regression, they'll gladly give it to you.
I never said it did, I asked you what he should have done differently and you can't provide an answer. I already provided one - he should have gone nuclear on the McConnell filibuster with a huge stimulus package and paid for it by taxing rich people.
Crony capitalism is capitalism. The goal in capitalism is to maximize profits, if you can do that by lobbying and influencing a government that's been hamstrung by conservative deregulation, you're going to since it's in the best interest of your shareholders. If you hate crony capitalism then you hate capitalism.
The alternative is perpetual regression. You're being disingenuous pretending that I ever said the economic recovery was great. If the conservatives offered me a candidate whose policy would improve the life of median Americans more than the democrats' policy does, I'd vote for that conservative.
Not really. Prosperity has a historical upward trend.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
