patrick.net

Democratic platform has been reduced to hating Trump and pandering to illegal aliens.PATHETIC!

BayArea says

errc says

Strategist says

errc says

Which part do you disagree with? Seems like they’re reporting the facts

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-2009-buying-stocks-is-a-potentially-good-deal-2015-6

Obama gets credit for preventing a depression.
Trump gets credit for a full recovery, and the coming boom.
It's as simple as that. Lets be honest.

Well if we’re being honest here, it looks like The S&P tripled under Obama. It looks like it’s up about 27% under Trump.

Outside of emotional feelZ by the Trumpcucks, ...

What is disingenuous about showing where the stock market was when Obama took office and how it performed under his presidency?

Do you define disingenuous as meaning you don’t like the reality that is showed in the image?

In my book, disingenuous is claiming Obama failed where Trump succeeded. I’ve been banging this drum throughout Trumps presidency. Show any graph of the metric Trump is claiming as his own win, and it’s the exact same trend line. You can hardly tell that the presidency changed hands.

This is getting tiring, i can’t tell if you guys are being honest or not

Not a knock out punch, but a good right cross on the chin of the DNC.

GOP voters are revitalized, and independents are seeing just how effective Trump has been for the country, and the nation is seeing Democrat senators not applauding record low black and latino unemployment.

The midterms will be interesting for sure.

errc says

Show any graph of the metric Trump is claiming as his own win, and it’s the exact same trend line. You can hardly tell that the presidency changed hands.

Wow, just wow. OK, once again.

The last TWO years of Obama (after the QE flow was turned off)

Sniper says

Now compare that to the trend line of Trump's ONE year (WITHOUT any QE)

Sniper says

If those two trend line look the same, well, ....

errc says

This is getting tiring, i can’t tell if you guys are being honest or not

True, we know who's not being honest in this thread.

Why ignore the FACT that without the $4.5 TRILLION of QE injected into the market during Obama, there would have been low growth?

anonymous says

Why gosh darn it - you mean Harley closing one of their plants is a good thing ?

Same with Ford Motor Company having it's credit rating lowered and it's bonds rated as just above junk status ?

Anyone bothered to look at the job cuts website recently ?

Can't have it both ways.

Leftist/Democrats: The roaring economy is still Obama's economy.

Also Leftist/Democrats: Trumps fault for some companies cutting jobs.

anonymous says

Anyone bothered to look at the job cuts website recently ?

Sure, go here, it might help!!

http://www.dailyjobfix.com/

I don't play race politics, that's all. I think Democrats playing race politics show just how weak their platform is.

Sniper says

errc says

Show any graph of the metric Trump is claiming as his own win, and it’s the exact same trend line. You can hardly tell that the presidency changed hands.

Wow, just wow. OK, once again.

The last TWO years of Obama (after the QE flow was turned off)

Sniper says

Now compare that to the trend line of Trump's ONE year (WITHOUT any QE)

Sniper says

If those two trend line look the same, well, ....

errc says

This is getting tiring, i can’t tell if you guys are being honest ...

Why would you compare the last two years of Obamas presidency to the first one of Trumps. Do an apples to apples comparison then.

Either show the trend line from jan 20 2009 to present (you won’t because it blows your narrative to shreds) or post Obamas first year 1/20/09 to Trumps first year 1/20/17. Your attempt to cherry pick further proves my point

errc says

Why would you compare the last two years of Obamas presidency to the first one of Trumps. Do an apples to apples comparison then.

It's a fair comparison. QE was vastly reduced during those stagnant years of BO's economy.

Goran_K says

I don't play race politics, that's all. I think Democrats playing race politics show just how weak their platform is.

I thought the intellectually lazy just gobble up whatever the Repubs say as gospel. Like Trump is somehow responsible for record low black unemployment. What did he do? What was the trendline he inherited

Obviously the racists are the people discrediting Obama while bliwing Trump. It’s very easy to see if you’re paying attention to reality.

And I’m getting tired of defending Obama after ripping him for eight years, but it’s important to be honest and factual

errc says

Why would you compare the last two years of Obamas presidency to the first one of Trumps.

Someone was saying that Trump was following Obama's trend line. That's statement was factually wrong, the charts prove it.

errc says

or post Obamas first year 1/20/09 to Trumps first year 1/20/17. Your attempt to cherry pick further proves my point

Did the market go up 5000+ points in Obama's first year?

What about this?

Sniper says

Why ignore the FACT that without the $4.5 TRILLION of QE injected into the market during Obama,

errc says

height="328" width="600">

Is printing $4.5 Trillion (the RED line) to boost the market just lunch money?

errc says

What did he do?

Massive deregulation, tax reform, basically creating an environment that grows the pie instead of treating it as a zero sum game. You know, the way a REAL economy actually works.

Goran_K says

I don't play race politics, that's all. I think Democrats playing race politics show just how weak their platform is.

It's really sad. That speech was fairly centrist, but you can't get any decent discussion going. Mentioned on facetwat that the Dems need the (poorer) common working citizens to win and it went right to "oh those rays cyst people, it's rays cyst to assume we need them". Yawn.

mell says

It's really sad. That speech was fairly centrist, but you can't get any decent discussion going. Mentioned on facetwat that the Dems need the (poorer) common working citizens to win and it went right to "oh those rays cyst people, it's rays cyst to assume we need them". Yawn.

Lazy leaches will be lazy leaches, they damn sure don't want Trump fucking up their shit.
Go to City Hall, the DMV your local Schools KG - 12, pretty much every administrative building. Tell me what you see? They had shiftless lazyness sewn up.
They got the job based on Pantone chart shades alone. They are great at making your Civil Administrative experience as shitty and a hastle as ever. From the minute you park in the parking garages until the minute you leave.

Ever see a door you're not supposed to enter through, and a Black Civil servant instructing people not to use it?

How do those Motherfuckers do it? That's right from a hide across the street, 10's of yards from the erroneous Entrance so they can purp bark directions to you.
"USE THE OTHER DOOR! THAT ONE IS CLOSED, YOU DON'T NEED TO WORRY ABOUT WHY THERE'S NOT A SIGN ON DOOR!"

another favorite.
"SIR YOU NEED TO REMOVE YOUR BELT AND PUT IT IN THE BASKET" pushes you aside while you're actually taking it off so you almost lose your balance, points to a huddle of people being needlessly hassled by Obama's son.
"Do it OVER THER!" Me "HEY! You need to chill you work for me and my home owner taxes, less you forget that!"
Try that you should see how they act then, they shut the fuck up because they know they are tripping on themselves.

Just miserable cockbites. The bastards could put a sign on the door and call it a day. No they just lock it, even though it says "Main Entrance" So they can bark out orders to you to walk around to the construction entrance on the side.
And if I tell you I have never EVER been able to tell why those doors are locked in the first place other than to give Obama son a chance to flex their authority on the public about something so painfully obvious like a fucking LOCKED DOOR!

Thanks Obama you sure did good!

anonymous says

that could never be because minorities are lazy and just feed off the government teat not to mention incompetent.

Engaging in hyperbole can sometimes be funny. This isn't one of those times.

Also, not sure why you're asking me about "right wing view". Have never voted for a GOP presidential candidate. But after seeing what the left wing tried to do to this country before Trump, I simply see which side is the most dangerous to this republic, and it's undoubtedly the left wing at this point in time.

@anonymous the above comment by Goran should not have been marked personal.

The mere use of "you" is not necessarily an attack on you personally.

Sure, if they're insulting you deliberately or talking about your personal motives or qualities, that would be personal.

anonymous says

Don't need safety and environmental protections

Well of course we need safety and environmental protections, but unfortunately the way these laws usually get made is this:

* Big company realizes that the cost of complying with various regulations is a problem for smaller competitors.
* Big company gets super-virtuous in public about "saving the environment" with new regulations which may or may not actually be effective at saving the environment.
* Small company cannot pay the cost of complying with the regulations and still stay in business.
* Small company dies.
* Big company raises prices because there is less competition. CEO puts feet up on desk and smokes cigar, chuckling to self.

So mere "environmental regulation" by itself is not necessarily a good thing. It has to actually protect the environment in some significant way, without just being an anti-competitive move.

Patrick says

anonymous says

Don't need safety and environmental protections

Well of course we need safety and environmental protections, but unfortunately the way these laws usually get made is this:

* Big company realizes that the cost of complying with various regulations is a problem for smaller competitors.
* Big company gets super-virtuous in public about "saving the environment" with new regulations which may or may not actually be effective at saving the environment.
* Small company cannot pay the cost of complying with the regulations and still stay in business.
* Small company dies.
* Big company raises prices because there is less competition. CEO puts feet up on desk and smokes cigar, chuckling to self.

So mere "environmental regulation" by itself is not necessarily a good thing. It has to actually protect the environment in some significant way, without ju...

Same with the war on coal. Clean coal today is pretty clean. Many say it's a dying sector anyways, fine, so let it die, but in the market place. If it were so much more expensive than other forms of energy then it should be a quick end and transition to other sources. Why punish those people working those jobs like Obummer did before they can find a different job? I have a hunch that clean coal will be around for a while because its uncompetitiveness has been greatly exaggerated. If it only takes 10% of the total mix, so be it. Just don't skew the market with government "regulations".

Was talking to Coworker that immigrated to US 15yrs ago about the speech. He said he has been a democrat since he could vote but is disgusted by them and asked me how to change parties. It pisses him off that he had to come here legally and the dems are always siding with illegals.

anonymous says

Anyway the other day the owner of the largest East Coast oil-refining complex is filing for bankruptcy and blaming an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) biofuel mandate.

This is actually an excellent example of Patrick's statement above. Biofuels are in most cases less environmentally friendly than oil-derived gasoline. They are pushed by big Agro, which, it turns out, not only gobbles up taxpayers' money, but also increases CO2 emissions. True capitalism, where small investment in legislature gives oversized returns.

Once estimates from the literature for process emissions and displacement effects including land-use change are considered, the conclusion is that U.S. biofuel use to date is associated with a net increase rather than a net decrease in CO2 emissions.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10584-016-1764-4
drBu

Wow, Huffington Post poll, in 2016, that would have been stilted the otherway.

A lot of people, young people btw, have been red pilled.

2018 midterms will be very interesting to see.

anon_e9ed4 says

This is actually an excellent example of Patrick's statement above. Biofuels are in most cases less environmentally friendly than oil-derived gasoline. They are pushed by big Agro, which, it turns out, not only gobbles up taxpayers' money, but also increases CO2 emissions. True capitalism, where small investment in legislature gives oversized returns.

Absolutely correct, when one considers the petroleum involved in transporting/developing fertilizer and moving heavy feedstock to ethanol plants.

Anyway...Trump to Again Propose Eliminating Chemical Safety Board, Official Says


———————-

Trump is doing a good job so far. Pissing off the piss ant liberals and putting crooked Hillary in jail. #MAGA googoo gaga