Slap some lipstick on that pig Joe
[QUOTE=CaliGuy;2743122]Am I the only one that can see Biden disaster presidency. Biden and White House celebrating their $500 billion giveaway inflation fighter and inflation soars upward. [/QUOTE]Hilarious isn't it. The "Inflation Reduction Act. " It has nothing to do with inflation and everything to do with pork. Green pork.
Momentum. When it counts. Previously, that is.
For the first time since last year the FUX News Poll shows Dems have surged ahead of Repubs on the Generic Congressional Ballot question, 44% to 41%, a huge swing in their favor since April, June and July:
[URL]https://www.pollingreport.com/2022.htm[/URL]
And, yes, the Dem advantage momentum continues in the Poll of Polls version of that question on the RealClearPolitics and FiveThirtyEight sites.
[URL]https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/2022-generic-congressional-vote-7361.html[/URL]
[URL]https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/generic-ballot/[/URL]
Now, it should be pointed out that kind of momentum only mattered in the past before the Repub Party decided their one and only current and future potential winning election "platform" and campaign strategy is to pack state and local ballot collecting and vote counting entities with Big Liars, Election Denying Repub QAnon loons proud and loud about their intentions to announce Repubs as the "winners" of every election going forward no matter what the actual votes were.
So that's a problem.
No, I don't believe in spurious correlations
[QUOTE=Tiny12;2743466]Hi Tooms,
Well, if you believe in spurious correlations, you should go all in and put all your savings in USA Stock index futures. Every year in January, if an NFC team wins, go long, and if an AFC team wins, go short.
The primary determinant of whether the economy performs well or poorly over a 4 or 8 year period is whether the USA went through a recession. If you kick out the recessions and the recoveries, I bet you wouldn't see much of a correlation between GDP growth or real household income or whatever and the party of the president. There are exceptions, like Reagan's second term, Clinton's second term, and, for median household income and wages (but not GDP), 2019. Please note that, perhaps coincidentally, no one party controlled government during these periods. The presidency and at least the House were controlled by different parties.
So, when you boil it all down, the question is when were the recessions? You're clearly blaming COVID and the 2020 recession solely on Trump. You appear to be blaming the collapse of the housing market and the consequent 2008/2009 recession solely on George W. Bush. As well as the collapse of the internet boom. George H. W. Bush is responsible for the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and the subsequent increase in oil prices. And then of course there was the most diabolical of Republicans, Ronald Reagan. He too was responsible for high energy prices. And stagflation and the Fed's actions to control it.
It's so simple isn't. It's like you said, they're Republicans, and "that is what they do for a living. It is the only thing they do, know how to do and want to do. " Nuke the economy. Satan has hardened their hearts.[/QUOTE]There is nothing "spurious" about the correlation between the POTUS and economic results.
The POTUS runs for election on a set of largely economic propositions. In addition to Executive Orders, they then present that agenda to Congress, often outlining specific details to be included in a budget and tax policy. They can and often do lobby individual members of Congress to move legislation negotiations in the direction they want. When placed on their desk they can and often do request a revision to legislation before signing or exercise their veto powers.
Add the incomparable Presidential Bully Pulpit and Fed Chair appointments and a POTUS can easily be more responsible for the economic direction and results than any other federal entity.
The most common denominator in the major economic downturns and job losses of at least the past 100 years is the Party that was in the White House when it started. It was the Repub Party. Every time.
The most common denominator in starting the major economic expansions and jobs creation during that same timeframe has also been the Party in the White House. It was the Dem Party. Every time.
You think that is a spurious correlation?
I used to think the same thing. Pre Reagan. I was an ignorant, ill-informed Bothsider back then. I even stupidly voted for Reagan in 1980. Yes, I was that ignorant and ill-informed.
In my defense, we did not have nearly the consistent pattern to review and consider in 1980. Sure, we had Hoover's Great Repub Depression, Eisenhower's triple Recessions and one of the worst jobs creation records ever. Not really enough data to come to an inevitable and unavoidable conclusion.
However, by the middle of Reagan's first term and noting every Repub vs Dem results before and since over the past century, whooboy, it is now impossible to ignore; Economic disaster, huge balooning deficits accomplishing nothing and skyrocketing unemployment and / or massive job destruction is the Repub Party / s agenda and goal. It must be. No other way to explain the pattern. They can't all be that blundering and incompetent, can they?
You know, it turns out not every player at a crap table has their chips placed on the Pass Line or the Come Bar banking on the shooter to make his point rather than not making it and crapping out. So too it turns out one of the major Parties does not see economic success for the country as its ticket to election victory, power and personal wealth. If they did, they would all be Dems and govern that way.
Besides, wiping out millions of jobs and flushing billions and trillions down the shitter with nothing to show for it is so much easier than creating millions of jobs and improving people's lives for the money. The latter is hard work and you really need to know what you're doing. With little glory and reward for it. It requires a rare dedication to Public Service. So that's why lazy, increasingly addle-brained former Dems like Reagan and Trump switched to the Repub Party when they pursued a career in politics.
Bothsidesism that lies with dogs...
[QUOTE=JustTK;2743436] ...Saying that you have smthg in common with insects bcos you can only see binary is not name calling. I am attacking your message. Which was to call me a QaNon supporter bcos of your binary (your either with us or against us) view of the world. ...[/QUOTE]
Dude, I wouldn't loose any slept over it.
However, it obvious to many of us here, as to why your "bothsidesism" politics is seen as QAnon/Repubs dogma. Your posts are self-evident, no explanation need, for those who see clearly past any Repub rhetoric/dogma dressed up as "bothsidesism".
Let me put it like this. Wrongly or rightly, perhaps it's simply a case of, [b]"He that lies with the dogs, riseth with fleas". [/b]
And BTW, me saying you have something in common with dogs and fleas, by no means, I'm I trying to insult you or call you names.
[QUOTE=JustTK;2743057] ... Clearly I was mistaken. Maybe that's why your called Spidery. [/QUOTE]
Or for that matter, your political "dogma that lies with men with pointy hats and tiki-torches", is maybe why you're called JustTKKK.
Evidently you don't remember
[QUOTE=Tiny12;2743490]So what do you propose? Put price controls on the utilities and watch them all go bankrupt?[/QUOTE]Evidently you don't remember the fiasco in Texas a couple of winters ago (when Buttface Cruz slunk off to Mexico) where people were getting surprise electric bills of $10,000+ because the Texas grid was as badly mismanaged as Texas politics.