American Politics

[Gino02]

Biden-Harris administration announces new and truly innovative plan to win the 2024 presidential election. They requested Trump (with AOC as VP) to take over immediately so that they can again blame Trump and his cronies for everything, and thus win the 2024 election easily with all-main-in ballots.

[JustTK]

Here is what you said "Historically the Reps use supply side economics that favour business, so you would expect the Dems to do better on the factors that they target."
First, I assume that you meant to say "historically" and were simply too lazy to correct your error.

First thanks for correcting my spelling error which was already spelled correctly.

Second, you alluded to the fact that "supply side" economics worked. It is right there in black and white: "so you would expect the Dems to do better on the factors that they target. " In other words, if "Dems do better on the factors they target", Repubs do better on the factors "they" target.

Second I didn't say anything about supply side economics apart from that Reps used it. [Deleted by Admin]

I didn't say I thought SSE did or did not work. I simply said that the Dems were likely to do better on the issues that they target themselves bcos the Reps don't use those same targets.

Anything else you want to put in my mouth while you have my attention?

[MarquisdeSade1]

Exactly. Why do you think most corporations (except for few like My Pillow) hates Trump? Because he refuses to be a puppet of these corporations that controls the American politics. Because he refuses to start any war. Because he believes in diplomacy over wars. Because he cares about how your 401 K performs. Because he cares about keeping prices affordable for the citizens. The list goes on.

https://www.aol.com/news/pope-critic...5OETM5Gklaj9EA

He agrees that Putin was provoked into fighting, but thinks he's being a meany LOL.

He just needs to be kinder so the west wins LMAO.

Never bet against the Russians, they are the salt of the earth!

[Gino02]

Pope Francis says Ukraine war "perhaps somehow either provoked or not prevented".

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/pope-fr...not-prevented/

He said that months before the war, a head of state warned him that NATO was "barking at the gates of Russia," and that Russia would not tolerate it, which could lead to war.

Do we need to investigate if it was Biden or Trump who made NATO to provoke Russia to start the war? LOL.

[ScatManDoo]

Yes, I didn't look so closely at those bcos I assumed they would be correlated and, well, I have a life. Hehe. Historically those are the factors that the Dems used to run on and target. Histroically the Reps use supply side economics that favour business, so you would expect the Dems to do better on the factors that they target.

Let's look a little at a different measure. GDP - check out this report - https://www.thebalance.com/democrats...conomy-4771839.

Obvioulsy FDR is the clear winner bcos he was pres during the economic vacuum post WW2.

While I was getting my degree in economics from one of the Universities of California.

We were shown that the most successful post war economies were run in a very flexible manner.

Limited resources that got shuttled from one needy place to another needed place.

Flexibility, flexibility, and more flexibility.

FDR's post WW2 economic policies were far too stiff.

Moron.

[Elvis 2008]

Uh. Carter's was barely a blip on the screen by comparison. And his was probably closer to "life-altering" than any of the other two Dem-related ones of the past 100 years you mentioned. LOL. The "'37" recession and post WWII recession were as minor and forgettable as Biden's minor GDP Growth contraction that is so far as close to flat as it is to even a 3% contraction.

Carter's handoff to Reagan was still better than any Repub to Dem or even the Repub to Repub (1988) handoff of the past 100 years. Dems can only dream and wish they could ever enjoy the economic conditions, trends and trajectory Reagan inherited from Carter in a someday, faraway future Repub to Dem handoff.

And now we have proof of the genius concept of investing based on who is in office. I went to triple shorts starting in April and am up 50%. Fully invested Eih AKA the self proclaimed Milton Friedman is down 20% after being fully invested in this market. This is a difference of 70%. You would think given the difference in such a score Milton would shut up, but he is still rambling on about his beloved Dems.

The issue now is people are still spending like drunken sailors and they believe the government which just handed out free money will do it again. They do not get this was s one time deal.

[Elvis 2008]

Exactly. Why do you think most corporations (except for few like My Pillow) hates Trump? Because he refuses to be a puppet of these corporations that controls the American politics. Because he refuses to start any war. Because he believes in diplomacy over wars. Because he cares about how your 401 K performs. Because he cares about keeping prices affordable for the citizens. The list goes on.

Good post. Yeah, the Dems are so afraid of Trump that they have tried like crazy to beat him everywhere but the ballot box. If the election were today, Biden would get killed. We saw how the polls lied about Trump's support in both elections. My guess is Biden's approval rating now is closer to 25% than the 39% listed.

We saw the dumb Dems cheering on the drug companies and their overrated vaccines. Then it was the defense industry to help Ukraine. As soon as they got their $40 billion, all of a sudden Russia was winning and a Ukraine loss was in the cards. There would not have been a war at all if not for the Dems stirring up shit in Ukraine and Russia. Hell, the Dems beloved Ukraine ambassador said there would not have been a war if Trump had been re-elected.

We had one dumb Dem here say that the NASDAQ is not a market indicator just so it would not be official that we are in a bear market. Well, we are now. S&P 500 is down over 20%. Trump did not want to throw the economy down over Covid but he was goaded on and told that he did not care about people dying with Covid. Of course, the lockdown and laying people off who were non-essential worker was fucking stupid, but the Dems chastised Trump over this, and he had no choice to do it.

Biden bragged that he would shut down the virus and not the country but the virus tore through the country like never before after he was elected.

And now we have a shortage of tampons for (not women) but people who menstruate. https://www.zerohedge.com/political/...bidens-america.

Maybe the American women having to pay sky high gas prices, cannot find baby formula, and now have to use something other than tampons will learn that mean tweets and the "grab them by the pussy" line said in private was not that bad after all.

This is what you get when you put verbal sensitivity above job competence. Of course, it was a joke the whole time that the Biden men respected women or should that be people who menstruate.

[Gino02]

This is the problem w cycical appointments. You can always blame your predecessor. I am sure the Reps would blame leaving dems for inflationary pressure caused by the overspending.

For me, the sign of a successful country is one that has a happy, healthy, educated and safe population. One that values all citizens equally (not just its own). On every metric the USA is a total failure. This is becuase both parties are owned by corporates, and corporations do not have morals.

Exactly. Why do you think most corporations (except for few like My Pillow) hates Trump? Because he refuses to be a puppet of these corporations that controls the American politics. Because he refuses to start any war. Because he believes in diplomacy over wars. Because he cares about how your 401 K performs. Because he cares about keeping prices affordable for the citizens. The list goes on.

[JustTK]

Meanwhile clueless Joe and his minions seem unaware of the damage his woke socialist policies are causing the American people.

Which policies would those be? Was that the free education that they provided? Free healthcare for all? Write off of all student debt? The imposition of sky high tax rates on the rich? The public buy back of primary resources and utility services? The recognition of the sovereign rights of other countries?

[Gino02]

Washington Post is wrong again!

"How bad things are for Biden? It's not just his approval rating; it's his lack of a base".

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ing-lack-base/

They missed Buyden's huge very smart base in this ISG thread.

[JustTK]

FDR being one of those incoming Dems. Barack Obama being another. I submit the same could be said for the results for JFK / LBJ, Carter and Clinton but to a lesser degree than for FDR and Obama. And the typically disastrous Repub to Dem handoff from Trump to Biden is definitely up there with the worst of all time as well.

This is the problem w cycical appointments. You can always blame your predecessor. I am sure the Reps would blame leaving dems for inflationary pressure caused by the overspending.

For me, the sign of a successful country is one that has a happy, healthy, educated and safe population. One that values all citizens equally (not just its own). On every metric the USA is a total failure. This is becuase both parties are owned by corporates, and corporations do not have morals.

[PVMonger]

Must you continue to post on my comments? I am really fatigued from calling you a complete moron.

I never said that it worked. You clearly cannot read and just make shlt up. No wonder your on a site like this. I mean, who could bear to live with you? Any Dem with at least half a brain must be embarrassed to have you on their side.

Here is what you said "Historically the Reps use supply side economics that favour business, so you would expect the Dems to do better on the factors that they target."

First, I assume that you meant to say "historically" and were simply too lazy to correct your error.

Second, you alluded to the fact that "supply side" economics worked. It is right there in black and white: "so you would expect the Dems to do better on the factors that they target. " In other words, if "Dems do better on the factors they target", Repubs do better on the factors "they" target.

Now you're saying that "supply side" economics doesn't work? Are you saying that "supply side" economics might be great for companies but it almost always fails the workers? Or are you saying that Repubs are great con men because they tell the masses that "supply side" economics will be great for them but those same Repubs know that what they're saying is bullshit?

[EihTooms]

As usual the daily hyperbolic, false dichotomy is expounded. Others have taken a look at the last 100 years, and while the Dems overall have performed better, still four of the seventeen "devastating, mind boggling, atrocious, crashing and life destroying recessions" (wink) started under Democratic administrations. He's alluding to the post WW I recession, another after the Great Depression that started in '37, the one post WW II, and the undeniable one that began in the last year of Carter's presidency, speaking of "bad handoffs. " And this is from a historic, well reputed left wing publication that is decidedly on your side. They also have no failed fact checks in the last five years. I doubt a guy in a monger forum that has long painted himself in a corner singing the same tune for two years can adequately correct them, but feel free to give it a shot.

One Quarter of 7% GDP Growth contraction followed by a consecutive quarter of 0. 7% GDP Growth contraction, followed by two more consecutive quarters of positive GDP Growth of 7.5% and 8. 5%, all while both inflation and the unemployment rate (that only spiked up to 7.8% for a single month during those barely two negative quarters) were steadily declining month over month into that Dem to Repub handoff and that mini "recession" having been purposely induced by the Fed in order to cool down an overheated Carter economy that was creating too many more jobs than there were applicants to take them is in your mind as "devastating" as the ones under Hoover, the combined three under Eisenhower, the huge and prolonged one under Reagan, the long one under Bush1, the gigantic one under Bush2 (his 2nd one) and the colossal one under Trump?

Uh. Carter's was barely a blip on the screen by comparison. And his was probably closer to "life-altering" than any of the other two Dem-related ones of the past 100 years you mentioned. LOL. The "'37" recession and post WWII recession were as minor and forgettable as Biden's minor GDP Growth contraction that is so far as close to flat as it is to even a 3% contraction.

Carter's handoff to Reagan was still better than any Repub to Dem or even the Repub to Repub (1988) handoff of the past 100 years. Dems can only dream and wish they could ever enjoy the economic conditions, trends and trajectory Reagan inherited from Carter in a someday, faraway future Repub to Dem handoff.

[EihTooms]

The Jan. 6 Hearings' 2nd day did a masterful job of confirming what 225+ Million Americans already knew at least since 2015; that the other 74 Million Americans who could possibly be conned by a blatantly obvious even lousy con man are either total numbskulls, have as much contempt for the country and the people in it as he does or both.

[EihTooms]

Supply-side economics supposedly "works by giving incentives to businesses to expand. A corporate tax cut gives businesses more money to hire workers, invest in capital equipment, and produce more goods and services. An income tax cut increases the dollars per hour worked. It boosts workers' incentive to remain employed and creates more labor. "

Therefore, if supply-side economics actually worked, Republicans would have better employment numbers than Democrats because businesses would hire more people, pay them more which, in turn would mean more workers.

In practice, none of that happens. Supply-side economics is bullshit. Everybody with a brain knows this. The only people who don't know this are Republicans because the wealthy people who bankroll Republican candidates are the primary beneficiaries of tax cuts for the rich.

"While progressives may not have all the answers to achieve equitable growth, conservatives have the wrong answers. If conservatives are serious about promoting economic growth and prosperity, they need to stop fetishizing tax cuts and start proposing policy ideas that are based on actual facts. Indeed, history would tell us that investing in the middle class and those who want to rise into it is the best long-term economic growth strategy. " https://democracyjournal.org/magazin...e-and-for-all/.

The only question is do Repubs promote and pass their beloved economically disastrous Supply-Side / Trickle-Down policies over and over again whenever the electorate is dumb or careless enough to put them in a position to do it because they are hopelessly unchangeable numbskulls or because their primary mission is to destroy the USA economy, wipe out millions of jobs and produce rock bottom bargain basement prices for America's assets and wages so their monied political donors can swoop in to buy at the ideal times and get even wealthier at the great expense of everyone else.

Not that it matters which, really.