Not really. It tells one a little about what my positions are. I find it amusing how some of them are very progressive yet the dims on the board consider me a hard core ultra right wing racist Trumpster only because I don't agree with 100% of their positions. Insufferable.
Truth Detector (12-19-2018)
Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.
Hello Arminius,
In my view, you have failed to prove me wrong. We are talking about opinions here. Proof is accomplished with facts. You have attempted a 'proof' by using your opinions, an exercise fraught with logical impossibility. Opinions 'prove' nothing. They are simply personal impressions of a situation.
Simply using and identifying with loaded spin buzz word sound bytes like 'the worst recovery' automatically leaves the realm of facts and enters full-on propaganda. As if all recessions are the same. Which they are not. So when a recession is deeper than the rest, more pronounced, more devastating to the economy, as was The Great Recession, it is only expected that a recovery from that is going to take longer. Criticizing policy makers by focusing on the amount of time required for a full recovery is thus disingenuous and nothing more than slanted opinion. Cherry picking and focusing on the negative without considering the context. That's bias, not proof.
I've presented my view, my opinion, that if we still had President Obama, that the deficit would be lower. I strongly believe that. But I have in no way attempted to assert that my opinion is fact, or tried to prove it. It's simply something I believe which cannot be proven one way or the other. I can provide supporting evidence, and there is plenty. But I understand it can't be proven. It is just something I believe in very strongly.
If we still had President Obama, the deficit would be lower.
I would give that a 99.9% chance of being true.
President Obama did not spend frivolously. Unless it is somehow 'frivolous' to Promote the General Welfare of the United States of America.
Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.
iolo (12-19-2018)
PoliTalker (12-19-2018)
It's a simple fact that with Obama the deficit would be lower. I have to caution everybody that decent conversation alone is subject to moderation for being off-topic. Be careful, and keep in mind that Obama is such a huge contrast to Trump. It's comparing the very worst of Trump with what could become the best president ever.
Bringing reform and decency from Canada, one forum at a time.
Bookmarks