Conservatives just can't get over the fact that Clinton won the popular vote,

Libs can't get over the fact that it doesn't matter.
The rules are not new, if clinton was too stupid to understand them it just reinforces what a terrible candidate she was
 
domer76 said:
Where did the money come from for the tax cuts? (1/3 of the package). I thought you conservatives always claimed that was returning money to people that owned it in the first place. That can't be debt, can it? Or, I guess you disagree with the economic philosophy of your fellow conservatives.

I'll see what I can find on the return of the other investments.
Click to expand...

Ok, I see you don't understand. Fair enough. The basis of supply side economics is that reduced marginal tax rates will actually increase revenue received by the treasury. Short term payroll tax cuts are not supply side cuts. So you are comparing apples and oranges. Obama's tax cut was very Keynesian, what you as a liberal supposedly support but I guess you don't even know what you believe
 
Celticguy said:
Libs can't get over the fact that it doesn't matter.
The rules are not new, if clinton was too stupid to understand them it just reinforces what a terrible candidate she was
Click to expand...

The rules go all the way back to the first election. It doesn't say that you have to win a majority of the popular vote but the ELECTORAL vote.
 
�� On the tenth day of Trumpmas The Donald gave to me, TEN FEET HIGHER, nine filled-up rallies, eight years of winning, seven spicy shitposts, six networks lying, FIIIIIIIVE CENTIPEDES, four Pence timelines, three red pills, two Turtle Jeb!s, and a Pepe in a Trump Tweet ��
 
domer76 said:
Where did the money come from for the tax cuts? (1/3 of the package).
Click to expand...

uh, gomer....there were no tax cuts in the package......people who would have gotten a tax refund the following January simply didn't have it taken out of their paychecks during the course of the year......didn't you know that?.....
 
cawacko said:
Ok, I see you don't understand. Fair enough. The basis of supply side economics is that reduced marginal tax rates will actually increase revenue received by the treasury. Short term payroll tax cuts are not supply side cuts. So you are comparing apples and oranges. Obama's tax cut was very Keynesian, what you as a liberal supposedly support but I guess you don't even know what you believe
Click to expand...

I see you posting Domer so I bump this for you
 
Sailor said:
In the hole with who? It does not matter anymore. You have a new President. You really need to grow up a little and deal with that. Complaining is not going to change it.
Click to expand...

I think the left are just trying to make it known that they wish it to be recognized by the entire world that they do not, as the majority of people voting for a presidential candidate, want to be associated with anything Trump does.

They are just virtue signaling to the rest of mankind. Their minds are made up that Trump will be a disaster and they are preemptively apologizing for what Trump is about to do. Who can blame them? I can't. I'd rather see them wait and stop all the complaining, let Trump do something stupid, and then get his ass impeached. If you give him some rope he'll hang himself. By hyperventilating over every move Trump makes, you are giving Trump the road map to all the pitfalls he needs to avoid. Instead, let his ignorant ass make some huge... excuse me, YUUUGGEE mistakes and then nail him for it. Stop the daily Trump hatefests. You are damaging the view children have of the process in this country. Take Trump out the right way: Show him respect and let him think he has free rein. Allow him to make the mistake that can take him down.
 
Sailor said:
Trump won and is going to be President. Not Clinton obviously. I really do not think Trump or his supporters at this point give a flying fuck how many votes Clinton got. She is not going to the WH. Trump is. Right?
Click to expand...

This is the reality that they can't face. Just like AL Bore's loss.
 
Midas Whale67 said:
This is the reality that they can't face. Just like AL Bore's loss.
Click to expand...

Yeah - you guys were the same way then. Gloating like crazy, saying that Dems would never win again, talking about how Bush was going to "save" the country (from the incredible peace & prosperity of the Clinton years).

And then we got a 10-year war and an massive economic crash. Thanks again for that, btw.
 
Thing1 said:
Yeah - you guys were the same way then. Gloating like crazy, saying that Dems would never win again, talking about how Bush was going to "save" the country (from the incredible peace & prosperity of the Clinton years).

And then we got a 10-year war and an massive economic crash. Thanks again for that, btw.
Click to expand...

What do you believe caused the economic crash?
 
cawacko said:
What do you believe caused the economic crash?
Click to expand...

There were a lot of factors. Obviously, the housing bubble was a huge part of it - and that happened on Bush's watch, and he was happy to reap the benefits of it while it was expanding.

But I always point to that admin's insane fiscal irresponsibility. Cheney said that deficit spending didn't matter, and he meant it. Signing off on bloated, pork-laden energy & transportation bills. Engaging in trillion $ wars of choice. Cutting taxes at the same time. There was absolutely no sense of balancing a budget or reigning in spending.

So, our economy had no foundation when the bubble finally burst. We were set up to crash. Is Bush 100% responsible? Of course not. But he & his admin bear a lot of accountability for it. And that's just the way it goes, regardless - the President is the economic steward, and what happens on his watch - particularly over 2 terms - is his responsibility.
 
Thing1 said:
There were a lot of factors. Obviously, the housing bubble was a huge part of it - and that happened on Bush's watch, and he was happy to reap the benefits of it while it was expanding.

But I always point to that admin's insane fiscal irresponsibility. Cheney said that deficit spending didn't matter, and he meant it. Signing off on bloated, pork-laden energy & transportation bills. Engaging in trillion $ wars of choice. Cutting taxes at the same time. There was absolutely no sense of balancing a budget or reigning in spending.

So, our economy had no foundation when the bubble finally burst. We were set up to crash. Is Bush 100% responsible? Of course not. But he & his admin bear a lot of accountability for it. And that's just the way it goes, regardless - the President is the economic steward, and what happens on his watch - particularly over 2 terms - is his responsibility.
Click to expand...

Arguing politics and economics are two different things. Bush definitely pushed for extended home ownership but it started well before him. Groups wanted the gov't to push ownership among lower income folks with lesser credit. You also had the Fed who left rates too low that gave steroids to the housing bubble.
 
cawacko said:
Arguing politics and economics are two different things. Bush definitely pushed for extended home ownership but it started well before him. Groups wanted the gov't to push ownership among lower income folks with lesser credit. You also had the Fed who left rates too low that gave steroids to the housing bubble.
Click to expand...

Respectfully, they're not isolated. Politics can have enormous implications for the economy.
 
Thing1 said:
Respectfully, they're not isolated. Politics can have enormous implications for the economy.
Click to expand...

The crash happened on Bush's watch and people get credit/blame for what happens while they're in charge. But if you are talking about who is responsible for the housing bubble and what was its genesis it started well before Bush took office.
 
cawacko said:
The crash happened on Bush's watch and people get credit/blame for what happens while they're in charge. But if you are talking about who is responsible for the housing bubble and what was its genesis it started well before Bush took office.
Click to expand...

Like I said, Bush did a lot of things to tear down whatever foundation could have lessened the impact of the crash. And he well knew the bubble was expanding for a full 8 years.
 
Thing1 said:
Like I said, Bush did a lot of things to tear down whatever foundation could have lessened the impact of the crash. And he well knew the bubble was expanding for a full 8 years.
Click to expand...

Leaving aside that we had leading Democrats fighting to claim there was no bubble and Freddie and Fannie didn't need to be looked into you also had the head of the Fed claiming there was no bubble. So what was Bush to do to lessen the impact? This isn't a question to absolve him of responsibility but one to ask what were the levers you saw as available at the time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top