POLITICAL THREAD

[CrittendenWildcat]

Ever notice how Z starts out with a post that is almost reasonable, almost logical, you almost want to say Z has a point there...then subsequent posts drift into ranting, raving, radical leftist lunacy?

It's like he takes his meds in the morning, and we can use his posts as a gauge of the half-life and efficacy of the drug as it wears off throughout the day.

 

[vhcat70]

^^^ That's all well and good but we are talking about a significant portion of our population who are seeing red to the point that I'm afraid they might do something really stupid if they don't get their way. The lunatics have already made it clear there will be no reasoning with them. They feel completely justified in their rebellion and their hatred is off the charts. I hope it's not as bad as it seems but I don't know. It concerns me.

It would be OK by me if they tore their cities up. It's the only place they live.

 

[bigbluefattycat]

1) the media should be honest and truthful at all times.

2) it isn't calming down any lunatics. It's actually doing the opposite, just as intended.

The media is at war with Trump. Soros is at war with Trump. Hildabeast is at war with Trump. They will flame everything he does. Trump's 100 day plan is in place and the counter plan by the resistance is armed and ready. Heard some BS this morning that the protest were spontaneous and uncoordinated. Sure. CAIR and the ACLU were waiting for this and unleashed the troops. Media follows the marching orders by putting out some hit words to control the narrative.

Now they are going through all the terrorist attacks on US soil that were not from the list. Bolton is pointing out that it was the Obama administration created the list.

Wait a second I thought Obama said there were no terrorist attacks on US soil during his administration? Obama created the list of 7?

 

[Rex Kwon Do]

Btw, pretty incredible that California succession is serious enough to merit an article on yahoo......can you imagine? How awesome would that be? That would leave so much Republican domination that even I'd be uncomfortable with it and I'm an Evil Conservative. There'd literally never be a Democrat ever elected potus ever again, as in ever.

Ohhhh, hope you really like the Mexican people as you'll be welcoming 10 million more.

 

[the nail at the foul line]

If the non-agricultural counties in California want to go, c ya. They should not be allowed to force the agricultural counties to go.

 

[Supreme Lord Z]

If the non-agricultural counties in California want to go, c ya. They should not be allowed to force the agricultural counties to go.

If California goes they better figure out a way to take the Colorado River with them.

 

[warrior-cat]

Ever notice how Z starts out with a post that is almost reasonable, almost logical, you almost want to say Z has a point there...then subsequent posts drift into ranting, raving, radical leftist lunacy?

It's like he takes his meds in the morning, and we can use his posts as a gauge of the half-life and efficacy of the drug as it wears off throughout the day.

The medicine is antitrolleptic pills. Problem is, living in his mothers basement, he can only take so many a day because he can't afford anymore. As the day progresses, troll flem builds up and takes control and free radicals run his thought processes.

 

[krazykats]

Ever notice how Z starts out with a post that is almost reasonable, almost logical, you almost want to say Z has a point there...then subsequent posts drift into ranting, raving, radical leftist lunacy?

It's like he takes his meds in the morning, and we can use his posts as a gauge of the half-life and efficacy of the drug as it wears off throughout the day.

Yea his original post was as spot on as he can get........then he totally blamed republicans for what the democrats do, actually, and then went off the deep end about trump.

I'll give you this, it is economics, but social issues are your parties triumph not republicans.

As far as hammering democrats into their own race baiting geography that is a secondary reaction based on how your base exists. It's not intentional but it is true it's happening because of the democrats own choosing.

Good luck in the future getting away from it.

 

[bigblueinsanity]

If California goes they better figure out a way to take the Colorado River with them.

Yep. Perfect case study on 2017 thinking. They don't have enough fresh water or power to provide for who they currently have. But good vibes somehow are more important

 

[warrior-cat]

Let all of California go. They will still have to deal with us agriculturally to sell their products and if they don't, make sure the water from the Colorado does not get to them.

 

[Vandalayindustries]

Almost impossible it ever happens. I think they have to have 2 votes, and according to the polls, it wouldn't pass. And then I think we'd have to amend the consitution which means 2/3 of the Senate, 2/3 of the House, and 2/3 of the states.

 

[Moopyj]

The ban is necessary for a few logical reasons.

1- we are terrible at figuring out who is coming in our country. This is the root of the problem.
2- as we take back our business in America the hate will increase as our image gets back to the America on top of the world vs the last 24 years where the goal was America sharing with the world.
3- the only fix is to vet these people in their country and I doubt we set up an intelligence office in these countries.

Muslims use the Trojan horse of discrimination enabled by libs to destroy America

 

[Supreme Lord Z]

Yep. Perfect case study on 2017 thinking. They don't have enough fresh water or power to provide for who they currently have. But good vibes somehow are more important

Imperial Valley ceases to exist as one of the most productive agricultural regions in the US without the Colorado River. The whole idea of California succeeding is a non-starter without addressing where their water would come from. Didn't they watch Chinatown?

 

[Mime-Is-Money]

Yes, decreasing less than .01%. You can select identical trends across the timeline. You're juxtaposing convenient facts, rather than honestly exploring causality versus association.

Not sure where you're seeing a decrease less than .01%. It's decreasing by 100 bps (a decrease of 1 pct pt), or a total decrease of 1.5% using 2002 as the base. If we're using your understanding of the graph, the labor participation rate only decrease .03%. That's incorrect, it dropped by about 350 bps, with two thirds of that happening during the Great Recession and subsequent economic malaise.

It's not a convenient fact that the labor participation rate is impacted by our aging population and baby boomers calling it quits, it's simply a fact. Like I said, we had solid economic growth from 2002 to 2007, yet we still experienced a drop of the labor participation rate. There's obviously something else going on there. I'm also associating the majority of the decrease from 2008 to the economic environment of the time.

 

[screwduke1]

Trump has already filed for a 2020 run.

 

[krazykats]

Muslims use the Trojan horse of discrimination enabled by libs to destroy America

Exactly.

 

[Moopyj]

Trump has already filed for a 2020 run.

View embedded media

Good. I hope trumps son runs after that then his other son the one who libs called a future rapist#death2libs

 

[CrittendenWildcat]

Democrats have alienated their true base. They made the horrible miscalculation that due to demographics all they had to do was drive up African American turnout like Obama did and that would make them invincible in 2016 and forever going forward.

Unfortunately in pandering to African Americans they horrified their Blue Collar midwestern base. They don't "march" in the midwest. They don't hate the police in the midwest. They don't "protest" as a way of life in the midwest.

So now the Democratic party is eviscerated and to add insult to injury Trump is successfully siphoning off the trade unions, which should be totally impossible for a Republican to do and would be if Trump were actually a Republican, which he is not.

It is a long road ahead for Democrats. Only thing I can tell them is that anyone that mentions "marching" or "protesting" something is a moron. Got to get the focus back on the pocketbook and get the hell away from race at all costs. Got to paint the Republicans as greedy rich bastards out stacking the deck for their rich buddies. Got to get all the black race baiters off television at all costs. Got to get the hell away from BLM at all costs. CNN has just killed the Democratic base with their parade of whining black commentators that see every issue through the lens of slighted racial injustice.

The ONLY way back is the pocketbook. The Bernie Sanders blueprint. But Trump has such a lead due the blindingly stupid missteps of the Clinton campaign that it may be too late for a generation.

As I said a year ago, if Trump successfully brings jobs back to the Midwest then the Democrats could lose it for a generation and in a single decisive swoop the Republicans go from a party at the brink of national irrelevance into one with its foot on the throat of a dying Democratic Party. A complete flip of fates made possible by a foolish arrogant leadership that forgot essentially what it stood for or more importantly, who it stood for.

The loss of white blue collar voters is essentially the end of the Democratic Party and the beginning of pure straight race based politics of the type that has destroyed every country around the world that has descended into it. As I repeatedly warned, you cannot run a campaign nor a country by dividing folks along racial lines and that is exactly fatally where we find ourselves now.

This was a fairly good analysis. Let me correct a couple things though:
1) To the extent you meant the Bernie Sanders campaign focused on the economy, and income inequality, I get your point. But Bernie Sanders' economic policies is not a "blueprint" for anything but a pathway to ruin.
2) It is not the right that makes everything about race, it is the left. Take race out of the equation, and analyze the policies of the incoming administration objectively. Protect ourselves from terrorists? The left calls that discrimination against Muslims. Blue collar worker who votes Trump because he works hard to earn a living but sees other people getting handouts and preferences? The left calls that a "Whitelash." Label, label, label. Everything's a dog whistle when you want to be offended.

 

[JBHolmesfan]

Good. I hope trumps son runs after that then his other son the one who libs called a future rapist#death2libs

Rupp was the Baron of the Bluegrass. Trump's kid can be Barron of the free world.

 

[Moopyj]

This was a fairly good analysis. Let me correct a couple things though:
1) To the extent you meant the Bernie Sanders campaign focused on the economy, and income inequality, I get your point. But Bernie Sanders' economic policies is not a "blueprint" for anything but a pathway to ruin.
2) It is not the right that makes everything about race, it is the left. Take race out of the equation, and analyze the policies of the incoming administration objectively. Protect ourselves from terrorists? The left calls that discrimination against Muslims. Blue collar worker who votes Trump because he works hard to earn a living but sees other people getting handouts and preferences? The left calls that a "Whitelash." Label, label, label. Everything's a dog whistle when you want to be offended.

Bernie knew he wasn't allowed to be prez ; the dnc wouldn't let him proven in wiki leaks

 

[JumperJack]

Democrats have alienated their true base. They made the horrible miscalculation that due to demographics all they had to do was drive up African American turnout like Obama did and that would make them invincible in 2016 and forever going forward.

Unfortunately in pandering to African Americans they horrified their Blue Collar midwestern base. They don't "march" in the midwest. They don't hate the police in the midwest. They don't "protest" as a way of life in the midwest.

So now the Democratic party is eviscerated and to add insult to injury Trump is successfully siphoning off the trade unions, which should be totally impossible for a Republican to do and would be if Trump were actually a Republican, which he is not.

It is a long road ahead for Democrats. Only thing I can tell them is that anyone that mentions "marching" or "protesting" something is a moron. Got to get the focus back on the pocketbook and get the hell away from race at all costs. Got to paint the Republicans as greedy rich bastards out stacking the deck for their rich buddies. Got to get all the black race baiters off television at all costs. Got to get the hell away from BLM at all costs. CNN has just killed the Democratic base with their parade of whining black commentators that see every issue through the lens of slighted racial injustice.

The ONLY way back is the pocketbook. The Bernie Sanders blueprint. But Trump has such a lead due the blindingly stupid missteps of the Clinton campaign that it may be too late for a generation.

As I said a year ago, if Trump successfully brings jobs back to the Midwest then the Democrats could lose it for a generation and in a single decisive swoop the Republicans go from a party at the brink of national irrelevance into one with its foot on the throat of a dying Democratic Party. A complete flip of fates made possible by a foolish arrogant leadership that forgot essentially what it stood for or more importantly, who it stood for.

The loss of white blue collar voters is essentially the end of the Democratic Party and the beginning of pure straight race based politics of the type that has destroyed every country around the world that has descended into it. As I repeatedly warned, you cannot run a campaign nor a country by dividing folks along racial lines and that is exactly fatally where we find ourselves now.

Z, you post some of the most inane things I've ever seen. Then you post something brilliantly correct, as we see here. It's like there's more than one of you.

 

[AustinTXCat]

Apologies in advance if a repost.

 

[Mime-Is-Money]

Here it is from 1990 to present. Your theory is false. Oh, the center of economic research also claims the boomer theory is false and actually calls out the Washington Post among others for running that mythical story.

Was finally able to read the link. Thanks for providing!

First, the CEPR does not claim that retiring baby boomers are not impacting the decreasing labor participation rate. The author-less article finds issues with the WaPo labeling increasing retirement as 'largely due to demographic shifts'. As I previously mentioned, the majority of the decreasing labor participation rate from 2008 to 2012 is due to the economic environment from the Great Recession and subsequent economic malaise. This CEPR article also fails to separate workers in prime-age (25-54) leaving the work force from the impact of the Great Recession.

It's a sloppy article from the CEPR to be honest. The original WaPo article it references also points to the recession, and the issues with the 'blurry margins' of the work force, which the CEPR completely ignores.

Going back to my argument of the aging population having a significant impact, I'm going by the BLS report from 2006 citing the beginning of the decrease in the LFPR at 2000, with the first reason listed being "the impact of the baby-boom generation on the labor force".

Per the BLS : "The impact of the baby-boom generation on the composition and growth of the labor force will continue to be a key factor. As this large cohort ages, the increase in the share of the older labor force and, eventually, the exit of the baby-boom cohort from the workforce will be the main factor in lowering the growth of the labor force."

Here's an article listing better support than the CEPR on the reasons behind the decreasing rate. From the article :

"But since 2000, the labor force rate has been steadily declining as the baby-boom generation has been retiring. Because of this, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago expects the labor force participation rate to be lower in 2020 than it is today, regardless of how well the economy does."

Lastly, looks like we need a quick correction to the denominator (labor force eligible population) calculation of the LFPR. This number does include people older than 65 (excluding military employees and institutionalized citizens). So, the aging population impact is greater than I originally argued.

Y'all on the right need to know this as the LFPR continues to shrink over the next 4 years.

 

[bigbluefattycat]

Couple more social justice issues and they will be eating their own fighting each other over oppression cards.
Women's March had reports of this.
Reports of wall protest.
Pipeline protest.
Muslim ban.
School choice probably next.

Won't be long before they are fighting with each other about which protest has the biggest crowds.

 

[CATSrock]

Apologies in advance if a repost.

View embedded media

Wow, I didn't bother listening to Ashley during the march for death but she really has gone full psycho. Just wow...

 

[UK till Death]

Liberals making the pain of airport travel even worse...

Thank God Trump won't be cowed by these paid Soros thugs like most Republicants would.

I think about what Killary would be doing to our final remnants of a border and increasing Rapefugees by 550% and a shiver runs down my spine.

Thank God for Trump.

Putting persecuted Christians at the head of the line.

Enough sharia-loving Muzzies who despise American values.

 

[ymmot31]

Was finally able to read the link. Thanks for providing!

First, the CEPR does not claim that retiring baby boomers are not impacting the decreasing labor participation rate. The author-less article finds issues with the WaPo labeling increasing retirement as 'largely due to demographic shifts'. As I previously mentioned, the majority of the decreasing labor participation rate from 2008 to 2012 is due to the economic environment from the Great Recession and subsequent economic malaise. This CEPR article also fails to separate workers in prime-age (25-54) leaving the work force from the impact of the Great Recession.

It's a sloppy article from the CEPR to be honest. The original WaPo article it references also points to the recession, and the issues with the 'blurry margins' of the work force, which the CEPR completely ignores.

Going back to my argument of the aging population having a significant impact, I'm going by the BLS report from 2006 citing the beginning of the decrease in the LFPR at 2000, with the first reason listed being "the impact of the baby-boom generation on the labor force".

Per the BLS : "The impact of the baby-boom generation on the composition and growth of the labor force will continue to be a key factor. As this large cohort ages, the increase in the share of the older labor force and, eventually, the exit of the baby-boom cohort from the workforce will be the main factor in lowering the growth of the labor force."

Here's an article listing better support than the CEPR on the reasons behind the decreasing rate. From the article :

"But since 2000, the labor force rate has been steadily declining as the baby-boom generation has been retiring. Because of this, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago expects the labor force participation rate to be lower in 2020 than it is today, regardless of how well the economy does."

Lastly, looks like we need a quick correction to the denominator (labor force eligible population) calculation of the LFPR. This number does include people older than 65 (excluding military employees and institutionalized citizens). So, the aging population impact is greater than I originally argued.

Y'all on the right need to know this as the LFPR continues to shrink over the next 4 years.

It says it counts people over 65 IF they are looking for work, or are employed.

Every baby boomer doesn't retire early.

People who aren't actually trying to get a job are not counted in the labor force. Retirees are not counted.

It is the ratio of people who are employed to those who are not employed. That number dropped for the entire O'bama experiment despite us being told repeatedly what a great job he had done with the economy. Which economy?

 

[Willy4UK]

 

[bigblueinsanity]

Wonder how many of today's protesters also protested during the women's walk?

Wonder how many of them realize the incredible hypocrisy?

 

[WettCat]

Wonder how many of them realize they are being funded and co-ordinated by....Soros?

https://pjmedia.com/trending/2017/0...-to-stop-trumps-temporary-refugee-halt-order/

 

[ymmot31]

Wonder how many of today's protesters also protested during the women's walk?

Wonder how many of them realize the incredible hypocrisy?

Wonder how many understand that he is trying to save their lives and their country and they are fighting it as hard as they can?

 

[YourPublicEnemy]

An old tweet just to show you the media we are dealing with.

 

[NCukcat62]

Drunken Italians find Shia Labeouf's 24/7 live feed camera and drop some knowledge.

View embedded media

Those guys are amazing

 

[warrior-cat]

It says it counts people over 65 IF they are looking for work, or are employed.

Every baby boomer doesn't retire early.



I am a baby boomer and so are 5 other people in my office and the adjoining office consisting of 10 workers. I would also say in the building I work in (one of the largest and most populated at Ft. Sill) it is similar in that about 50% or more working in this building are boomers. Now, that does not mean it is the same everywhere but, I would say that there is a large portion of boomers still in the work force.

 

[warrior-cat]

View embedded media

An old tweet just to show you the media we are dealing with.

Kick those whities out!

 

[Moopyj]

Wonder how many of today's protesters also protested during the women's walk?

Wonder how many of them realize the incredible hypocrisy?

We vote liberals protest I'm fine with that

 

[Supreme Lord Z]

Serious question... what voter in America is going to be swayed by a protest march anymore? I mean every week it's a new march and John Lewis sits in with them until he gets hungry and leaves. Rinse repeat.

I am a liberal to the core and yet I cannot stand the sight of a march because all I think of is voters that we need shutting down and refusing to listen. Exhausted by the endless griping. Do Republicans ever march? Seems to me like they handle their business in the House, Senate, White House, and Judiciary where it matters.

Sick of looking weak. Of being on the side of perpetual complainers. Pointless endless griping. Even when we have everything we still can't get shit done meanwhile the Republicans are successful even in the minority. It's like the whole Democratic Party is setup just to give the illusion of a voice when it always has been and always will be Republican ideas winning where it counts with us on the outside looking in. I am bitter and disillusioned and no longer believe in anything I am doing.

 

[krazykats]

Ok and now for the follow up.............

 

[screwduke1]

Ha, I told you @cardkilla. You libs got trolled by Trump AGAIN. You fools will never learn.

 

[bbonds]

and 2/3 of the states.

I think 98% of the states will wave goodbye.