You know how they play the game, we reformed, you have been rebuked. Like I said let me or you lie to a judge and I’d bet my life that we wouldn’t be rebuked. We would live in the land of lawlessness if a touching rebuke was your punishment. Now we could say that it isn’t finished but everybody already knows the rebuke and reform was put out there as the punishment.
POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
The Roaring Twenties Part II begins in 13 days.
Last edited:
Sure it is. They can't afford to put anyone on the stand who will spill the beans about the whole deal to save themselves. Treason goes all the way to O'bama and there is no way he is going to face justice and set off the riots around the country.. They all know they are safe.
So Austin, did you also lose money during the years 2009-2016? I’m referencing it that way on purpose because that’s what this whole discussion has been about.
Scalise R-LA said democrats voted to impeach Trump 2 years ago because he criticized NFL players who kneeled for the pledge. The Democratic Party needs to be abolished, they have zero integrity.
I'm going to say one more thing about this then I will be done. I'll even use as many right wing terms as possible to make it easy for you guys to understand.
The triggering event about this whole portfolio back and forth was a poster saying that his 401k was stuck in neutral or losing money during the 8 years Obama was POTUS but he was up $300k since DJT took office. That's not possible. When I called him out on that, a bunch of snowflakes sprung to his defense and started moving goalposts. The kicker was Bill using the DJIA 2008 high of 14.5k, which was a full 11 months before O even took office - I almost spit out my effing covfefe when I read that. Had the OP said he spent the 8 years O was in office recovering lost wealth, that would have been that and we could have moved on. But hating O and loving DJT is so wired into his head, he was incapable of doing that.
Fact - the DJIA was 7900 the day O took office.
Fact - the same DJIA was 19800 the day Trump took office.
I will repeat what I said earlier and be confident in saying it - if you lost money in the markets during the period frorm 1/20/09 to 1/20/17, you should be shot. I'll even provide the hamberder for your last meal.
And to answer your earlier question, P, no - I don't think Obama deserves a shred of credit for the recovery and don't think Trump deserves a shred of credit for the continued upswing. At some point there will be a correction, and it will probably happen in the next 5 years. Trump won't deserve a shred of blame for that either.
So John, you think the election of a new President has no effect on the stock market? Compare market activity on the day O'bama was elected, it continued to tank, and the day Trump was elected, it rose sharply.
Trump has taken several measures to increase the value of the stock market and he has done it in spite of the fed raising rates at a crazy rate.
A country cannot tax itself into prosperity any more than a man can stand in a bucket and lift himself by the handle. Ever hear that? You might want to study it for awhile and realize how the tax cut had a profound effect on our economy.
Trump has taken several measures to increase the value of the stock market and he has done it in spite of the fed raising rates at a crazy rate.
A country cannot tax itself into prosperity any more than a man can stand in a bucket and lift himself by the handle. Ever hear that? You might want to study it for awhile and realize how the tax cut had a profound effect on our economy.
If we had known Bevin was going to do shit like this, I wonder if he'd have been re-elected. What a good, Christian, pro life man he is. A fine example to us all.
https://local12.com/news/local/matt...dBM5dIrA5dOXBjMdhidkFpMePBzZY1AFAMpHJroGjLG8M
https://local12.com/news/local/matt...dBM5dIrA5dOXBjMdhidkFpMePBzZY1AFAMpHJroGjLG8M
It "continued to tank" for precisely 2 months. By the end of 2009, it was up 25% from the time O took office.
You guys are so blinded by hate (and unrequited love) that you can't just look at black and white facts. Again, this is a very single threaded question. Did you lose money in the markets between 1/20/09 and 1/20/17? Disregard who your constable or mayor or congressman or senator or POTUS was during said period.
And who are you going to blame when the correction comes while DJT is still in office? Obama?
Last edited:
Former Vice President Joe Biden on Thursday dismissed the idea that his former boss could have been thinking about him when extolling the virtues of women leaders and questioning the value of older men clinging to power.
Ha, sure thing Joe. Just like you asked him not to endorse you.
Ha, sure thing Joe. Just like you asked him not to endorse you.
After half ass watching the seven stooges, the gutless moronic moderaters, & the panzee panel, I contemplate how the hell do people become this nuts.
Last edited:
Based on what I am seeing, Gabbard won tonight's debate. Bold move not showing up, but seems like it paid off.
She was also the only lib to vote present for the impeachment. Now Nancy hates her politics as much as her youth and real teeth.
Ah . . . the ubiquitous stock market to POTUS debate. And while analyzing the exact 8 yr. range (or 4, or even less in unique cases), never being mindful of cyclic conditions, such as how what a president does one moment may not achieve it's economic zenith until several years down the road. This without ANY doubt, one of the stupid-most ways to examine the issue (as if the bozo I'm replying to has any clue what that issue truly is).
Hopefully my favorite example of this will always be the housing bubble, and how that is 'blamed' on the man in the White house when it happened, and not the one before who mandated to federal lending authorities to grant loans almost without measuring any risk, any amount to any man will do, confusing the market for private lenders, and POP. Oh, my . . . how can such a bubble not burst immediately when it began to be blown? An idiot's question. Likely KRJ1975's question.
And then to examine an 8 year period of growth? What 8 year period of the modern market economy does not show growth? Yes, if you want to isolate an ending to a narrow window there are some less rewarding than others. Idiot's do this often to validate their stupidity for market performance all the time, and in doing so, for my money, which isn't exactly a fortune but can provide a retirement and continue to grow, illustrates that the market is something that they know how to talk about, think about, but not how to take actual life-long rewarding risks with, and should be ignored.
I didn’t isolate it. Another poster did. I simply called him a liar.
Your comprehension skills need work. I never once gave credit or assigned blame to a POTUS. The post that sparked this whole debate claimed that the poster lost money between 1/20/09 and 1/20/17. He was either lying or brain dead.
Isolate that, dickhead.
Did you just use the roaring twenties as a positive benchmark for American prosperity? When rampant inequality and financial speculation begat the largest economic disaster in American history, the Great Depression? Top notch historical analysis there.
Trump Trump Trump Trump Trump Trump Trump 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020...
That is all....Good Night ah, er....morning...
That is all....Good Night ah, er....morning...
A better use is a cistern...nuff of the money-making schemes...
Ha thanks. Where does the cis reference come from?
Liberal buzz word salad.
Board break for me guys. I don’t have any more 2019 energy to try and infuse common sense into this place.
Merry Christmas and Happy new year. See you guys in 2020.
Merry Christmas and Happy new year. See you guys in 2020.
Spend most of your life in academia, law, DC/politics or all of the above...
It is shocking (not) when analyzing support for impeachment in Congress. Those that support it have ancestors that were mainly in eastern or southern Europe one hundred or so years ago, or they are black. Those against it have ancestors that were in the colonies. Their ancestors wrote and ratified the Constitution. And somehow the eastern Europeans understand the Constitution better.![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
They just performed a trial illegal in Anglo Saxon culture since 1215.
They just performed a trial illegal in Anglo Saxon culture since 1215.
Last edited:
He's not perfect. In fact, I've said it before "He was not a good candidate, but the best we had at the time". I still believe that.
I learned a long time ago you should generally judge a pol based on his own merits, but it is reasonable to judge them on who and who does not support him. In this case, the constant whining of the left, and the responses of those global powers that do not have American interests at the forefront give the perfect reason to support Trump.
You can judge a man by the company he keeps. Hmmm....pro-American, tax cutting, pro-gun, etc... vs pro-abortion, pro-lbgqxyz..., pro-entitlements, pro-obammer, etc.... On top of that, the media hates him and if the media supports you, you must be a reprobate. The choice is easy.
I never stated that it was14500 when Obama was in office, nor did I blame him for the drop. I also never stated I didn't make money in the market during Obama's term.
My point is that the market had tanked, recovering previous market is not growth, it's recovery. It just happened to be the one of the slowest recovery's in history which IMO was due to Obama's policies or lack thereof.
Fact is the market dropped 20% between election day 2008 and inauguration day 2009, it jumped 1200 points between election day 2016, and inauguration day 2017. You figure out the common denominator in the 2.
So you think none of Trump's policies have created the market rise? That's a joke right?
There's nothing that necessitates very bad times are followed by very good times, or that one directly and necessarily causes the other; it is the case however that in order to have good times you will necessarily create inequality.
It never ceases to amaze me though the true ignorance that is the socialism virus, how the first thought that comes to your mind when someone makes a hyperbolic statement like that to illustrate the same damn point I'm always making that the times are unbelievably good, is that the greedy rich are going to ruin it for you and it's not fair.
It's the same kind of ignorance where you have leading presidential candidates straight-faced telling you, oh well the top economists are wrong, or oh well middle class wages haven't risen in real terms. It's colossal ignorance and mass psychosis or it's simply evil, noone makes things more unfair or does things better to ruin things for you than the man in the mirror who can't see through the Marxist lies and distortions.
Last edited:
You're missing an important fact: Trump has policies in place that are absolutely contributing, if not outright causing, this economic upturn and market rally.
Obama... not so much. He was simply in the chair during the recovery. And he is a POS, btw.
When all info you consume is from the same myopic nutjobs. Not ever having media pushback has created a rapid one-way escalation of idiocy.
