Rdskns2000

Presidential Election :11/3/2020- Trump the Impeached vs Superplanner Lizzie, Shake Your Booty Pete & some other Dems

Recommended Posts

On 6/16/2019 at 12:27 PM, Simmsy said:

I think you guys give Trump too much credit with the 2016 polling. I believe it was 70%/30% for Clinton/Trump respectfully, so she would win about of out of 3 elections if there were that many. Trump just happened to win the first one. There are also somethings you have to take into consideration:

 

1. Comey coming out and saying Clinton was under FBI investigation (but didn't mention Trump) clearly hurt and dropped her poll number just a couple of weeks before the election.

 

2. Polling isn't as accurate when it comes to presidential races, the EC really muddies the water when you try to get the full picture on what you predict is going to happen.

 

3. Clinton wasn't a very strong/likable candidate.

 

4.   People thought Trump can't really be this bad, would "grow into the job," and would surround himself with competent experts to make up for his lack of experience, expertise, and cognitive ability. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

4.   People thought Trump can't really be this bad, would "grow into the job," and would surround himself with competent experts to make up for his lack of experience, expertise, and cognitive ability. 

 

Not coincidentally the two states who had elected actors/celebs to their most executive position in the last 2 decades knew of the danger (and stupidity) of doing it. They both voted for HRC in 2016.

 

Minnesota and California. 

Edited by The Evil Genius
  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

4.   People thought Trump can't really be this bad, would "grow into the job," and would surround himself with competent experts to make up for his lack of experience, expertise, and cognitive ability. 

On the other hand, you can make the case that, despite Trump's daily buffoonery showing that he hasn't grown into the job, the economic numbers (at least for now) still appear solid and we aren't involved (yet) in some big overseas crisis that can hinder the re-election bids of incumbents. Hate to say it, but based on that, as well as the current crop of Dems running (none with HRC's baggage, but none particularly politically inspiring either) I can see more people going in November 2020 and pulling the lever giving Trump four more years than those who are sick of the aforementioned buffoonery and will vote for the Dem candidate no matter what. But my opinion just a worthless prediction 18 months out, and I do think Trump will lose the national popular vote again (something the 2016 polls did get correct). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, hail2skins said:

On the other hand, you can make the case that, despite Trump's daily buffoonery showing that he hasn't grown into the job, the economic numbers (at least for now) still appear solid and we aren't involved (yet) in some big overseas crisis that can hinder the re-election bids of incumbents. Hate to say it, but based on that, as well as the current crop of Dems running (none with HRC's baggage, but none particularly politically inspiring either) I can see more people going in November 2020 and pulling the lever giving Trump four more years than those who are sick of the aforementioned buffoonery and will vote for the Dem candidate no matter what. But my opinion just a worthless prediction 18 months out, and I do think Trump will lose the national popular vote again (something the 2016 polls did get correct). 

I really hope you're wrong, I just don't see how people can't realize that the economy isn't that great. Also, its only doing as "great" as it is despite of Trump, not because of what he has done. The economy HAS to go down at some point, but just imagine how much stronger it would be with someone who has policies to actually boost it up?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

The economy is absolutely not doing great. 

It does drive me crazy when people on TV describe the economy as "booming." By what historical measure?

 

And its tough to know any particular individual's situation, especially those in the Rust Belt states who contributed to Trump's election.

 

That said, the bottom line number of ~3 percent GDP growth isn't bad and may well be enough to get him reelected. Even if there's a dropoff in the next 18 months, its tough to see it being substantial enough. But who knows. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, hail2skins said:

On the other hand, you can make the case that, despite Trump's daily buffoonery showing that he hasn't grown into the job, the economic numbers (at least for now) still appear solid and we aren't involved (yet) in some big overseas crisis that can hinder the re-election bids of incumbents. Hate to say it, but based on that, as well as the current crop of Dems running (none with HRC's baggage, but none particularly politically inspiring either) I can see more people going in November 2020 and pulling the lever giving Trump four more years than those who are sick of the aforementioned buffoonery and will vote for the Dem candidate no matter what. But my opinion just a worthless prediction 18 months out, and I do think Trump will lose the national popular vote again (something the 2016 polls did get correct). 

Well yeah. He is an incompetent buffoon and people are tired of it, but despite the denial by most on this board not everything he has done has been a failure. His deregulation and tax policies have super charged the economy, maximized employment and increased wages.  Many will vote their pocketbook. So to think he has no chance at reelection is to delude oneself.  Articles a couple of months ago opined the best strategy to use against him would be a Coolidge type "Return to Normalcy" campaign.  However it doesn't appear the Dems will follow that playbook. 

49 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

The economy is absolutely not doing great. 

In what country?

37 minutes ago, hail2skins said:

It does drive me crazy when people on TV describe the economy as "booming." By what historical measure?

 

And its tough to know any particular individual's situation, especially those in the Rust Belt states who contributed to Trump's election.

 

That said, the bottom line number of ~3 percent GDP growth isn't bad and may well be enough to get him reelected. Even if there's a dropoff in the next 18 months, its tough to see it being substantial enough. But who knows. 

Huh??? For a developed nation 3% growth has long been the definition for a great economy  .

Edited by nonniey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

All the criticisms & concerns the GOP had under the rapidly improving economy under Obama seemed to evaporate as soon as Trump was sworn in.  All the organizations that compile statistics on jobs reports that Trump claimed were fake, suddenly became legitimate over night once Trump was in office. 

 

I'll never forget the day I heard Ted Cruz talking about income inequality on a debate stage when criticizing the recovery numbers under Obama.  I was flabbergasted for a few mins.   I haven't heard any of those same concerns repeated by any of the GOP since Trump has been elected. 

 

The "jobs report" is about the most vague method of judging the economy. 

Edited by NoCalMike
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, nonniey said:

Huh??? For a developed nation 3% growth has long been the definition for a great economy  .

The economy's growth in 2018 (2.9 pct) was the same as it was in 2015 under Obama. But I don't think you can cite anyone in the GOP who was calling the economy "booming" then. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LadySkinsFan said:

The economy's only great for stock owners, corporations, and 1%ers. It's **** for the rest of us.

Not even that great for stock owners. Trump has been wiping gains.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

U.S. employers have added jobs for 104 months in a row now. Trump has reigned for what, 30 of them?

 

Oh wait..we aren't talking jobs? Maybe there is an economic indicator that Trump and only Trump can take credit for (largest gap between haves and have nots maybe?). Because it looks to me that all he has done is ride the coattails of the previous admin who had to deal with the fallout of Dubya's collapsing economy.

Edited by The Evil Genius
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So was the recovery under Obama simply a result of actions taken by W?

 

People taking credit is fun, just like Clinton benefiting from actions taken during HW's term and from a adversarial congress.  :ols:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 Maybe there is an economic indicator that Trump and only Trump can take credit for (largest gap between haves and have nots maybe?). 

Possibly wage growth over the past year or so, but we aren't quite where we need to be yet either:

 

https://www.epi.org/nominal-wage-tracker/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Simmsy said:

I really hope you're wrong, I just don't see how people can't realize that the economy isn't that great. Also, its only doing as "great" as it is despite of Trump, not because of what he has done. The economy HAS to go down at some point, but just imagine how much stronger it would be with someone who has policies to actually boost it up?

Let me explain it to you then. 

 

People, in general, don’t gave a clue how the economy works. 

5 minutes ago, twa said:

So was the recovery under Obama simply a result of actions taken by W?

 

People taking credit is fun, just like Clinton benefiting from actions taken during HW's term and from a adversarial congress.  :ols:

Well he actually listened and did the bailout which started it 

 

most republicans were against it and many hate him for doing it so...

 

republicans were calling for strict austerity measures during the Obama years. They get zero credit for anything. They were wrong on pretty much everything. 

 

41 minutes ago, nonniey said:

Huh??? For a developed nation 3% growth has long been the definition for a great economy  .

Yes but it’s still not enough for the gop tax plan to “pay for itself”

 

so it’s a failure for the gop given what they said and their policies. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, tshile said:

Yes but it’s still not enough for the gop tax plan to “pay for itself”

 

so it’s a failure for the gop given what they said and their policies. 

T, you assume anyone gives a damn about the deficit anymore 😀

And right on cue...….Fox News talking head about elections and the markets:

 

 

  • Haha 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

The economy is absolutely not doing great. 

 

It is not perfect.  

 

There are, however, some pretty standard metrics which, rightly or wrongly, have been used as indicators of economic health for decades.  

 

Probably the biggest is the unemployment rate. GDP growth is another widely recognized one.  

 

The former is at or near historic lows.  The latter, I think, is pretty good.  

 

Now, yeah, if you look around, you can find some numbers which aren't as famous, that might suggest problems on the horizon.  (I would assert that running a deficit as big as the current one, when the economy is "as good as this", is one.)  

 

But I would argue that, if someone points at one of those two as proof of a good economy, then at least they're not cherry picking data to make their case.  (An argument which I'm not sure you can make.)  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

It is not perfect.  

 

There are, however, some pretty standard metrics which, rightly or wrongly, have been used as indicators of economic health for decades.  

 

Probably the biggest is the unemployment rate. GDP growth is another widely recognized one.  

 

The former is at or near historic lows.  The latter, I think, is pretty good.  

 

Now, yeah, if you look around, you can find some numbers which aren't as famous, that might suggest problems on the horizon.  (I would assert that running a deficit as big as the current one, when the economy is "as good as this", is one.)  

 

But I would argue that, if someone points at one of those two as proof of a good economy, then at least they're not cherry picking data to make their case.  (An argument which I'm not sure you can make.)  

 

 

I dont know the circles you and others run in, but the economy is doing poorly for everyone else. 

 

Wage growth is stagnant. A lot of people have dropped out of hte job market so they aren't being counted. Many that are still in it, are taking on-demand jobs like Uber which provides no financial security.

 

Not a sign of a good economy

 

Not a sign of a good economy

https://www.wsoctv.com/news/local/walmart-outsourcing-means-layoffs-for-nearly-600-employees-in-charlotte/958442533

 

And for my cohort, millennials, we have been effed beyond repair.

 

The traditional metrics are being used to say the economy is strong, but if you have rode an Uber/Lyft or any car share service today with someone its not doing good. People are struggling, taking fish antibiotics because they can't afford real ones, and I feel like everyone is playing that "Everything is Awesome" song from Lego Movie to hide hte truth. We never really recovered from teh 2008 crash. Only the wealthy who are hoarding even more money.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

i dont know the circles you and others run in, but the economy is doing poorly for everyone else. 

A good chunk of the middle to upper middle class has been tricked into thinking this is a “good economy”

 

The problem is that wage stagnation, wealth gap, underemployment, and other things have become decades long problems and accepted as “normal”. People are concerned with the more short term stuff and have become conditioned to ignore the long term trends. 

 

The economy is good with respect to 2009. Or any of the years immediately around it. 

 

With respect to the overall health (literally and figuratively) of the economy it’s not really good. It’s not really gonna collapse into chaos but a large swath of the country are not happy, they work a lot for a little and if things go right that’ll work; if anything goes sideways it could be big trouble. 

 

For all the rah rah patriotism about certain things we don’t seem to care that we’re all Americans when it comes to standard of living and happiness. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WaPo article tonight on the economy:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/trump-is-about-to-face-his-biggest-test-yet-on-the-economy/2019/06/17/ec9d00a6-911b-11e9-b570-6416efdc0803_story.html?utm_term=.778dce469833

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

I dont know the circles you and others run in, but the economy is doing poorly for everyone else. 

 

Wage growth is stagnant. 

 

And has been for 40 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

And has been for 40 years. 

 

I still blame Carter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, tshile said:

A good chunk of the middle to upper middle class has been tricked into thinking this is a “good economy”

 

The problem is that wage stagnation, wealth gap, underemployment, and other things have become decades long problems and accepted as “normal”. People are concerned with the more short term stuff and have become conditioned to ignore the long term trends. 

 

The economy is good with respect to 2009. Or any of the years immediately around it. 

 

With respect to the overall health (literally and figuratively) of the economy it’s not really good. It’s not really gonna collapse into chaos but a large swath of the country are not happy, they work a lot for a little and if things go right that’ll work; if anything goes sideways it could be big trouble. 

 

For all the rah rah patriotism about certain things we don’t seem to care that we’re all Americans when it comes to standard of living and happiness. 

 

 

I think a lot of people have been tricked into what is a good economy for a developed economy and this might actually be "good" growth.

 

Almost any post-WW1 growth greater than 2% can be tied to the destruction of the industrial base in the rest of the world by WWII, deficit spending, or a bubble.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.