Democrats Lose Due To The Economy (1 Viewer)

[ludin]

Not relevant to the basic facts: Republicans tank the economy. Democrats grow it.

Tell that to carter or clinton who rode the Reagan/bush economy till he crashed it with his tax increases.

So far every republican president has been left with a mess of an economy.
The only exception was obama who had the worst post recovery ever.

If he would have had the inflation to match he would have been carter 2.0
And another round of stagflation

 

[Puigb]

I have yet to meet a liberal that didn't like a tax increase or something else that takes money out of my pocket and gives it to someone else.

I have yet to meet a liberal that didn't like a regulation which again takes money out of my pocket.

So yes I very much see voting for most liberals as voting against my self interest.

Heh, GOP voters and Trump want to take money out of my pocket to fund a stupid wall that will do absolutely nothing.

When the GOP is in power, they take plenty of money out of my pocket to fund their garbage agenda. So spare me your tripe.

 

[ludin]

Except for the part where Trump was saying from the escalator ride onwards WASHINGTON SUCKS!, that something needs to be done about Washington.....sucking..........so bad that they gave us Hillary....with no approved options.......and JEB!

Clearly you dont want to listen so I have wasted enough time on your education for now.

:bon_voyag

It was one of the worst campaigns ever.
And frankly the only reason trump got my vote was due to clinton.

Had the democrats put up someone other than sanders and Clinton they would have had my consideration.
Johnson was a throw away vote.

Trump was the only person left.

 

[ludin]

Heh, GOP voters and Trump want to take money out of my pocket to fund a stupid wall that will do absolutely nothing.

When the GOP is in power, they take plenty of money out of my pocket to fund their garbage agenda. So spare me your tripe.

That is why I try to pay as little in tax as they can.
However is the wall built nope so no money has been taken.

Therefore your argument is invalid.

 

[Puigb]

That is why I try to pay as little in tax as they can.
However is the wall built nope so no money has been taken.

Therefore your argument is invalid.

The wall hasn't been built because the establishment GOP doesn't want it...probably one of the very few things the GOP is doing right.

 

[ludin]

The wall hasn't been built because the establishment GOP doesn't want it...probably one of the very few things the GOP is doing right.

Your argument was still invalid.

 

[Puigb]

Your argument was still invalid.

nope, valid.

Your precious GOP spends my tax dollars on their garbage agenda all the time. So when I hear conservatives complain about their tax dollars going to waste...I tell them to shove it.

 

[Moderate Right]

Not relevant to the basic facts: Republicans tank the economy. Democrats grow it.

The basic facts are Trump won and the Democrats own analysis show why and you want to ignore those facts.

 

[Moderate Right]

The Republicans and Trump don't care either. And they voted Trump because they always vote for the GOP candidate. They'd vote for Ronald McDonald if he were the GOP candidate.

If Trump won because they always vote for the GOP candidate then how do you ever expect to win again? Are you saying that Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania always vote for the GOP candidate?

 

[calamity]

Tell that to carter or clinton who rode the Reagan/bush economy till he crashed it with his tax increases.

So far every republican president has been left with a mess of an economy.
The only exception was obama who had the worst post recovery ever.

If he would have had the inflation to match he would have been carter 2.0
And another round of stagflation

If Bush Sr couldn't ride the coatails of Reagan's economy, what on earth makes you believe Clinton did? Smh

 

[calamity]

The basic facts are Trump won and the Democrats own analysis show why and you want to ignore those facts.

Trump won because:
Clinton couldn't catch on in the South and rural Midwest
She was the first wife of a baggage laden administration
Comey's letter
Trump appealed to racists, homophobes, xenophobes and sexists
People wanted something different
Well timed leaks and effective social media bots

 

[Moderate Right]

Trump won because:
Clinton couldn't catch on in the South and rural Midwest
She was the first wife of a baggage laden administration
Comey's letter
Trump appealed to racists, homophobes, xenophobes and sexists
People wanted something different
Well timed leaks and effective social media bots

Your alarm is going off. Time to wake up now.

 

[ocean515]

Your alarm is going off. Time to wake up now.

I think for a number of people, there are no alarms. Just the twang from a time clock when checking in for duty.

 

[ludin]

If Bush Sr couldn't ride the coatails of Reagan's economy, what on earth makes you believe Clinton did? Smh

Read an actual book on it.
A lot of clinton success was started by Reagan and bush.

Yet started tanking after clinton pushed his tax increases.
Then in 2000 it fully crashed.

 

[Cigar]

Will they listen to themselves or will they continue saying it was voter turnout, Comey, the Russians, gerrymandering, and the EC? Did I forget anything? It's so hard to keep track of the looney left.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...-card-a:homepage/story&utm_term=.a2e47e15c2c0

It was about voter turnout
It was about Comey
It was about Russians interference
It was about gerrymandering
It was about EC

... and guess what, Hillary really did get 3 Million more Votes.
... and the sky really is Blue.

 

[calamity]

Read an actual book on it.
A lot of clinton success was started by Reagan and bush.

Yet started tanking after clinton pushed his tax increases.
Then in 2000 it fully crashed.

The Clinton tax increases actually improved the deficit situation that has been spiraling out of control since Ronnie's original tax cuts and military build up. Deficit spending instead of raising taxes to cover expenses has been a GOP bait and switch trick that has caused this country the most damage since the days of Herbert Hoover.

 

[calamity]

Your alarm is going off. Time to wake up now.

Translation: I cannot refute your post. So, I will throw out a one-liner.

 

[bubbabgone]

It was about voter turnout
It was about Comey
It was about Russians interference
It was about gerrymandering
It was about EC

... and guess what, Hillary really did get 3 Million more Votes.
... and the sky really is Blue.

Yup. Goes to show you that maybe birds of a feather shouldn't all flock together in places like Commiserfornia.

 

[Moderate Right]

It was about voter turnout
It was about Comey
It was about Russians interference
It was about gerrymandering
It was about EC

... and guess what, Hillary really did get 3 Million more Votes.
... and the sky really is Blue.

Your alarm is going off. Time to wake up now. But, just in case you're not dreaming:

What are you going to do about voter turnout?

What are you going to do about Russian interference?

What are you going to do about gerrymandering?

What are you going to do about EC?

 

[Moderate Right]

Translation: I cannot refute your post. So, I will throw out a one-liner.

Well, you're right there. You can't refute my post. If you don't learn from your mistakes you are doomed to repeat them. The Russians aren't going to stop interfering. How is gerrymandering going to be any different? Is the EC going to be different? Your candidate was up against the most "unpopular" nominee of all time and you didn't get voter turnout then. Are you going to automatically assume that a different person would automatically get the voter turnout? In other words, the Democratic party shouldn't change anything but the nominee? With Trump in charge, are you just going to assume that there won't be another Comey thing for the next nominee? The negative anti-Trump stuff from the mainstream media, the Democratic party and celebrities didn't work before but magically it will work next time around?

 

[calamity]

Well, you're right there. You can't refute my post. If you don't learn from your mistakes you are doomed to repeat them. The Russians aren't going to stop interfering. How is gerrymandering going to be any different? Is the EC going to be different? Your candidate was up against the most "unpopular" nominee of all time and you didn't get voter turnout then. Are you going to automatically assume that a different person would automatically get the voter turnout? In other words, the Democratic party shouldn't change anything but the nominee? With Trump in charge, are you just going to assume that there won't be another Comey thing for the next nominee? Did all the negative anti-Trump stuff from the mainstream media, the Democratic party and celebrities work before but magically it will work next time around?

lol...yeah, that's what that response said. :roll: Denial runs deep in your neck of the woods. :lamo

 

[Moderate Right]

lol...yeah, that's what that response said. :roll: Denial runs deep in your neck of the woods. :lamo

You completely side stepped my questions. The Russians aren't going to stop interfering. What are you going to do about that? How is gerrymandering going to be any different? Is the EC going to be different? Your candidate was up against the most "unpopular" nominee of all time and you didn't get voter turnout then. Are you going to automatically assume that a different person would automatically get the voter turnout? In other words, in your mind, the Democratic party shouldn't change anything but the nominee? With Trump in charge, are you just going to assume that there won't be another Comey thing for the next nominee? Did all the negative anti-Trump stuff from the mainstream media, the Democratic party, and celebrities that didn't work before magically work next time around?

 

[calamity]

You completely side stepped my questions. The Russians aren't going to stop interfering. What are you going to do about that? How is gerrymandering going to be any different? Is the EC going to be different? Your candidate was up against the most "unpopular" nominee of all time and you didn't get voter turnout then. Are you going to automatically assume that a different person would automatically get the voter turnout? In other words, in your mind, the Democratic party shouldn't change anything but the nominee? With Trump in charge, are you just going to assume that there won't be another Comey thing for the next nominee? Did all the negative anti-Trump stuff from the mainstream media, the Democratic party, and celebrities that didn't work before magically work next time around?

Yeah. Pretty much. The bold is the answer. Any Centrist Democrat not named Hillary Clinton would have won easily.

 

[Puigb]

If Trump won because they always vote for the GOP candidate then how do you ever expect to win again? Are you saying that Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania always vote for the GOP candidate?

black turn out for Clinton was down in those states. If they vote for the Democrat in large numbers in 2020, Trump and the GOP loses those states.

 

[Moderate Right]

black turn out for Clinton was down in those states. If they vote for the Democrat in large numbers in 2020, Trump and the GOP loses those states.

So, you're saying the only way that Democrats can win from now on is if they have a black nominee? Sanders and Pocahontas don't qualify then.