- Joined
- Dec 9, 2009
- Messages
- 134,496
- Reaction score
- 14,621
- Location
- Houston, TX
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Conservative, why did you ignore Redress's posts?
That is between Redress and me, Redress knows the reason
I am sure you would including WWII which helped a lot
Conservative, why did you ignore Redress's posts?
Because he ignores anything that proves him wrong. It's his way.
After this post he'll say no ones proven him wrong, he'll do his classic copy paste, he'll tell me I'm a blind liberal that doesn't want to see reality and the Obama record...
Pretty much.
Of his 20, 000+ posts, you can bet that 60% of them are just the copypasta + how terrible liberals are.
He's a man of little substance.
That is between Redress and me, Redress knows the reason
Sorry, don't see what you call debunking as my data is absolutely factual as Why has even acknowledged but apparently you haven't bothered to look up.
Yep, that is it, I always run from people in this forum. By the way I love you too
I actually appreciate you taking the effort to say something nice about someone else for a change, even though it is sarcastic, rather than trolling them and belittling people you don't know. It is noted and appreciated.
So you say, yet the data posted is absolutely 100% factual and accurate. I understand how liberals like you hate data the refutes your feelings. Why don't you interpret the data for me then and then which number is false?
Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
There are a few people here that I respect a lot and have told them so. I don't respect liberals who call data false and then fail to prove it. You haven't proven any of my data false thus debunked nothing
I am sure you would including WWII which helped (FDR's economy) a lot
Guess you don't understand the concept of proving my numbers wrong. Nothing you have posted have done that. Could it be that you don't understand the numbers? When you post GDP growth how does that change the fact that the first two qtrs of 2011(Oct-Dec 10, Jan-Mar-11) were .4% and 1.3%?
How does your private sector job growth change the fact that there has been a 2.6 million net job loss through Sept. 2011?
This is going to be a shocker to you but I never said it didn't. What you are doing is ignoring that the GDP was far worse under Bush and the .4% and 1.3% is a drastic improvement over your boy Bush. Same goes for the 2.6 million net job loss. Your boy Bush was headed in the wrong direction, he goes home and all the sudden there is a drastic turn-around.
You refuse historic data because you'd rather play the blame game with no history attached. Our data is actually the same. The difference is, you show where we are at and scream... "ZOMG!!!1!1!1 It's Obama's fault." I post the same numbers but also show how where they came from and how they got there and you don't like that one bit, because it blows your blame game out of the water.
View attachment 67117513
Your excuse in not acceptable.
I see now. Whyso used your post as a crutch to validate his claim. He then made up the rest to 'make a point'. In review it looks like his point was 'your dumb...I can be dumb too'.
Sorry for the confusion.
Then I guess you don't know the definition of debunking. "My" boy Bush isn't on the ballot and Obama was hired to fix the problem and as the numbers show he hasn't done that at a cost of 4.2 trillion to the debt. This thread is about Obama, not Bush. Historical data posted is 2011 compared to 2009 data which Obama inherited. Obama's economic policy was passed in February 2009 and he said it was for shovel ready jobs and could be spent immediately. 2 3/4 years later the numbers posted are as I stated.
This is going to be a shocker to you but I never said it didn't. What you are doing is ignoring that the GDP was far worse under Bush and the .4% and 1.3% is a drastic improvement over your boy Bush. Same goes for the 2.6 million net job loss. Your boy Bush was headed in the wrong direction, he goes home and all the sudden there is a drastic turn-around.
You refuse historic data because you'd rather play the blame game with no history attached. Our data is actually the same. The difference is, you show where we are at and scream... "ZOMG!!!1!1!1 It's Obama's fault." I post the same numbers but also show how where they came from and how they got there and you don't like that one bit, because it blows your blame game out of the water.
View attachment 67117513
IN conclusion, you are lying by blaming Obama and ignoring history and the BLS records and I'm being honest by showing you the record.
By the way, here is the reason I posted the first and second qtr 2011 as I was comparing it to the 2010 numbers showing that every month in 2010 the GDP dropped and in 2011 it is under 2%. that is hardly a success
Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
2010 2011
I II III IV I II
3.9 3.8 2.5 2.3 0.4 1.3
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
Doesn't matter if your boy Bush is on the ballot or not. I'm referencing what was that is effecting what is. You dodge by playing the "next election" card. I'm talking about what is and why it is. You Obama derangement syndrome is the worst derangement syndrome of anyone I've ever seen.
Compared to your boy Bush's exit stage right it is. It is a massive success.
Your cut & paste lies debunked here:
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?