• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

President Donald J. Trump

Started by The General, February 11, 2011, 01:33:34 AM

Quote from: Roswells, Art on December 17, 2017, 01:45:38 AM

Did I say that? I could have because it seems about right. We did seem to have so much of a surplus that the second Bush decided to give 300 dollars back to every tax payer. That was from Clinton, not Bush. Bush just used it as some cheap PR device. Rebublicans don't seem to give a shit about the debt. Dems lessen it, Republicans spend it.


You might want to rethink if you are a republican still. It doesn't seem like it.

Remember the recession with the first Bush, or was that Reagan? Probably both. The second Bush was also so happy to claim that more people own houses than ever before. That was right before that bubble blew and they were all losing their houses.

1.  Not a Republican - they suck too - but prefer them to the Ds, who are worse in nearly every area (and that's the least of it). 

2.  Bush II was an idiot, and said and did any number of dumb things

3.  I'm not even going to bother explaining presidents don't ''run the economy'', other than to say there is a boom and bust cycle, that there isn't much the government can do other than erect obstacles or tear them down.  Being seen as ''pro-business'' and pro-jobs, while reducing taxes and regulations is about all a president can do to positively influence the economy on the one hand (for example Reagan and Trump), and the opposite of all that to negatively impact it on the other (for example Obama).

Saying presidents run the economy is a great tactic for media to use in order to hide the damage their party does when in office, though.  Most people have little understanding of economics, and there are enough who believe whatever the media tells them. 

They like being told the current president is responsible for all aspects of the current economy - it makes it easy for them and gives them the comfort of thinking they know something about what goes on around them.  Except it glosses over a lot of factors, including the Fed, what's gone on policy-wise just prior to a current president taking office, the worldwide economy overall,  lags between implementing good and bad policies and when they take effect, and etc.

4. Yes, we talked about that (the balanced budget in the 90s) not even a week ago.  This is why it's pointless to discuss any of this with a Lib.  They don't know what they are talking about, and will ignore and forget anything that doesn't work inside their bubble.  Ask them to explain something, and they'll ''get back to you'':

Quote from: Roswells, Art on December 11, 2017, 09:08:13 PM
It wasn't a $20 trillion debt when Bill Clinton was in office. Heck, we had so much money Bush decided to give $300 dollars back to every citizen. Remember that? Have you noticed the pattern? Democrats get the budget in order, Republicans spend the shit out of it.

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on December 11, 2017, 09:55:25 PM
I'm quite curious to finally find out exactly what it was that Bill Clinton did to balance the budget and manage the finances so well. 

Since you seem to know, please point out the reforms he implemented, the policies he changed, the legislation he demanded and pushed through, the times he faced down the Fed, the times he threatened to ''shut down the government'' in order to get his budget balancing budgets passed, and so on.  I'd really like to know.

Quote from: Roswells, Art on December 11, 2017, 10:08:28 PM
You think shutting down the government is what we elected our officials for? By the way, that was Newt Gingrich that led that travesty. Some of us were visiting our national parks at the time.

P.S. I'll have to get back to you on the stuff he passed.

So do you know or not?

Swishypants

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on December 17, 2017, 07:38:00 AM



Do they also have a license to kill?  Why don’t you go have a wank and screw beautiful women in your mind.

LOL! BYE!  ;D

Quote from: 4chan mole on December 17, 2017, 01:43:56 AM
You might be jumping to conclusions way too soon.
TL might be more intuitive than you think when comes to this issue.

You're right, that probably won't be her dumbest post overall, just her dumbest post to date.


Spy

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on December 16, 2017, 10:19:05 PM

I know a place where there's a school for the mentally challenged.

Of course you do. I also heard you're very well-behaved on the bus.


Up All Night

The MSM Sunday Morning Shows were in FULL Spin Mode over the Doug Jones win in Alabama, none more so than Chuck Todd on NBC. They parlayed the one ray of light for the Democratic Party into the bright dawn of a new day, a turning point for the Democratic Party, and, the defeat of Roy Moore as the beginning of the end for the Republicans, with talk of the Democrats regaining the House and the Senate in the 2018 Mid-Term Elections. CBS, even before their morning show, dedicated a segment with Doug Jones in a fluff interview piece in his office, with the optics carefully placed and set. Photo of MLK and bust of JFK behind Doug Jone's head. And an autographed Alabama University Football when the the interviewer was on camera.

ABC was the only one with an unbiased opening statement: "Will this Jones win seem like a 'win' in November of 2018??

They spent a huge chunk of their with a segment with the old "Middle Ground" candidate John Kasich. Go ahead and buy into the Dem's false optimism John, and think you have a shot at running against Trump in 2020...

Trump hasn't even finished his first year in office ! ! ! ! And the middle of the road Republicans like Kasich are already ready to bury him!! Pathetic.

The constant MSM drumbeat about Roy Moore on every news cycle for a month did allow for a high turnout against the highly controversial Republican candidate Roy Moore. So yeah, that worked.

But there's no possible way for the MSM to give that same coverage on 20 or more Republican candidates in the 2018 Mid-Terms. And President Trump will hold rallies for those Republicans, and that will energize the voters, and that energized voter base will come out against the Democratic vote, in the mid-terms.

PaulAtreides

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on December 17, 2017, 07:48:17 AM

Steinbeck was required reading in HS.


You went to high school?  I thought sixth grade was your senior year.

PaulAtreides

Quote from: Spy on December 17, 2017, 09:45:39 AM
Of course you do. I also heard you're very well-behaved on the bus.




Well, MD MD did have to wear a helmet and he was often disciplined for licking the windows.

Kidnostad3

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on December 17, 2017, 08:41:50 AM
1.  Not a Republican - they suck too - but prefer them to the Ds, who are worse in nearly every area (and that's the least of it). 

2.  Bush II was an idiot, and said and did any number of dumb things

3.  I'm not even going to bother explaining presidents don't ''run the economy'', other than to say there is a boom and bust cycle, that there isn't much the government can do other than erect obstacles or tear them down.  Being seen as ''pro-business'' and pro-jobs, while reducing taxes and regulations is about all a president can do to positively influence the economy on the one hand (for example Reagan and Trump), and the opposite of all that to negatively impact it on the other (for example Obama).

Saying presidents run the economy is a great tactic for media to use in order to hide the damage their party does when in office, though.  Most people have little understanding of economics, and there are enough who believe whatever the media tells them. 

They like being told the current president is responsible for all aspects of the current economy - it makes it easy for them and gives them the comfort of thinking they know something about what goes on around them.  Except it glosses over a lot of factors, including the Fed, what's gone on policy-wise just prior to a current president taking office, the worldwide economy overall,  lags between implementing good and bad  and when they take effect, and etc.

4. Yes, we talked about that (the balanced budget in the 90s) not even a week ago.  This is why it's pointless to discuss any of this with a Lib.  They don't know what they are talking about, and will ignore and forget anything that doesn't work inside their bubble.  Ask them to explain something, and they'll ''get back to you'':


Of course you’re right about Presidents not running the economy but doing the pro-growth things that Trump was able to do by executive order to ease the undue regulatory burden on businesses and his  pushing for a 20% corporate tax rate don’t hurt.  I realize that these things haven’t had time to show results in themselves but they sure have buoyed the outlook of business and the market.  As always, the problem is that people vote their pocketbooks and if, despite the measures Trump is taking, the long predicted major market correction should occur between now and the next election, he will take the hit for it.  Voters are very fickle.

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on December 17, 2017, 01:10:31 PM

Of course you’re right about Presidents not running the economy but doing the pro-growth things that Trump was able to do by executive order to ease the undue regulatory burden on businesses and his  pushing for a 20% corporate tax rate don’t hurt...

That was covered in the post


Quote from: Kidnostad3 on December 17, 2017, 01:10:31 PM
...  As always, the problem is that people vote their pocketbooks and if, despite the measures Trump is taking, the long predicted major market correction should occur between now and the next election, he will take the hit for it.  Voters are very fickle.

Also covered was the lag time on some (most) policy changes. 

The recovery from the deep 2008 recession should have been fairly quick, and the economy should have rebounded to where it had been after maybe a couple of years.  It didn't because the people making investment decisions for their businesses had zero confidence in Obama being pro-business - he wasn't - and they didn't know how that would manifest itself next.  They sat on their cash.

Which means all that pent up energy may have a further ways to run than expected before stalling out.  Not sure, haven't really looked at it.



Quote from: Kidnostad3 on December 17, 2017, 01:10:31 PM
...  Voters are very fickle have littel understanding of economics, and will believe the media if they blame a recession on Trump.

Fify

Kidnostad3

Quote from: PaulAtreides on December 17, 2017, 12:51:57 PM

You went to high school?  I thought sixth grade was your senior year.


Yup, I did the whole freshman year.

Kidnostad3

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on December 17, 2017, 01:23:03 PM
That was covered in the post


Also covered was the lag time on some (most) policy changes. 

The recovery from the deep 2008 recession should have been fairly quick, and the economy should have rebounded to where it had been after maybe a couple of years.  It didn't because the people making investment decisions for their businesses had zero confidence in Obama being pro-business - he wasn't - and they didn't know how that would manifest itself next.  They sat on their cash.

Which means all that pent up energy may have a further ways to run than expected before stalling out.  Not sure, haven't really looked at it.



Fify


I don’t think any other President, even Reagan, did much in the way of reducing the regulatory burden on small businesses nor did they slash the corporate tax rate by nearly half.  He did ease regulations on banks, insurance companies, etc.  I do believe this is new ground.


ACE of CLUBS

Quote from: 4chan mole on December 16, 2017, 08:07:33 PM
Too much 'support the pedos' talk on your board. Too many pedos posting their crap here.
That's why your board is held in deep disrespect on other boards.

There's some creepy shit on this thread now ...... it started with Dr. Dumb Dumb, and all his sexual references to anything that he had no intelligent response to.
This thread is quite disturbing  .....
It's not about Trump anymore.



Up All Night

Doug Jones: Trump shouldn't resign over harassment allegations

Doug Jones told CNN's Jake Tapper that he disagrees with the Democratic senators who are calling on President Trump to resign over the allegations of sexual misconduct that surfaced before the 2016 election.

"Where I am on that right now is that those allegations were made before the election. And so people had an opportunity to judge before that election ... I don't think the president ought to resign at this point. We'll see how things go but certainly those allegations are not new and he was elected with those allegations at front center."

Swishypants

Quote from: ACE of CLUBS on December 17, 2017, 02:42:04 PM
There's some creepy shit on this thread now ...... it started with Dr. Dumb Dumb, and all his sexual references to anything that he had no intelligent response to.
This thread is quite disturbing  .....
It's not about Trump anymore.




PaulAtreides

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on December 17, 2017, 02:57:21 AM

Yeah, I don't type with my mouth, faggot. Now get back to what you normally do with yours: sucking cock. ;D


Pay him no mind.  For months I've been trying to convey to MD MD that I am the Kwisatz Haderach and he is but a steaming pile of shit.  But he just doesn't get it.


albrecht

Quote from: Spy on December 17, 2017, 04:51:14 PM

Apparently he is not giving up and is fund-raising, at some point one must one wonder if the donations are coming from Democrats at this point?
ps: Consession? Or is that the spelling in The Great White North?



Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 21st Century Man on December 17, 2017, 05:22:20 PM

Is that Mueller's dad?


People are wondering just that. The timing lines up more or less.

Up All Night

Former Attorney General Eric Holder called for "mass, popular, peaceful" protest from the American public if Special Counsel Robert Mueller is fired amid reports that Trump's transition lawyers are saying Mueller obtained emails illegally.

When operative Eric Holder calls for protests if Trump fires Mueller, then it's time to fire Mueller.

Thanks for the tip Eric!!

ABSOLUTE RED LINE: the firing of Bob Mueller or crippling the special counsel’s office. If removed or meaningfully tampered with, there must be mass, popular, peaceful support of both. The American people must be seen and heard - they will ultimately be determinative.

https://twitter.com/EricHolder/statuses/942481938165747712

https://www.axios.com/eric-holder-firing-mueller-is-absolute-red-line-reason-for-protest-2518225816.html

Quote from: Up All Night on December 17, 2017, 05:36:21 PM
Former Attorney General Eric Holder called for "mass, popular, peaceful" protest from the American public if Special Counsel Robert Mueller is fired amid reports that Trump's transition lawyers are saying Mueller obtained emails illegally.

When operative Eric Holder calls for protests if Trump fires Mueller, then it's time to fire Mueller.

Thanks for the tip Eric!!

ABSOLUTE RED LINE: the firing of Bob Mueller or crippling the special counsel’s office. If removed or meaningfully tampered with, there must be mass, popular, peaceful support of both. The American people must be seen and heard - they will ultimately be determinative.

https://twitter.com/EricHolder/statuses/942481938165747712

https://www.axios.com/eric-holder-firing-mueller-is-absolute-red-line-reason-for-protest-2518225816.html


Holder can go jump off a cliff.

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on December 17, 2017, 01:38:01 PM

I don’t think any other President, even Reagan, did much in the way of reducing the regulatory burden on small businesses nor did they slash the corporate tax rate by nearly half.  He did ease regulations on banks, insurance companies, etc.  I do believe this is new ground.

We need regulations.  It's a matter of addressing where individual self interest (greed) and capitalism go off the rails.  The Left want to control everything, and use the regulatory process to do so; while others, calling themselves conservatives, don't appreciate why we need any regulations at all. 

I don't pay close attention to much of what goes on in DC, only at a general level with more focus on certain issues that interest me.  So as far as what Trump has been doing with the regs, my sense is he mostly wants to undo anything Obama has done, whether it's useful or not.  Perhaps he has more of a clue than that, not sure.   

For example net neutrality.  I support net neutrality, but I would define it as including Google, Facebook, and the rest - entitis that are so big, and because of the space they are in, are in a position to control what we see and have access to.  But the executives of those companies were buddies with Obama and net neutrality was writen so as not to over them - they only covered the cariers (those providing internet service).  Instead of repealing it, they should have extended it to cover those companies as well.

Another example is SWAPs.  These financial insurance contracts are a big part of what decimated the economy in 2008.  As insurance they protect the value of an investment or the receipt of dividends, interest income, etc.  Except anyone can buy these things, not just those who own the underlying investment.  A necessary regulation would prohibit those not owning the underlying asset from buying the insurance (SWAP).  Did the Congress do this?  No.  Instead they added more bank regulations that don't do a thing to protect the economy.

Quote from: Up All Night on December 17, 2017, 05:36:21 PM
Former Attorney General Eric Holder called for "mass, popular, peaceful" protest from the American public if Special Counsel Robert Mueller is fired amid reports that Trump's transition lawyers are saying Mueller obtained emails illegally.

When operative Eric Holder calls for protests if Trump fires Mueller, then it's time to fire Mueller.

Thanks for the tip Eric!!

ABSOLUTE RED LINE: the firing of Bob Mueller or crippling the special counsel’s office. If removed or meaningfully tampered with, there must be mass, popular, peaceful support of both. The American people must be seen and heard - they will ultimately be determinative.

https://twitter.com/EricHolder/statuses/942481938165747712

https://www.axios.com/eric-holder-firing-mueller-is-absolute-red-line-reason-for-protest-2518225816.html

This pig was one of the top officials in the Obama Administration.  An administration that could have done much to reconcile our racial divide, but instead did everything it could to exacerbate it.

A sane country would never have allowed these people anywhere near the White House; an honest media that put journalism first would have hounded them for their conduct, and their real crimes, the way they now hound Trump for imaginary ones; and in that sane country, had they somehow gotten into office under subterfuge, would have been removed through the impeachment process.

Eric Holder ought to lay low and thank his lucky stars everyday he isn't in prison, or worse.  Why he and his fellow felons in the Obama Administration haven't been indicted, tried, convicted, and locked up is beyond me.

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod