Current Events > How do people legitimately still like and support Trump?

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3
Mike_Stanton 10/13/17 10:13:57 AM #101:	Mal_Fet posted... He averaged 2% growth after the recession. It was the weakest recovery after a recession since the great depression.Obama was not good with the economy or jobs. As far as growth and the recovery he wasn't great, but the GDP growth rate was negative by the end of Bush's term. And as far as jobs and poverty refer to the stats posted earlier. Obama didn't have a great economy or anything but it was still better than any time the president has relied on supply side economics. --- RIP Butters_1188 2005-2009 Prove me wrong <cite>Mike_Stanton posted [p:888355217] in How do peo... [t:75871315]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mal_Fet posted...</cite> <quote>He averaged 2% growth after the recession. It was the weakest recovery after a recession since the great depression.Obama was not good with the economy or jobs.</quote> As far as growth and the recovery he wasn't great, but the GDP growth rate was negative by the end of Bush's term. And as far as jobs and poverty refer to the stats posted earlier. Obama didn't have a great economy or anything but it was still better than any time the president has relied on supply side economics.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
FrisbeeDude 10/13/17 10:15:30 AM #102:	MrSinclair posted... Are they actually stupid or more stubborn? Racism is a helluva drug --- No one gets in the way of my frisbee games! NO ONE! <cite>FrisbeeDude posted [p:888355281] in How do peo... [t:75871315]...</cite> <quote><cite>MrSinclair posted...</cite> <quote>Are they actually stupid or more stubborn?</quote> Racism is a helluva drug</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Malcolm_McGuffi 10/13/17 10:15:35 AM #103:	Red Hats like Mal are just nasty people, that's the long and short of it. They don't care about Trump as much as they care about protecting America from "libcucks" and "SJW's" <cite>Malcolm_McGuffi posted [p:888355286] in How do peo... [t:75871315]...</cite> <quote>Red Hats like Mal are just nasty people, that's the long and short of it. They don't care about Trump as much as they care about protecting America from "libcucks" and "SJW's"</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KainFourteh 10/13/17 11:02:59 AM #104:	GreatEvilEmpire posted... ImTheMacheteGuy posted... Imagine believing this much fake news Imaging being a winner. Imagining is the closest you'll ever get with your illiteracy issues. <cite>KainFourteh posted [p:888357618] in How do peo... [t:75871315]...</cite> <quote><cite>GreatEvilEmpire posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted...</cite> <quote> Imagine believing this much fake news</quote> Imaging being a winner.</quote> Imagining is the closest you'll ever get with your illiteracy issues.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ImTheMacheteGuy 10/13/17 2:20:34 PM #105:	tommybel89 posted... ^Not with that spelling, lolol --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted [p:888368160] in How do peo... [t:75871315]...</cite> <quote><cite>tommybel89 posted...</cite> <quote>^Not with that spelling, lolol</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ImTheMacheteGuy 10/13/17 2:25:05 PM #106:	Mal_Fet posted... CrimsonRage posted... Obama was good with jobs, the economy, He averaged 2% growth after the recession. It was the weakest recovery after a recession since the great depression. Obama was not good with the economy or jobs. CrimsonRage posted... and disaster relief Lol apparently you don't remember much about Hurricane Sandy. I remember Sandy. It was a blizzard for me. I walked around in the snow and briefly directed traffic before the cops showed up to do so. Power was still out the next day so I chilled with a friend of mine and got drunk. I was drinking peppermint schnapps with snow out of a dunkin donuts cup. Power was restored within 24 hours of being off. --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted [p:888368431] in How do peo... [t:75871315]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mal_Fet posted...</cite> <quote><cite>CrimsonRage posted...</cite> <quote>Obama was good with jobs, the economy, </quote> He averaged 2% growth after the recession. It was the weakest recovery after a recession since the great depression. Obama was not good with the economy or jobs. <cite>CrimsonRage posted...</cite> <quote>and disaster relief </quote> Lol apparently you don't remember much about Hurricane Sandy.</quote> I remember Sandy. It was a blizzard for me. I walked around in the snow and briefly directed traffic before the cops showed up to do so. Power was still out the next day so I chilled with a friend of mine and got drunk. I was drinking peppermint schnapps with snow out of a dunkin donuts cup. Power was restored within 24 hours of being off.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mal_Fet 10/13/17 3:51:36 PM #107:	Mike_Stanton posted... As far as growth and the recovery he wasn't great, but the GDP growth rate was negative by the end of Bush's term. Gee, I wonder what happened right at the end of his term --- Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. -George Orwell <cite>Mal_Fet posted [p:888373639] in How do peo... [t:75871315]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mike_Stanton posted...</cite> <quote>As far as growth and the recovery he wasn't great, but the GDP growth rate was negative by the end of Bush's term. </quote> Gee, I wonder what happened right at the end of his term</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Letron_James 10/13/17 3:52:26 PM #108:	to answer the OP's question Because stupidity exists --- Ask me if I would eat da booty. <cite>Letron_James posted [p:888373693] in How do peo... [t:75871315]...</cite> <quote>to answer the OP's question Because stupidity exists</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mal_Fet 10/13/17 3:52:32 PM #109:	Mike_Stanton posted... Obama didn't have a great economy or anything but it was still better than any time the president has relied on supply side economics. Besides Reagan's, you mean. And he also had a way stronger recovery from a recession. --- Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. -George Orwell <cite>Mal_Fet posted [p:888373696] in How do peo... [t:75871315]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mike_Stanton posted...</cite> <quote>Obama didn't have a great economy or anything but it was still better than any time the president has relied on supply side economics.</quote> Besides Reagan's, you mean. And he also had a way stronger recovery from a recession.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mike_Stanton 10/14/17 12:32:08 AM #110:	Mal_Fet posted... Mike_Stanton posted... As far as growth and the recovery he wasn't great, but the GDP growth rate was negative by the end of Bush's term. Gee, I wonder what happened right at the end of his term A weak economy inevitably results in a recession. Anything else? Mal_Fet posted... Mike_Stanton posted... Obama didn't have a great economy or anything but it was still better than any time the president has relied on supply side economics. Besides Reagan's, you mean. And he also had a way stronger recovery from a recession. What was the top tax rate for a majority of Reagan's presidency? waits as Mal googles it --- RIP Butters_1188 2005-2009 Prove me wrong <cite>Mike_Stanton posted [p:888399546] in How do peo... [t:75871315]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mal_Fet posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Mike_Stanton posted...</cite> <quote>As far as growth and the recovery he wasn't great, but the GDP growth rate was negative by the end of Bush's term. </quote> Gee, I wonder what happened right at the end of his term</quote> A weak economy inevitably results in a recession. Anything else? <cite>Mal_Fet posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Mike_Stanton posted...</cite> <quote>Obama didn't have a great economy or anything but it was still better than any time the president has relied on supply side economics.</quote> Besides Reagan's, you mean. And he also had a way stronger recovery from a recession.</quote> What was the top tax rate for a majority of Reagan's presidency? waits as Mal googles it</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mal_Fet 10/14/17 1:54:06 AM #111:	Mike_Stanton posted... A weak economy inevitably results in a recession. Anything else? Actually the housing bubble caused the recession, not a "weak economy". Mike_Stanton posted... What was the top tax rate for a majority of Reagan's presidency? So you support supply-side economics as long as there's sufficent deductibles? --- Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. -George Orwell <cite>Mal_Fet posted [p:888402448] in How do peo... [t:75871315]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mike_Stanton posted...</cite> <quote>A weak economy inevitably results in a recession. Anything else? </quote> Actually the housing bubble caused the recession, not a "weak economy". <cite>Mike_Stanton posted...</cite> <quote>What was the top tax rate for a majority of Reagan's presidency? </quote> So you support supply-side economics as long as there's sufficent deductibles?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mike_Stanton 10/14/17 2:52:08 AM #112:	Mal_Fet posted... Actually the housing bubble caused the recession, not a "weak economy". Yes, bubbles burst when there's a weak economy. Like when you have an administration that promotes deregulation by turning a surplus into a deficit among other ways. Mal_Fet posted... So you support supply-side economics as long as there's sufficent deductibles? You mean being within the Laffer curve? Yeah, but I wouldn't consider that true supply side economics because the Laffer curve doesn't have a clearly defined range. 50% is still a relatively high tax rate, but it isn't as excessive as the 70% top tax rate before Reagan's term. Reagan didn't go full trickle down mode until the end of his presidency when it went from 50% to 28%. The 28% bracket didn't work when Bush the Elder tried to continue it which is why even he admitted it was "voodoo economics"... --- RIP Butters_1188 2005-2009 Prove me wrong <cite>Mike_Stanton posted [p:888403959] in How do peo... [t:75871315]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mal_Fet posted...</cite> <quote>Actually the housing bubble caused the recession, not a "weak economy".</quote> Yes, bubbles burst when there's a weak economy. Like when you have an administration that promotes deregulation by turning a surplus into a deficit among other ways. <cite>Mal_Fet posted...</cite> <quote>So you support supply-side economics as long as there's sufficent deductibles?</quote> You mean being within the Laffer curve? Yeah, but I wouldn't consider that true supply side economics because the Laffer curve doesn't have a clearly defined range. 50% is still a relatively high tax rate, but it isn't as excessive as the 70% top tax rate before Reagan's term. Reagan didn't go full trickle down mode until the end of his presidency when it went from 50% to 28%. The 28% bracket didn't work when Bush the Elder tried to continue it which is why even he admitted it was "voodoo economics"...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dash_Harber 10/14/17 2:56:49 AM #113:	I don't get how anyone can back him after his asinine actions with the whole Iran deal. Not only did he needlessly piss off Iran, for literally no reason, when they were finally willing to co-operate, for absolutely no benefit, and ultimately no effect, but he also made every other fucking country on the planet clearly distance themselves from the US, making them literally take Iran's side. How the fuck is that a justifiable action? Why would anyone want that? <cite>Dash_Harber posted [p:888404069] in How do peo... [t:75871315]...</cite> <quote>I don't get how anyone can back him after his asinine actions with the whole Iran deal. Not only did he needlessly piss off Iran, for literally no reason, when they were finally willing to co-operate, for absolutely no benefit, and ultimately no effect, but he also made every other fucking country on the planet clearly distance themselves from the US, making them literally take Iran's side. How the fuck is that a justifiable action? Why would anyone want that?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mal_Fet 10/14/17 2:01:37 PM #114:	Mike_Stanton posted... Yes, bubbles burst when there's a weak economy. Uh, no, the housing bubble burst because the government mandated banks to give out housing loans to people who could not pay them back. And who's idea was that, hmm? Mike_Stanton posted... You mean being within the Laffer curve? Yeah, but I wouldn't consider that true supply side economics because the Laffer curve doesn't have a clearly defined range. 50% is still a relatively high tax rate, but it isn't as excessive as the 70% top tax rate before Reagan's term. Reagan didn't go full trickle down mode until the end of his presidency when it went from 50% to 28%. No one actually paid the 50% rate. The tax code was so complex and littered with deductibles that Reagan's simplification of the code just cut out all the fat and made the tax rate a realistic number that people were actually paying. Also, Reagan's tax ratw at the end of his presidency led into the 90's, which was also a highly prosperous decade. More so towards the beginning, until Clinton screwed it all up. --- Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. -George Orwell <cite>Mal_Fet posted [p:888423401] in How do peo... [t:75871315]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mike_Stanton posted...</cite> <quote>Yes, bubbles burst when there's a weak economy. </quote> Uh, no, the housing bubble burst because the government mandated banks to give out housing loans to people who could not pay them back. And who's idea was that, hmm? <cite>Mike_Stanton posted...</cite> <quote>You mean being within the Laffer curve? Yeah, but I wouldn't consider that true supply side economics because the Laffer curve doesn't have a clearly defined range. 50% is still a relatively high tax rate, but it isn't as excessive as the 70% top tax rate before Reagan's term. Reagan didn't go full trickle down mode until the end of his presidency when it went from 50% to 28%. </quote> No one actually paid the 50% rate. The tax code was so complex and littered with deductibles that Reagan's simplification of the code just cut out all the fat and made the tax rate a realistic number that people were actually paying. Also, Reagan's tax ratw at the end of his presidency led into the 90's, which was also a highly prosperous decade. More so towards the beginning, until Clinton screwed it all up.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mike_Stanton 10/15/17 1:58:34 AM #115:	Mal_Fet posted... Uh, no, the housing bubble burst because the government mandated banks to give out housing loans to people who could not pay them back. The government allowed them to give out such loans. Not mandated. It wouldn't have been a problem though without banks taking such risky investments, but apparently that's what happens when you concentrate too much wealth at the top. More importantly, people being unable to pay for things is an indicator of a poor economy, which is why the poverty rate was already very high even before the mortgage crisis. And yes, deliberately creating a deficit (starving the beast) is a way to promote further deregulation, which certainly didn't help anything. Mal_Fet posted... And who's idea was that, hmm? The Republican party who overwhelmingly voted to repeal Glass-Steagall + Bill Clinton. Which of course, wasn't a bad thing. Mal_Fet posted... No one actually paid the 50% rate. The tax code was so complex and littered with deductibles that Reagan's simplification of the code just cut out all the fat and made the tax rate a realistic number that people were actually paying. That works too. Historically, tax cuts when the top tax rate is >50% were successful for both Kennedy and Reagan. Going much lower than the 39ish % rate has never worked. Mal_Fet posted... Also, Reagan's tax ratw at the end of his presidency led into the 90's, which was also a highly prosperous decade. More so towards the beginning, until Clinton screwed it all up. lol now this is some good revisionist history, Mal_Feasant. The 90s didn't start being prosperous until Clinton raised the top tax rate to 39.6% in '93. Before that Bush Sr. (with the 28% top tax rate) had a recession on his watch and had brought poverty up to over 15% before Clinton brought it down to 11.3% by the end of his presidency. What great thing about Reagan/Bush's economy did Clinton screw up exactly? --- RIP Butters_1188 2005-2009 Prove me wrong <cite>Mike_Stanton posted [p:888458630] in How do peo... [t:75871315]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mal_Fet posted...</cite> <quote>Uh, no, the housing bubble burst because the government mandated banks to give out housing loans to people who could not pay them back.</quote> The government allowed them to give out such loans. Not mandated. It wouldn't have been a problem though without banks taking such risky investments, but apparently that's what happens when you concentrate too much wealth at the top. More importantly, people being unable to pay for things is an indicator of a poor economy, which is why the poverty rate was already very high even before the mortgage crisis. And yes, deliberately creating a deficit (starving the beast) is a way to promote further deregulation, which certainly didn't help anything. <cite>Mal_Fet posted...</cite> <quote>And who's idea was that, hmm?</quote> The Republican party who overwhelmingly voted to repeal Glass-Steagall + Bill Clinton. Which of course, wasn't a bad thing. <cite>Mal_Fet posted...</cite> <quote>No one actually paid the 50% rate. The tax code was so complex and littered with deductibles that Reagan's simplification of the code just cut out all the fat and made the tax rate a realistic number that people were actually paying.</quote> That works too. Historically, tax cuts when the top tax rate is >50% were successful for both Kennedy and Reagan. Going much lower than the 39ish % rate has never worked. <cite>Mal_Fet posted...</cite> <quote>Also, Reagan's tax ratw at the end of his presidency led into the 90's, which was also a highly prosperous decade. More so towards the beginning, until Clinton screwed it all up.</quote> lol now this is some good revisionist history, Mal_Feasant. The 90s didn't start being prosperous until Clinton raised the top tax rate to 39.6% in '93. Before that Bush Sr. (with the 28% top tax rate) had a recession on his watch and had brought poverty up to over 15% before Clinton brought it down to 11.3% by the end of his presidency. What great thing about Reagan/Bush's economy did Clinton screw up exactly?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ledbowman 10/15/17 1:59:48 AM #116:	Because memes are literally all they care about. --- I wish we all waved <cite>ledbowman posted [p:888458672] in How do peo... [t:75871315]...</cite> <quote>Because memes are literally all they care about.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3

Current Events > How do people legitimately still like and support Trump? (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > How do people legitimately still like and support Trump?