The 2020 Presidential Election - Convention & General Election

[Moiraine]

3 hours ago, HuskerNation1 said:

So wages have not been rising? Black and Hispanic unemployment have not reached record lows?  Its hard for leftists to accept Trumps policies which were starkly different from Obamas have given the economy the boost it needed leading to all the records that have been set. 

 

 

 

Nebraska is up 118-14 in the 4th quarter of a football game. They put the 4th string QB in, Matt Masker. He scores a touchdown and Nebraska breaks its record of most points ever scored in a game.

Did Matt Masker give the offense the boost it needed to set the scoring record?

[HuskerNation1]

8 hours ago, Landlord said:

 

 

It's hard for you to engage in common sense with most of the things you post.

 

Your lack of a response is telling....you cannot refute the facts I have shared.   

[HuskerNation1]

7 hours ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

 

Nebraska is up 118-14 in the 4th quarter of a football game. They put the 4th string QB in, Matt Masker. He scores a touchdown and Nebraska breaks its record of most points ever scored in a game.

Did Matt Masker give the offense the boost it needed to set the scoring record?

 

Nebraska is stuck with a pattern of slightly above average seasons at 7-5 or 8-4. They bring in a new coach that changes the entire structure of the program...how practices are handled, the approach to recruiting and teaching, expectations of accountability on and off season, and the team begins consistenly winning 10 to 13 games a year including championships.  New CEO of team...new results.   

 

Sorry I am not going to let you continue to make false claims about an economic trend that you want to use to give Obama credit for todays economic records. Did Obama reduce the same level of regulations that Trump did? Did Obama reduce taxes to stimulate economic growth, including a reduction in corporate rates. Its a simple question. 

[RedDenver]

8 hours ago, HuskerNation1 said:

Sorry I am not going to let you continue to make false claims about an economic trend that you want to use to give Obama credit for todays economic records.

Look at where the economic metrics were the day Trump was inaugurated and then again today. How much did they change? Then do the same for past presidents. Come back and show us the data and where Trump ranked.

[Moiraine]

9 hours ago, HuskerNation1 said:

 

Nebraska is stuck with a pattern of slightly above average seasons at 7-5 or 8-4. They bring in a new coach that changes the entire structure of the program...how practices are handled, the approach to recruiting and teaching, expectations of accountability on and off season, and the team begins consistenly winning 10 to 13 games a year including championships.  New CEO of team...new results.   

 

Sorry I am not going to let you continue to make false claims about an economic trend that you want to use to give Obama credit for todays economic records. Did Obama reduce the same level of regulations that Trump did? Did Obama reduce taxes to stimulate economic growth, including a reduction in corporate rates. Its a simple question. 

 

 

There has been no sign yet that lowering taxes or deregulating have had an impact, because there has been no significant change in the rates of improvement for any of the variables you spout off and come to the wrong conclusion about.

 

You aren’t asking the right question.

 

 

Your analogy does not at all describe your argument or what Trump has done. I described your argument well already, but to use wins and losses:

 

Obama takes over a football team that goes 0-12 in its previous season. He then goes 3-9, 5-7, 7-5, 9-3. Trump then takes over and changes the offense and defense, is currently 6-2, and you give Trump credit for turning the program around. You then have 6-2 rings made for him and throw him a parade. Another fan informs you that the team had made steady improvement with the previous offense and defense and you plug your ears and start humming loudly. 

[mrandyk]

2 hours ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

There has been no sign yet that lowering taxes or deregulating have had an impact, because there has been no significant change in the rates of improvement for any of the variables you spout off and come to the wrong conclusion about.

 

You aren’t asking the right question.

 

 

Your analogy does not at all describe your argument or what Trump has done. I described your argument well already, but to use wins and losses:

 

Obama takes over a football team that goes 0-12 in its previous season. He then goes 3-9, 5-7, 7-5, 9-3. Trump then takes over and changes the offense and defense, is currently 6-2, and you give Trump credit for turning the program around. You then have 6-2 rings made for him and throw him a parade. Another fan informs you that the team had made steady improvement with the previous offense and defense and you plug your ears and start humming loudly. 

Being able to go 6-2 after a coaching change shows just how much better Trump is than Obama ever was.

[mrandyk]

22 hours ago, HuskerNation1 said:

 

Yet many times this past year his polling numvbers were higher than Obama and Reagans...and despite 92% negative coverage. You must be racist for continuing to make such slanderous statements.

His black approval rating is at its highest point since the inauguration, 13%. Do you honestly believe that sounds like someone set to earn more than 8% of the black vote? The opponent will matter but he has done next to nothing to sell himself here.

[HuskerNation1]

18 hours ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

There has been no sign yet that lowering taxes or deregulating have had an impact, because there has been no significant change in the rates of improvement for any of the variables you spout off and come to the wrong conclusion about.

 

You aren’t asking the right question.

 

 

Your analogy does not at all describe your argument or what Trump has done. I described your argument well already, but to use wins and losses:

 

Obama takes over a football team that goes 0-12 in its previous season. He then goes 3-9, 5-7, 7-5, 9-3. Trump then takes over and changes the offense and defense, is currently 6-2, and you give Trump credit for turning the program around. You then have 6-2 rings made for him and throw him a parade. Another fan informs you that the team had made steady improvement with the previous offense and defense and you plug your ears and start humming loudly. 

 

What do you mean there have been no signs that lowering regulations and the corporate tax rate are having an impact.  GDP was declining in Obama's final years...a downward trend.  It's rebounded and in on pace for 3% plus annual growth.  In fact, the annual GDP growth rate in 2016 was the worst it had been in 5 years.  Unemployment has improved for all racial groups and set records for minority groups.  Consumer confidence and business confidence has surged.  If you want to go back further, let's go back the past 2 decades.  Bush 43 inherited a recession from Clinton along with the stock market crash and 9/11.  He starts out 0-12 in his first year.  The tax cuts of 2003 were enacted and the economy picked up steam and showed an upward trend (several seasons at 8-4 or 9-3).  Then the WORLD economy collapses (not just a US recession) and all leaders are back to 0-12.  Obama averages 6-6  to 7-5 up  from 2010 to 2016 with some upticks in GDP growth followed by a downward trend his final year in office.  After Trump policies the US economy goes from 7-5 up to 11-1 in his 2nd year in office.  At no point in Obama's entire 8 years or Bush 43's entire 8 years was 11-1 the record.  There were some ups and downs for 43 and 44 but nothing that resulted in a magical 11-1 season.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/07/how-trump-has-set-economic-growth-on-fire.html

[StPaulHusker]

2 minutes ago, HuskerNation1 said:

 

What do you mean there have been no signs that lowering regulations and the corporate tax rate are having an impact.  GDP was declining in Obama's final years...a downward trend.  It's rebounded and in on pace for 3% plus annual growth.  In fact, the annual GDP growth rate in 2016 was the worst it had been in 5 years.  Unemployment has improved for all racial groups and set records for minority groups.  Consumer confidence and business confidence has surged.  If you want to go back further, let's go back the past 2 decades.  Bush 43 inherited a recession from Clinton along with the stock market crash and 9/11.  He starts out 0-12 in his first year.  The tax cuts of 2003 were enacted and the economy picked up steam and showed an upward trend (several seasons at 8-4 or 9-3).  Then the WORLD economy collapses (not just a US recession) and all leaders are back to 0-12.  Obama averages 6-6  to 7-5 up  from 2010 to 2016 with some upticks in GDP growth followed by a downward trend his final year in office.  After Trump policies the US economy goes from 7-5 up to 11-1 in his 2nd year in office.  At no point in Obama's entire 8 years or Bush 43's entire 8 years was 11-1 the record.  There were some ups and downs for 43 and 44 but nothing that resulted in a magical 11-1 season.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/07/how-trump-has-set-economic-growth-on-fire.html

 

Did you just say Bush 43 inherited a recession from Clinton due to 9/11?

[HuskerNation1]

4 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

 

Did you just say Bush 43 inherited a recession from Clinton due to 9/11?

 

The economy was in a recession during Q1, 2001 so technically while Bush had taken over as POTUS, but that does not change the reality that the economy and stock market were already heading South before 9/11 collapsed everything.  Perhaps it would be more accurate to say Bush inherited an economy with great weakening as he took over.

 

http://www.nber.org/cycles/november2001/

[BigRedBuster]

3 minutes ago, HuskerNation1 said:

 

The economy was in a recession during Q1, 2001 so technically while Bush had taken over as POTUS, but that does not change the reality that the economy and stock market were already heading South before 9/11 collapsed everything.  Perhaps it would be more accurate to say Bush inherited an economy with great weakening as he took over.

 

http://www.nber.org/cycles/november2001/

 

So....the economy, stock market, unemployment, consumer confidence...etc. in the first quarter of a President's term should be credited to the previous President?  I agree with that.

[StPaulHusker]

7 minutes ago, HuskerNation1 said:

 

The economy was in a recession during Q1, 2001 so technically while Bush had taken over as POTUS, but that does not change the reality that the economy and stock market were already heading South before 9/11 collapsed everything.  Perhaps it would be more accurate to say Bush inherited an economy with great weakening as he took over.

 

http://www.nber.org/cycles/november2001/

Q: The NBER has dated the beginning of the recession in March 2001. Does this mean that the attacks of September 11 did not have a role in causing the recession?

A. No. Before the attacks, it is possible that the decline in the economy would have been too mild to qualify as a recession. The attacks clearly deepened the contraction and may have been an important factor in turning the episode into a recession.

[HuskerNation1]

29 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

So....the economy, stock market, unemployment, consumer confidence...etc. in the first quarter of a President's term should be credited to the previous President?  I agree with that.

 

Last I checked the economic records set under Trump did not occur in his 1st quarter in office.   GDP growth has been in 2018, unemployment records for minorities has been in 2018, and the same with consumer confidence.

[HuskerNation1]

28 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

Q: The NBER has dated the beginning of the recession in March 2001. Does this mean that the attacks of September 11 did not have a role in causing the recession?

A. No. Before the attacks, it is possible that the decline in the economy would have been too mild to qualify as a recession. The attacks clearly deepened the contraction and may have been an important factor in turning the episode into a recession.

 

This has been debated in the economist community for some time now.  Did the shrinking economy in Q1 technically qualify as a recession..many say yes, some think not quite.  Regardless the economy was in a downward trend AND got much worse with the 9/11 attacks.  Let's not also forget that the stock market crash BEGAN in 2000, and the weakening of the economy seemed to lag the start of the market crash.  

 

I will say the current stock market is overvalued and does remind me of the 1990s buildup.  It's had some correcting in recent months which I think is a good thing as it can hopefully prevent a widespread crash.

[StPaulHusker]

2 minutes ago, HuskerNation1 said:

 

This has been debated in the economist community for some time now.  Did the shrinking economy in Q1 technically qualify as a recession..many say yes, some think not quite.  Regardless the economy was in a downward trend AND got much worse with the 9/11 attacks.  Let's not also forget that the stock market crash BEGAN in 2000, and the weakening of the economy seemed to lag the start of the market crash.  

 

I will say the current stock market is overvalued and does remind me of the 1990s buildup.  It's had some correcting in recent months which I think is a good thing as it can hopefully prevent a widespread crash.

You can't post a link claiming fact and when I pull something from that link you say it's debatable.