Democrats Hate Just To Hate!

[hollodero]

(01-09-2019, 07:51 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Well if you take the biggest accomplishment off the table; you're kinda proving the point. 

Am I though? The economy was also an Obama accomplishment, and he did actually inherit a mess. But it did not count, not even the slightest, I was told by half of America. No ounce of praise for Obama. On the grounds of exploding national debt and on these grounds alone. That was the way to see it, or else I'd been called "biased".

But now that it's Trump's economy, I as an outsider am supposed to forget that it didn't count back then, to regard it as a big accomplishment now regardless of exploding debt and to get called all kinds of stuff if I believe there should be the same measure stick for all. For me, the point proven is hypocrisy by the "fiscally responsible" conservative Trump praisers.

[*bfine32*]

(01-09-2019, 08:40 PM)hollodero Wrote: Am I though? The economy was also an Obama accomplishment, and he did actually inherit a mess. But it did not count, not even the slightest, I was told by half of America. No ounce of praise for Obama. On the grounds of exploding national debt and on these grounds alone. That was the way to see it, or else I'd been called "biased".

But now that it's Trump's economy, I as an outsider am supposed to forget that it didn't count back then, to regard it as a big accomplishment now regardless of exploding debt and to get called all kinds of stuff if I believe there should be the same measure stick for all. For me, the point proven is hypocrisy by the "fiscally responsible" conservative Trump praisers.

Why's it got to be about Obama? The economy is booming under the current POTUS; but when someone says "You cannot include the economy" in his list of accolades; then that person is proving the point made by the OP. 

[hollodero]

(01-09-2019, 09:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Why's it got to be about Obama? The economy is booming under the current POTUS; but when someone says "You cannot include the economy" in his list of accolades; then that person is proving the point made by the OP. 

It's about Obama to establish a measure stick to see if I really prove said point. Here's how I see the OP's stance:

The economy is doing good, the debt goes up: It's awful, a disaster, how could anyone be supportive of that carnage! (A Democrat is president)
The economy is doing good, the debt goes up: It's marvellous, all credit to our president, how hateful does one have to be to not see that! (A Republican is president)

And piling up debt in economic good times isn't that much of an accomplishment, especially when being fiscally responsible was the one selling point in former times. Anyone, even I, could minimize unemployment with an additional 2 trillion dollars (only I would use the money to let people build roads and bridges and such instead of giving the richest money to buy back their stock). It comes with a price, one future generations have to pay. Same goes with rolling back all kinds of protections for environment or people. Sure the markets like it, but that's not the end of the story - and one can't possibly say, the unbiased thing would be to look no further and demand unquestionable praise for the president. That's the biased thing to do.

[*bfine32*]

(01-09-2019, 10:05 PM)hollodero Wrote: It's about Obama to establish a measure stick to see if I really prove said point. Here's how I see the OP's stance:

The economy is doing good, the debt goes up: It's awful, a disaster, how could anyone be supportive of that carnage! (A Democrat is president)
The economy is doing good, the debt goes up: It's marvellous, all credit to our president, how hateful does one have to be to not see that! (A Republican is president)

And piling up debt in economic good times isn't that much of an accomplishment, especially when being fiscally responsible was the one selling point in former times. Anyone, even I, could minimize unemployment with an additional 2 trillion dollars (only I would use the money to let people build roads and bridges and such instead of giving the richest money to buy back their stock). It comes with a price, one future generations have to pay. Same goes with rolling back all kinds of protections for environment or people. Sure the markets like it, but that's not the end of the story - and one can't possibly say, the unbiased thing would be to look no further and demand unquestionable praise for the president. That's the biased thing to do.

Actually you're the one that brought up the economy, not the OP. You just wanted to take it off the table. 

[hollodero]

(01-09-2019, 10:17 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Actually you're the one that brought up the economy, not the OP. You just wanted to take it off the table. 

That is correct. I have no idea about the OP's view on that, I just have a hunch it's just as I described, because that seems typical. I also don't want to be painted as someone who would protest Trump even if he had cured cancer just because I wouldn't praise him for the economy. (Or wahtever OP had in mind when posting that meme.)

Sure, it's not my economy, I just wonder how being opposed to Trump equals said meme.

[BmorePat87]

(01-09-2019, 08:31 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: lol. Here we go again.

Your team only cut him once the public outcry got so bad that they had no choice. It had nothing to do with the actual video coming out because even you have no explanation for how a woman is fine one minute but then suddenly unconscious and being carried!

As opposed to signing and drafting someone who did it. 

[*jason*]

(01-09-2019, 10:36 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: As opposed to signing and drafting someone who did it. 

It's not as bad if it's not your fiancee...

To the OP... Democrats be trippin'.

[Benton]

Typical, Trump cures cancer and all you guys can do is complain.

Sheesh.

Kudos to Trump. I'm glad he could get through all the rhetoric and do some real good.



BTW, thanks, Brad. I wasn't aware of this breakthrough.

[BFritz21]

(01-09-2019, 10:36 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: As opposed to signing and drafting someone who did it. 

Your team didn't cut him until the public outcry became too big.

Maybe you missed that part of my post.

Also, Mixon was just a college kid that made a mistake when provoked after telling the women to leave him alone.  It doesn't make it right, but it also doesn't make him a woman-beater, especially if you watched how remorseful he was in his interviews/press conference after it.

[fredtoast]

(01-09-2019, 07:51 PM)bfine32 Wrote:  They just used to have a monopoly on accusing people of hate.

WEhen exactly was this.

Republicans been accusing Democrats of hatred for as long as I can remember.

They hate religion!!!

They hate the military!!!

They hate freedom!!!

They hate the rich!!!

[Benton]

(01-10-2019, 01:24 AM)fredtoast Wrote: WEhen exactly was this.

Republicans been accusing Democrats of hatred for as long as I can remember.

They hate religion!!!

They hate the military!!!

They hate freedom!!!

They hate the rich!!!

And now they hate the cure for cancer. !!!

[*bfine32*]

(01-09-2019, 07:51 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As to the OP: The left has no monopoly on hate. They just used to have a monopoly on accusing people of hate; but times are a changing.

(01-10-2019, 01:24 AM)fredtoast Wrote: WEhen exactly was this.

Republicans been accusing Democrats of hatred for as long as I can remember.

They hate religion!!!

They hate the military!!!

They hate freedom!!!

They hate the rich!!!

See?

[*jason*]

(01-10-2019, 01:34 AM)Benton Wrote: And now they hate the cure for cancer. !!!

Don't forget guns...

[treee]

Nice 'Political Comic, Meme, Joke, etc.' , Brad  

[BmorePat87]

(01-10-2019, 12:37 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: Your team didn't cut him until the public outcry became too big.

I know they cut him

Quote:Also, Mixon was just a college kid that made a mistake when provoked after telling the women to leave him alone.  It doesn't make it right, but it also doesn't make him a woman-beater, especially if you watched how remorseful he was in his interviews/press conference after it.

He was a kid and he was sorry? Defending a man punching a woman is a bad look, dude. 

[fredtoast]

(01-10-2019, 01:53 AM)bfine32 Wrote: See?

No I don't see.

I guess you missed the question so I will ask it again.

When was it that the left had a monopoly on accusing people of hate?

[Dill]

(01-09-2019, 10:05 PM)hollodero Wrote: It's about Obama to establish a measure stick to see if I really prove said point. Here's how I see the OP's stance:

The economy is doing good, the debt goes up: It's awful, a disaster, how could anyone be supportive of that carnage! (A Democrat is president)
The economy is doing good, the debt goes up: It's marvellous, all credit to our president, how hateful does one have to be to not see that! (A Republican is president)

And piling up debt in economic good times isn't that much of an accomplishment, especially when being fiscally responsible was the one selling point in former times. Anyone, even I, could minimize unemployment with an additional 2 trillion dollars (only I would use the money to let people build roads and bridges and such instead of giving the richest money to buy back their stock). It comes with a price, one future generations have to pay. Same goes with rolling back all kinds of protections for environment or people. Sure the markets like it, but that's not the end of the story - and one can't possibly say, the unbiased thing would be to look no further and demand unquestionable praise for the president. That's the biased thing to do.

Just have to say, I appreciate the precision of these comparisons. 

I might add another--during Obama's presidency, as unemployment steadily dropped, a metric dubbed "the REAL Unemployment Rate" began appearing in news media to explain why the government was supposedly "lying" about the steadily improving economy under the worst president ever. Don't believe the positive numbers!
https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/10/11/obamas-real-unemployment-rate-is-14-7-and-a-recessions-on-the-way/#2c10c86b9cdc

Under Trump this is briefly flipped and redeployed, as Trump himself began claiming the REAL Unemployment Rate is actually LOWER than the stats show.
https://www.npr.org/2017/01/29/511493685/ahead-of-trumps-first-jobs-report-a-look-at-his-remarks-on-the-numbers

Other than that, we hardly hear any reference to the real unemployment rate anymore.  It is not a wholly fictitious/meritless metric; I just don't recall seeing it deployed almost weekly against other presidents as it was against Obama, as if this were a new, more accurate and "real" picture of what was happening behind all those misleading government stats.  Then suddenly, gone.

[Belsnickel]

(01-10-2019, 01:47 PM)Dill Wrote: Just have to say, I appreciate the precision of these comparisons. 

I might add another--during Obama's presidency, as unemployment steadily dropped, a metric dubbed "the REAL Unemployment Rate" began appearing in news media to explain why the government was supposedly "lying" about the steadily improving economy under the worst president ever. Don't believe the positive numbers!
https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/10/11/obamas-real-unemployment-rate-is-14-7-and-a-recessions-on-the-way/#2c10c86b9cdc

Under Trump this is briefly flipped and redeployed, as Trump himself began claiming the REAL Unemployment Rate is actually LOWER than the stats show.
https://www.npr.org/2017/01/29/511493685/ahead-of-trumps-first-jobs-report-a-look-at-his-remarks-on-the-numbers

Other than that, we hardly hear any reference to the real unemployment rate anymore.  It is not a wholly fictitious/meritless metric; I just don't recall seeing it deployed almost weekly against other presidents as it was against Obama, as if this were a new, more accurate and "real" picture of what was happening behind all those misleading government stats.  Then suddenly, gone.

I wish I had the patience to get into these conversations. I often think about what I would add or clarify or what have you, but then I realize that it would be wasted. The people that need the information will ignore it, and those that already know will be the only ones to read it.

[fredtoast]

(01-09-2019, 10:17 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Actually you're the one that brought up the economy, not the OP. You just wanted to take it off the table. 

(01-09-2019, 07:46 PM)bfine32 Wrote:  it's better to know what someone is going to reply before they do so.

[Dill]

(01-10-2019, 02:31 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I wish I had the patience to get into these conversations. I often think about what I would add or clarify or what have you, but then I realize that it would be wasted. The people that need the information will ignore it, and those that already know will be the only ones to read it.

Most of us would probably still like to hear what you have to say. 

Those who will be the only ones to read it don't always "already know" what you have to say.