LaxPower Back-Up Stick

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:58 am**

Yea...wiki is gospel.

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:06 am**

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:51 am
youthathletics wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 8:07 am
6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:38 am
a fan wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 11:08 pm
youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 8:51 pm I believe as I noted below, with CU77 and afan commenting below. Most people are working that want to work, we have unemployment numbers unlike anytime in recent history, a Russian investigation essentially all clean for Trump, someone spearing to engage on border enforcement. My point, is that there is not much Trump has done for our citizens to "feel pain", enough so, that they say eff this screwball.
The Russian investigation was NOT clean. Trump's people TRIED to collude, and he lied to the American people every chance he got.

His border enforcement is barely different than Obama's.

Unemployment numbers, yeah---remember the workforce participation rate numbers? Pretty much the same 62-63%.

None of these numbers or facts matter to Trump voters. And economy doesn't matter. Not even a little.

So long as Trump continues to be a d*ck to the libs, he'll get reelected. That, and low voter turnout is all it will take.
yeh yeh we'd all be so much better off with Hillary in the White House.

Google thought so too. They were her #1 contributor. Watch the whole testimony. Or do you only believe liberals that testify in congressional hearings

This guy voted for Hillary

https://www.facebook.com/vinnysinisi/vi ... yODQzNjIy/
How dare you post something from an educated and respected man, that brings credence to an equivalence of the russian voting tampering. FOr all we know, it was google allowing this to happen. And do not think for 1 minute that google is not connected to our intelligence department.
Geez, do you guys even know how to do a little search before you post baloney?
I'd never heard of him, so I bothered.

Here's a quick background on the good doctor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Epstein

Look at the subjects in which he actually has expertise. Related to computers, algorithms, elections??? Any expertise at all in this subject area???

And then see where his beef with Google began, and how it has morphed into an ongoing slur campaign with zero basis in fact.

This the kind of garbage you guys consume from Fox News and other rightwing media feeds, and then turn around and spew it out to others as if credible.

And then have the audacity to call the MSM Fake News.

Now see I thought his credentials would appeal to you liberals. But alas bad news means bad credentials.

By your own post he seems eminently qualified to understand the manipulations of human behavior.

Robert Epstein (born June 19, 1953) is an American psychologist, professor, author, and journalist. He earned his Ph.D. in psychology at Harvard University in 1981, was editor in chief of Psychology Today, a visiting scholar at the University of California, San Diego, and the founder and director emeritus of the Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies in Concord, MA

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:11 am**

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:38 am yeh yeh we'd all be so much better off with Hillary in the White House.

Who said anything about HRC?

But since you brought it up, Hillary would've increased our military presence overseas if you ask me.

And McConnell would have been insisting on deficit reduction, so we wouldn't have had even one of the four big spending bills passed. No major bills of any kind, actually.

Mixed bag had Hillary been elected.

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:38 am Google thought so too. They were her #1 contributor. Watch the whole testimony. Or do you only believe liberals that testify in congressional hearings

This guy voted for Hillary

Uh-oh. I thought you and your crew thought regulation was bad, and the government ruins everything? Change of tune, and you want Google regulated?

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:13 am**

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:06 am
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:51 am
youthathletics wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 8:07 am
6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:38 am
a fan wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 11:08 pm
youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 8:51 pm I believe as I noted below, with CU77 and afan commenting below. Most people are working that want to work, we have unemployment numbers unlike anytime in recent history, a Russian investigation essentially all clean for Trump, someone spearing to engage on border enforcement. My point, is that there is not much Trump has done for our citizens to "feel pain", enough so, that they say eff this screwball.
The Russian investigation was NOT clean. Trump's people TRIED to collude, and he lied to the American people every chance he got.

His border enforcement is barely different than Obama's.

Unemployment numbers, yeah---remember the workforce participation rate numbers? Pretty much the same 62-63%.

None of these numbers or facts matter to Trump voters. And economy doesn't matter. Not even a little.

So long as Trump continues to be a d*ck to the libs, he'll get reelected. That, and low voter turnout is all it will take.
yeh yeh we'd all be so much better off with Hillary in the White House.

Google thought so too. They were her #1 contributor. Watch the whole testimony. Or do you only believe liberals that testify in congressional hearings

This guy voted for Hillary

https://www.facebook.com/vinnysinisi/vi ... yODQzNjIy/
How dare you post something from an educated and respected man, that brings credence to an equivalence of the russian voting tampering. FOr all we know, it was google allowing this to happen. And do not think for 1 minute that google is not connected to our intelligence department.
Geez, do you guys even know how to do a little search before you post baloney?
I'd never heard of him, so I bothered.

Here's a quick background on the good doctor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Epstein

Look at the subjects in which he actually has expertise. Related to computers, algorithms, elections??? Any expertise at all in this subject area???

And then see where his beef with Google began, and how it has morphed into an ongoing slur campaign with zero basis in fact.

This the kind of garbage you guys consume from Fox News and other rightwing media feeds, and then turn around and spew it out to others as if credible.

And then have the audacity to call the MSM Fake News.
Now see I thought his credentials would appeal to you liberals. But alas bad news means bad credentials.

Am I a "liberal" now?

I guess in the eyes of Trumpists everyone opposed to Der Leader is a "liberal".

No.
Having no credentials in a field is the issue, not 'bad credentials'.
Couple that with having a totally unrelated preceding beef and we have motive of malice.
And last, an absence of any facts is what fully disqualifies being taken as credible.

Unfortunately, that's not the standard Trumpists apply. Kinda scary really.

UPDATE: Ahhh, you edited your post to focus on his qualifications in psychology.
Sure, if he actually had a clue about the algorithms being employed and had actually submitted some sort of facts with his BS, we might say we should examine his work to see whether there was something to be learned.

But look at the actual areas of Psychology that have been his own field of study. Not at all related to "manipulation" much less computer algorithms.
Of course, his target is Google, not social media per se, also revealing of his motivation.

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:19 am**

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:53 am Thats not what the Mueller Report, a rabid MSM or three other congressional investigations found. Nice try.

This is new from you. So Kush & Co. didn't meet with a Russians spy, looking for dirt on Hillary? That didn't happen?

I know you don't care, and that's fine. But you know this happened. They TRIED to work with Russia.

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:38 am Then why all the noise and handwringing?

Because he didn't pass the immigration reform bill he promised, remember? You don't care that he didn't, and that's par for the course, but that's why.

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:38 am a 1% move is almost 2million households. Ask those two million if they notice a difference in their lives.

Odd, you didn't feel that way when unemployment dropped every year Obama was in office. Neither did FoxNation. instead, they pointed at the workforce participation rate.

You're stuck now. You telling me that Obama improved the lives of millions and millions of Americans since he took office, and they were put back to work? Uh-oh. You're going to lose your "I hate Obama" membership card over this.

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:38 am From your post you can tell facts and numbers don't matter to YOU!

Not remotely true. Economy is doing great. My issue is with WHY the economy is doing great.

Trump got us here by borrowing Trillions, spending most of it on stuff we don't need, and handing the bill to our kids. You don't care, because you're a fake conservative. That's fine. Your prerogative.

The Federal Government is bigger than ever. And you're applauding. It's hilarious, if you ask me. Turns out the values you had a few years ago don't matter----you're getting paid, and that's all that matters.

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:20 am**

The standard reply from sufferers of Trump derangement syndrome.

The guys credentials are perfect for the discussion. Its his findings that aren't.

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:22 am**

"I think they can deal with his behavior 'if I'm getting mine'."

This is one of the saddest things I've read on this board, mostly because it's true. Think of everything one has to overlook to get there.

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:25 am**

a fan wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:19 am
6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:53 am Thats not what the Mueller Report, a rabid MSM or three other congressional investigations found. Nice try.
This is new from you. So Kush & Co. didn't meet with a Russians spy, looking for dirt on Hillary? That didn't happen?

I know you don't care, and that's fine. But you know this happened. They TRIED to work with Russia.

What did the Mueller report find? Come on you can say it. Youu might choke on it but what dod the report find.

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:38 am Then why all the noise and handwringing?
Because he didn't pass the immigration reform bill he promised, remember? You don't care that he didn't, and that's par for the course, but that's why.

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:38 am a 1% move is almost 2million households. Ask those two million if they notice a difference in their lives.
Odd, you didn't feel that way when unemployment dropped every year Obama was in office. Neither did FoxNation. instead, they pointed at the workforce participation rate.

You're stuck now. You telling me that Obama improved the lives of millions and millions of Americans since he took office, and they were put back to work? Uh-oh. You're going to lose your "I hate Obama" membership card over this.

Obama took office in 2008 in 2013 participation in the workforce was the lowest it had been since 1978 FACT

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:38 am From your post you can tell facts and numbers don't matter to YOU!
Not remotely true. Economy is doing great. My issue is with WHY the economy is doing great.

Trump got us here by borrowing Trillions, spending most of it on stuff we don't need, and handing the bill to our kids. You don't care, because you're a fake conservative. That's fine. Your prerogative.

The Federal Government is bigger than ever. And you're applauding. It's hilarious, if you ask me. Turns out the values you had a few years ago don't matter----you're getting paid, and that's all that matters.

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:26 am**

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:20 am The standard reply from sufferers of Trump derangement syndrome.

The guys credentials are perfect for the discussion. Its his findings that aren't.

Here's his work in psychology:
Work in psychology[edit]
In various writings, Epstein has been a strong advocate of the view that people can deliberately learn to love each other. He studied arranged marriages and found that in many of them the partners developed greater feelings of affection for each other than did couples who had married for love.[3] In 2002 he published a study in which he said that many couples marry for other reasons than love, and develop love in their relationships over time.[4] He gave students in one of his classes at University of California, San Diego extra credit for taking part in affection building exercises.[5] At one time he used himself as an experimental subject to investigate this.[6]

Epstein collected data from over 18,000 people via the Internet for a study on sexual orientation published in 2007. He found a continuum between heterosexuality and homosexuality that is skewed by societal influences.[7] He also found that some people changed their orientation during their lives.[1]

Epstein is also a scholar in the field of psychological maturity, and once published an online maturity test. He is critical of what he sees as the "artificial extension of childhood" over the past century, arguing that what society views as the "teen brain" is often the result of Western cultural factors and infantilization, rather than a set of brain characteristics that are inherent in all humans throughout their teen years. In certain essays, he has cited studies which found that some teenagers are in some ways more developmentally mature than most adults, and advocates giving young people more adult responsibility, as well as placing them in environments in which they will not be prone to socializing simply with other teenagers.[8][9]

Anything in there about computers, algorithms, or even behavioral manipulation???

And here's his beef:

Criticism of Google[edit]
See also: Criticism of Google and Web search engine § Search engine bias
In 2012, Epstein publicly disputed with Google Search over a security warning placed on links to his website.[10] His website, which features mental health screening tests, was blocked for serving malware that could infect visitors to the site. Epstein emailed "Larry Page, Google's chief executive; David Drummond, Google's legal counsel; Epstein's congressman; and journalists from The New York Times, The Washington Post, Wired, and Newsweek."[10] In it, Epstein threatened legal action if the warning concerning his website was not removed, and denied that any problems with his website existed.[10] Several weeks later, Epstein admitted his website had been hacked, but criticized Google for tarnishing his name and not helping him find the infection.[11] Epstein has since continued to criticize Google, writing in TIME magazine that Google had "a fundamentally deceptive business model".[12][13]

Gee, a real "expert".

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:33 am**

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:25 am
a fan wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:19 am
6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:53 am Thats not what the Mueller Report, a rabid MSM or three other congressional investigations found. Nice try.
This is new from you. So Kush & Co. didn't meet with a Russians spy, looking for dirt on Hillary? That didn't happen?

I know you don't care, and that's fine. But you know this happened. They TRIED to work with Russia.

What did the Mueller report find? Come on you can say it. Youu might choke on it but what dod the report find.

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:38 am Then why all the noise and handwringing?
Because he didn't pass the immigration reform bill he promised, remember? You don't care that he didn't, and that's par for the course, but that's why.

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:38 am a 1% move is almost 2million households. Ask those two million if they notice a difference in their lives.
Odd, you didn't feel that way when unemployment dropped every year Obama was in office. Neither did FoxNation. instead, they pointed at the workforce participation rate.

You're stuck now. You telling me that Obama improved the lives of millions and millions of Americans since he took office, and they were put back to work? Uh-oh. You're going to lose your "I hate Obama" membership card over this.

Obama took office in 2008 in 2013 participation in the workforce was the lowest it had been since 1978 FACT

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:38 am From your post you can tell facts and numbers don't matter to YOU!
Not remotely true. Economy is doing great. My issue is with WHY the economy is doing great.

Trump got us here by borrowing Trillions, spending most of it on stuff we don't need, and handing the bill to our kids. You don't care, because you're a fake conservative. That's fine. Your prerogative.

The Federal Government is bigger than ever. And you're applauding. It's hilarious, if you ask me. Turns out the values you had a few years ago don't matter----you're getting paid, and that's all that matters.

6ft, clearly you didn't read the Mueller Report nor apparently even listen to Mueller's testimony.

Making it really simple, KISS principle:

The Trump campaign welcomed Russian interference, then lied as to whether they'd even met with Russians. Then lied about the content of meetings when exposed.

Trump lied repeatedly on the Campaign trail and thereafter about his business dealing with Russia, was trying to do a huge deal in Moscow deep into the campaign.

Trump actively sought to get others to lie on his behalf.

But hey, that's cool, he wasn't indicted.
But then again, Mueller made clear that he couldn't indict a sitting President, but that Trump could be indicted once he left office. Went out of his way to make that point.

But hey, so what, it's all FAKE NEWS!

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:36 am**

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:25 am What did the Mueller report find? Come on you can say it. Youu might choke on it but what dod the report find.

That Trump's team tried to collude with Russia, and didn't succeed. Yep. You're right.

Comey cleared Hillary of indictable offenses. Using 6ftsticks juvenile logic, this means you think it's thumbs up and super cool that Hillary transmitted classified documents and State Dept. business over an un-secure server. Many didn't voter for her over that, but it seems you think that's ok behavior. Learn something new every day about your views, 6ft.

You and I have different standards.

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:38 am Then why all the noise and handwringing?

Because he didn't pass the immigration reform bill he promised, remember? You don't care that he didn't, and that's par for the course, but that's why.

6ftstick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:38 am Obama took office in 2008 in 2013 participation in the workforce was the lowest it had been since 1978 FACT[/color][/b]

Ah, so the workforce participation rate DOES matter to you! Neat.

Great. How's Trump doing on that count?

https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:41 am**

Gonna have to get rid of this silly Bureau of Labor Statistics soon. We can start by relocating the office in Yuma.

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 11:01 am**

a fan wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:36 am Ah, so the workforce participation rate DOES matter to you! Neat.

Great. How's Trump doing on that count?

https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

the one thing that doesn't show - and I don't know the answer or how to (at least easily) find the answer, but the key here is HOW people are participating in the labor force. My sense was that during the Obama period of the recovery, a large chunk of the labor participation was in part-time jobs, or in jobs well below people's qualifications. Which was one of the reasons (I believe) that Hillary lost. I get the SENSE that while job participation rates have remained steady, people have gradually moved into jobs that better equate to their qualifications. That is why they feel better about the economy and consumer spending is up. That and the huge dose of speed Trump injected into the economy with his drunken sailor on shore leave spending program.....

But my point is, the key (from an election perspective) is the QUALITY of job force participation.

I suspect the quality factor has improved over the past few years. I would go so far as to say it was probably already improving under Obama, it just hadn't registered with the voters in time for Hillary.....

It is worth pointing out that presidents get way too much credit and blame for the performance of the economy. On the margin there are things they can do to help or hinder the economy like: push regulation, pump up gov spending, be predictable, wage wars. Trump has failed on at least two of these - (1) he is very unpredictable, and (2) where he has pumped up gov spending, he has spent it on stupid things (I wish he took all that money and spent it on infrastructure). Trump's positive has been around how businesses feel about regulatory uncertainty - which was Obama's bugaboo - justified or not.

But all politicians have figured out that you max out the credit card if you want to stay in office.

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 11:05 am**

HooDat wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 11:01 am
a fan wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:36 am Ah, so the workforce participation rate DOES matter to you! Neat.

Great. How's Trump doing on that count?

https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000
the one thing that doesn't show - and I don't know the answer or how to (at least easily) find the answer, but the key here is HOW people are participating in the labor force. My sense was that during the Obama period of the recovery, a large chunk of the labor participation was in part-time jobs, or in jobs well below people's qualifications. Which was one of the reasons (I believe) that Hillary lost. I get the SENSE that while job participation rates have remained steady, people have gradually moved into jobs that better equate to their qualifications. That is why they feel better about the economy and consumer spending is up. That and the huge dose of speed Trump injected into the economy with his drunken sailor on shore leave spending program.....

But my point is, the key (from an election perspective) is the QUALITY of job force participation.

I suspect the quality factor has improved over the past few years. I would go so far as to say it was probably already improving under Obama, it just hadn't registered with the voters in time for Hillary.....

It is worth pointing out that presidents get way too much credit and blame for the performance of the economy. On the margin there are things they can do to help or hinder the economy like: push regulation, pump up gov spending, be predictable, wage wars. Trump has failed on at least two of these - (1) he is very unpredictable, and (2) where he has pumped up gov spending, he has spent it on stupid things (I wish he took all that money and spent it on infrastructure). Trump's positive has been around how businesses feel about regulatory uncertainty - which was Obama's bugaboo - justified or not.

But all politicians have figured out that you max out the credit card if you want to stay in office.

People in Ohio and Michigan are complaining that the new jobs are crappy jobs (sic). Here is an old article: https://www.policymattersohio.org/resea ... job-growth

With all of the power grabbing being done by the current administration, unchecked.... what I am afraid of is a left wing nut getting in office with control of the house and senate and then declaring "income inequality" as a national emergency. It is not impossible. The further Trump pushes the boundaries, it becomes increasingly possible......

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 11:21 am**

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 11:05 am
HooDat wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 11:01 am
a fan wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:36 am Ah, so the workforce participation rate DOES matter to you! Neat.

Great. How's Trump doing on that count?

https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000
the one thing that doesn't show - and I don't know the answer or how to (at least easily) find the answer, but the key here is HOW people are participating in the labor force. My sense was that during the Obama period of the recovery, a large chunk of the labor participation was in part-time jobs, or in jobs well below people's qualifications. Which was one of the reasons (I believe) that Hillary lost. I get the SENSE that while job participation rates have remained steady, people have gradually moved into jobs that better equate to their qualifications. That is why they feel better about the economy and consumer spending is up. That and the huge dose of speed Trump injected into the economy with his drunken sailor on shore leave spending program.....

But my point is, the key (from an election perspective) is the QUALITY of job force participation.

I suspect the quality factor has improved over the past few years. I would go so far as to say it was probably already improving under Obama, it just hadn't registered with the voters in time for Hillary.....

It is worth pointing out that presidents get way too much credit and blame for the performance of the economy. On the margin there are things they can do to help or hinder the economy like: push regulation, pump up gov spending, be predictable, wage wars. Trump has failed on at least two of these - (1) he is very unpredictable, and (2) where he has pumped up gov spending, he has spent it on stupid things (I wish he took all that money and spent it on infrastructure). Trump's positive has been around how businesses feel about regulatory uncertainty - which was Obama's bugaboo - justified or not.

But all politicians have figured out that you max out the credit card if you want to stay in office.
People in Ohio and Michigan are complaining that the new jobs are crappy jobs (sic). Here is an old article: https://www.policymattersohio.org/resea ... job-growth

With all of the power grabbing being done by the current administration, unchecked.... what I am afraid of is a left wing nut getting in office with control of the house and senate and then declaring "income inequality" as a national emergency. It is not impossible. The further Trump pushes the boundaries, it becomes increasingly possible......

Just a year ago, but I'd wager the same would be true today.
It's a long way to November 2020.
But also very short in terms of actually altering economic trajectory.
Which appears to be increasing uncertainty squelching growth momentum, due to 'sugar high' wearing off and trade yo-yo.

I agree about 'national emergency'.
Once we take down the guard rails against authoritarianism, it could come in any form with the swing of the pendulum.
We need to rebuke the fascist, now, but heaven forbid we turn to left wing authoritarianism instead.

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 11:40 am**

It won’t be so entertaining. A nut case administration could also take a flame thrower to these “nationalists” camps in the name of “national emergency”.

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:57 pm**

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 11:40 am It won’t be so entertaining. A nut case administration could also take a flame thrower to these “nationalists” camps in the name of “national emergency”.

Trump's emergency declaration over the borderlands, diversion of funds appropriated by Congress explicitly for other measures, and the GOP Congress's unwillingness to exercise the power of Congress to countermand that declaration, already set in place the possibility or even likelihood of a Reichstag Fire here in the USA. Sure, sure, I must have "TDS." So I'll say this too: we already have a nut case administration. A vote for Trump in the 2020 election must be understood to be an act consistent with the end of the country as we at least thought it was, and inconsistent with the rule of law, the Constitution, the separation of powers and limited government. He'll be 74 on election day, and no longer inhibited by his Obama fetishism. Trump, in a second four years, would be unbridled.

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:59 pm**

seacoaster wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:57 pm
Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 11:40 am It won’t be so entertaining. A nut case administration could also take a flame thrower to these “nationalists” camps in the name of “national emergency”.
Trump's emergency declaration over the borderlands, diversion of funds appropriated by Congress explicitly for other measures, and the GOP Congress's unwillingness to exercise the power of Congress to countermand that declaration, already set in place the possibility or even likelihood of a Reichstag Fire here in the USA. Sure, sure, I must have "TDS." So I'll say this too: we already have a nut case administration. A vote for Trump in the 2020 election must be understood to be an act consistent with the end of the country as we at least thought it was, and inconsistent with the rule of law, the Constitution, the separation of powers and limited government. He'll be 74 on election day, and no longer inhibited by his Obama fetishism. Trump, in a second four years, would be unbridled.

YEP....

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:13 pm**

HooDat wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 11:01 am It is worth pointing out that presidents get way too much credit and blame for the performance of the economy.....

...........But all politicians have figured out that you max out the credit card if you want to stay in office.

Obama & the Congressional R's cut spending for the first time since 1953. He got ZERO credit from the right. Instead, they whined like the little babies that they are that the economy wasn't roaring.

Trump, who's no fool when it comes to making these idiots happy, went on a spending just as Reagan did all those years ago. Result?

Happy Republican voters with a much, much larger Federal government. Denial ain't just a river in Egypt. How do you govern people who have no values? You can't. Only way to govern them is to lie, and allow them to wallow in denial that they are really just boilerplate lefties.

As for Obama being anti-business, I've said it a million times. I cannot tell you the difference between Trump, Obama, or Bush when it came to their actions affecting my business. No difference between the three.

Posted: **Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:23 pm**

And McConnell would have been insisting on deficit reduction, so we wouldn't have had even one of the four big spending bills passed. No major bills of any kind, actually.

Yup.

We would be in MUCH better financial shape if HRC had won. No stupid tax cuts. No dumb spending bills. Economy would have kept on trucking just like it had been under Obama/Boehner-Ryan/McConnell. Back when we had reasonable taxes (certainly lower than ideal but tolerable) and muted spending increases (certainly higher than ideal but also tolerable).

When it comes to deficits and spending, the only formula that works is a D president and a Congress controlled (at least one chamber) by the GOP. Clinton/Gingrich. Obama/Boehner-Ryan/McConnell.

None of the other combos work. #facts

P.S. We REALLY would be in better financial shape if also Gore had won in 2000 -- Gore/Hastert/Daschle-Lott-Frist.

LaxPower Back-Up Stick

2020 Elections - Trump FIRED

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning

Re: 2020 Elections - A Reckoning