10 minutes ago, riclag said:

 I like and can understand your point.I'm a retired, Business owner but before that during my youth I had all the endorsements  for a CDL. I probably would of retired from trucking with a full 30 years in, if it wasn't for NAFTA and how it took away many of the USA  southern and northern inter-modal operations. Good for You and to hell with Globalist! 

And who did you vote for down the years?!

 

I’m not interested in the revisionist version so treat the question as rhetorical.

42 minutes ago, Becker said:

I guess you're against the wall then...

Don’t mention the wall!

 

 

What a idiot. He failed badly as president and now he's taking ownership of the economy recovery.

 

What a divisive speech.

 

America needs a strong leader. Not a dreamer.

 

 

 

 

Sent from a so called Smartphone using an App.

 

 

 

 

10 hours ago, rooster59 said:

 

"I'm sorry, I watched it but I fell asleep," he said during a fundraiser in North Dakota. "I found that he's very, very good for sleeping."

Great, just great. 

 

A major political figure raises salient points and this is trump’s  response. 

 

Buffoon. 

 

Though on reflection, maybe the world is better off when the grand poobah is asleep. 

 

Safer, for sure. 

Edited September 8, 20187 yr by Bluespunk

2 hours ago, riclag said:

Wrong ,it's BS,Obama made a mess of the world  .Many American's didn't want another 4 years of his apoligizing to the world for past administrations. He failed at uniting America ,hence change. His forcing people to  buy Obamacare or pay  a penalty tax, for me $800 for others who can't afford health Ins,more than that. In 2008 he ran on not giving in to lobbyist,years later he bailed out the banks than the CEO turned around and thanked him,while they were giving themselves millions in pay increases .

Obama went around the world and apologized for America .The scum bag let  America  down.

Are you really saying that it is wrong to apologise for past wrongs?

50 minutes ago, riclag said:

 I like and can understand your point.I'm a retired, Business owner but before that during my youth I had all the endorsements  for a CDL. I probably would of retired from trucking with a full 30 years in, if it wasn't for NAFTA and how it took away many of the USA  southern and northern inter-modal operations. Good for You and to hell with Globalist! 

Although a highly politicised issue, overall NAFTA has been a gain for the USA as has globalisation. Too many people fail to understand that without globalisation the US economy would not be competitive as has been as is being proved by the trade war with China created by Trump.

 

You personally may have suffered loss from NAFTA, but in the bigger picture is of benefit to the US. You and others like to abuse Obama policies, sure every president makes mistakes, but fail to comprehend the success of Obama's bailouts for the banking and automotive sectors.

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/columnists/ct-obama-economy-robert-reed-110-biz-20170109-column.html

 

Obama made some errors with foreign policy. However Obama apologies for US, get some understanding, a starting point...

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2012/10/23/politics/fact-check-apology-tour/index.html

I listened to the hour long speech on Youtube this morning.

Afterwards I wondered how America could have shunted so far off course in such a short period of time .

Here was a person fully on top of his game, reasoning intelligently without any of the bluster and b...shit of the current Trump rallies.

At last he seems to be coming out and attacking the current madness in the WH

Long may it continue..

 

4 minutes ago, Jonnapat said:

I listened to the hour long speech on Youtube this morning.

Afterwards I wondered how America could have shunted so far off course in such a short period of time .

Here was a person fully on top of his game, reasoning intelligently without any of the bluster and b...shit of the current Trump rallies.

At last he seems to be coming out and attacking the current madness in the WH

Long may it continue..

 

Yes but instead of the tRump supporters weeping over the huge gap in intelligence and skills between the orange clown and Obama, they think it's ok to have an ignorant idiot in charge of their country...…...

57 minutes ago, alocacoc said:

America needs a strong leader. Not a dreamer.

Now they've got a clown instead!!

A most disrespectful troll post and a reply have been removed

2 hours ago, riclag said:

Yes the next Dem will take away Social Security  and open the boarders  for all to come .then take away the  American constitution and replace it with a manifesto. Obama to Cortez!

 

Meltdown mode - engaged.

Sad to see, really.

3 hours ago, PhonThong said:

How much is your business worth and how many people do you employ?  Are you giving them medical benefits because Obama care is such a joke? Has your bottom line gone up 32% since Obama left office?

 Unless you can answer these questions in the affirmative,

then your comment is worthless and childish. My biggest fear is that if the Dems get back into office. I will be forced to lay off my newest employees or worse.

  Right now I have two brand new Peterbilt 379's sitting in the company lot with no drivers because the economy is doing so well that I cannot find drivers.

 We pay some of the highest wages in the industry and a full line of benefits for our employees and their families. But, still difficult to find qualified drivers.

  I might add, we do the same in Thailand.

 But none the less. Thank you, president Trump!

MAGA

To sum up your thesesi, business is good therefore it's because of Trump. And you mock other people's grasp of economics?

American Presidential politics are fickle, wake me up when that changes.
8 years of Clinton lead to 8 years of Bush which lead to 8 years of Obama which brings us to Trump. So the only question is will it be 4 or 8 years.
Democrats lost approximately 1000 state and local seats during Obama’s 8 years.
Voter turnout is apathetic and therefore the election results don’t necessarily reflect the true sentiment of the entire nation. The results only reflect the 60% at best that are willing to go to the effort to be polled.

“Voter turnout in the United States fluctuates in national elections. In recent elections, about 60% of the voting eligible population votes during presidential election years, and about 40% votes during midterm elections. Turnout is lower for odd year, primary and local elections.”
Voter Turnout - Fairvote

3 hours ago, PhonThong said:

How much is your business worth and how many people do you employ?  Are you giving them medical benefits because Obama care is such a joke? Has your bottom line gone up 32% since Obama left office?

 Unless you can answer these questions in the affirmative,

then your comment is worthless and childish. My biggest fear is that if the Dems get back into office. I will be forced to lay off my newest employees or worse.

  Right now I have two brand new Peterbilt 379's sitting in the company lot with no drivers because the economy is doing so well that I cannot find drivers.

 We pay some of the highest wages in the industry and a full line of benefits for our employees and their families. But, still difficult to find qualified drivers.

  I might add, we do the same in Thailand.

 But none the less. Thank you, president Trump!

MAGA

Typical American comment. The ONLY thing that matters is money. I'm alright jack.

 

Well let me inform you that you have lost the respect of the world. So enjoy your gated communities and feel proud as the rest of the world looks the other way.

4 minutes ago, KMartinHandyman said:

American Presidential politics are fickle, wake me up when that changes.
8 years of Clinton lead to 8 years of Bush which lead to 8 years of Obama which brings us to Trump. So the only question is will it be 4 or 8 years.
Democrats lost approximately 1000 state and local seats during Obama’s 8 years.
Voter turnout is apathetic and therefore the election results don’t necessarily reflect the true sentiment of the entire nation. The results only reflect the 60% at best that are willing to go to the effort to be polled.

“Voter turnout in the United States fluctuates in national elections. In recent elections, about 60% of the voting eligible population votes during presidential election years, and about 40% votes during midterm elections. Turnout is lower for odd year, primary and local elections.”
Voter Turnout - Fairvote

By most indications Democrats are a lot more motivated about voting in midterms than are Republicans. 

3 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

By most indications Democrats are a lot more motivated about voting in midterms than are Republicans. 

 

As much as I'd like to believe that, this is one area I'd be careful casting predictions about. Notoriously dodgy to accurately assess, and all the more so with regard to certain demographics and groups. Democrats being more motivated in areas were they already hold sway is one thing, winning over contested seats or those traditionally held by the other side is another matter.

Just now, Morch said:

 

As much as I'd like to believe that, this is one area I'd be careful casting predictions about. Notoriously dodgy to accurately assess, and all the more so with regard to certain demographics and groups. Democrats being more motivated in areas were they already hold sway is one thing, winning over contested seats or those traditionally held by the other side is another matter.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/07/27/turnout-in-this-years-u-s-house-primaries-is-up-especially-on-the-democratic-side/

https://www.wsj.com/articles/democrats-outperforming-republicans-in-small-donations-1536139801

1 hour ago, alocacoc said:

What a idiot. He failed badly as president and now he's taking ownership of the economy recovery.

 

What a divisive speech.

 

America needs a strong leader. Not a dreamer.

 

 

 

 

Sent from a so called Smartphone using an App.

 

 

 

 

 

29 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

To sum up your thesesi, business is good therefore it's because of Trump. And you mock other people's grasp of economics?

When they reply with a rediculous comment. Yes, I mock them. 

9 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/07/27/turnout-in-this-years-u-s-house-primaries-is-up-especially-on-the-democratic-side/

https://www.wsj.com/articles/democrats-outperforming-republicans-in-small-donations-1536139801

 

The first link hardly makes your argument. If anything it demonstrates the complexity of such predictions, and the many ways in which presentation of figures can be manipulated. The second link is, again, not quite what this is about.

Just now, Jonnapat said:

 

A divisive speech indeed.

And what would you call Trump's daily tweets and outbursts?

Unifying? Get real, they're reminiscent of Hitler's rallies of the 1930's

And you only have to check data to find out when the economic recovery began.

Also a rising stock market means the 1% are piling it in even more.

43 minutes ago, PhonThong said:

When they reply with a rediculous comment. Yes, I mock them. 

That is rediculous!

6 hours ago, PhonThong said:

This from a man that accomplished nothing in eight years. Except for higher unemployment, larger welfare roles.

 

Care to show your math on that?  Here's mine:
 

 

 

6 hours ago, PhonThong said:

The largest deficit in the history of the United States.

 

Donald Trump would like you to hold his beer:

 

"Donald Trump: As projected in the FY 2019 budget, Trump plans to add $8.282 trillion, a 41-percent increase from the $20.245 trillion debt at the end of Obama's last budget for FY 2017. He will add almost as much in four years as Obama did in eight. That would also make him the second-biggest contributor to the debt in history in just one term."

 

 

6 hours ago, PhonThong said:

A health plan that is so bad, they had to use threats of possible imprisonment if one failed to participate. With copayments so high most cannot afford to use it anyway.

 

Then why is it so popular?  Obamacare Hits Highs In Popularity And Profits:  

 

"New polls show the public’s opinion of the ACA becoming more favorable, hitting an all-time high in one survey out last week. The Kaiser Family Foundation had 54% with a "favorable view" of the ACA, the “highest share in more than 80 tracking polls ” since President Barack Obama signed the landmark legislation into law in 2010."

14 hours ago, rooster59 said:

"I'm sorry, I watched it but I fell asleep," he said during a fundraiser in North Dakota. "I found that he's very, very good for sleeping."

Shouldn't be a surprise really...……….after all you have got a president with the intelligence and attention span of a 6 yr old, and he'd probably eaten too many big Macs.

 

What else would you expect?

12 minutes ago, xylophone said:

Shouldn't be a surprise really...……….after all you have got a president with the intelligence and attention span of a 6 yr old, and he'd probably eaten too many big Macs.

 

What else would you expect?

 

I'd expect he actually watched every minute of it, fumed and hurled abuse at the screen (plus any unfortunate enough to be present).

A post containing an aberrant miss spelling of Obama's name has been removed.  If you do not want your post to be removed, spell people's names correctly. 

On 9/8/2018 at 1:27 PM, PhonThong said:

You are really showing your ignorance. Our drivers can earn $100,000 plus in their first year.

 <----------->

 You, should not respond to things you obviously know nothing about.

 

You call me ignorant which is derived from the Latin word ignorare = not knowing. You would like to silence me with the fact that you cannot find a driver for your company earning +100,000$ in their first year. Or more than 8.000$ monthly. But I don't know, if „earning“ means gross or net in your case.

 

After searching the internet, I have to believe that it isn't easy to find a driver for your company because of some state regulation. Therefore immigrants can't get the job, in general. I have to correct me.

 

But internet also showed me that you gave me/us only a look at one side of the coin, the bright side. This salary maybe given in NYK, San Francisco, Palo Alto, Los Angeles, Boston, big cities etc. The dark side is the inflated prices of living in those/your locations. Especially rent an apartment i.e. with prices about 50% of the income or more. And possibly not near to the driver's residence.

 

I've read in San Francisco a two-paycheck-couple isn't able to start a familiy because they belong to the low-income earners with an income of 10,350$ ! Furthermore, I have read in the Silicon Valey a coupe, she a lawyer, he a software-ingeneer, are not able to raise a family because of the „tremendous“ living costs.

 

With the same income they would be kings/queens in the rust belt or Mississippi-delta where the yearly earning of 40,000§ is of „no need“. You can guess the daily costs are there much, much cheaper.

I could ad more of these conflicting results. If this is true what I've read then you must admit that earning as much as +100,000$ yearly isn't the point if you are hit by inflation of the prices for goods and daily/monthly living in your residence. It's only a sign that it easier to gain a job at now. But it's not a sign that the poor and the middle class got richer. Getting richer ,means the net income must start upwards.

Let's wait for some years. Then we can talk about this again.

On 9/8/2018 at 9:56 AM, Morch said:

 

Reporting live from Bizarro World....

Well, explain this to me then.

If things are so bad, why is Obama trying to take credit for it?

Troll post removed. 

1 hour ago, PhonThong said:

Well, explain this to me then.

If things are so bad, why is Obama trying to take credit for it?

 

I don't speak Bizzaro, sorry.

If you wish to frame arguments in a less "creative" manner, perhaps.