29 minutes ago, ballpoint said:

The problem is, even when his fans know he's lying, they'll still support him.  Bob Woodward tells how he asked 20 - 25 Midlands, Texas, Republican voters if they believed that the 2020 election was stolen - none of them did.  He then asked them if, given the chance, they'd vote for Trump again - all of them indicated they would.

 

 

Why Texas? 

2 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Why Texas? 

Not only Texas but "Midlands" Texas. Redneck central.

On 7/2/2022 at 1:49 AM, bendejo said:

Classic example of, what was called decades ago, The Peter Principle: a person rises to the level of their incompetence.

And then there is the credo "the boss is never wrong."

 

It'll be interesting to see where Miss Cassidy goes with her career -- will she be somewhere in politics?  Will she still be a conservative?  I think it's pretty obvious no one will give her a job as an aide to a politician.

 

 

It's pretty clear she won't be working for GOP politicians....she's way too honest.  Moreover, she wouldn't put her boss before country.

Former Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani has now been ordered to testify before a special grand jury in Fulton County, Georgia that is investigating former President Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

 

Via NPR's Stephen Fowler, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis sent out an order compelling Giuliani's appearance as a witness in the grand jury's investigation.

The order notes that Giuliani "failed to appear at a show cause hearing" that was supposed to take place earlier this month, and thus has left Willis no choice but to order his testimony on August 9th, 2022.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/rudy-giuliani-georgia-2657701786/

On 7/3/2022 at 12:50 PM, Phoenix Rising said:

"He was good for the US and good for the economy while he was in office........"

No, he wasn't and no, he wasn't.

 

President Trump's Impact on the National Debt

"The national debt increased by almost 36% during Trump's tenure. The national debt stood at $19.9 trillion when President Trump took office in January 2017, and it reached a high of $27 trillion in October 2020."

 

"About the only good he does is in still turning the left and the media into gibbering morons- it is quite entertaining."

And that seems to be the main motivation for most MAGA sheeple.

Five of the 7 million difference was spent in his last year, 2020. Something about Covid, I think.

13 hours ago, ozimoron said:

That's because, right or wrong, truth or lies, Trump gives voice to their racist, white privilege agenda of anti immigration and anti globalist policies. They understand that a popular vote win is outside their grasp now and so embrace fascism as the only path to political power. Bottom line, the more wack job his conspiracy theories and lies are the less they need to defend them with truth and logic. None of them believe the lies and they don't care.

 

I do believe that Trump's most hardcore supporters are as you describe, these outcasts, white nationalists, conspiracy mongers, cultural bigots....people that have long been ignored.  As they should be.  Trump is their cultural warrior, the only President who would give them legitimacy.  They know that no future president, even a Republican one, would be on their side.  The other stuff, economy, taxes, inflation, unemployment, environment, international engagement, the lying, corruption....none of that stuff really matters to these people.  They're mentally not well. 

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

Five of the 7 million difference was spent in his last year, 2020. Something about Covid, I think.

What you don't acknowledge is that Trump increased the annual deficits when the economy was doing well thanks to his massive tax cuts.

"Economists agree that we needed massive deficit spending during the COVID-19 crisis to ward off an economic cataclysm, but federal finances under Trump had become dire even before the pandemic. That happened even though the economy was booming and unemployment was at historically low levels. By the Trump administration’s own description, the pre-pandemic national debt level was already a “crisis” and a “grave threat.”"

https://www.propublica.org/article/national-debt-trump

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

What you don't acknowledge is that Trump increased the annual deficits when the economy was doing well thanks to his massive tax cuts.

"Economists agree that we needed massive deficit spending during the COVID-19 crisis to ward off an economic cataclysm, but federal finances under Trump had become dire even before the pandemic. That happened even though the economy was booming and unemployment was at historically low levels. By the Trump administration’s own description, the pre-pandemic national debt level was already a “crisis” and a “grave threat.”"

https://www.propublica.org/article/national-debt-trump

Why should I? The economy not doing well - since 2008 it was kept afloat by QE and low interest rates - now we can see the result of that.

25 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Why should I? The economy not doing well - since 2008 it was kept afloat by QE and low interest rates - now we can see the result of that.

 Why should you? Because it's a fact, that's why. Trump massively raised the deficit when the economy was at full employment and tax revenues were going up.

As for your comment about the economy, another religious statement masquerading as an economic fact. Please share with us how the current situation is due to QE and low interest rates.

37 minutes ago, placeholder said:

 Why should you? Because it's a fact, that's why. Trump massively raised the deficit when the economy was at full employment and tax revenues were going up.

As for your comment about the economy, another religious statement masquerading as an economic fact. Please share with us how the current situation is due to QE and low interest rates.

Your "fact". Not mine. Apart from Covid year, the average annual debt increase was higher under Obama than Trump. Some of that Fed balance increase (debt) was due to the regime of multiple sounds of QE (money printing) that initially worked to ease US markets in the aftermath of the 2008 GFC. The cumulative effect of QE has helped produce the high inflation we see today.  

57 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Your "fact". Not mine. Apart from Covid year, the average annual debt increase was higher under Obama than Trump. Some of that Fed balance increase (debt) was due to the regime of multiple sounds of QE (money printing) that initially worked to ease US markets in the aftermath of the 2008 GFC. The cumulative effect of QE has helped produce the high inflation we see today.  

Od course, it's a dishonest comparison as it includes the post crisis spendings at the beginning of Obama's first mandate. Now let's compare what is comparable (similar economic conditions). The average debt increase by Trump during the first two years pre-covid was 50% higher than the average increase during Obama's last mandate! ????

https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296

 

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

Your "fact". Not mine. Apart from Covid year, the average annual debt increase was higher under Obama than Trump. Some of that Fed balance increase (debt) was due to the regime of multiple sounds of QE (money printing) that initially worked to ease US markets in the aftermath of the 2008 GFC. The cumulative effect of QE has helped produce the high inflation we see today.  

So the covid year is irrelevant but the fact that Obama inherited an economy that was under the greatest threat since the Great Depression is not relevant? Actually, the reason for QE is because, unlike the Democrats who responded to the emergency of covid, Republicans refused to increase spending to counter the depressed state of the economy. And just repeating that QE is responsible for current inflation does not make it true. You may have heard of Occam's razor. The simplest explanation that fits the facts is the best one. We have supply shortfalls due to covid and a war that has increased the cost of energy. Yet your explanation takes none of that into account. 

22 minutes ago, candide said:

Od course, it's a dishonest comparison as it includes the post crisis spendings at the beginning of Obama's first mandate. Now let's compare what is comparable (similar economic conditions). The average debt increase by Trump during the first two years pre-covid was 50% higher than the average increase during Obama's last mandate! ????

https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296

 

Why dishonest? The total numbers in your link agree with what I see but Trump's average overall was not 50% higher than Obama - I have to assume that you have selected "last mandate" as Obama's final 4-year term to fit your agenda.   

10 minutes ago, placeholder said:

So the covid year is irrelevant but the fact that Obama inherited an economy that was under the greatest threat since the Great Depression is not relevant? Actually, the reason for QE is because, unlike the Democrats who responded to the emergency of covid, Republicans refused to increase spending to counter the depressed state of the economy. And just repeating that QE is responsible for current inflation does not make it true. You may have heard of Occam's razor. The simplest explanation that fits the facts is the best one. We have supply shortfalls due to covid and a war that has increased the cost of energy. Yet your explanation takes none of that into account. 

It is relevant, that's why I mentioned it. So is Covid. Energy prices and inflation were rising well before the war started - yes they are even worse since February but war is not the sole cause of this inflation - what is worse is that this US administration is doing little to fix it.

 

\

3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

It is relevant, that's why I mentioned it. So is Covid. Energy prices and inflation were rising well before the war started - yes they are even worse since February but war is not the sole cause of this inflation - what is worse is that this US administration is doing little to fix it.

 

\

Given shortfalls in production, and the Ukraine war, what do you suggest? And which administration are you referring to? The UK's? Germany's? France's? Inflation is rampant in virtually all the developed economies except Japan's. Oddly enough, their inflation rate is 2.5% despite the fact that their GDP to debt ratio is almost 3 times that of the USA.

48 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Why dishonest? The total numbers in your link agree with what I see but Trump's average overall was not 50% higher than Obama - I have to assume that you have selected "last mandate" as Obama's final 4-year term to fit your agenda.   

You don't have to assume anything as I wrote myself it was during Obama's last mandate, as they were "normal" years without the post-crisis years which were atypical, just like the Covid years were atypical for Trump. There were similar economic conditions as during Trumps first two years.

 

Now if you want to play it stupid and consider that all years must be included, without thinking and paying attention to specific economic conditions, then we must compare Obama's two terms with Trump's full term. The average is 55% higher for Trump. ????

19 hours ago, nauseus said:

Why Texas? 

Because they're "special".

44 minutes ago, nauseus said:

It is relevant, that's why I mentioned it. So is Covid. Energy prices and inflation were rising well before the war started - yes they are even worse since February but war is not the sole cause of this inflation - what is worse is that this US administration is doing little to fix it.

 

\

Right, global energy prices and global inflation started to rise before  the Ukraine war. In the U.S. it has been aggravated by the fast rate of job creation which induced wage increases, which then further fuelled inflation.

 

So, according to you, the government is doing little to fix it. What are the GOP practical proposals to fix it on short term? I didn't notice any.

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

Given shortfalls in production, and the Ukraine war, what do you suggest? And which administration are you referring to? The UK's? Germany's? France's? Inflation is rampant in virtually all the developed economies except Japan's. Oddly enough, their inflation rate is 2.5% despite the fact that their GDP to debt ratio is almost 3 times that of the USA.

I am referring to Joe Biden's "administration", which needs to change several policies, especially relating to US energy production. Why do you think his domestic approval ratings are so low now? Lower fuel prices will lower prices of everything and are possible.

 

Fix the shortfalls in US production first, then Europe and elsewhere will improve too, although Europe is far more affected by the war than the US. 

 

If America is to continue using oil, then they can and should use their own energy and so cut out any need for desperate Saudi trips. Much better for Joe's image for him to stay at home than take off on AF1 with its enormous escort, depositing even more CO₂ across the northern hemisphere skies... for nothing.

3 hours ago, candide said:

and global inflation started to rise befor

 

3 hours ago, candide said:

Right, global energy prices and global inflation started to rise before  the Ukraine war. In the U.S. it has been aggravated by the fast rate of job creation which induced wage increases, which then further fuelled inflation.

 

So, according to you, the government is doing little to fix it. What are the GOP practical proposals to fix it on short term? I didn't notice any.

I don't have any inside track or influence with the GOP. But simply giving the US oil industry the freedom to operate that it had 2-3 years ago, with guarantees of no restrictions in the near/mid term, should fix it.

4 hours ago, candide said:

You don't have to assume anything as I wrote myself it was during Obama's last mandate, as they were "normal" years without the post-crisis years which were atypical, just like the Covid years were atypical for Trump. There were similar economic conditions as during Trumps first two years.

 

Now if you want to play it stupid and consider that all years must be included, without thinking and paying attention to specific economic conditions, then we must compare Obama's two terms with Trump's full term. The average is 55% higher for Trump. ????

It's obvious that far more money was used to battle Covid. 

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

 

I don't have any inside track or influence with the GOP. But simply giving the US oil industry the freedom to operate that it had 2-3 years ago, with guarantees of no restrictions in the near/mid term, should fix it.

Energy prices are global. It is not a limited increase in U.S. production which will solve the current problem. It also takes time to develop new production drills, so the additional production will come too late on the market. On top of it, the future price of oil may not allow new investment to be profitable and operators know it.

15 minutes ago, candide said:

Energy prices are global. It is not a limited increase in U.S. production which will solve the current problem. It also takes time to develop new production drills, so the additional production will come too late on the market. On top of it, the future price of oil may not allow new investment to be profitable and operators know it.

Takes time. Yes. So they need to get on with it, before Joe sells the rest of the strategic reserve.

32 minutes ago, nauseus said:

It's obvious that far more money was used to battle Covid. 

It's true, but the 2008 crisis wasn't ridiculous either. 

The hearings never fail to deliver!

"Trump spent most of the January 6 attack watching TV in the White House dining room, according to new video from House committee" ????

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-watching-tv-during-jan6-white-house-dining-room-video-2022-7

8 hours ago, Phoenix Rising said:

Because they're "special".

They sure are boi. They're Republican!  ????

4 hours ago, nauseus said:

I am referring to Joe Biden's "administration", which needs to change several policies, especially relating to US energy production. Why do you think his domestic approval ratings are so low now? Lower fuel prices will lower prices of everything and are possible.

 

Fix the shortfalls in US production first, then Europe and elsewhere will improve too, although Europe is far more affected by the war than the US. 

 

If America is to continue using oil, then they can and should use their own energy and so cut out any need for desperate Saudi trips. Much better for Joe's image for him to stay at home than take off on AF1 with its enormous escort, depositing even more CO₂ across the northern hemisphere skies... for nothing.

Trump pressured Saudi Arabia to reduce oil production to help Russia. At the same time he auctioned off oil leases in environmentally sensitive areas in the US.

 

Special Report: Trump told Saudi: Cut oil supply or lose U.S. military support - sources

 

As the United States pressed Saudi Arabia to end its oil price war with Russia, President Donald Trump gave Saudi leaders an ultimatum.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-oil-trump-saudi-specialreport-idUSKBN22C1V4

 

 

5 hours ago, nauseus said:

I am referring to Joe Biden's "administration", which needs to change several policies, especially relating to US energy production. Why do you think his domestic approval ratings are so low now? Lower fuel prices will lower prices of everything and are possible.

 

Fix the shortfalls in US production first, then Europe and elsewhere will improve too, although Europe is far more affected by the war than the US. 

 

If America is to continue using oil, then they can and should use their own energy and so cut out any need for desperate Saudi trips. Much better for Joe's image for him to stay at home than take off on AF1 with its enormous escort, depositing even more CO₂ across the northern hemisphere skies... for nothing.

Actually, the US is a net producer of oil and gas. Oil and gas companies vastly increased their drilling rights during the Trump administrations thanks to a fire sale of those rights by the Trump administration. So there is no lack of reserves to be drilled.                               

10 hours ago, nauseus said:

It is relevant, that's why I mentioned it. So is Covid. Energy prices and inflation were rising well before the war started - yes they are even worse since February but war is not the sole cause of this inflation - what is worse is that this US administration is doing little to fix it.

 

\

The "fix" for inflation is an economic slowdown, which can be brought about by higher interest rates and/or increased taxes.  Interest rates are already higher.  Are you advocating for tax increases?

 

Or perhaps you want to try the Republican's last attempt at fixing inflation; President Nixon's Wage and Price freeze, a.k.a Republican Socialism.

5 hours ago, nauseus said:

I am referring to Joe Biden's "administration", which needs to change several policies, especially relating to US energy production. Why do you think his domestic approval ratings are so low now? Lower fuel prices will lower prices of everything and are possible.

 

Fix the shortfalls in US production first, then Europe and elsewhere will improve too, although Europe is far more affected by the war than the US. 

 

If America is to continue using oil, then they can and should use their own energy and so cut out any need for desperate Saudi trips. Much better for Joe's image for him to stay at home than take off on AF1 with its enormous escort, depositing even more CO₂ across the northern hemisphere skies... for nothing.

If high oil prices cause inflation, then why was inflation low in 2011 and 2012 when oil prices were comparable to now?  https://www.thebalance.com/oil-price-history-3306200

 

Also, nothing the Biden administration is doing is preventing oil companies from increasing production now.  What's even more informative is that today's high prices also aren't tempting these companies into increasing production.  That's because any production increase will take billions in investment and take months if not years to show any results. 

 

As I've posted before, the oil companies know that today's high prices may prove to be oil's last great moment before declining into irrelevance in the energy market.  For that reason they aren't going to make big investments that can result in stranded assets. 

 

Nothing short of heavy handed government interference in the market will change that.  Do you advocate such a socialist approach?