This political chat room is for you to sound off about any political ideology and discuss current political topics. Everyone is welcome, yes, even conservatives, but keep in mind, the nature of the No Holds Barred political chat forum platform can be friendly to trolling. It is your responsibility to address this wisely. Forum Rules
User avatar
Termin8tor

Share      Unread post

User avatar
      
      
Posts: 5,513
Politics: Conservative

You couldn't turn on TV without some MSM reporter babbling stupidly about how great the Obama Economy is.

Either they're hopelessly incompetent or lying. :\
After 8 Years It’s Clear=> Obama’s Economic Policies Cannot Hold Up to Reagan’s Record-Setting Years
Jim Hoft .....

Ronald Reagan brought forth an annual real GDP growth of 3.5%.

Barack Obama will be lucky to average a 1.55% GDP growth rate.

This ranks Obama as the fourth worst presidency on record.

Barack Obama will be the only U.S. president in history who did not deliver a single year of 3.0%+ economic growth.

Obama will be lucky to average 2% growth in his final year in office.
According to Louis Woodhill, if the economy continues to perform below 2.67% GDP growth rate this year, President Barack Obama will leave office with the fourth worst economic record in US history.
Assuming 2.67% RGDP growth for 2016, Obama will leave office having produced an average of 1.55% growth. This would place his presidency fourth from the bottom of the list of 39*, above only those of Herbert Hoover (-5.65%), Andrew Johnson (-0.70%) and Theodore Roosevelt (1.41%)
Image
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/01 ... ing-years/

User avatar
HarryParatestes

Share      Unread post

User avatar
  
  
Posts: 69

Termin8tor » 03 Jan 2017 12:30 pm » wrote:You couldn't turn on TV without some MSM reporter babbling stupidly about how great the Obama Economy is.

Either they're hopelessly incompetent or lying. :\
Source is Paul Ryans smegma.

User avatar
Termin8tor

Share      Unread post

User avatar
      
      
Posts: 5,513
Politics: Conservative

Termin8tor » 03 Jan 2017 12:30 pm » wrote:You couldn't turn on TV without some MSM reporter babbling stupidly about how great the Obama Economy is.

Either they're hopelessly incompetent or lying. :\
Liberals as usual are doing their best to be reality-free.
WORST JOBS PRESIDENT EVER: Obama’s 94 Million Jobless Americans
Jim Hoft
Under Obama the labor participation rate plummeted. In September 2016, 94,184,000 Americans were not in the labor force. The nation’s labor participation rate began its steady downward trend in 2000, and has not recovered....
Image
Due to the fact that the US population is larger than ever and combined with the terrible labor participation rate, the US now has more people without work under Obama than at any time in our nation’s history. In May 2016 a record 94,708,000 Americans were not in the labor force.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/01 ... americans/

User avatar
HarryParatestes

Share      Unread post

User avatar
  
  
Posts: 69

Hant heard what Groppenfuhrer jobs plans are.

Oh and, that 94 million number... :die:

User avatar
Termin8tor

Share      Unread post

User avatar
      
      
Posts: 5,513
Politics: Conservative

Termin8tor » 03 Jan 2017 12:30 pm » wrote:You couldn't turn on TV without some MSM reporter babbling stupidly about how great the Obama Economy is.

Either they're hopelessly incompetent or lying. :\
And as usual, just about dead silence from liberals.
The last jobs report of President Obama's presidency came out on Friday. What it says about his economic performance can be summed up in one word: Lackluster.....
look at the job market in the proper context, and Obama's record is pretty dismal.

Consider that in 2016, the number of jobs grew by 2 million. Sounds impressive, doesn't it? But the working-age population increased by 2.8 million.

Since 2010, the population climbed by an average of 2.5 million a year. Job growth, however, has averaged 2.2 million.
So while Obama brags about 15-plus million new private sector jobs created since early 2010, what he leaves out is that the population of people who can work climbed by almost 18 million.

Not only has the economy not been able to close the jobs gap opened by the recession, that gap has gotten wider during the agonizingly slow recovery and expansion since the recession ended in June 2009.

Image
what about the unemployment rate? Well, unlike previous economic expansions, the main reason the unemployment rate is down today is that a stunning 14 million have given up looking for work, and so no longer get counted as unemployed.

That can be seen by the sharp decline in the labor force participation rate, which was at 65.7% when Obama took office and is just 62.7% as he leaves it.
Had those millions not given up searching for a job, the official unemployment rate would be more like 9% today.
http://www.investors.com/politics/edito ... residency/

User avatar
Cannonpointer

Share      Unread post

User avatar
98% Macho Man
98% Macho Man
Posts: 14,064
Politics: Insurrectionist
Location: Your sister's bedroom - the slutty one

WhistleSNAP
Termin8tor » 03 Jan 2017 12:30 pm » wrote:You couldn't turn on TV without some MSM reporter babbling stupidly about how great the Obama Economy is.
The republican nominee in 08 was forced to suspend his campaign and return to washington dc to deal with the train wreck that the bush economy was.

Your finger has **** on it - please clean before pointing, ***.

User avatar
Cannonpointer

Share      Unread post

User avatar
98% Macho Man
98% Macho Man
Posts: 14,064
Politics: Insurrectionist
Location: Your sister's bedroom - the slutty one

WhistleSNAP
Termin8tor » 07 Jan 2017 9:45 am » wrote: bla bla, graphs from 30 years ago
Why not show stats from Lincoln's day, clown?

Why won't you compare obama to his predecessor, clown?

Still trying to pretend the bush years never happened, clown?

User avatar
Termin8tor

Share      Unread post

User avatar
      
      
Posts: 5,513
Politics: Conservative

Cannonpointer » 07 Jan 2017 9:56 am » wrote:Why not show stats from Lincoln's day, clown?

Why won't you compare obama to his predecessor, clown?

Still trying to pretend the bush years never happened, clown?
Trying to change the subject again, psycho?

Everyone on the board with common sense knows your deceitful tactics and lies.

User avatar
Cannonpointer

Share      Unread post

User avatar
98% Macho Man
98% Macho Man
Posts: 14,064
Politics: Insurrectionist
Location: Your sister's bedroom - the slutty one

WhistleSNAP
Termin8tor » 07 Jan 2017 10:00 am » wrote:
Trying to change the subject again, psycho?

Everyone on the board with common sense knows your deceitful tactics and lies.
The topic is "Obama's failure on the economy."

I am comparing him to his REPUBLICAN PREDECESSOR. You're invoking William Howard Taft, you sniveling fraud.

COMPARE HIM TO BUSH, *** HAT. Why are you pretending the bush years are unavailable for scrutiny and comparison you dishonest cretin?

User avatar
Termin8tor

Share      Unread post

User avatar
      
      
Posts: 5,513
Politics: Conservative

Cannonpointer » 07 Jan 2017 10:03 am » wrote: The topic is "Obama's failure on the economy."

I am comparing him to his REPUBLICAN PREDECESSOR. You're invoking William Howard Taft, you sniveling fraud.

COMPARE HIM TO BUSH, *** HAT. Why are you pretending the bush years are unavailable for scrutiny and comparison you dishonest cretin?
Here's a hint, Dim. Liberals claim that Obama has been a success on the economy, so I am comparing him to a president who truly was a success; Reagan.

That's the freaking point, so obvious that maybe even you can figure it out. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

But given your endless psychotic delusions, obviously not, because you stupidly claim that Reagan wasn't an economic success. :blink:

User avatar
Cannonpointer

Share      Unread post

User avatar
98% Macho Man
98% Macho Man
Posts: 14,064
Politics: Insurrectionist
Location: Your sister's bedroom - the slutty one

WhistleSNAP
Termin8tor » 07 Jan 2017 10:08 am » wrote:
Here's a hint, Dim. Liberals claim that Obama has been a success on the economy, so I am comparing him to a president who truly was a success; Reagan.

That's the freaking point, so obvious that maybe even you can figure it out. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

But given your endless psychotic delusions, obviously not, because you stupidly claim that Reagan wasn't an economic success. :blink:
The topic is "Obama's failure on the economy."

I am comparing him to his REPUBLICAN PREDECESSOR - and you pretend I am "changing the subject." What a fraud you are, Glory Hole.

You're invoking William Howard Taft, you sniveling fraud.

COMPARE HIM TO BUSH, *** HAT. Why are you pretending the bush years are unavailable for scrutiny and comparison you dishonest cretin?

User avatar
Termin8tor

Share      Unread post

User avatar
      
      
Posts: 5,513
Politics: Conservative

Cannonpointer » 07 Jan 2017 10:10 am » wrote:The topic is "Obama's failure on the economy."
I am comparing him to his REPUBLICAN PREDECESSOR. You're invoking William Howard Taft, you sniveling fraud.
COMPARE HIM TO BUSH, *** HAT. Why are you pretending the bush years are unavailable for scrutiny and comparison you dishonest cretin?
Blah, blah, blah.

Liberals claim that Obama has been a success on the economy, so I am comparing him to a president who truly was a success; Reagan.

That's so obvious that maybe even you can figure it out. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

User avatar
Termin8tor

Share      Unread post

User avatar
      
      
Posts: 5,513
Politics: Conservative

Termin8tor » 03 Jan 2017 12:30 pm » wrote:You couldn't turn on TV without some MSM reporter babbling stupidly about how great the Obama Economy is.

Either they're hopelessly incompetent or lying. :\
Both.

These charts are so obvious, a few liberals might even get it. :rofl: :rofl:
In First 4 Months After Election: Dow Increased by 14% After Trump Elected but Decreased by (29%) After Obama Elected
Jim Hoft
Image
Image
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/03 ... a-elected/

User avatar
Cannonpointer

Share      Unread post

User avatar
98% Macho Man
98% Macho Man
Posts: 14,064
Politics: Insurrectionist
Location: Your sister's bedroom - the slutty one

WhistleSNAP
Termin8tor » 10 Mar 2017 8:57 am » wrote:
Both.

These charts are so obvious, a few liberals might even get it. :rofl: :rofl:
The charts ARE obvious.

Obama was handed a failing economy, and handed off a growing one to tRump.

User avatar
Cannonpointer

Share      Unread post

User avatar
98% Macho Man
98% Macho Man
Posts: 14,064
Politics: Insurrectionist
Location: Your sister's bedroom - the slutty one

WhistleSNAP
Termin8tor » 07 Jan 2017 10:11 am » wrote: Liberals claim that Obama has been a success on the economy, so I am comparing him to a president who truly was a success; Reagan.
So bush was a failure on the economy?

Okay, thanks. Even though it's obvious, I still didn't expect a hack to admit it.

What did reagan have the bush DIDN'T?

Answer: A democrat congress to keep him out of the ditch.

User avatar
Cannonpointer

Share      Unread post

User avatar
98% Macho Man
98% Macho Man
Posts: 14,064
Politics: Insurrectionist
Location: Your sister's bedroom - the slutty one

WhistleSNAP
I'm not very good with charts.

Those numbers on the left - what do they mean?

It says under 10,000 with a downward trend when Obama took office, and 17,000 trending upward when he left. what do those numbers stand for? You know this economics stuff - help me out.

User avatar
Termin8tor

Share      Unread post

User avatar
      
      
Posts: 5,513
Politics: Conservative

Cannonpointer » 10 Mar 2017 9:17 am » wrote:
So bush was a failure on the economy?

Okay, thanks. Even though it's obvious, I still didn't expect a hack to admit it.
Where did I claim that Bush failed on the economy, psycho? Can you quote me?

No, as usual.

Bush's record on the economy is in great dispute, which is why I didn't cite him.
What did reagan have the bush DIDN'T?

Answer: A democrat congress to keep him out of the ditch.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. The usual bulls***.

User avatar
Cannonpointer

Share      Unread post

User avatar
98% Macho Man
98% Macho Man
Posts: 14,064
Politics: Insurrectionist
Location: Your sister's bedroom - the slutty one

WhistleSNAP
Termin8tor » 10 Mar 2017 9:58 am » wrote: Where did I claim that Bush failed on the economy, psycho? Can you quote me?

No, as usual.

Bush's record on the economy is in great dispute, which is why I didn't cite him.


zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. The usual bulls***.
Hey, coward.

When I responded on point to your op in another thread, you said this:
Termin8tor » 10 Mar 2017 9:59 am » wrote: Why would I waste time with a lying psychotic?
Answer your own question, ya filibustering coward.

Why are you responding here, and not there? You must be engaging in dishonesty, in one thread or the other.

User avatar
Cannonpointer

Share      Unread post

User avatar
98% Macho Man
98% Macho Man
Posts: 14,064
Politics: Insurrectionist
Location: Your sister's bedroom - the slutty one

WhistleSNAP
Cannonpointer » 10 Mar 2017 9:24 am » wrote:I'm not very good with charts.

Those numbers on the left - what do they mean?

It says under 10,000 with a downward trend when Obama took office, and 17,000 trending upward when he left. what do those numbers stand for? You know this economics stuff - help me out.
Bump.

Help me with the charts, clem - you know this economy stuff. I don't. What do those numbers tell us - the under 10,000 number on the left, downward trending, when obama took over, and the over 17,000 number on the left, upward trending, when obama left?

Is that number measuring how many people went bankrupt in the obama economy? The chart doesn't say. :huh:

User avatar
Termin8tor

Share      Unread post

User avatar
      
      
Posts: 5,513
Politics: Conservative

Cannonpointer » 10 Mar 2017 10:09 am » wrote:Bump.

Help me with the charts, clem - you know this economy stuff. I don't. What do those numbers tell us - the under 10,000 number on the left, downward trending, when obama took over, and the over 17,000 number on the left, upward trending, when obama left?

Is that number measuring how many people went bankrupt in the obama economy? The chart doesn't say. :huh:
It says you're a lying psychotic and a waste of time.

In small print.