One criticism of President Biden I saw earlier in this thread is someone dismiss him as a “career politician.” As if that’s a bad thing! It’s not. President Biden’s experience is a good thing. It makes him the most qualified candidate for the job.
If you need surgery, do you want the “career surgeon” who has ample experience and has steadily risen in his field, or do you want some hack from an unrelated field who says he can do it better, had a chance, and failed?
Maybe it's just me, but I honestly can't tell if you're trolling. I'd swear you are, but your posts alternate with stuff like this and then rational takes on the legitimate threat Trump is.
President Biden pulled us out of the economic hole that Trump dug.
Is this parody?
I've never liked Presidents given lots of credit/blame for the economy but this absurd. You mean that Covid dug?
Trump dug it. Sure, Covid wrecked things, but it wouldn’t have been as bad if Trump had managed it better. He showed he doesn’t know how to handle a crisis, which is an important part of being President. He failed that test.
Even before covid hit, Trump was digging a hole. His trade wars were an absolute disaster for American farmers and for American manufacturing. His trade policies resulted in the three largest trade deficits in American history.
His immigration policies hurt American businesses.
His tax cuts resulted in increasing our national debt.
Don’t believe me? I brought receipts.
A September 2019 study by Moody’s Analytics found that the trade war had already cost the U.S. economy nearly 300,000 jobs and an estimated 0.3% of real GDP. Other studies put the cost to U.S. GDP at about 0.7%. A 2019 report from Bloomberg Economics estimated that the trade war would cost the U.S. economy $316 billion by the end of 2020, while more recent research from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and Columbia University found that U.S. companies lost at least $1.7 trillion in the price of their stocks as a result of U.S. tariffs imposed on imports from China.
Numerous studies have found that U.S. companies primarily paid for U.S. tariffs, with the cost estimated at nearly $46 billion. The tariffs forced American companies to accept lower profit margins, cut wages and jobs for U.S. workers, defer potential wage hikes or expansions, and raise prices for American consumers or companies. A spokesperson for the American Farm Bureau stated that “farmers have lost the vast majority of what was once a $24 billion market in China” as a result of Chinese retaliatory actions.
The ultimate results of the phase one trade deal between China and the United States — and the trade war that preceded it — have significantly hurt the American economy without solving the underlying economic concerns that th...
Trump made taming trade deficits a key part of his campaign. On that score, he will have failed. The three largest U.S. deficits in history will have occured during his administration.
The “King of Debt” promised to reduce the national debt — then his tax cuts made it surge. Add in the pandemic, and he oversaw the third-biggest deficit increase of any president.
I've never liked Presidents given lots of credit/blame for the economy but this absurd. You mean that Covid dug?
Mr.Rojo, how convenient you forget your boy Bush 2nd left town with Mr.Obama with a banking crisis near global economic collage....absurd ?
Bush 43 can be faulted for much, but the Great Recession was caused by Bill Clinton and the Community Reinvestment Act. It was the original "go woke, go broke" - subprime mortgages made companies too big to fail, fail. Obama made the recession worse.
Mr.Rojo, how convenient you forget your boy Bush 2nd left town with Mr.Obama with a banking crisis near global economic collage....absurd ?
Bush 43 can be faulted for much, but the Great Recession was caused by Bill Clinton and the Community Reinvestment Act. It was the original "go woke, go broke" - subprime mortgages made companies too big to fail, fail. Obama made the recession worse.
Bush 43 had 9 years to fix what you claim was Clinton's fault.
I didn't see the interview, not liking the reviews. But...the day after the debate I saw him speak at a rally or speech. I only saw a little bit, but he seemed quite clear. I wonder if the energy of a crowd could make the difference between a very poor appearance and a good one. I don't know if it's too late to ask for this, as the terms for the second debate might have already been agreed upon, but if he stays in the race and they can negotiate terms, they should insist that there be a live audience.
I didn't see the interview, not liking the reviews. But...the day after the debate I saw him speak at a rally or speech. I only saw a little bit, but he seemed quite clear. I wonder if the energy of a crowd could make the difference between a very poor appearance and a good one. I don't know if it's too late to ask for this, as the terms for the second debate might have already been agreed upon, but if he stays in the race and they can negotiate terms, they should insist that there be a live audience.
Hello!!!! You just don't get it
Take away the teleprompter & Sleepy Joe reverts to a senile mess.
I didn't see the interview, not liking the reviews. But...the day after the debate I saw him speak at a rally or speech. I only saw a little bit, but he seemed quite clear. I wonder if the energy of a crowd could make the difference between a very poor appearance and a good one. I don't know if it's too late to ask for this, as the terms for the second debate might have already been agreed upon, but if he stays in the race and they can negotiate terms, they should insist that there be a live audience.
Hello!!!! You just don't get it
Take away the teleprompter & Sleepy Joe reverts to a senile mess.
Could be the teleprompter. Fact is, he's used to an audience and there wasn't one. Plenty of performers, athletes (in particular) and others perform best when there's more energy in the building. If he gets to the second debate, there is an audience, and his performance mirrors the first debate, then you're good.
