Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

President Donald Trump - Formal Impeachment Inquiry Announced

Options
1…149150152154155…173

Comments

  • Options
    #4532
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,418 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Doubled it? Really?

    Regardless... OH, NO! A POLITICIAN DOESN’T KEEP ALL OF HIS CAMPAIGN PROMISES... NEWS AT 11!

    Shocked, I tell you. Shocked! I think you may have just found Nancy Pelosi’s next reason to impeach Trump.

    But doesn't Congress create the budget and control the purse strings?

    Just pointing out the fact that you don't read replies to you correctly.
    notobtuse wrote: »
    I never said he would wipe it out.


  • Options
    #4533
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    Just pointing out the fact that you don't read replies to you correctly.
    Huh?

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #4534
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,418 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Huh?

    Scroll up and re read your reply to something that was never claimed of you.


  • Options
    #4535
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    Scroll up and re read your reply to something that was never claimed of you.
    Where the poster wanted MY justification for Trump's claim he’d wipe out the debt? Why am I required to give my justification for something I never said?

    As for your request for my thoughts on it... I gave it to you.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #4536
    FreeThePants
    Registered Users Posts: 94 ✭✭FreeThePants


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Obama left office with the deficit lower than he inherited? What comic book did you find that information in?
    The White House, though I was off on Obama who went from 459bm to 585bn, an increase but one that pales in comparison to Bush Jr, Bush Sr, Raegan or Trump.

    So to summarise...

    Raegan/Bush snr: 400% increase ($89bn to 400mn). Left the US in recession.

    Clinton: 100% decrease, eradicating the deficit, and then building a surplus of £236bn - the largest in us history. Got the US out of recession.

    Bush jr: wasted all of the above and left with not only the biggest recession in a century that did huge damage globally and domestically, and then left with a record deficit of 458bn.

    Obama: took over that sh*t show, spent like hell to stimulate the economy which the republicans made out to be the worst thing ever, drove the deficit up to 1.4tn in the process, and in the process ended the recession, recovered the economy and in the process rose the debt 585bn (441bn was 2015s figure). That is an increase of 27%.

    Trump: took over a great financial situation, but has managed to increase the deficit to over $1tn in just 3 years, largely in the name of cutting taxes in the ultra wealthy and getting slapped around in a lost trade war with China.

    These statistics have all been taken from the White House. It's very clear that the democrats care a hell of a lot more about fiscal responsibility in government than the Republicans.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4537
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    FreeThePants wrote: »
    The White House, though I was off on Obama who went from 459bm to 585bn, an increase but one that pales in comparison to Bush Jr, Bush Sr, Raegan or Trump.

    So to summarise...

    Raegan/Bush snr: 400% increase ($89bn to 400mn). Left the US in recession.

    Clinton: 100% decrease, eradicating the deficit, and then building a surplus of £236bn - the largest in us history. Got the US out of recession.

    Bush jr: wasted all of the above and left with not only the biggest recession in a century that did huge damage globally and domestically, and then left with a record deficit of 458bn.

    Obama: took over that sh*t show, spent like hell to stimulate the economy which the republicans made out to be the worst thing ever, drove the deficit up to 1.4tn in the process, and in the process ended the recession, recovered the economy and in the process rose the debt 585bn (441bn was 2015s figure). That is an increase of 27%.

    Trump: took over a great financial situation, but has managed to increase the deficit to over $1tn in just 3 years, largely in the name of cutting taxes in the ultra wealthy and getting slapped around in a lost trade war with China.

    These statistics have all been taken from the White House. It's very clear that the democrats care a hell of a lot more about fiscal responsibility in government than the Republicans.
    Sorry to break it to you but Obama added about $9 Trillion US dollars to the national debt while in office... Almost doubling it from what it was when he took office.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #4538
    kilns
    Registered Users Posts: 3,525 ✭✭✭kilns


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Ireland has a low-profile partnership with NATO and relies on it for their defense. And NATO relies on the US. Ergo...

    You just made that up but ok


  • Options
    #4539
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 11,149 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Sorry to break it to you but Obama added about $9 Trillion US dollars to the national debt while in office... Almost doubling it from what it was when he took office.

    Can you quote a source on that?


  • Options
    #4540
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    kilns wrote: »
    You just made that up but ok
    No I didn’t. Don't you know by now that people here on the right don't state things unless they have sources to back it up... as required? It's an unwritten rule that only posters on the right need to abide by.
    Cottey assesses the relationship between Ireland and NATO, characterising it as a distinctly low-profile partnership. Irish neutrality emerged in the struggle for independence from Britain, was consolidated in the Second World War and has become deeply embedded domestically since then. When NATO established the Partnership for Peace (PfP) in the 1990s, domestic wariness of the Alliance made Ireland a late-comer in joining the programme. Ireland eventually joined PfP in 1999, driven in particular by NATO’s growing role in peacekeeping (with Ireland contributing forces to the Alliance’s operations in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo). With NATO’s role in peacekeeping declining, partnership with the Alliance will have less salience for Ireland—although military interoperability with NATO members remains important for the Irish defence forces.

    https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/978-1-137-59524-9_7

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #4541
    woohoo!!!
    Registered Users Posts: 803 ✭✭✭woohoo!!!


    There has been different figures thrown out there so an official link is required to clarify.

    Pelosi's tearing up of the speech and Trumps refusal of handshake is hilarious stuff. I think they should have a boxing match on youtube to settle it ;)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4542
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    duploelabs wrote: »
    Can you quote a source on that?
    Of course I can.

    https://www.businessinsider.com/national-debt-deficit-added-under-president-barack-obama-2017-1

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #4543
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    woohoo!!! wrote: »
    There has been different figures thrown out there so an official link is required to clarify.

    Pelosi's tearing up of the speech and Trumps refusal of handshake is hilarious stuff. I think they should have a boxing match on youtube to settle it ;)
    Did you see it? It can be taken both ways. One is Trump refused the handshake. But it you watch the replay it sure looks like Trump handed her the speech and started turning away before she put out her hand, therefore not seeing it.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #4544
    woohoo!!!
    Registered Users Posts: 803 ✭✭✭woohoo!!!


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Did you see it? It can be taken both ways. One is Trump refused the handshake. But it you watch the replay it sure looks like Trump handed her the speech and started turning away before she put out her hand, therefore not seeing it.

    I think US politics is pure pantomine, hard to take them seriously. Trolling and petulance is the standard to aim for. Perhaps inevitable in an ever increasingly online world where confirmation bias reigns supreme.


  • Options
    #4545
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,418 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    woohoo!!! wrote: »
    There has been different figures thrown out there so an official link is required to clarify.

    Pelosi's tearing up of the speech and Trumps refusal of handshake is hilarious stuff. I think they should have a boxing match on youtube to settle it ;)

    My money would be on Pelosi :D


  • Options
    #4546
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    woohoo!!! wrote: »
    I think US politics is pure pantomine, hard to take them seriously. Trolling and petulance is the standard to aim for. Perhaps inevitable in an ever increasingly online world where confirmation bias reigns supreme.
    Becoming the leader of the most powerful nation on earth is never a pantomime... it's nothing less than all out war between political parties.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #4547
    woohoo!!!
    Registered Users Posts: 803 ✭✭✭woohoo!!!


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Becoming the leader of the most powerful nation on earth is never a pantomime... it's nothing less than all out war between political parties.
    The war between the parties is nothing new.


  • Options
    #4548
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    woohoo!!! wrote: »
    There has been different figures thrown out there so an official link is required to clarify.

    Pelosi's tearing up of the speech and Trumps refusal of handshake is hilarious stuff. I think they should have a boxing match on youtube to settle it ;)

    The US Treasury.... Official enough?

    Take the total from 2016 and subtract the total from 2008… The Obama years.

    https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #4549
    FreeThePants
    Registered Users Posts: 94 ✭✭FreeThePants


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Sorry to break it to you but Obama added about $9 Trillion US dollars to the national debt while in office... Almost doubling it from what it was when he took office.
    That would be debt vs deficit. We have covered why it went up under Obama, who spent his way out of the worst recession the world had seen in a century, delivered by the GOP.

    Now what were the reasons that it went up $5.5tn under bush who inherited one of the best economic situations any president has in us history? Much like Bush Jr... what is his excuse for all this increased debt?

    And why has it gone up at an even faster rate under Trump than it did under Obama? In the last three years it has gone up over $3.3tn yet almost no republicans seems to care remotely.

    Under raegan/Bush Sr it went up from 1tn to 4.4tn. Under Clinton is went from 4.4 to 5.6tn. Both parties have increased the debt ever since baby boomers outright rejected fiscal responsibility in the 80s (see: 1980-88 presidential electoral maps), but one puts theirs towards creating surpluses and digging out of historic recessions, while the GOP uses theirs to give tax cuts to billionaires.

    Because that's the thing - Democrats have a history of being good for the overall economy, while republicans have a history of being good for billionaires.


  • Options
    #4550
    woohoo!!!
    Registered Users Posts: 803 ✭✭✭woohoo!!!


    notobtuse wrote: »
    The US Treasury.... Official enough?

    Take the total from 2016 and subtract the total from 2008… The Obama years.

    https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm
    Yes I recall Obama borrowing very heavily and there being great concern about this. Still it's the deficit or surplus that a president leaves is the important for that's his legacy.


  • Options
    #4551
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    FreeThePants wrote: »
    That would be debt vs deficit. We have covered why it went up under Obama, who spent his way out of the worst recession the world had seen in a century, delivered by the GOP.

    Now what were the reasons that it went up $5.5tn under bush who inherited one of the best economic situations any president has in us history? Much like Bush Jr... what is his excuse for all this increased debt?

    And why has it gone up at an even faster rate under Trump than it did under Obama? In the last three years it has gone up over $3.3tn yet almost no republicans seems to care remotely.

    Under raegan/Bush Sr it went up from 1tn to 4.4tn. Under Clinton is went from 4.4 to 5.6tn. Both parties have increased the debt ever since baby boomers outright rejected fiscal responsibility in the 80s (see: 1980-88 presidential electoral maps), but one puts theirs towards creating surpluses and digging out of historic recessions, while the GOP uses theirs to give tax cuts to billionaires.

    Because that's the thing - Democrats have a history of being good for the overall economy, while republicans have a history of being good for billionaires.
    The skyrocketed under Obama had a lot to do with his funneling of money to his friends, people who donated to democrat causes, and democratic cronies.

    “You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.” ~ Rahm Emanuel

    Remember that?

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4552
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    woohoo!!! wrote: »
    Yes I recall Obama borrowing very heavily and there being great concern about this. Still it's the deficit or surplus that a president leaves is the important for that's his legacy.
    Are we required to pay interest (you know... cold hard cash) on debt or deficit?

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #4553
    FreeThePants
    Registered Users Posts: 94 ✭✭FreeThePants


    notobtuse wrote: »
    The skyrocketed under Obama had a lot to do with his funneling of money to his friends, people who donated to democrat causes, and democratic cronies.

    “You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.” ~ Rahm Emanuel

    Remember that?
    It went to stimulating the economy, and it worked so well that Trump has just had to make sure to not change much for it to continue to pay off during his presidency.

    But you seem to have completely ignored the debt ballooning under Raegan, Bush Sr, Bush Jr and now Trump, with it raising at the same rate it did under Obama but without any recession to dig out of, nor deficit being reduced.

    It's clear the GOP are worse for the economy, for the debt, for the deficit, and for fiscal responsibility and stability. And its clear you are aware of this, which is you're cowering away from those points and are not even attempting to argue against them.


  • Options
    #4554
    FreeThePants
    Registered Users Posts: 94 ✭✭FreeThePants


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Are we required to pay interest (you know... cold hard cash) on debt or deficit?
    Do you mean the deficit that has ballooned to record numbers under Trump who received a solid economy? Or the debt that has ballooned to record rates and on the same pace as Obama under Trump, who received a solid economy?


  • Options
    #4555
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    FreeThePants wrote: »
    It went to stimulating the economy, and it worked so well that Trump has just had to make sure to not change much for it to continue to pay off during his presidency.

    But you seem to have completely ignored the debt ballooning under Raegan, Bush Sr, Bush Jr and now Trump, with it raising at the same rate it did under Obama but without any recession to dig out of, nor deficit being reduced.

    It's clear the GOP are worse for the economy, for the debt, for the deficit, and for fiscal responsibility and stability. And its clear you are aware of this, which is you're cowering away from those points and are not even attempting to argue against them.
    A big chunk went to stimulating democrat's pockets. Prove me wrong... show me where the bulk of the $9 Trillion US went. Just the big numbers will do. I don't think you can.

    But I'll give you a little help and let you just focus on the green energy money... as that you will be able to find. And you'll be shocked. Also, who owned those companies and how many of those companies continued to exist once they ran out of taxpayer funds?

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #4556
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    FreeThePants wrote: »
    Do you mean the deficit that has ballooned to record numbers under Trump who received a solid economy? Or the debt that has ballooned to record rates and on the same pace as Obama under Trump, who received a solid economy?
    Do your arms get tired of continually moving the goalposts?

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #4557
    weisses
    Registered Users Posts: 9,437 ✭✭✭weisses


    notobtuse wrote: »
    The skyrocketed under Obama had a lot to do with his funneling of money to his friends, people who donated to democrat causes, and democratic cronies.

    Can you give a rough estimate as to who benefited and how much they got ?


  • Options
    #4558
    ebbsy
    Registered Users Posts: 6,745 ✭✭✭ebbsy


    Democrats can't even add up a few votes.

    Who won ? Trump did.

    They are done.


  • Options
    #4559
    FreeThePants
    Registered Users Posts: 94 ✭✭FreeThePants


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Do your arms get tired of continually moving the goalposts?
    No goalposts moving here, you're saying democrats have no sense of fiscal responsibility but the facts show they are far more fiscally responsible than their GOP counterparts. A fact you really, really don't want to a knowledge.

    I'm not tiring at all at your eagerness to avoid discussing the inconvenient truth, republicans are bad for the deficit and debt and Trump is increasing the debt at the exact same rate Obama did while increasing the deficit considerably more.

    To acknowledge this would be to break the virtue signalling of your loyalty to Trump, and we know what happens when someone leaves the cult or even speaks out against if. So don't worry, I don't ever expected you to either. But I will keep pointing it out.


  • Options
    #4560
    un5byh7sqpd2x0
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,862 ✭✭✭un5byh7sqpd2x0


    And he’s been acquitted 53-47


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4561
    FreeThePants
    Registered Users Posts: 94 ✭✭FreeThePants


    Janiyah Hallowed Shower wrote: »
    And he’s been acquitted 53-47

    Hardly surprising given the head of the GOP in the Senate point blank came out and said they would be crooked jurors, it's gas how some of them are even outright saying "yeah he did it but I'm finding him innocent anyway".

    Entirely expected, though.


Advertisement