Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

XY wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

To be fair, the market overall is up a lot since he took office. Bad day today of course, but the Dow is still up 5.44% as of this morning for 2018. 2017 was a really good year.

5.44% with the current confidence measures is not good. 2017 was Obama’s doing.

That's ridiculous. The markets are inherently forward looking.

Saying GDP and unemployment rates in 2017 were more Obama's doing than Trump's is not unreasonable (although President's get WAY too much credit/blame for this stuff than they should). But to claim that stock market results in 2017 had more to do with Obama than Trump is just ignorant (and again, WAY too much credit/blame is given to POTUS in general).

PIO! wrote:

XY wrote:

5.44% with the current confidence measures is not good. 2017 was Obama’s doing.

That's ridiculous. The markets are inherently forward looking.

Saying GDP and unemployment rates in 2017 were more Obama's doing than Trump's is not unreasonable (although President's get WAY too much credit/blame for this stuff than they should). But to claim that stock market results in 2017 had more to do with Obama than Trump is just ignorant (and again, WAY too much credit/blame is given to POTUS in general).

Positive Foreward looking due to economic factors established under Obama’s tenure.

PIO! wrote:

XY wrote:

5.44% with the current confidence measures is not good. 2017 was Obama’s doing.

That's ridiculous. The markets are inherently forward looking.

Saying GDP and unemployment rates in 2017 were more Obama's doing than Trump's is not unreasonable (although President's get WAY too much credit/blame for this stuff than they should). But to claim that stock market results in 2017 had more to do with Obama than Trump is just ignorant (and again, WAY too much credit/blame is given to POTUS in general).

With a normal non-nimrod president, your comment would be 100% correct. As it is, actually it is still 100% correct, but the caveat is that in 2017 the market WAS goosed by Trump with his tax cuts and de-regulation, both unnecessary in an already very strong economy. But, as you said, Presidents get too much credit and blame for the economy, and usually without merit. Markets are forward-looking as you said (leading indicators).

2017 was part of the continuation of the good economy and stock market that was present for almost all of Obama's 8 years. The Dow went up 31% in 2017, and likely half of that was due to the tax cut talk and the de-regulation, or a goosing by Trump. Bad things to do when the economy was already so good.

Rhinestoner wrote:

Look at Obama's unkept promises. Why didn't you start you own thread back then and b*tch about him? Because you're biased coward and that's why you're all getting yours right now, you deserve it. Being upset for 4 years of you life, how dumb. I was less upset over Obama's 8 year reign and he lied repeatedly, but was saved by his race.

PIO! wrote:

XY wrote:

5.44% with the current confidence measures is not good. 2017 was Obama’s doing.

That's ridiculous. The markets are inherently forward looking.

Saying GDP and unemployment rates in 2017 were more Obama's doing than Trump's is not unreasonable (although President's get WAY too much credit/blame for this stuff than they should). But to claim that stock market results in 2017 had more to do with Obama than Trump is just ignorant (and again, WAY too much credit/blame is given to POTUS in general).

Right. Because stagnant markets sitting at 14,000ish for three years, and then an explosion in 'investor confidence' upon the election is totally a carry-over of success from Barack 'CitiGroup' Obama.

Get real.

That Blue Wave isn't happening for the Senate:

-AZ: McSally (R) +6

-TN: Blackburn (R) +8

-IN: Donnelly (D) even

-NV: Heller (R) +2

-ND: Cramer (R) +12

-TX: Cruz (R) +6

-FL: Nelson (D) +2

-NJ: Menendez (D) +7 NJ is hopelessly Iibtard

-MO: Hawley (R) +0.4

BINGO! wrote:

PIO! wrote:

That's ridiculous. The markets are inherently forward looking.

Saying GDP and unemployment rates in 2017 were more Obama's doing than Trump's is not unreasonable (although President's get WAY too much credit/blame for this stuff than they should). But to claim that stock market results in 2017 had more to do with Obama than Trump is just ignorant (and again, WAY too much credit/blame is given to POTUS in general).

Right. Because stagnant markets sitting at 14,000ish for three years, and then an explosion in 'investor confidence' upon the election is totally a carry-over of success from Barack 'CitiGroup' Obama.

Get real.

The truth:

Rigged for Hillary wrote:

That Blue Wave isn't happening for the Senate:

-AZ: McSally (R) +6

-TN: Blackburn (R) +8

-IN: Donnelly (D) even

-NV: Heller (R) +2

-ND: Cramer (R) +12

-TX: Cruz (R) +6

-FL: Nelson (D) +2

-NJ: Menendez (D) +7 NJ is hopelessly Iibtard

-MO: Hawley (R) +0.4

I don't think anyone here said it would happen in the Senate. I have specifically said Democrats will take over the House and very unlikely take the Senate, and I have never called it a "blue wave".

So, straw man argument. Got anything else to try to make yourself feel good?

Flagpole wrote:

Nagging Annie wrote:

“To be fair”....now that’s refreshing.....

I am fair and honest and logical at all times.

You are honest in your beliefs, but you are neither fair or logical. That was proven in your Avenatti Kavanaugh accuser analysis.

Flagpole wrote:

BINGO! wrote:

Right. Because stagnant markets sitting at 14,000ish for three years, and then an explosion in 'investor confidence' upon the election is totally a carry-over of success from Barack 'CitiGroup' Obama.

Get real.

The truth:

https://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/170110091440-dow-obama-780x439.png

Thanks for proving my point. 2014-2017... virtually stagnant.

Now, add a graph showing from Feb. 2017-present. I bet you won't do that.

Flagpole wrote:

Rigged for Hillary wrote:

That Blue Wave isn't happening for the Senate:

-AZ: McSally (R) +6

-TN: Blackburn (R) +8

-IN: Donnelly (D) even

-NV: Heller (R) +2

-ND: Cramer (R) +12

-TX: Cruz (R) +6

-FL: Nelson (D) +2

-NJ: Menendez (D) +7 NJ is hopelessly Iibtard

-MO: Hawley (R) +0.4

I don't think anyone here said it would happen in the Senate. I have specifically said Democrats will take over the House and very unlikely take the Senate, and I have never called it a "blue wave".

So, straw man argument. Got anything else to try to make yourself feel good?

Ha, do you not see the stupid irony in your post? Flagpole said " I have specifically said Democrats will take over the House ..."

Wow, that's an amazing stealth gloat over an obvious outcome.

Got anything else to try to make yourself feel good?

Nagging Annie wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

I am fair and honest and logical at all times.

You are honest in your beliefs, but you are neither fair or logical. That was proven in your Avenatti Kavanaugh accuser analysis.

Flagpole has gone over the deep end and there's no chance of him coming back. He's delusional to an unhealthy level. I've never seen someone so desperately seek the approval of others.

This is gonna be the biggest I told you so in history. That comment alone speaks volumes about his level of insecurity. He's super desperate for someone to tell him he's right, but that ain't gonna happen. He voted for HRC and she went down!

He's bumming now as he knows that he has to redirect the thread away from his moronic predictions in an attempt so sound like HE and only HE came up with the prediction. LL ,Fat Hurts and Trollminator are pawns in his game and just following along like lost puppies.

It is one thing to have a political opinion, it is quite another to be obsessed to the edge of the illogic. He has even gone to the extreme of analyzing Senator Graham’s sexuality in some vague attempt to prove a political point.

Nagging Annie wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

I am fair and honest and logical at all times.

You are honest in your beliefs, but you are neither fair or logical. That was proven in your Avenatti Kavanaugh accuser analysis.

INCORRECT!

BINGO! wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

The truth:

https://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/170110091440-dow-obama-780x439.png

Thanks for proving my point. 2014-2017... virtually stagnant.

Now, add a graph showing from Feb. 2017-present. I bet you won't do that.

No...you said stagnant at 14,000 for three years, and that wasn't true.

I have already said it has been good for Trump so far. 31% gain in 2017 and now 3% gain in 2018 after this bad week.

Kettle2Potpole wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

I don't think anyone here said it would happen in the Senate. I have specifically said Democrats will take over the House and very unlikely take the Senate, and I have never called it a "blue wave".

So, straw man argument. Got anything else to try to make yourself feel good?

Ha, do you not see the stupid irony in your post? Flagpole said " I have specifically said Democrats will take over the House ..."

Wow, that's an amazing stealth gloat over an obvious outcome.

Got anything else to try to make yourself feel good?

Wasn't a gloat...was just a factual statement belying his straw man that anyone here said anything about Democrats taking over the Senate. I don't need to say things to make myself feel good. If I want to feel good, I just look at myself in the mirror, preferably with my shirt off.

Ha! To prove a political point?! Trying to figure out Graham's sexuality has NOTHING to do with any political points. What point would that be even?

Just in case anyone wondered...

Mueller is coming.

The clown is done.

The Dow was over 26,000 in January and is below that right now.

The 2017 run up was in anticipation of the huge corporate tax cuts that eventually were passed.

It’s been schizo since then all year.

Trump’s tariffs and general economic policies have people concerned.

They fear the unknown.