When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
:
The hatred for Trump is completely understandable. Everyone hates greatness and what they cannot themselves achieve.
... he gives hope to every US-born citizen, you can live your life with your head up your **** thinking it smells really nice in there, completely alienate 80% of the population and STILL become leader of your country without needing to stage a military coup d'état.
Better than the Clinton criminal enterprise. When we are faced with choices between two egomaniacs we chose the one who was for Law and Order and far less government intrusion into our private lives. Smaller taxes, smaller government, and less corruption. Can't you understand?
When we are faced with choices between two egomaniacs
This is the most fundamental problem; the normalization of the two-party system, and the echo-chamber mentality of the current media landscape (by which I mean both populist social media and traditionally-regulated media of which I am a member) has resulted in an environment which selects for the candidate which reflects the most extreme exaggeration of the ideals of the supporting party.
Or, put another way, We the People have voted for a system which produced candidates which are essentially caricatures of world leaders.
Better than the Clinton criminal enterprise. When we are faced with choices between two egomaniacs we chose the one who was for Law and Order and far less government intrusion into our private lives. Smaller taxes, smaller government, and less corruption. Can't you understand?
If you want small government, neither party is right for you. Which I guess is one of the issues Joe also mentions.
Your misleading chart is misleading on purpose because you went to a left-wing political hack site to find it. Please see the attached chart not based on previous spending percentage increase but actual dollars spent per year. What an incredibly different picture the actual numbers present.
Don't let yourself be manipulated. Use your brain.
And since the president has Jack s*** to do with the actual spending because it is controlled by Congress in our country, one should really be looking at the Congress majority party in each of those years. And maybe whether or not we had a war going on.
Your misleading chart is misleading on purpose because you went to a left-wing political hack site to find it. Please see the attached chart not based on previous spending percentage increase but actual dollars spent per year. What an incredibly different picture the actual numbers present.
Don't let yourself be manipulated. Use your brain.
And since the president has Jack s*** to do with the actual spending because it is controlled by Congress in our country, one should really be looking at the Congress majority party in each of those years. And maybe whether or not we had a war going on.
No need to personally attack me :-) Also, I just googled some sources. I don't think the image I posted (and the additional images) are in contradiction with what you've posted.
Both pictures show the same thing: Obama spent more than Bush 2, Bush 2 spent more than Clinton, who spent more than Bush 1, who spent more than Reagan etc. How much more was spent at the end of a tenure than the previous president is listed in the picture I posted. Therefore, no president was able to reduce the government spending during the last 30 years, even though both republicans and democrats have been in power. Furthermore, a president would always be able to veto an increase in spending.
Finally, the budget for FY18 ($4.094 trillion) is higher than FY16's spending ($3.853 trillion), despite having a republican majority in both the house and the senate.
The sharp increase in spending during the Bush Jr. years were a direct result of the two invasions he headed and authorized via a strong arm media campaign to get Congress to authorize.
Both invasions were justified internally by what happened on 9/11.
It is really expensive to invade two countries in a short time frame.
Remember that previously Russia attempted to invade and mold Afghanistan into a well mannered Communist neighbor and it was supposedly a financial disaster.
A large portion of the country did not agree with the invasions or the financial cost of waging them but once the situation happened we are stuck with the job of picking up the pieces.
For historical context take a look at government spending levels on the chart before and during WW2 and Viet Nam.
Both had significant increase in the level of spending.
It is the financial cost of us deciding to stick our nose in the affairs of the rest of the world.
I have always wished that "None of the Above" would be an option on the voting form with a rule that any candidate on the losing end of that vote could never run for public office again.
The other thing that I would strongly be in favor of is to have a mandatory retirement age for elected politicians and political appointees.
70th birthday should be the mandatory retirement date.
Doesn't matter if you are part way thru your term.
70th birth date and you are out.
My opinion as a 59 year old who has seen many years of politics is that the older officials (appointed and elected, doesn't matter which) are much more in favor of whatever is currently in place because it favors their personal importance and bloats their ego well beyond the time they are being useful to society.
Judges, congressmen, mayors, law enforcement, etc.
Force them all to retire and let them go to work at WalMart as door greeters if they still want to work.
Yep, you're right, 100% of them are outraged liberals.
Disregard the fact that he currently has a 47% approval rating.
This is why I despise identity politics.
Women, Hispanics, African Americans and most academics - hardly a "minority".
Half of the women in the country are fine with him.
Hispanics are about 15% of the population, African Americans are about 13% of the population, so definitely minorities. Academics? Sure, more than half of Americans are academics. Hyper is their king.
While I don't especially like the image which president Trump projects, I certainly wouldn't say I'm pissed off. I asked a few friends down at the minority club, and they're not pissed either.
Truthfully, I only know two person personally who are really fervent Trump-haters. One is a 41 year old white male who is a lawyer, the other is a 45-ish Indian woman. Both are hardcore SJW-types.
07-13-2018, 12:30 PM
0
