Trump Endorses Moore - Better a Sexual Predator Than a Democrat

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by ericgtr12, Dec 4, 2017.

  1. GermanSuplex macrumors 6502a

    GermanSuplex

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    #201
    I don't have a "portfolio", I'm working class and live paycheck to paycheck, and don't have money to invest in the stock market. I want real-world results.

    And I question what stocks you have that are so much better now than they were 11 months ago.

    Also, do you know what a straw-man is? I think Trump signing EO's that can just as well be reversed again under the next president as a straw-man argument to him passing anything meaningful.

    As for Roy Moore, exactly what is he going to do in the senate besides play Trump's lackey? Is that anti-establishment, because other than the moronic things Trump has done just for shock value, Trump himself is very much in line with traditional conservative agendas, which basically revolves around the tired argument that if the rich are richer, we are all richer.

    Again, does it not bother Trumpsters that - besides the abuse allegations - Moore failed to uphold the law. Bad look to see him elected as a lawmaker...
     
  2. NewdestinyX macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    #202
    Clearly you have no idea what a strawman argument is. But let’s not bore the thread with a debate on that… Rolling back economy crushing EO‘s, those of Obama, inspires confidence. That is why we are riding high right now. Even an economics 101 class would teach that and a first your economic student could understand the reason why the economy is rebounding in a huge way. It has everything to do with badObama policy and the “significant Trump accomplishment“ of rolling back years of economy crushing regulations - that now won’t be worth changeable for another 7 years. That’s right you’re going to have to bear with this guy for 7 more years, gang.

    Since Trump ALL portfolios have risen by a greater % than ever under Obama’s 8 years.Simple fact. Read a little please. Even ‘us’ working stiffs can educate ourselves on the basics of economics.
     
  3. GermanSuplex macrumors 6502a

    GermanSuplex

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    #203
    Do you know what passing legislation is? Because that is not a strawman argument. Using EO's - because that's all he's been successful at thus far - is not really that meaningful because any president can and has done so. Yes, some of the wealthiest Americans like what they see, and thus the stock markets respond accordingly.

    You seem to be conflating growth over time due to a trend with comparing a number now vs. a few months back. You act like Trump walked into the same situation Obama did and turned things around in 11 months. Let him actually pass his tax bill, which is a gift to the wealthy donors and a workaround to help gut important parts of the ACA, and then we'll see where we are in a few months.
     
  4. MarkG21 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2010
    #204
    Not sure if I'm misunderstanding what your saying but the S&P 500 had a 32% return in 2013.
    https://ycharts.com/indicators/sandp_500_total_return_annual
     
  5. NewdestinyX macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    #205
    Because tax cuts (for all - but especially corporations and pass-throughs), every time in history that it’s been done, under Reagan and under Bush the junior, has raised more revenue than its projected loss. Simple fact of history. An inconvenient one if you’re a Leftist who loves talking points like “this will add $1 trillion to the debt”. If you read back about 30 posts I debunked that myth when I shared that the CBO‘s numbers on the projected deficit are only based on a projected GDP growth of 1.8% over the entire period that the tax cuts are in effect. In the last 3 quarters Trump has almost doubled that number each quarter. There is no way this thing tax bill will add $1 trillion to the debt. Pure Left wing propaganda fiction.

    Read for yourself here to verify their overly pessimistic 1.8% projected growth number coming up with the bogus 1T number.

    https://www.cbo.gov/topics/taxes

    Now of course things have to keep going at well above 1.8% to erase that defecit potential. I’ll acknowledge that.
     
  6. Naaaaak macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    #206
    Moore's accuser has a history of false accusations, won't submit the alleged yearbook for neutral-party inspection, the picture of the signatures shown do not match, the story has missing details…

    Compare this to the host of celebrities and politicians (the overwhelming majority of which are Democrat) who have a history of sexual predation and abuse coverups and evidence to support the numerous claims against them.
     
  7. GermanSuplex macrumors 6502a

    GermanSuplex

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    #207
    I like how you focus on Moore’s sole accuser and bold the word ‘numerous’ in regards to democrats. Moore has more than one accuser....

    That whole shopping mall “rumor” has been around about the same amount of time as when the allegations were alleged to have started too. Imagine that.
     
  8. duffman9000 macrumors 68000

    duffman9000

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Location:
    Orange County
    #208
    Ugh, that's not what Forbes says.

    Is Wikipedia correct in saying that Reagan raised taxes 11 times?

    What about what Alan Simpson said? He was there, is he wrong also in saying Reagan raised taxes 11 times?

     
  9. NewdestinyX macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    #209
    Are you going to believe what Forbes' slanted opinion pieces tell you - or what the CBO office tells you about their OWN numbers.. Sheesh.. Why do I even try...
    --- Post Merged, Dec 7, 2017 ---
    Here's a pretty balanced article on the SPECIFICS of how deregulation has a direct impact on economic (GDP) growth. Offers some cautions too.. Not a partisan publication at all - so offers good balanced input. But certainly one can conclude from this source that the rollbacks of Obama regulations are partly involved in this great growth we're experiencing..

    http://voxeu.org/article/how-deregulation-and-globalisation-interact-boost-economic-growth

    Remember I'm on record as saying.. that it's still early to attribute ALL of what's happening to Trump accomplishments. But most of you Libs are saying he has ZERO to do with it. This and other sources I have prove otherwise.
     
  10. duffman9000, Dec 7, 2017
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2017

    duffman9000 macrumors 68000

    duffman9000

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Location:
    Orange County
    #210
    From NPR:

    --- Post Merged, Dec 7, 2017 ---
    You moved the goal posts. You went from:
    Onto something else. Why?

    I see. I because I disagree with you I'm one of those libs?
     
  11. NewdestinyX macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    #211
    Here's another pretty good source
    Now you're just not reading my posts.. What does that NPR interview have to do with the CBO projections? Focus, like a laser beam, please.. You keep quoting my CBO point - and then providing sources to a completely different topic.. This is why I hate this back and forth with sources.. Now you're posting 'opinion interviews' as authoritative sources.. SMH....

    Here's another good source on my claims about de-regulation.. From inside the beltway but still from true economists.

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/wh...ents/The Growth Potential of Deregulation.pdf
     
  12. duffman9000 macrumors 68000

    duffman9000

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Location:
    Orange County
    #212
    How is the fact that Reagan had to raise taxes 11 times "opinion interviews"?
     
  13. NewdestinyX macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    #213
    Stay focussed.. Forget about my inconvenient truths about tax cutting under Reagan and Bush.. Side point.. If we're going to go off topic from Moore.. just stay on the challenge I was given about Trumps accomplishments in reversing Obama era deregulation and its enormous impact on this current growth. That's the 'off-topic' topic. Not gonna debate you on Reaganomics and Bushnomics when you try to use NPR interviews as a source.. That's just a waste of time.
     
  14. bopajuice macrumors 65816

    bopajuice

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    Location:
    Dark side of the moon
    #214
    So super racist “Trumps” pedophilia. Ok...
    --- Post Merged, Dec 7, 2017 ---
    Interesting to see people wrestling with the pedophilia issue while still trying to defend the GOP agenda. Very entertaining and pathetic at the same time.
     
  15. duffman9000 macrumors 68000

    duffman9000

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Location:
    Orange County
    #215
    But I found proof that directly contradicts what you said here:

    With this:


    I thought you were going to post what Trump has done to do away with Obama's economy crushing policies?
     
  16. NewdestinyX macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    #216
    Good point. And the 14yearold claim was debunked anyway. That's the most egregious one. THOUGH I hate that Moore changed his original story he have to Hannity to something a bit different now.. There's a lot of duplicity about this man.. And now that Al Franken has resigned - making himself a sacrificial lamb on the Lib side (the party I'm sure asked him to do that so they could look like the high road takers and nail the Repubs for not making Moore do the same) - they'll use that to the hilt to try and make Repubs look like the party supporting bad players.. This whole last minute attack against Moore was a BRILLIANT political move by the Left.. I have to tip my hat to their political genius. Can't get Trump on the collusion hoax - so let's take out one of their Senators and then force one of ours out (Franken) too to make the Repubs look dirty if they don't follow suit.. BRILLIANT tacticians.. the Left.
    --- Post Merged, Dec 7, 2017 ---
    An NPR interview is NOT proof. NPR is a partisan organization that does opinion shows. You need to show corroborated collegiate statistical sources to make a claim of PROOF. You haven't even come CLOSE to proving your point.

    Are you trying to be purposefully obtuse? I've posted 3 articles already supporting my claims. Read the EO's at the whitehouse.gov site. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/executive-orders
    --- Post Merged, Dec 7, 2017 ---
    I'll start another thread tomorrow and ask a mod to move all these posts on economy over there.. and continue you Libs' education on the topic.. ;)
     
  17. duffman9000 macrumors 68000

    duffman9000

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Location:
    Orange County
    #217
    I provided quotes from a Senator and the editor from Reagan's dairy.

    Republicans say that eliminating regulations will increase revenue. They've been saying this for at least 30 years. That doesn't make it true. It wasn't true when Reagan was forced to raise taxes. Why don't you want to believe that Reagan raised taxes 11 times?
     
  18. NewdestinyX macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    #218
    Because it's not true.. LOL. Wikipedia is able to be edited by any human on the planet. It is never an authoritative source - nor is an opinion show like NPR.. I don't care if they got Nancy Reagan herself giving an opinion about her husband's tax policies. Provide actual ECONOMIC numbers from authoritative sources proving that de-regulation didn't/doesn't work.. and then we can have a debate. Why haven't you responded to my 'proof' showing evidence that it DOES work?? Have you even taken the time to read them?
     
  19. duffman9000 macrumors 68000

    duffman9000

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Location:
    Orange County
    #219
    Why are you moving the goal posts again? I said I directly contradicted what you said about tax cuts and you just don't like the facts. Instead, you try to change the subject.
     
  20. NewdestinyX macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    #220
    I haven't changed any subject nor moved a goal post. From the beginning I said I hate the sourcing game played on these forums because people don't accept NOR OFTEN offer authoritative sources. I have offered 'authoritative' scholarly writings on the topic of deregulation working to aid growth and showed where Trump has issued deregulation EO's.. Put 2+2 together, please, Duffman. I have made my case - proved it - and as I suspected - you just won't accept it - because of your political bias. You offer a biographer 3rd party interview on a well-known Leftist radio station as your proof and you ask me to take you seriously? This is why I don't do the sourcing thing. We're done here. This is just laughable.

    It's a fact, gang, deregulation works to aid growth - to various degrees in different countries as my OECD paper shows - but in America it has worked in the past (to varying degrees) and it's working now. You may choose to believe the authoritative sources or not.. But at least they're scholarly - not opinion pieces.
     
  21. duffman9000 macrumors 68000

    duffman9000

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Location:
    Orange County
    #221
    Did you offer anything to disprove that Reagan didn't raise taxes?
    Did you offer anything to prove the following?

    Every time? Really? Why was Reagan forced to raise taxes if cutting taxes raised more revenue than it's projected loss every time?
     
  22. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #222
    Their grand plan of blowing up the deficit so they can then whine that they have to cut social programs to offset the escalating debt. Paul Ryan has stated that is the goal for next year so he's already trying to put the plan in place.

    Do you have a source for that? I haven't seen that anywhere. Where are you looking? Sure hope its not a conspiracy theory website.

    Here's what you said earlier:

    You were implying in that post that everything was due to Trump EO's, (especially the two for one which I asked you about and you never answered or explained why that is the biggest factor, when I don't even think Trump has put a new additional regulation in place. So what is being double eliminated?)

    Thus you are changing the story a bit. So if not Obama in any way, and not Trump all the way, then what factors?

    How is it a political move by the left when at least some, if not all, of the women have said they are Republicans?

    I'd prefer an independent source/study, not the one claiming their ideas are the best. That is circular logic.
     
  23. NewdestinyX macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    #223
    The later raises came nowhere close to undoing the unprecedented growth. My superlative 'always' set me up for am almost takedown there.. Still you can't call Regan's presidency a failure in proving deregulation is tied to growth - which is what you were trying to do there. You created a a straw man argument there.. as I never claimed Reagan never RAISED taxes. I claimed that lowering taxes and deregulation ALWAYS works to create growth which brings in more revenue. I still stand by the claim and you haven't disproved it even remotely - because you have no authoritative source and you mounted a red herring argument AND a straw man - Reagan raising taxes later.
    --- Post Merged, Dec 7, 2017 ---
    I couldn't care less what you'd 'prefer'. I knew you only asked for a source to ultimately move the goal post. You Libs (and others) do that all the time here. That's why sourcing is a waste. And I offered '3' sources. All scholarly. I'll bet you haven't read a word of even one. Your true colors are showing, MadeTheSwitch. Partisan hack-ism. So common on these topics. It remains a 'proven fact' that Trump's deregulation EO is part of the equation in this expanded growth. Can't attribute that to Obama. I acknowledged - coming out of the recession and getting the auto industry back on the ground is something we can say thank you to Obama for. He did walk us back from the brink. But then he got stuck under 2% growth for the remainder of his Presidency.. something you Libs and he referred to as 'the new normal'. That has turned out to be nonsense. There is a one to one correlation FACTUALLY and SPECIFICALLY laid out in my sources to the Trump effect. It's early.. I'll grant that.. but if this keeps up - the tax bill won't cost anywhere near 1T in added defecit.
     
  24. duffman9000 macrumors 68000

    duffman9000

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Location:
    Orange County
    #224
    My argument wasn't a straw man anything. Furthermore, what you said initially is not even close to what you're claiming to have said now. Now you just want to change your story because you were wrong.
     
  25. NewdestinyX, Dec 7, 2017
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2017

    NewdestinyX macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    #225
    But the Libs will still find a way to spin it as gloom and doom. Right now I'm loving all this 'winning' Trump promised. It's a good day to be on the winning side.
    --- Post Merged, Dec 7, 2017 ---
    My story hasn't changed a bit. You've posted my words several times. So you can see what I actually said. Revenue has ALWAYS increased. That's a fact. No change in my story. What happened LATER in Reagan's presidency is a 'side argument' and can not be construed as a failure of early policies. He had to raise taxes because it become harder and harder to keep us safe with the mounting fights around the world.. Nothing at all to do with deregulation not working in the first term. You are wrong in your analysis.. not I.

    Here are my original words..
    [[Because tax cuts (for all - but especially corporations and pass-throughs), every time in history that it’s been done, under Reagan and under Bush the junior, has raised more revenue than its projected loss. Simple fact of history.]]

    I then later restated it this way:

    [[I claimed that lowering taxes and deregulation ALWAYS works to create growth which brings in more revenue. ]]

    Both consistent and true statements. When Reagan cut the taxes and deregulated in his first time it sparked the greatest growth in our economy in the prior 50 years. Fact.

    Do you actually know WHY he raised the taxes later (and I never claimed he didn't).
     

Share This Page