Obama tries to take credit for current economy....

Obama had a supermajority his first two years and did nothing with it other than two wasteful stimulus packages and cash for clunkers

 

Trumps not backing down. China conceded

 

Did they now?
That's not what the stock market thought.

 

Well actually most of the time he had 59 votes in the Senate. And there were a few moderate dems in GOP districts to deal with. The stimulus package boosted economic spending, which is always good during a recession. And the cash for clunkers did a bit to get people spending money in the auto industry. And you must not forget the auto bailout and the unemployment benefit extension. Republicans not only suggested not doing these beneficial things, but cutting spending to reduce the deficit. This would have crippled economic spending and made the recession worse.

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-ch...artial-deal-clinched-says-beijing-11573129323

 

https://hbr.org/2009/08/how-cash-for-clunkers-failed-a

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ws...ama8217s-stimulus-five-years-later-1392640078

He and his policies were massive failures.

 

And one can say that same about the GOP investigations of Obama and Hillary during Obama's second term. The Republicans really didn't do much about the economy when Obama was president. They were more interested in getting a Republican president in office.

 

Sorry, but you were proven wrong.

 

Simple math evades them.. maybe it's the counter-intuitive nature of getting more tax revenue by pursuing conservative economic principles..

 

being willfully obtuse isn't really an argument.

 

@Distraff you are mostly right on most of your post and then you throw in a statement, usually a dem talking point, and discredit (in my eyes) the whole post.

 

not sure why you find official BLS data uninformative. It quite clearly shows your claim is complete bullshit.

 

yes, well done on not screwing up what he was handed. Now, if only republicans remembered that they pretended to be fiscal debt hawks just a few short years ago.................

 

These articles mostly just argue that the money was spent inefficiently or we didn't see a great improvement in the economy as a result. However, with the condition the economy was in, just not crashing was a good result. And no matter how the money is spent, simply spending money helped prop up the economy.

 

Some of those democrat talking points are correct or have a grain of truth to them. You should try listening to their talking points and find the truth in them.

 

And so it follows, why take a chance on someone unknown if Trump is doing well, maintaining and improving Obama's economy?

 

Because despite the fact the economy is doing fairly well, he is running trillion dollar deficits, and is extremely unpopular. Not to mention he has been impeached.

 

His stimulus was a failure by his own measure and his own admittance it was supposed to hold unemployment to 8% and then rapidly fall but instead it soared to 10% and stayed over 8% for the next three years.

All he cash for clunkers did was take good used cars off the market that the lower incomes desperately need for transportation forcing them to spend money they would have spent on other things on more expensive cars.

 

Odd, and yet donnie is trying to steal credit for that failure; despite the objective evidence.

But this is economics, not bankruptcy don's strong suit

 

The trade deals are being signed and China cutting it's tarriffs and we are lifting ours do you support that? Just announced a lifting of tariffs on aircraft parts. Trump has been proposing budget cuts do you support those?

 

That 8% max projection greatly underestimated the economic collapse. The stimulus took effect in Feb 2009, but unemployment was already 8.3% at that time. It couldn't have held unemployment below 8%, because unemployment was already above 8% before it took effect. Only 185 billion was spent in 2009 and even fewer in the first three months. It was simply impossible for it to magically stop any jobs from ever being lost during the economic collapse.

 

The new NAFTA, basically the same as the old nafta.

Lifting of tariffs is temporary (one year, look it up).

Still got a long way to go to make up for the roughly $400 billion its cost us so far. Expected to cost every US household $1277 in 2020.

Why donnie was a massive business failure

 

I've heard them.. ad nauseum.. Every good lie has a grain of truth in it, That's what I was saying about Democrt Talking Points..

 

You are free to call whatever you want a lie I guess. But that doesn't make you right.

 

I wouldn't expect anything other then that from you ¯\_(º¸º)_/¯