U.S. Politics

[Lone Star]

(2011 to 2013 numbers) $240Million

Except those years reflect Obama's numbers -- the globalist with designs on being POTWorld. The same guy who betrayed American Free Enterprise and Individual Liberty.

Ambassador Haley didn't work for Obama. She took on the UN for 2 years beginning in 2017, and was there at the direction of DJT. Apparently, there was no UN progress over those two years when it came to bias, antisemitism and alleged UN corruption.

The easy part is to go along to get along -- like the rest of the world -- and stupidly continue to pay into it. The hard part is to reject what is unacceptable, cut losses and move on while everyone else puts up with it.

[Lone Star]

Yeah, that's STEADY WINNING.

[Lone Star]

Gee, that coincidence isn't being reported. Wonder why?

[Udon Map]

Gee, that coincidence isn't being reported. Wonder why?

Why? Because it's not true. The term "fake news" comes to mind.

While your graph makes it appear that the market is doing better under Trump, you've shown only the last couple of years of Obama. Here's a parallel timeframe comparison of the last three presidents, showing market performance starting on the first day of each presidency:

See? Looks much different when you compare like timeframes.

And for the idea that the market turned downwards when the Dems won the House, it's simply not so. The S&P closed at a high on September 20th of 2,930.75 and went down from there. 1½ months before the election.

Maybe tone down the spin a little...?


(Source: https://www.macrotrends.net/2324/sp-500 ... chart-data)

[papafarang]

I came across the same info as Udon map , seems some people like to try to manipulate always missing out part of the puzzle hoping no one would notice. as stated fake news, disinformation . funny but if he was Russian he would be classed as part of one of those troll farms trying to interfere with Americans using forums to influence opinions with poor data....presenting fake news , lonestargate

[Lone Star]

And for the idea that the market turned downwards when the Dems won the House, it's simply not so. The S&P closed at a high on September 20th of 2,930.75 and went down from there. 1½ months before the election.

Yes, I know.

I've said all along that the Fed was a major part of it. Just threw that out there when I ran across it, didn't check it out or verify it, and my fans didn't disappoint.

[papafarang]

perception is a funny thing . reading about Tessla opening a mega factory in china , and the next article is about American trade reps groveling to the Chinese government. When your WINNING I though the losers came to you.
smacks of desperation.

[Lone Star]

The US trade delegation arrived in China yesterday in an effort to reach an agreement before the tariff increase deadline of March 1. It is the first of many scheduled meetings between the two sides.

Department of Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross interviewed with CNBC and provides some information regarding the negotiations. He flatly states that the strategy is binary -- either get a deal, or tariffs go up. Ross also expounds on what everyone knows who is studying this: China needs to export to the US many times more than what the US exports to China.



As with NK, cautiously optimistic. China will show their panda personality to the world and their dragon personality to the folks back home.

As Trump would say, "We'll see what happens."

[Lone Star]

More jobs!

STEADY WINNING.

[Udon Map]

And for the idea that the market turned downwards when the Dems won the House, it's simply not so. The S&P closed at a high on September 20th of 2,930.75 and went down from there. 1½ months before the election.

Yes, I know. ... Just threw that out there when I ran across it, didn't check it out or verify it....

You mean you were caught out spreading fake news. Got it.

And what about your proposition that the stock market is doing so much better under Trump than under Obama, now disproven by the correct data? Spreading more fake news?

[Lone Star]

You mean you were caught out spreading fake news. Got it.

No. I posted a chart that I didn't verify. If you want to call it something else, up to you.

And what about your proposition that the stock market is doing so much better under Trump than under Obama, now disproven by the correct data? Spreading more fake news?

The stock market IS doing better under Trump. The numbers are definitely higher than when Bayrack left office. Trump's stock market numbers have been record-setting.

[Lone Star]

Kevin Hassett, Chairman of Trump's Council of Economic Advisors, tries to educate the masses on the economy, China and the shutdown.

Looks like there are reasons to be optimistic all the way around.

[Doodoo]

ANOTHER FIRST DURING THIS ADMINISTRATION

Posted 7 hours ago
Record-Breaking Number Of Americans Want To Get Out Of U.S. Forever
The percentage of Americans wanting to jump ship is markedly higher under the Trump administration than it was under his predecessors.
By Amy Russo



President Donald Trump may have staked his campaign on making America great again, but more citizens than ever before want to get out permanently.

In 2018, 16 percent of Americans said that they would like to move to another country, according to a Gallup poll released Friday.

While that number matches 2017 data and doesn’t stray much from global standards, it remains significantly higher than it was during the presidencies of Barack Obama or George W. Bush. In the Obama administration, 10 percent wanted to jump ship. The figure was 11 percent in the Bush administration.

The divide between men and women is also telling. Since Trump took office, 20 percent of women would like to leave, compared with 13 percent of men.

Full story: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/am ... 5a9830d1cc

-- HUFFINGTON POST 2019-01-08
ANOTHER WIN??????
Sure if you want all the people who are not happy with the direction Mr Trump is leading them to leave




1

[Lone Star]

.


Remember this name.

Judge Amy Coney Barrett.

[Doodoo]

Who am I supposed to remember????????????

[Doodoo]

oh now I remember

On October 5, 2017, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted on a party-line basis of 11–9 to recommend Barrett and report her nomination to the full Senate.[29][30] On October 30, 2017, the Senate invoked cloture by a vote of 54–42.[31] The Senate confirmed her with a vote of 55–43 on October 31, 2017, with three Democrats – Joe Donnelly, Tim Kaine, and Joe Manchin – voting for her.[6] She received her commission on November 2, 2017.[2]
Barrett had been included on President Donald Trump's list of potential Supreme Court nominees since 2017. In July 2018, following the retirement announcement of Anthony Kennedy, she was considered his possible successor,[11][32] though Trump nominated Judge Brett Kavanaugh for the position[33] Barrett is considered to be a possible nominee for future Supreme Court vacancies.[34]

[papafarang]

20190108-015014.jpg

More jobs!

STEADY WINNING.

yes noted that china just reduced their export tariffs on steel . and why a picture of Chinese steel ?

[Lone Star]

... cloture ...

The 60 vote threshold no longer applies regarding cloture, since Democrat Harry Reid changed the confirmation benchmark standards in the Senate (to benefit Obama's appointees). As a result, Trump's judicial appointees can be confirmed with a simple majority: 53-45-2.

I said at the time that Democrats would be doing something that would come back to bite them, but they thought that Hillary would be the next president. Oooops. Democrats are the undisputed Champions of Unintended Consequences. Their diabolical schemes always come back to bite them in the a55.

There are other extremely well qualified Originalists on Trump's short list for SCOTUS, but I anticipate that ACB is at the top. However, political considerations could dictate otherwise, but it is most assuredly going to be a woman if the vacancy occurs due to the retirement of a woman. Whoever it is and regardless of their sex, you can expect another circus of lies and innuendo from LIBs just like we saw with the Kavanaugh hearings. With ACB, I'm sure that LIBs will direct a full-fledged attack on her faith. That said, I'm sure that the new chairman of the committee, Lindsey Graham, will be ready for it.

[Udon Map]

You mean you were caught out spreading fake news. Got it.

No. I posted a chart that I didn't verify. If you want to call it something else, up to you.

It is what it is. When you posted it, you said nothing about not having verified it. That was only when it was identified as fake news and an incomplete picture of what was going on. Then you pulled the "But I didn't verify it" card out of your hat.

And what about your proposition that the stock market is doing so much better under Trump than under Obama, now disproven by the correct data? Spreading more fake news?

The stock market IS doing better under Trump. The numbers are definitely higher than when Bayrack left office. Trump's stock market numbers have been record-setting.

Amazing that you can stick to your story even in the face of the fact that the numbers/graph show that Trump is doing worse than Obama comparing performance since the start of his term.

Sure, if you're going by raw numbers, Trump's doing better. But by raw numbers, he's also doing better than FDR, because when FDR took office, the S&P 500 was around 6.50. But it's the percentage return that people are interested in, of course. Under FDR, the S&P was only up around 6 points for the entire time he was in office. Do I really need to explain the mathematics of raw numbers versus percent to you?

[tamada]

And for the idea that the market turned downwards when the Dems won the House, it's simply not so. The S&P closed at a high on September 20th of 2,930.75 and went down from there. 1½ months before the election.

Yes, I know.

I've said all along that the Fed was a major part of it. Just threw that out there when I ran across it, didn't check it out or verify it, and my fans didn't disappoint.

Sod off you dopey bugger. You had such a hard-on after you found that non-statistic meme, you posted it before 4 o'clock in the bloody morning.

BTW, did you have to get up for a ---- or a w@nk?

(rhetorical question)