Liberal BOMBSHELL #2,365!!!

[CCBlackhatter]

I know the left loves pointing to the successes of Obama job creation.

Apparently they weren't to thrilled with him creating 1,500 coal mining jobs from 2009-2011 (that was in West Virginia alone).

Like I said dumb mfers...

[DBP66]

24 minutes ago, CCBlackhatter said:

So we should perpetuate the unemployment of 76,000 persons?

 

what does that have to do,with changing environmental regulations Worldcitizen was talking about??....not a dam thing....how did Obama create so many coal jobs with such tough environmental standards??....

76,000?....try again....dumb M'fer.....

[Guest LOSer]

3 hours ago, GardenStateBaller said:

ISIS ruled Mosul and other key cities. No more. Exterminated. 

The Mosul offensive started in October.

Again, something that Trump has nothing to do with.

[Guest LOSer]

3 hours ago, CCBlackhatter said:

You're a dumb motherfucker if you think Trump is looking to move completely away from clean industry sources.

Trump pulled out of the Paris Climate deal and has appointed the most anti-environment EPA Director in history.

But now we're going to give him credit for clean jobs?

Sure, pal.

[Guest LOSer]

1 hour ago, CCBlackhatter said:

So we should perpetuate the unemployment of 76,000 persons?

No, the free market will do that.

Trump is selling out to 50,000 people in a dying industry.

It's absurd.

[Guest LOSer]

1 hour ago, CCBlackhatter said:

Apparently they weren't to thrilled with him creating 1,500 coal mining jobs from 2009-2011 (that was in West Virginia alone).

Apparently he created them while trying to destroy the coal industry.

Which is to say that he didn't sell out a growing new industry (clean energy) for a dying one (coal).

[stanscript]

12 hours ago, Blueliner said:

Clean Energy stocks model up 13.2%, 2% over it's benchmark (Renewable Energy World)...all other major models reporting the same.

US GDP up 3.5 % since Nov. (bureau of stats)

U6 Unemployment down from 9.4 to 8.0% since Nov. (bureau of stats)

U3 down to 4.4% (bureau of stats)

Gap between black and white workers at a historical low (Washington Post)

Stock market over 21K (Google

Southern border apprehensions down 61% since Nov (Homeland Security)

....the list goes on and on.  But hey, he grabbed that pussy and is in discussion with the Russians regarding a nice fondue recipe.  Rage on, monks!

The thing that inspired me to post this was that I was looking at the U3, and all the stat outlets were reporting it was low. THEN CNN (gasp) attempts the shell game and trying to make Trump look bad states "the real indicator of unemployment is the U6 (which it is). And that is at 8.0. So unemployment is not as low as it may seem".  Well, they conveniently forget to state (another gasp) that number is down from 9.4 from when DJT took over in Nov.  

Comical.

 

 

 

What liberals have learned from posts like this:

 

First, be suspicious of laundry lists without links.

Second, while some of the lists start out with mostly or somewhat true assertions, the veracity of the

statements go south pretty quickly.

Third, they use dubious sources. 

Fourth, this one doesn’t even start out being truthful.

Let’s examine the first two assertions:

Clean Energy stocks model up 13.2%, 2% over it's benchmark (Renewable Energy World)...all other major models reporting the same. (Couldn’t find a source for this. Care to supply a link?)

But let’s assume there is a link supporting your claim. That’s still not a plus for Trump.

Energy use is very close to a zero-sum game. Trump supports oil and coal production over wind (think of his golf courses here), solar and natural gas. When clean/renewable energy competes effectively with fossil fuels, fossil fuels take it in the shorts.  Do you think that the coal and oil industry along with RUSSIA want competition from clean/renewable sources?  (In the infamous words of Mike Pence…”Of course not”) The conclusion is that any increase in clean energy stocks is in spite of Trump not because of him, unless of course you actually believe there is such a thing as “clean” coal.

US GDP up 3.5 % since Nov. (bureau of stats) (Link?)

First, the US Real GDP would be on a link from the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), which is part of the Department of Commerce, not the Bureau of Stats (although that sounds pretty official).

Second, the BEA doesn’t report month to month but quarterly, so there is no way you could have started with November.

Third, President Obama was President in November, December and most of January. 

Fourth, there is no information for quarter #2 (Q2) so Trump could only be responsible for 1/3 of January, all of February and March from Q1.  Most people wouldn’t give credit nor blame to an incoming President for at least a few months or until his first budget took effect which hasn’t even been written, let alone starting to take effect.

Fifth, the number that BEA uses as most important is the Real GDP which for 2017 Q1 is 1.4%

Note: There is a difference between Real GDP and Nominal GDP.  Real GDP adjusts for inflation. Nominal GDP doesn’t account for inflation.  The BEA uses Real GDP thus comparing numbers after adjusted for inflation.  Without adjusting for inflation a millionaire in 2017 would be as rich as a millionaire in 1930 and we all know that isn’t so.  The BEA uses Real GDP which will always (as long as there is no deflation) be lower than Nominal GDP. Those that want to falsely promote the health of the economy will use Nominal GDP.  Those that want to accurately portray the economy will use Real GDP.

 

Below is a cut and paste from the BEA and the link is below in blue print. 

“Real gross domestic product (GDP) increased at an annual rate of 1.4 percent in the first quarter of 2017

(table 1), according to the "third" estimate released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the fourth

quarter of 2016, real GDP increased 2.1 percent.”

https://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm

or Google search for “BEA 17-32”

 

To get to 3.5%, did you add 1.4% (Q1 2017) + 2.1% (Q4 2016) to get 3.5% and call it “starting

From November?” If so, that is so wrong.  Even averaging those two numbers (1.75%) would be

wrong but at least it would be closer to the actual annual real GDP rate for October 2016 thru

March 2017. There is no way the annual Real GDP will be 3.5% for Trump’s first six months or

first year, regardless of when you to start.

 

Sixth, the quarters are compared in a “seasonally adjusted manner”…Q1 2016 is compared to

Q1 2017. How you could come up with 3.5% since November? That is taking

cherry-picking to a new art form.

 

I’m not going to waste my time trying to source and comment on the rest. 

Suffice to say that you need to do some serious research before you put out a laundry list

like this and expect anyone to be feeble minded enough to bite on it hook, line and

sinker.

 

When you post in the future use verifiable links “not sources.”  Sources are usually a dead give

away that something is fishy.

 

U6 Unemployment down from 9.4 to 8.0% since Nov. (bureau of stats)

U3 down to 4.4% (bureau of stats)

Gap between black and white workers at a historical low (Washington Post)

Stock market over 21K (Google

Southern border apprehensions down 61% since Nov (Homeland Security)

....the list goes on and on.  But hey, he grabbed that pussy and is in discussion with the Russians regarding a nice fondue recipe.  Rage on, monks!

The thing that inspired me to post this was that I was looking at the U3, and all the stat outlets were reporting it was low. THEN CNN (gasp) attempts the shell game and trying to make Trump look bad states "the real indicator of unemployment is the U6 (which it is). And that is at 8.0. So unemployment is not as low as it may seem".  Well, they conveniently forget to state (another gasp) that number is down from 9.4 from when DJT took over in Nov.  

Comical.

 

[Guest LOSer]

Just now, GardenStateBaller said:

The top three ISIS leaders are dead now. They weren't back in 2016. 

The top 3 leaders in ISIS are killed all the time. Then 3 new ones step in.

Guys like Al-Masri and others were killed years ago. In fact ISIS traces it's roots back to the Iraqi Resistance which saw dozens of leaders killed by the Bush and Obama Administrations.

The guys you mentioned were all killed due to an offensive that was started in October. Again, something Trump has nothing to do with.

Your understanding of the world is childish and ignorant.

[Blueliner]

10 hours ago, Sportsnut said:

O.K. On point 1, you lose. You readily admit the trend was downward.

The stock market has been hitting new highs since the middle of Obama's first 

Germany and the rest of the world has less respect for us now and surely does not trust us as much. 

Border crossings and attempted crossings have been going down for years now. Some wondered what was going on as there was an large number of Mexican nationals trying to get back to Mexico. Due to legislative actions. 

Point #1 has been going downward. But we all know that out of the 10 million jobs Obama created, about half were freakin' service jobs...wage jobs.  The fast food industry was trying to unionize for Christ's sake. What the eff does that tell ya.

Point #2  Not highs like THIS.

#3  a.) I could give a rats ass about Germany when it relates to this country. And I was born there. b.)You have zero clue as to what Germany or any other country for that matter thinks about Trump or the USA. You guys are so quick to act like you know what other countries think. You are a poster on a HS Football forum. 

#4 Border APPREHENSIONS are up 61% since November. All's I know is I don't see 100 Mexicans out in front of the Home Depot anymore. 

[Blueliner]

10 hours ago, Sportsnut said:

The Stock market has made a jump of 140% since 09'. There were 11.5 million jobs created under Obama. There have been 76 consecutive months of job growth. A record. 

Stocks didn't jump like THIS under Obama.  And the whole point is that you liberal clowns thought the frickin' world was going to implode after Trump trounced Kill-liar-y like the criminal that she is. 

And like I've already said. 50% of Hussein's jobs were in the service industry. All of those illegals have to work somewhere, I guess.

[Blueliner]

9 hours ago, DBP66 said:

clean energy?....who needs that...we're bringing back the coal industry....all 50,000 jobs....you can thank Obama and Co. for our clean enery industry that Trump threw out the window to go back to coal...

unemployment wasn't an issue in Nov....

there were more Mexicans leaving America prior to the election than entering...

...I believe the republicans only [assed one bill so far since they took control...a V.A. Bill both sides supported....other than that they have been the gang the can't shoot straight....they can't get out of their own way and Donny's Russia scandal  has taken this gov't. at a stand still...and that's all on them...they can't blame the big bad media for their dysfunction....but they still try

but everything is peachy...Jr. is a good guy....and "almost everyone would take that meeting"......I wonder what Donny shot today on the course?....SAD.....

Don't even know where to start with this.

[Blueliner]

7 hours ago, LOSer said:

And those stats were all good when Obama left office and Trump hasn't enacted any policies that would have affected them.

They have literally nothing to do with Trump.

You're incredibly ignorant.

They have everything to do with Trump. He's the sitting (your) president of the US. They'll never admit it but even the leftist elite commies have confidence as to where this country is headed. The poor liberal sheep are the ones being left out in the cold. Keep raging, though.

[Blueliner]

7 hours ago, LOSer said:

What are you talking about?

The "left" has spent the last 8 years explaining to dopes like you that the unemployment rate was going down. Nobody in their right mind would claim that it was 35% right now.

(Trump actually said the real unemployment rate was almost 42% during the campaign)

Only a complete idiot like you would think I was actually serious with the 35%.  The only reason that unemployment was going down under the leftist extremist regime is because McDonalds and effing Jack in the Box franchises were hiring unskilled labor. 50%...look that number up, smart guy, and get back to me.   Obama counted the service industry as REAL jobs. And then their income to the household is supplemented by government assistance.  I saw that shit everyday out here. Yeah. that's good for long term economic health.  You're a tool.

[Blueliner]

7 hours ago, LOSer said:

This is voodoo economic analysis.

Trump hasn't enacted any policies. So how could his non-existent policies affect the market?

The stock market went up 200% under Obama. Under Trump it's up, what? 10%?

So the stock market was skyrocketing under Obama and the unemployment rate was falling like a rock but since the trends have continued for 6 months after he left now it's all Trump's doing?

You are the reason why this country is so ignorant. People like you refuse to educate yourself.

You're so dumb. Your delusional leftist BS is the reason why this country will thankfully head back in the right direction. The stock market was so low when Obama took over that YOU could've raised the stocks 100%. FYI Trumps 11.5% increase in his first 100 days is the 2nd highest only to JKF. Trump is going to make REAL differences...unlike the community organizer.

[Blueliner]

7 hours ago, LOSer said:

Exactly what gives you the idea that Germany now respects us?

Because we have a circus clown as President?

People like you said the same thing about Bush. That since we had an idiot in office that now people would respect us.

There's literally no truth to anything you say.

Let me rephrase that.  Germany will fall in line like they always do. I could give a shit if Germany likes us.  They're one of the main reasons as to why the world is going to shit. Thankfully, Trump isn't going to let sissy fucking countries like Germany dictate what we do here.

Truth? Like your alternative "facts" mean anything to people in the actual real world.  Pull your head out of your ass, clown.  On second thought, dont.

[Blueliner]

2 hours ago, stanscript said:

 

What liberals have learned from posts like this:

 

First, be suspicious of laundry lists without links.

Second, while some of the lists start out with mostly or somewhat true assertions, the veracity of the

statements go south pretty quickly.

Third, they use dubious sources. 

Fourth, this one doesn’t even start out being truthful.

Let’s examine the first two assertions:

Clean Energy stocks model up 13.2%, 2% over it's benchmark (Renewable Energy World)...all other major models reporting the same. (Couldn’t find a source for this. Care to supply a link?)

But let’s assume there is a link supporting your claim. That’s still not a plus for Trump.

Energy use is very close to a zero-sum game. Trump supports oil and coal production over wind (think of his golf courses here), solar and natural gas. When clean/renewable energy competes effectively with fossil fuels, fossil fuels take it in the shorts.  Do you think that the coal and oil industry along with RUSSIA want competition from clean/renewable sources?  (In the infamous words of Mike Pence…”Of course not”) The conclusion is that any increase in clean energy stocks is in spite of Trump not because of him, unless of course you actually believe there is such a thing as “clean” coal.

US GDP up 3.5 % since Nov. (bureau of stats) (Link?)

First, the US Real GDP would be on a link from the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), which is part of the Department of Commerce, not the Bureau of Stats (although that sounds pretty official).

Second, the BEA doesn’t report month to month but quarterly, so there is no way you could have started with November.

Third, President Obama was President in November, December and most of January. 

Fourth, there is no information for quarter #2 (Q2) so Trump could only be responsible for 1/3 of January, all of February and March from Q1.  Most people wouldn’t give credit nor blame to an incoming President for at least a few months or until his first budget took effect which hasn’t even been written, let alone starting to take effect.

Fifth, the number that BEA uses as most important is the Real GDP which for 2017 Q1 is 1.4%

Note: There is a difference between Real GDP and Nominal GDP.  Real GDP adjusts for inflation. Nominal GDP doesn’t account for inflation.  The BEA uses Real GDP thus comparing numbers after adjusted for inflation.  Without adjusting for inflation a millionaire in 2017 would be as rich as a millionaire in 1930 and we all know that isn’t so.  The BEA uses Real GDP which will always (as long as there is no deflation) be lower than Nominal GDP. Those that want to falsely promote the health of the economy will use Nominal GDP.  Those that want to accurately portray the economy will use Real GDP.

 

Below is a cut and paste from the BEA and the link is below in blue print. 

“Real gross domestic product (GDP) increased at an annual rate of 1.4 percent in the first quarter of 2017

(table 1), according to the "third" estimate released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the fourth

quarter of 2016, real GDP increased 2.1 percent.”

https://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm

or Google search for “BEA 17-32”

 

To get to 3.5%, did you add 1.4% (Q1 2017) + 2.1% (Q4 2016) to get 3.5% and call it “starting

From November?” If so, that is so wrong.  Even averaging those two numbers (1.75%) would be

wrong but at least it would be closer to the actual annual real GDP rate for October 2016 thru

March 2017. There is no way the annual Real GDP will be 3.5% for Trump’s first six months or

first year, regardless of when you to start.

 

Sixth, the quarters are compared in a “seasonally adjusted manner”…Q1 2016 is compared to

Q1 2017. How you could come up with 3.5% since November? That is taking

cherry-picking to a new art form.

 

I’m not going to waste my time trying to source and comment on the rest. 

Suffice to say that you need to do some serious research before you put out a laundry list

like this and expect anyone to be feeble minded enough to bite on it hook, line and

sinker.

 

When you post in the future use verifiable links “not sources.”  Sources are usually a dead give

away that something is fishy.

 

U6 Unemployment down from 9.4 to 8.0% since Nov. (bureau of stats)

U3 down to 4.4% (bureau of stats)

Gap between black and white workers at a historical low (Washington Post)

Stock market over 21K (Google

Southern border apprehensions down 61% since Nov (Homeland Security)

....the list goes on and on.  But hey, he grabbed that pussy and is in discussion with the Russians regarding a nice fondue recipe.  Rage on, monks!

The thing that inspired me to post this was that I was looking at the U3, and all the stat outlets were reporting it was low. THEN CNN (gasp) attempts the shell game and trying to make Trump look bad states "the real indicator of unemployment is the U6 (which it is). And that is at 8.0. So unemployment is not as low as it may seem".  Well, they conveniently forget to state (another gasp) that number is down from 9.4 from when DJT took over in Nov.  

Comical.

 

I'll just say that I stand by my stats. If the effin' bureaus are incorrect or the publications are publishing BS, then that's on them.  Go look them up...I gave you the sources.

[Blueliner]

5 hours ago, HawgGoneIt said:

Haha!

 

Los, you know this is what America looks like when it's great, man. 

It wasn't great 7 months ago and all those type numbers were fake news, but for some reason those numbers from all of those fake ass media places are real now and it's the one damn thing that they have reported that wasn't fake this year. 

It's lunacy man. It's the only real explanation. 

You clowns don't get that it's the looney left who said the effing world was going to end under Trump. Life is good for anyone not a delusional leftist rage monkey.

[Blueliner]

3 hours ago, LOSer said:

Trump pulled out of the Paris Climate deal and has appointed the most anti-environment EPA Director in history.

But now we're going to give him credit for clean jobs?

Sure, pal.

The point is, numbnuts, is that clean energy isn't DECREASING as the looney left has preaching during their collective sky-is-falling campaign. Effing idiots.

[stanscript]

1 hour ago, Blueliner said:

I'll just say that I stand by my stats. If the effin' bureaus are incorrect or the publications are publishing BS, then that's on them.  Go look them up...I gave you the sources.

You gave me the sources but not the links.  I gave you the links.  You can pull a number off a page but unless you understand and explain what it means it's easy to claim that it is something that it isn't.  You could also make up a somewhat reasonable number and claim it as true and nobody could dispute it.  For example, I don't think you can find a link anywhere that GDP is up 3.5% since November since they don't report month to month but only quarterly.  The quarters start in January, April, July and October.  Find the link because I tried and couldn't.  

I think you got all these numbers from a source with a distinct point of view that slanted the information to deceive.  If you independently looked up all of them and could list them, I'd be very surprised since you don't or more likely can't supply the GDP link.  Don't you understand why I'm so skeptical about "your" list?

Let me give you an example of how someone could easily fool you and it's actually true.  Last year, Trump claimed that violent crime was increasing faster than at any time in 20 years.  Technically, he was correct.  So, should we be worried?  Not really, violent crime has been dropping since at least 1996 to where it is close to being down from about 640 to 373 per 100,000.  There was a slight uptick in 2015 but violent crime is still down substantially from 1996. The source is the FBI.

The link can be found searching "U.S. News Neuhauser crime rate 20-year low or using the link below:

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-09-26/us-crime-rate-rises-slightly-remains-near-20-year-low

and an even better explanation of Trump's claim using this link:

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/07/dueling-claims-on-crime-trend/

 

[DBP66]

4 hours ago, Blueliner said:

Don't even know where to start with this.

why don't you give it a shot pal?....take your time....relax....go for it...what do you got?

[DBP66]

3 hours ago, stanscript said:

You gave me the sources but not the links.  I gave you the links.  You can pull a number off a page but unless you understand and explain what it means it's easy to claim that it is something that it isn't.  You could also make up a somewhat reasonable number and claim it as true and nobody could dispute it.  For example, I don't think you can find a link anywhere that GDP is up 3.5% since November since they don't report month to month but only quarterly.  The quarters start in January, April, July and October.  Find the link because I tried and couldn't.  

I think you got all these numbers from a source with a distinct point of view that slanted the information to deceive.  If you independently looked up all of them and could list them, I'd be very surprised since you don't or more likely can't supply the GDP link.  Don't you understand why I'm so skeptical about "your" list?

Let me give you an example of how someone could easily fool you and it's actually true.  Last year, Trump claimed that violent crime was increasing faster than at any time in 20 years.  Technically, he was correct.  So, should we be worried?  Not really, violent crime has been dropping since at least 1996 to where it is close to being down from about 640 to 373 per 100,000.  There was a slight uptick in 2015 but violent crime is still down substantially from 1996. The source is the FBI.

The link can be found searching "U.S. News Neuhauser crime rate 20-year low or using the link below:

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-09-26/us-crime-rate-rises-slightly-remains-near-20-year-low

and an even better explanation of Trump's claim using this link:

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/07/dueling-claims-on-crime-trend/

 

in other words he's a B.S.er....

[DBP66]

4 hours ago, Blueliner said:

They have everything to do with Trump. He's the sitting (your) president of the US. They'll never admit it but even the leftist elite commies have confidence as to where this country is headed. The poor liberal sheep are the ones being left out in the cold. Keep raging, though.

why don't yo try reading the news headlines sometimes??...or try buying a clue if you can....the left will keep "raging" as long as Donny and Co. keep LYING...see how that woks??....

[DBP66]

6 hours ago, LOSer said:

Apparently he created them while trying to destroy the coal industry.

Which is to say that he didn't sell out a growing new industry (clean energy) for a dying one (coal).

you're talking way over CC's head...another lost Trump puppy...

[DBP66]

9 hours ago, stanscript said:

 

What liberals have learned from posts like this:

 

First, be suspicious of laundry lists without links.

Second, while some of the lists start out with mostly or somewhat true assertions, the veracity of the

statements go south pretty quickly.

Third, they use dubious sources. 

Fourth, this one doesn’t even start out being truthful.

Let’s examine the first two assertions:

Clean Energy stocks model up 13.2%, 2% over it's benchmark (Renewable Energy World)...all other major models reporting the same. (Couldn’t find a source for this. Care to supply a link?)

But let’s assume there is a link supporting your claim. That’s still not a plus for Trump.

Energy use is very close to a zero-sum game. Trump supports oil and coal production over wind (think of his golf courses here), solar and natural gas. When clean/renewable energy competes effectively with fossil fuels, fossil fuels take it in the shorts.  Do you think that the coal and oil industry along with RUSSIA want competition from clean/renewable sources?  (In the infamous words of Mike Pence…”Of course not”) The conclusion is that any increase in clean energy stocks is in spite of Trump not because of him, unless of course you actually believe there is such a thing as “clean” coal.

US GDP up 3.5 % since Nov. (bureau of stats) (Link?)

First, the US Real GDP would be on a link from the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), which is part of the Department of Commerce, not the Bureau of Stats (although that sounds pretty official).

Second, the BEA doesn’t report month to month but quarterly, so there is no way you could have started with November.

Third, President Obama was President in November, December and most of January. 

Fourth, there is no information for quarter #2 (Q2) so Trump could only be responsible for 1/3 of January, all of February and March from Q1.  Most people wouldn’t give credit nor blame to an incoming President for at least a few months or until his first budget took effect which hasn’t even been written, let alone starting to take effect.

Fifth, the number that BEA uses as most important is the Real GDP which for 2017 Q1 is 1.4%

Note: There is a difference between Real GDP and Nominal GDP.  Real GDP adjusts for inflation. Nominal GDP doesn’t account for inflation.  The BEA uses Real GDP thus comparing numbers after adjusted for inflation.  Without adjusting for inflation a millionaire in 2017 would be as rich as a millionaire in 1930 and we all know that isn’t so.  The BEA uses Real GDP which will always (as long as there is no deflation) be lower than Nominal GDP. Those that want to falsely promote the health of the economy will use Nominal GDP.  Those that want to accurately portray the economy will use Real GDP.

 

Below is a cut and paste from the BEA and the link is below in blue print. 

“Real gross domestic product (GDP) increased at an annual rate of 1.4 percent in the first quarter of 2017

(table 1), according to the "third" estimate released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the fourth

quarter of 2016, real GDP increased 2.1 percent.”

https://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm

or Google search for “BEA 17-32”

 

To get to 3.5%, did you add 1.4% (Q1 2017) + 2.1% (Q4 2016) to get 3.5% and call it “starting

From November?” If so, that is so wrong.  Even averaging those two numbers (1.75%) would be

wrong but at least it would be closer to the actual annual real GDP rate for October 2016 thru

March 2017. There is no way the annual Real GDP will be 3.5% for Trump’s first six months or

first year, regardless of when you to start.

 

Sixth, the quarters are compared in a “seasonally adjusted manner”…Q1 2016 is compared to

Q1 2017. How you could come up with 3.5% since November? That is taking

cherry-picking to a new art form.

 

I’m not going to waste my time trying to source and comment on the rest. 

Suffice to say that you need to do some serious research before you put out a laundry list

like this and expect anyone to be feeble minded enough to bite on it hook, line and

sinker.

 

When you post in the future use verifiable links “not sources.”  Sources are usually a dead give

away that something is fishy.

 

U6 Unemployment down from 9.4 to 8.0% since Nov. (bureau of stats)

U3 down to 4.4% (bureau of stats)

Gap between black and white workers at a historical low (Washington Post)

Stock market over 21K (Google

Southern border apprehensions down 61% since Nov (Homeland Security)

....the list goes on and on.  But hey, he grabbed that pussy and is in discussion with the Russians regarding a nice fondue recipe.  Rage on, monks!

The thing that inspired me to post this was that I was looking at the U3, and all the stat outlets were reporting it was low. THEN CNN (gasp) attempts the shell game and trying to make Trump look bad states "the real indicator of unemployment is the U6 (which it is). And that is at 8.0. So unemployment is not as low as it may seem".  Well, they conveniently forget to state (another gasp) that number is down from 9.4 from when DJT took over in Nov.  

Comical.

 

beautiful post....these Trump clowns need to read Mr. Neo-Con Conservative-Charles Krauthammer's opinion article in today's paper...he's a favorite talking head of the right and Fox news...he' s the "smart" guy at Fox news....

He has finally jumped ship!!...the FIRST GUY with a set of balls on the right to state the obvious and pour out his Trump Kool-Aid....the title of his article today?....

"Bungled collusion IS STILL COLLUSION".....the clowns here need to read the article and staple it to their foreheads so they can remember it.....and stop all their blind support for the clown in charge....

[TheRealCAJ]

5 hours ago, Blueliner said:

I'll just say that I stand by my stats. 

King Orange, stands by Jr too. It doesn't make him any less of an idiot.