What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Will Trump get reelected in 2020? (2019 version) (1 Viewer)

Will Trump get reelected

  • Yes

    Votes: 76 51.0%

  • No

    Votes: 73 49.0%
  • Total voters
    149
Don't Noonan said:
8 years Obama was in office.  Not one year year with annual GDP growth above 3%.  A feat so bad it has never happened before.  Thank God Trump was elected as Hillary wanted to continue Obama's policies.
Click to expand...
Again...your bolded does r match what Phantom said.

PhantomJB said:
All this Obama/Trump impact on the economy debate is pure BS.

Bernanke, Paulson & Co. spurred the recovery beginning with TARP, then QE infinity. The Fed's been on a roll ever since.

The only impact the presidents have had is Obama/Democratic Congress keeping it going by burying the Simpson-Bowles Act...then Trump and the GOP with their tax cuts.

Whoever is sitting president when the national debt implodes the economy is going to take the blame, just like GW.

Until then, presidents will just keep riding the train until the music stops. We are addicted.
Click to expand...

 
Look, I Republicans believe in pro growth policies like lower taxes and less regulation.  If you support Obama's redistribution of wealth policies you are giving up some growth in hopes it helps the poor.  I believe the poor are in better shape under Trump with unemployment levels where they are at due to pro business policies allowing them to hire more people. 

The Fed has been raising rates the past year due to the economy doing well.  They are the wild card.

National debt will be an issue that we will need to deal with for sure.

 
Unemployment levels that are again at the same trends they were following during Obama’s administration.  

 
Don't Noonan said:
Look, I Republicans believe in pro growth policies like lower taxes and less regulation. 
Click to expand...
IMO lowering taxes is only pro-growth a) when they are historically high to begin with and therefore stifling growth and b) when we are not buried in deficits and a national debt crisis.

In Trump's case, cutting taxes did not spur growth because the use of those funds was primarily for immediate consumption and corporate stock buybacks. Had they been used for capital investment, I might agree with you (over the long term).

Regarding regulation...the EPA, Clean Air and Clean Water Acts were enacted under Richard Nixon. These are good for America. Nixon was a Republican, I think.

 
sho nuff said:
And anyone with a clue understand where the economy was when Obama took over and where it was when he left.

  Trying to compare the two from where they started is laughable.
Click to expand...
To be fair...if you're going to give Obama this much credit then GW should get credit for approving TARP.  As well as Clinton blame for his Freddie and Fannie housing/lending policies that pretty much started the whole thing.

 
Don't Noonan said:
National debt will be an issue that we will need to deal with for sure.
Click to expand...
Then how can you support Trump? 

Im dead serious about this because I keep encountering this disconnect with conservatives. You guys continually act concerned about the debt, yet you keep voting for people that increase it. You keep voting against people who have successfully reduced it by raising taxes and/or cutting military spending. 

So does this issue really mean something to you or is it just a complete sham? 

 
PhantomJB said:
To be fair...if you're going to give Obama this much credit then GW should get credit for approving TARP.  As well as Clinton blame for his Freddie and Fannie housing/lending policies that pretty much started the whole thing.
Click to expand...
Bush didn’t understand TARP; he went along because he was forced to do it. It was largely Obama’s show. But the person most responsible for TARP was Nancy Pelosi. All the conservative politicians of the type that Don’t Noonan supports we’re fiercely opposed. 

 
PhantomJB said:
To be fair...if you're going to give Obama this much credit then GW should get credit for approving TARP.  As well as Clinton blame for his Freddie and Fannie housing/lending policies that pretty much started the whole thing.
Click to expand...
Sure and I have not opined in Bush nor did I even give credit to Obama.  Just pointing out where the economy was when he began and when he left.  And trying to compare between that and Trump.

 
PhantomJB said:
IMO lowering taxes is only pro-growth a) when they are historically high to begin with and therefore stifling growth and b) when we are not buried in deficits and a national debt crisis.

In Trump's case, cutting taxes did not spur growth because the use of those funds was primarily for immediate consumption and corporate stock buybacks. Had they been used for capital investment, I might agree with you (over the long term).

Regarding regulation...the EPA, Clean Air and Clean Water Acts were enacted under Richard Nixon. These are good for America. Nixon was a Republican, I think.
Click to expand...
A little early to proclaim the effects of the tax cuts IMO.  Reagan established trickle down worked.  

 
timschochet said:
Then how can you support Trump? 

Im dead serious about this because I keep encountering this disconnect with conservatives. You guys continually act concerned about the debt, yet you keep voting for people that increase it. You keep voting against people who have successfully reduced it by raising taxes and/or cutting military spending. 

So does this issue really mean something to you or is it just a complete sham? 
Click to expand...
Obama reduced the debt?  Come on Tim be real.  I would love for Trump to cut spending but that is a tough thing to do when Dems keep adding entitlements.  Speaking of, if you are serious about the debt how could any person consider voting for a socialist like Bernie who wants free college and healthcare?  What a joke.

 
timschochet said:
Bush didn’t understand TARP; he went along because he was forced to do it. It was largely Obama’s show. But the person most responsible for TARP was Nancy Pelosi. All the conservative politicians of the type that Don’t Noonan supports we’re fiercely opposed. 
Click to expand...
I don't deny Pelosi stepped up, as well. But I'll take Hank Paulson's word over yours, thank you very much.

"I'd often found the political realities of Washington frustrating, but I had also met politicians willing to make unpopular decisions to serve the greater good. No one showed more courage than President Bush, who not only unstintingly supported me but set aside ideology, and often the preferences of his own staff, to do what needed to be done."

p.434. On the Brink, Hank Paulson, 2010, Grand Central Publishing

 
Don't Noonan said:
A little early to proclaim the effects of the tax cuts IMO.  Reagan established trickle down worked.  
Click to expand...
I don't disagree there can be a time lag for tax cuts, but only if they are used for investment purposes or unleashing pent-up consumer demand. Also, there is a big difference in the economic, fiscal and monetary environment that exists now and when Reagan's tax cuts were implemented. 

 
Don't Noonan said:
Obama reduced the debt?  Come on Tim be real.  I would love for Trump to cut spending but that is a tough thing to do when Dems keep adding entitlements.  Speaking of, if you are serious about the debt how could any person consider voting for a socialist like Bernie who wants free college and healthcare?  What a joke.
Click to expand...
Let’s break this down: 

1. Once Obama was allowed to partially end the Bush  tax cuts, the annual deficit did go down. That’s a fact. Of course he didn’t reduce the total debt; to do that you’d have to eliminate the annual deficit altogether and no President has done that since Clinton. But Obama pushed the deficit down from about 700 billion to 400 billion; Trump, by cutting taxes and increasing military spending, has it back to over a trillion again. 

2. Your comment about entitlements suggests to me, no offense, that you are either ignorant about government spending or not serious about this subject. You could eliminate all of the “entitlements” that Democrats have imposed, outside of Social Security and Medicare, and you wouldn’t make a dent in the annual deficit. In order to do that, you have to either raise taxes, or make significant cuts to the military or Social Security or Medicare. Trump has cut taxes and increased military spending so again I have to ask if this issue really means anything to you. 

3. I will vote for the Democratic candidate, whoever that is, because the opponent is Donald Trump. If it’s Bernie Sanders (which I doubt) I have no fear of his spending program because he’ll never get it through Congress. He may be able to raise taxes, but if you’re truly concerned about the debt you should regard that as a good thing. Are you truly concerned about the debt???

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
Let’s break this down: 

1. Once Obama was allowed to partially end the Trump tax cuts, the annual deficit did go down. That’s a fact. Of course he didn’t reduce the total debt; to do that you’d have to eliminate the annual deficit altogether and no President has done that since Clinton. But Obama pushed the deficit down from about 700 billion to 400 billion; Trump, by cutting taxes and increasing military spending, has it back to over a trillion again. 

2. Your comment about entitlements suggests to me, no offense, that you are either ignorant about government spending or not serious about this subject. You could eliminate all of the “entitlements” that Democrats have imposed, outside of Social Security and Medicare, and you wouldn’t make a dent in the annual deficit. In order to do that, you have to either raise taxes, or make significant cuts to the military or Social Security or Medicare. Trump has cut taxes and increased military spending so again I have to ask if this issue really means anything to you. 

3. I will vote for the Democratic candidate, whoever that is, because the opponent is Donald Trump. If it’s Bernie Sanders (which I doubt) I have no fear of his spending program because he’ll never get it through Congress. He may be able to raise taxes, but if you’re truly concerned about the debt you should regard that as a good thing. Are you truly concerned about the debt???
Click to expand...
Bush cuts not Trump in #1

 
PhantomJB said:
I don't deny Pelosi stepped up, as well. But I'll take Hank Paulson's word over yours, thank you very much.

"I'd often found the political realities of Washington frustrating, but I had also met politicians willing to make unpopular decisions to serve the greater good. No one showed more courage than President Bush, who not only unstintingly supported me but set aside ideology, and often the preferences of his own staff, to do what needed to be done."

p.434. On the Brink, Hank Paulson, 2010, Grand Central Publishing
Click to expand...
It depends on one’s interpretation. But I like Paulson so I’ll accept yours.  (it’s hard enough to convince anyone here that TARP was a good thing in the first place. I’ve had to argue this with both conservatives and some progressives as well.) 

 
timschochet said:
It depends on one’s interpretation. But I like Paulson so I’ll accept yours.  (it’s hard enough to convince anyone here that TARP was a good thing in the first place. I’ve had to argue this with both conservatives and some progressives as well.) 
Click to expand...
Yes. I struggle with this as well but have come to believe there was truly systemic risk. Only problem is once you take a step down that slippery slope you end up where we are now.  

 
PhantomJB said:
Yes. I struggle with this as well but have come to believe there was truly systemic risk. Only problem is once you take a step down that slippery slope you end up where we are now.  
Click to expand...
We once saved Western Europe with the Marshall Plan. This time we were saving ourselves. 

 
Don't Noonan said:
8 years Obama was in office.  Not one year year with annual GDP growth above 3%.  A feat so bad it has never happened before.  Thank God Trump was elected as Hillary wanted to continue Obama's policies.
Click to expand...
Trump is 0-2 with the “greatest economy ever.”  The tax cut stimulus has worn off and his disasterous trade war is hurting Americans.  If he was going to hit 3% it was in 2018, there’s zero chance it happens in 2019 and then he’ll be 0-3 heading into the election.  All while increasing the deficit almost $3T during a “booming” economy.  What will you say then?

 
James Daulton said:
Trump is 0-2 with the “greatest economy ever.”  The tax cut stimulus has worn off and his disasterous trade war is hurting Americans.  If he was going to hit 3% it was in 2018, there’s zero chance it happens in 2019 and then he’ll be 0-3 heading into the election.  All while increasing the deficit almost $3T during a “booming” economy.  What will you say then?
Click to expand...
Obama increased the debt more than all the other presidents COMBINED

 
JohnnyU said:
Obama increased the debt more than all the other presidents COMBINED
Click to expand...
And?  While that was a negative and still is...you realize the difference betweem spending during a recession and tonget out of one and spending in what Trump calls the best economy ever...and adding debt at an even higher rate than Obama...right?

Also...why does the right that bashed Obama non stop keep bringing up what he  did to try and defend Trump?  If Obama was so bad, shouldn’t Trump not be outdoing him with the stiff that was bad?

 
sho nuff said:
And?  While that was a negative and still is...you realize the difference betweem spending during a recession and tonget out of one and spending in what Trump calls the best economy ever...and adding debt at an even higher rate than Obama...right?

Also...why does the right that bashed Obama non stop keep bringing up what he  did to try and defend Trump?  If Obama was so bad, shouldn’t Trump not be outdoing him with the stiff that was bad?
Click to expand...
How else could they hope to defend Trump?  On the merits of the job he’s doing?

Hahahahahahahaha

 
sho nuff said:
And?  While that was a negative and still is...you realize the difference betweem spending during a recession and tonget out of one and spending in what Trump calls the best economy ever...and adding debt at an even higher rate than Obama...right?

Also...why does the right that bashed Obama non stop keep bringing up what he  did to try and defend Trump?  If Obama was so bad, shouldn’t Trump not be outdoing him with the stiff that was bad?
Click to expand...
You have an answer for everything.  Mr. deflector.

 
JohnnyU said:
You have an answer for everything.  Mr. deflector.
Click to expand...
I accurately discussed your post (and took it down pretty easily as did another poster)...where you brought up Obama rather than being able to discuss Trump.  And you are calling me Mr. Deflector.

Thanks for the laugh.

 
JohnnyU said:
Obama increased the debt more than all the other presidents COMBINED
Click to expand...
You’re repeating talking points but I don’t believe you’re really thinking about them. 

You’re correct of course; mostly due to the stimulus package in the first year, combined with the continuing Bush tax cuts, Obama increased the debt by 9 trillion over 8 years. But once the stimulus was done, and the tax cut was partially removed, the level really slowed as Obama managed to shrink the annual deficit. 

In only 2 years, President Trump has managed to increase the debt by 4.78 trillion. After his first term, it will likely be in excess of 10 trillion, shattering Obama’s record over twice that time. And at least Obama has the excuse of trying to stimulate a broken economy. Trump came in with a good economy and cut taxes and increased military spending. It’s the single most irresponsible spending spree in American history and it would be hilarious, if it weren’t so damaging to our country, to watch conservatives continue to blindly praise Trump’s spending proclivities.  

 
Don't Noonan said:
A little early to proclaim the effects of the tax cuts IMO.  Reagan established trickle down worked.  
Click to expand...
I'd love a link to a single credible economist out there who is rejecting the notion that the tax cuts have run their course.  By any objective analysis all meaningful impact barely made it through 2018.

 
timschochet said:
You’re correct of course; mostly due to the stimulus package in the first year, combined with the continuing Bush tax cuts, Obama increased the debt by 9 trillion over 8 years. But once the stimulus was done, and the tax cut was partially removed, the level really slowed as Obama managed to shrink the annual deficit. 
Click to expand...
I wouldn't get too carried away with the Obama praise. Something called the Tea Party and GOP congress did keep Obama's spending in check. Who knows what the debt would have been if the Democrats owned both chambers like the first two years.

 
PhantomJB said:
I wouldn't get too carried away with the Obama praise. Something called the Tea Party and GOP congress did keep Obama's spending in check. Who knows what the debt would have been if the Democrats owned both chambers like the first two years.
Click to expand...
You’re correct. 

And notice that the only other time we’ve been able to keep spending down is when Bill Clinton had to work with a Republican Congress. 

The lesson seems to be that if either party gets full control of all branches, spending goes way up. 

 
That being said- Democrats do raise taxes from time to time, while Republicans rarely do, and since neither party is willing to significantly cut spending raising taxes is the only way to reduce the deficit. Therefore it seems to be that the Democrats are the more fiscally responsible party on the whole. 

 
timschochet said:
You’re correct. 

And notice that the only other time we’ve been able to keep spending down is when Bill Clinton had to work with a Republican Congress. 

The lesson seems to be that if either party gets full control of all branches, spending goes way up. 
Click to expand...
Good point. Even under Reagan this was the case. 

 
timschochet said:
That being said- Democrats do raise taxes from time to time, while Republicans rarely do, and since neither party is willing to significantly cut spending raising taxes is the only way to reduce the deficit. Therefore it seems to be that the Democrats are the more fiscally responsible party on the whole. 
Click to expand...
Yeah. Ok. Time for me to go back to watching basketball.

 
PhantomJB said:
Yeah. Ok. Time for me to go back to watching basketball.
Click to expand...
Hey I’m just trying to keep it real. 

Republicans are the better party at talking about being fiscally responsible- but that’s all it is. When it comes to actually cutting stuff they run and hide. 

 
Too early still, but again I say the Dems feel a lot like the GOP going into '16. Too many fractures, too segmented, too many candidates, not one of them that has separated themselves from the pack, or that the party or the media has really committed to yet. And until I see that, I feel confident in Trump winning.

 
ShamrockPride said:
Too early still, but again I say the Dems feel a lot like the GOP going into '16. Too many fractures, too segmented, too many candidates, not one of them that has separated themselves from the pack, or that the party or the media has really committed to yet. And until I see that, I feel confident in Trump winning.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure the Democrats will end up choosing one candidate.

 
timschochet said:
Pretty sure the Democrats will end up choosing one candidate.
Click to expand...
Yes they will choose one, but will they all back whoever it may be? I mean think about how last election went. It seems you now have a seemingly permanent divide between progressives and traditional Dems. If Bernie were to be the candidate, do you see the traditionalists backing him? Or how are you so sure Bernie won't repeat last election where many thought he wasn't entirely behind Clinton?

I think you need all the big names supporting each other (Kamala, Bernie, Warren, Biden, Beto, etc), and I just don't see that happening, at least as it stands at this moment.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ShamrockPride said:
Yes they will choose one, but will they all back whoever it may be? I mean think about how last election went. It seems you now have a seemingly permanent divide between progressives and traditional Dems. If Bernie were to be the candidate, do you see the traditionalists backing him? Or how are you so sure Bernie won't repeat last election where many thought he wasn't entirely behind Clinton?

I think you need all the big names supporting each other (Kamala, Bernie, Warren, Biden, Beto, etc), and I just don't see that happening, at least as it stands at this moment.
Click to expand...
Definitely a worry about the dems coming together. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
Revisiting The Young Turks 2016 Election Meltdown Over Trump's Stunning Victory (7/7/2022 9:35 PST)
Replies
16
Views
454
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
The Hill: Almost 20% Polled Say "Politics" Has Hurt/Ended Friendships & Family Relationships (10/18/22 19:43 PST)
Replies
2
Views
333
tymarsas
T
GordonGekko
Scott Chipman/AALM: Biden's Marijuana Pardons Will Have "No Real Impact Other Than The Headlines” (10/8/22 11:47 PST)
Replies
17
Views
544
parasaurolophus
parasaurolophus

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top