Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

TRUMP TO INFINITY AND BEYOND HQ - The Great and Positive Place


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Dickies said:

I don’t recall him promising that we will pay $17M per mile for 79 miles of wall. 

The funding for the project in Texas comes from congressional appropriations and is separate from construction funding authorized via an emergency order by President Trump.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 33.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • knowledge dropper

    2484

  • timschochet

    1845

  • SaintsInDome2006

    1688

  • The General

    1647

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

For anyone who has ever wondered how authoritarians manage to take power in "modern" democracies, here's your first hand evidence that the USA is not immune. Thankfully it appears that the system is h

Following in the footsteps of Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, Friendster, and Google Plus, the Footballguys Forum hereby suspends President Trump's posting privileges. The suspension takes effect immediat

Are we sure it isn't Alamo Landscaping?

6 minutes ago, John Blutarsky said:
9 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

I enjoy the subtle acknowledgment that all of the previous claims about "new" construction was just a lie.

This has been talked about here. First, they had to upgrade some of the current walls and it would take time to get all the necessary permits for new construction.

OK. But Trump claimed on multiple occasions that new wall had already been built. The Fox story would indicate that all of those claims were lies.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, matttyl said:

In my specific example, yes I guess it would be.  But that wasn't his promise of something new and "TRRRIFIC" as Tony the Tiger would say. 

I know. I think the GOP told him they had a plan and he was left without his pants on once he got elected and learned there was nothing. 

It still stands to reason that if the ACA was the single worst piece of legislation this country has ever seen, as I’ve heard many times, that replacing it with the old system would naturally be better. Worrying about political fallout tells me that at the very least there are some merits to the ACA

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dickies said:

I know. I think the GOP told him they had a plan and he was left without his pants on once he got elected and learned there was nothing. 

It still stands to reason that if the ACA was the single worst piece of legislation this country has ever seen, as I’ve heard many times, that replacing it with the old system would naturally be better. Worrying about political fallout tells me that at the very least there are some merits to the ACA

Yes, some people got some stuff for free.  Overturning it would take that away.  It's rare that the government takes back something it has been giving out.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, matttyl said:

Yes, some people got some stuff for free.  Overturning it would take that away.  It's rare that the government takes back something it has been giving out.

Did they really though?  Most people being given bronze plans for free can’t afford to meet the deductible to where the insurance actually kicks in. I think this is the biggest flaw with the ACA. Maybe we should continue this in the ACA thread or drop it since I don’t want to get us both suspended. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dickies said:

Did they really though?  Most people being given bronze plans for free can’t afford to meet the deductible to where the insurance actually kicks in. I think this is the biggest flaw with the ACA. Maybe we should continue this in the ACA thread or drop it since I don’t want to get us both suspended. 

The 20M added to Medicaid don't pay much of anything. 

And most people have subsidized silver plans (that also have CSRs - cost sharing reductions, which lower the deductible and OOP costs).  Here in VA, of the entire BCBS ACA individual block, I think like 85% of them are on exchange and getting at least premiums subsidies, and of those well over 75% are getting CSRs as well (so they have to be on a silver tier plan for that).  75% of 85% is roughly 2/3rds of people, getting not only premium subsidies, but also CSR subsides. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Business Insider again.  They will only come up with one or two conclusions for this result, and they will always be Trump's fault.

Come on guys, know your sources please.   If I post a FOX news account on how this result was due to, I don't know, the democratic promises of giving away the entire US economy if they get elected in 2020, you all would discount it...because of the source.

Do the same here.  Just cause it has the word "business" in it's name, doesn't make it non-biased.

Edited by supermike80
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GoBirds said:

Wait just one second......you are telling me politicians don’t deliver every single promise? Is this new?:o

You make a fantastic point here and I hope everyone pays attention to it, especially the people who are extremely against Democrats.  Both parties like to use certain talking points from each other and use them as fear mongering but we should all know that not every promise made will happen.  In fact, very few promises will actually be made by any President.  This is why I am not concerned about Democrats taking away our guns or turning the US into a communist nation, they won't get it accomplished even if they actually wanted to.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

Business Insider again.  They will only come up with one or two conclusions for this result, and they will always be Trump's fault.

Come on guys, know your sources please.   If I post a FOX news account on how this result was due to, I don't know, the democratic promises of giving away the entire US economy if they get elected in 2020, you all would discount it...because of the source.

Do the same here.  Just cause it has the word "business" in it's name, doesn't make it non-biased.

Since when is Business Insider biased?

https://www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/07D21842-C822-11E9-ABDA-7682C7CD78DA

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

Business Insider again.  They will only come up with one or two conclusions for this result, and they will always be Trump's fault.

Come on guys, know your sources please.   If I post a FOX news account on how this result was due to, I don't know, the democratic promises of giving away the entire US economy if they get elected in 2020, you all would discount it...because of the source.

Do the same here.  Just cause it has the word "business" in it's name, doesn't make it non-biased.

The articles I linked do include commentary, but there are also a number of charts that show things like unemployment rate and income growth through the last couple presidencies. They actually show that things are pretty good, but that they generally aren't a large deviation from pre-existing trends. The article I responded to is a persuasive opinion piece literally drafted by "a senior adviser to Donald J. Trump for President Inc." that intentionally distorts the picture.

Edited by mrip541
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, supermike80 said:
16 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

 

Business Insider again.  They will only come up with one or two conclusions for this result, and they will always be Trump's fault.

Come on guys, know your sources please. 

Sorry, always learning - what’s the deal with BI?

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

OK. But Trump claimed on multiple occasions that new wall had already been built. The Fox story would indicate that all of those claims were lies.

Not really, especially since that footage is some of the same footage that has been discussed in the past. Some of it is even dated August. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

You make a fantastic point here and I hope everyone pays attention to it, especially the people who are extremely against Democrats.  Both parties like to use certain talking points from each other and use them as fear mongering but we should all know that not every promise made will happen.  In fact, very few promises will actually be made by any President.  This is why I am not concerned about Democrats taking away our guns or turning the US into a communist nation, they won't get it accomplished even if they actually wanted to.

None of the Democrats running, to my knowledge, are promising these things.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The left is promising the world knowing they won't deliver. They are simply hoping they can fool enough people in order win beat Trump. Free everything is their motto right now. Don't worry about the increased taxes you have to pay.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, lod001 said:

The left is promising the world knowing they won't deliver. They are simply hoping they can fool enough people in order win beat Trump. Free everything is their motto right now. Don't worry about the increased taxes you have to pay.

Pretty standard tactic in politics, really.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This has less to do with whether or not politicians keep their promises and is more about fear-mongering.  The stock market will crash, all guns will be seized, illegal immigrants will flood the country, the country will turn to  Marxist communism, our military will be eliminated, and we will allow transgenders to use restrooms.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Don't Noonan said:

OMG.  Millennials obviously need better education on this.  Very, very scary thinking about the future if they don't get educated.

Communism isn't inherently some "evil" thing. It's a system of government that works really well in small settings with like-minded members who consent to such form of government (e.g. monasteries are a very positive, real-life example of communism that works). As Aristotle long-ago explained, however, it's a poor form of government on a grand scale because it's very rife to morph into totalitarianism and does not account well for dissenting opinion. 

Edited by Zow
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, lod001 said:

The left is promising the world knowing they won't deliver. They are simply hoping they can fool enough people in order win beat Trump. Free everything is their motto right now. Don't worry about the increased taxes you have to pay.

Do you think this is different than Trump promising to build a wall and have Mexico pay for it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dickies said:

This has less to do with whether or not politicians keep their promises and is more about fear-mongering.  The stock market will crash, all guns will be seized, illegal immigrants will flood the country, the country will turn to  Marxist communism, our military will be eliminated, and we will allow transgenders to use restrooms.

At least two of those things are already happening, so...

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, tonydead said:

At least two of those things are already happening, so...

Which two? I'm guess the bathroom thing is one, but I genuinely don't know which other one is perceived to be happening...

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Dickies said:

This has less to do with whether or not politicians keep their promises and is more about fear-mongering.  The stock market will crash, all guns will be seized, illegal immigrants will flood the country, the country will turn to  Marxist communism, our military will be eliminated, and we will allow transgenders to use restrooms.

There were posters here and so called experts that said the stock market would crash if Trump won. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lod001 said:

So we need 'landmark legislation' to be great? I don't think so. We are all great in here.

Agreed, a lot of legislation is irrelevant or has a negative impact as shown above. Not sure that’s a benchmark anyone is looking for. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, FF Ninja said:

The only thing that is sad is that he's still the president. He got booed because of all his reprehensible actions since taking office. Somebody in the military doing their job doesn't offset all of the ways trump has failed at his job.

I respectfully disagree with this hilarious take.

Edited by Widbil83
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tonydead said:

Try googling "Beto take your guns"

He probably means real candidates. I await his response to this though because I couldn’t believe Beto said this. It ranks up there with every Democrat candidate raising their hand during the first debate agreeing to give free healthcare to illegals kind of bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, supermike80 said:

Didn't read it.   I avoid the WAPO and Business Insider because I find them biased in their reporting.  

This is a good rebuttal

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/08/07/success_of_the_trump_economy_is_bad_news_for_democrats_140956.html

 

ETA:  I didnt read this one either, but I am willing to bet it has different numbers than the ones you linked to..  Just sayin.  

So in response you posted an article by Junior's girlfriend?

  • Laughing 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:
3 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

Bias for bias

I promise I'm not being deliberate, what is the basis for claiming BI is biased?

What is the basis for claiming that the bias of Business Insider is equal to the bias of Donald Trump Jr.'s girlfriend?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John Blutarsky said:

There were posters here and so called experts that said the stock market would crash if Trump won. 

I still have the Paul Krugman election night piece saved for a few laughs-
 

Quote

It really does now look like President Donald J. Trump, and markets are plunging. When might we expect them to recover?

Frankly, I find it hard to care much, even though this is my specialty. The disaster for America and the world has so many aspects that the economic ramifications are way down my list of things to fear.

Still, I guess people want an answer: If the question is when markets will recover, a first-pass answer is never.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/opinion/election-night-2016/paul-krugman-the-economic-fallout

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, supermike80 said:
33 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

What is the basis for claiming that the bias of Business Insider is equal to the bias of Donald Trump Jr.'s girlfriend?

No one said equal 

:lol:

When someone says "bias for bias", and refuse to qualify either side of the equation, I take it that the reader is supposed to interpret that as being code for "a tiny amount of unspecified bias for a large amount of very specific bias".

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, [scooter] said:

:lol:

When someone says "bias for bias", and refuse to qualify either side of the equation, I take it that the reader is supposed to interpret that as being code for "a tiny amount of unspecified bias for a large amount of very specific bias".

Ok well good.  

Edited by supermike80
  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, supermike80 said:

Ok well good.  

I just want to get a grasp here of what you find at Business Insider is biased?  Every chart I have seen of media bias has them pretty much in the center and fair.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

Well 2 reasons..1 is I read the articles

2 is I check using this site

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/

Ah, BI has "left center" bias.

Quote

 

Analysis / Bias

In review, Business Insider occasionally publishes listicles such as: “The top 10 Google searches of 2018” and “10 burning questions Americans asked Google in 2018.” Business Insider reports news and opinions with the use of moderately loaded words such as this: “Trump inexplicably told Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi that Mexico would pay for the border wall as part of the landmark new trade deal” and “China looks like it’s going to give Trump a huge symbolic trade war win, fueling hope for a big deal.”  When it comes to sourcing information they utilize credible media sources such as gbm.hsbc.com, brookings.edu, Bloomberg, Council on Foreign Relations , and asia.nikkei.com.

 

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

Well 2 reasons..1 is I read the articles

2 is I check using this site

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/

Which gives it a left-center bias...including high rating for factual reporting.  I also looked at their right center list and don't have an issue with any of those either...if listed as a high rating for factual reporting.

Business Insider very much appears to be a fair source to use and shouldn't just be written off immediately.  Its not like Vox or Fox or Conservative Treehouse or HuffPo....

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, John Blutarsky said:

Almost 4 million jobs created since election.

Ok, let's try this again.

NABE Panel Reports Less Growth of Sales, Profit Margins, and Capital Spending Last Quarter, and Tariffs Are Disrupting Business Conditions

Quote

After more than a year since the U.S. first imposed new tariffs on its trading partners, higher tariffs are disrupting business conditions, especially in the goods-producing sector. Two-thirds of respondents from that sector indicate that tariffs have had negative impacts on business conditions at their firms.”

Quote

Hiring was far less prevalent at panelists’ firms in the third quarter. At a reading of just 8, the employment NRI is at a five-year low. The index, which was stable between 22 and 25 for the previous four quarters, fell primarily because of a significant decline in the percentage of respondents indicating employment at their firms was rising—from 34% in July to 20% in October.

 

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sho nuff said:

Which gives it a left-center bias...including high rating for factual reporting.  I also looked at their right center list and don't have an issue with any of those either...if listed as a high rating for factual reporting.

Business Insider very much appears to be a fair source to use and shouldn't just be written off immediately.  Its not like Vox or Fox or Conservative Treehouse or HuffPo....

 

Thank you for your opinion. If you are Ok with it, I will keep mine.  Have a great day!

  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:
1 hour ago, supermike80 said:

Well 2 reasons..1 is I read the articles

2 is I check using this site

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/

Ah, BI has "left center" bias.

With a "high" rating for "factual reporting".

Meanwhile, the Media Bias Chart puts Business Insider almost exactly at dead center -- on par with Forbes and Fortune, and to the right of the BBC, all of them being in the category of "Most Reliable For News".

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • knowledge dropper changed the title to TRUMP TO INFINITY AND BEYOND HQ - The Great and Positive Place

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...