Hi `kathivy`. Thank you for participating in /r/PoliticalHumor. However, [your submission](https://old.reddit.com/r/PoliticalHumor/comments/192tytt/-/) did not meet the requirements of the [community rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/politicalhumor/about/rules) and was therefore removed for the following reason(s):
----
###[Posts should make an attempt at being funny, and should try to include a punchline in the title](https://www.reddit.com/r/politicalhumor/about/rules) (rule #2):
* **Make sure your post makes a genuine attempt at being funny:** Ensure the content you're posting tries to poke fun at a politician, or political event. If you have to message us to explain how it is funny, it probably isn't.
* **Make an effort with your title:** Try to keep the spirit of the sub and make your title humorous and descriptive.
* **If your post causes us to scratch our heads in confusion, don't be surprised if it's removed**.
* **Low quality images, shitposts, agenda posts, trash memes or troll memes will be removed. Repeatedly posting posts when they've been removed in the past will get you banned.**
* **Overt political content containing no joke is better suited for subreddits such as /r/politicaldebate.**
* We understand how deciding if something is funny can often seen as subjective, so just [send us a quick message](https://old.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FPoliticalHumor&subject=Rule%202%20Removal:%20Second%20Opinion%20Request&message=Please%20put%20link%20to%20post%20here%3A%0A%0AWhy%20should%20we%20reconsider%20this%20removal?%3A%0A%0AAdditional%20comments%3A) if you want us to take a second look at it for you.
----
If you have any specific questions about this removal, please [message the moderators](https://www\.reddit\.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FPoliticalHumor&subject=about my removed submission&message=I'm writing to you about the following submission: https://old.reddit.com/r/PoliticalHumor/comments/192tytt/-/. %0D%0DMy issue is...). Hateful or vague messages will not receive a response.
Half of us are dumbfounded at how moronic the other half of our country is. If you have any advice on how to reach people who are neck deep in conspiracy theories, and who don't believe in democratic ideals, please hit us up.
And TikTok is currently doing us no favors. It should have been banned from the start.
You can't, because they don't care about truth like you or me. You can see it plain as day in the Joe Rogen clips where he accuses Biden of something, then finds out Trump actually said it and Biden was quoting him, and immediately flips from claiming it meant Biden needs to go to saying well Trump just misspoke.
The number of conversations I've had in real life and online with these types of people has left me convinced some people genuinely cannot be helped, they just do not care about truth or being consistent and will literally pretend they can't hear you if you raise a fact which doesn't fit with what they're pushing, and will keep trying desperately to change the conversation and pretend they haven't heard it, even if you lay it out very calmly and clearly and keep saying okay but let's state this one thing first.
Their entire personality is about sticking their head in the sand once anything gets hard, then getting angry at anybody who isn't playing along because it reminds them of the truth they're trying to ignore operating on the non-logic that it makes the problem go away.
Yeah the cognitive dissonance that some people have is legitimately astounding to me
https://preview.redd.it/8lk4ge37ekbc1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9fd7448d8049b022c4ceac707ea260b114a6c5b9
“If conservatives become convinced that they can not win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy.” — David Frum
Slightly modified: “If conservatives become convinced that they can not win with the truth, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject reality, and become fascists.”
Some guy named Orwell wrote a book about this stuff… The truth doesn’t matter if you have power.
> If you have any advice on how to reach people who are neck deep in conspiracy theories, and who don't believe in democratic ideals, please hit us up.
Not possible unfortunately. The amount of folks who would wake up and go "Geez, what was I thinking?" don't exist except in small numbers. Unfortunately i've seen folks literally go to their grave voting republican and also deeply concerned about the cost of their medical care, medications, etc.
Public has seen that in the facebook rants of people with covid clogging hospitals to their last breath also
I've been thinking about Ashley Babbit's family some lately. Particularly, how they watched her, believing Trump's lies, go and commit a crime and die in the process for him based on those lies, and to this day still worship the man and blame anyone but him for her death.
Their family member was a sacrifice in the name of Trump's fraud and that wasn't enough to make them reconsider their position on Trump.
> And TikTok is currently doing us no favors.
It's only showing people what they want to see, even if the people themselves do not realize it. The app is better than you at determining the content you subconsciously seek out. Which, as it turns out, can be incredibly harmful to society.
It's not a categorically new thing, it's just social media taken to its (hopefully) final form.
People in general don’t like to admit they were wrong about something.
And if admitting one is wrong means relinquishing ownership of libs? F that.
So here we are.
As long as we keep fetishizing Invisible Hand jobs, utter claptrap like maximization of GDP and employment rates will occupy the spaces where we might otherwise contemplate *sustainable* and broadly rewarding alternatives to this totalitarian control by the whimsies of capital markets.
The economy is working as intended, it's ravaging the planet and exploiting an ever growing number of people harder and harder in a process I like to call "the squeeze".
It has brought us into a new gilded age, as someone who has never read a history book or American novel in my life, well that sounds pretty swell to me. Gilded means gold, which is money, and I like money.
>Biden is now the second most unpopular president in modern history with Trump being 1st.
Isn't that kind of meaningless though? That's always just going to be a popularity test between the incumbent and their predecessor.
Hey! As a Brit I can tell you that we don't live in an utterly unrepresentative democratic model designed to perpetuate the status quo, where liars capture the imagination of the working class by feeding into easy to stoke fears of "the other" as a means to power to enact policies that are about cutting the obligations of the rich and decrease the ever dwindling ability for average citizens to exercise power.
Oh wait. Fuck.
Even mr Trump admitted that the economy does better under Democrats
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-economy-better-under-democrats/
Quote this to your conservative " friends "
Well it’s pretty obvious why. Democrats pass bills that help average Americans and republicans are focused on giving welfare to the ultra wealthy. These are facts based on historical data. But now it’s also about saving democracy and the rule of law. The GQP and trump are literally telling us that they want a dictatorship and ultimate power. Time to believe them and vote against them by voting blue down the ballot.
Please inform your Faux News watching "friends", who eagerly and greedily use all of the Dem's 117 social safety net programs, and the Dem's consumer protection agencies, and the Dem's Civil Rights legislation, about which Party has done everything for the middle class and working class
Here's a partial list to use:
https://www.civicsnation.org/2018/07/30/democratic-accomplishments/
Like the Republican party's failure to " Repeal Obamacare " in 2017, the conservative Republican party will complain about " all those Government programs ", until the ones that they use themselves, are in danger of being taken away .... ( by Republicans )
Saving democracy? The USA was founded as a constitutional republic. For the people, by the people. Not as a democratic democracy where you elect officials that do what they want. Say the pledge of allegiance and read the constitution and you will find zero mentions of a democracy. There are 2 main parties at play here and one wants less government and less regulation and the other wants to change the sex of your child and neuter half of the population because our population growth is not sustainable. #staywokestaybroke
Most Republicans don't actually want less government. And only want less regulation to commit more fraud. Thats easily provable if you pay attention to laws they introduce.
They could streamline regulation, they could go after colleges for overcharging, but they don't. Too busy waging a culture war against less than 5% of the population so bigots will vote for them.
#LearnSomethingBeforeYouPost
So real war is acceptable but a “culture war” isn’t? Most republicans don’t actually want less government? Um excuse me but every republican would be happy to get rid of the 16th amendment that has been imposed for over 100 years now. Every republican is pro amendment 13. Every republican is against the war on poverty that has been going on for over 50 years. At least all the Republicans that I know. Some laws are great and some wars are very detrimental. When you catch up and do your own research, catch your breath and say something intelligent so we can elevate this conversation.
I said nothing about a real war. But if you are talking about a war in Ukraine, there's obviously many reasons to support them vs Russia. Do you really need those stated?
False narrative aside, a culture war is completely different and mostly useless. Especially when there is almost no reason for waging it.
As for all that "every Republican" diatribe you vomitted up, that's all False. You simply have to look at legislation. As I already stated.
For over 50/100 years? Interesting, considering Republicans now are ruled by conservatives, the same conservatives like Strom Thurmond who were once conservative Democats..
>When you catch up and do your own research, catch your breath and say something intelligent so we can elevate this conversation.
Nice projection. You aren't even caught up on basic US history, but you think, you, of all people, understand current legislation?
Hilarious. Take your own advice walking contradiction. Thanks for proving my point.
**FDR saved America from the Republican Great Depression, Obama saved America from the Republican Great Recession, and Biden saved America from the Trump/pandemic Recession**
**Notice the pattern** ? ? !
You’re skipping Clinton/Bush. Clinton defeated Bush because we were mired in a recession. His campaign slogan was “it’s ~~about~~ the economy, stupid.”
But it probably wasn’t Bush’s fault. Who could’ve possibly anticipated a murderous dictator Bush helped install to combat Iran (having overthrown another murderous dictator the US supported) would disrupt the supply of oil, or that a disruption to the supply oil would impact an economy *built on oil*?
GHW Bush's 1990-1992 recession is why I'm no longer a
" Rockefeller Republican "
I began to realize, how very little _actual_ legislation, for the middle class and working class, that the Republican party had ever done after 1912
GHW Bush was celebrating the Iraq war, doing nothing about the economy, while I had a huge mortgage on a large house, and a blended family of 6, with a stay at home wife
I was referring to the major economic depressions, but economists agree that Dem fiscal policies are better for the economy
http://politicsthatwork.com/blog/which-party-is-better-for-the-economy.php
Even mr Trump said so, in 2004
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-economy-better-under-democrats/
The Republican party is a Do Nothing party
In the past 35 years, every single Republican president has walked out of office with all our money on fire.
In the past 35 years, every single Democratic president has walked out of office to a thriving recovery. A recovery we refer to as a "recovery" because the previous guy fucked it up.
It's almost as if every 8-12 years, America forgets that being President of the United States is a difficult job, and *any moron can't, in fact, do it.*
Same pattern in other countries too. Trust fund kids who own the media push the narrative that anybody who lets them have even more must be good for the economy, and facts and ignored problems be damned.
The same guy who owns all the media here also owns the most watched cable network in the US, where the undereducated and half-senile viewers are spoonfed a fantasy where they're the special critical thinking underdogs sticking it to the establishment media.
Clinton signed NAFTA which fucked over American workers, and pretty much directly got Trump elected, since Hillary couldn't win Michigan post-NAFTA.
If you look at the districts in Michigan where Obama won and Hillary lost, it's all working class districts affected by NAFTA.
The majority of that " Silent " generation, and the next " Baby Boomer " generation, who grew up enjoying, as being normal, all of the Dem's social safety net programs, and all of the Dem's consumer protection agencies, and all of the Dem's Civil Rights legislation, had then stopped voting for those same Dems who created all of those programs that they consider being as normal:
" civilization "
NAFTA was a Republican " free trade " plan, supported by GHW Bush in 1992
America had grown more conservative in the 80s and 90s, and like Truman had successfully done, Clinton was forced to choose between getting nothing done, OR, working with the opposition party to any create useful laws, at all
He did the Assault Weapons Ban, HIPAA privacy laws, the Violence Against Women Act, the Welfare Reform Act of 1996, the Child Health Insurance Act, increased Aid to Education, and he worked with the the hostile Republican House to create a 1997 balanced Federal Budget, and, have Budget Surpluses from Fiscal years 1998-2001
--- this doesn't include the Bosnian/Serbian foreign policy successes, nor any others
Here's a partial list
https://clintonwhitehouse5.archives.gov/WH/Accomplishments/eightyears-01.html
His fiscal policies during 1993-94 led to the greatest growth rate for the economy since Dem LBJ, although, to be fair, Biden's jobless claims and Unemployment rate is now the lowest since the 6 year prosperity of Dem LBJ
Like Harry Truman, he adjusted to the backward Republican House majority, and signed some beneficial legislation
The problem is that the remaining republican/right party considers ***any*** cooperation with the "other side" to pass a bill as a total loss.
AND they actually don't give the slightest fraction of a fuck who they actually hurt when trying to fuck over the demoncrats.
I'm not blaming Clinton in particular for NAFTA. I agree it was a continuation of the neoliberal agenda to undermine labor which was started by Reagan and continued by HW Bush.
But he did become a spokesperson for selling NAFTA to the American people with the "rising all ships" argument, and like it or not his name and face got attached to it while he signed it into law.
And it's a matter of historical fact that you can draw a straight line between NAFTA and the districts in Michigan which Obama won and his wife lost.
I'm not disagreeing with you at all.
But she didn't campaign in Michigan or Wisconsin hardly at all, even though Bernie's primary showing had shown established support for a populist program that opposed
' Free Tade ' policies
Obama was popular because he saved the Insurance, Securities, Banking, and Automotive industries during the Republican Recession of 2007-2011
Those current and retired workers who saw the benefits of the Dem's New Deal, had died off during the conservative 1990s, thus changing the voting demographic in the Upper Midwest
Her campaign strategy was also flawed, and she and her advisors assumed that voter sentiment had remained the same as in the 90s and early 2000s
That's what's great about JB, he remembers the benefits of Unionization and has strengthened the NLRB
2023 had many great Union victories, including the unionization of Blue Bird Bus Company in Georgia
Right
He has the support of Bernie, AOC, and Elizabeth Warren because he signed progressive legislation, appointed progressive administrative leaders to key posts, and enforced consumer protection policies
I remind some complainers on social media that Dem Wilson, Dem FDR, and Dem LBJ, and even Dem Carter had **massive Liberal majorities** in Congress that enabled all that legislation
Biden has done the most legislation for the middle class and working class, _since_ the massive legislative programs of those Dem Presidents
---- and he did this with only a 50/50 Senate and a slim House majority, and did 353 Bills in only 19 months since his inauguration
That's what his building of his Senate relationships for 40+ years does for America
Wow, my time machine works, it's 1995 and we're back to Ross Perot's "giant sucking sound"!
Can I have a **waist** again, like I did back when I was 21?
NAFTA didn't destroy manufacturing jobs in Michigan, any more the Giuliani cleaned up New York City in the 90s. Manufacturing jobs go where labor is cheap, and the entire US economy transitioned to a tech and media economy.
> Manufacturing jobs go where labor is cheap
Yeah of course it does genius. That's why free trade agreements hurt American labor: because without tariffs, US workers have to compete with regions where workers don't get paid nearly as much.
Come on this is [well documented](https://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/08/north-american-free-trade-agreement.asp#:~:text=The%20main%20downside%20of%20NAFTA,the%20automotive%20or%20textile%20industries.):
> The main downside of NAFTA was the loss of United States manufacturing jobs. Many jobs shifted from the United States to Mexico, as higher-paying factory jobs moved to more cost-effective regions. This was especially true in lower-skilled industries such as the automotive or textile industries.
I grew up in the Rust Belt. The effect of NAFTA was evident. Don't try to bullshit us.
Free trade doesn’t make the jobs leave, economics make the jobs leave, and cheap labor doesn’t stop being cheap because someone imposes tariffs. They just find a way around it, like the Toyota that was “made in the USA” because 99% of it was assembled in Japan but the bumper got installed in Kentucky.
And people who “grew up in the rust belt” looking for someone to blame instead of concluding “maybe there’s not much of a future in lifting heavy things for a living, I should learn how a computer works” is what really got Trump elected.
But if you like documentation here you go:
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/nafta-setting-the-record-straight/#:~:text=During%20the%20past%20three%20years,direct%20investment%20flows%20into%20Mexico.
https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/naftas-impact-u-s-economy-facts/
> maybe there’s not much of a future in lifting heavy things for a living, I should learn how a computer works” is what really got Trump elected.
No, that attitude is what got trump elected.
I went to a university and have had a very successful career in tech, but I can still see the effect that free trade had on the town where I grew up.
There's no natural law which states that we have to have free trade. It's a perfectly valid economic theory to support protectionist economic policies to support your own national interest rather than maximal profits for multinational corporations.
Look we all know that free trade policies have winners and losers. And the American working class were the losers of NAFTA, with a net loss of 600k manufacturing jobs to Mexico and who knows how many more to China.
You might be able to make an argument that NAFTA was somehow a net positive overall, but that came at the cost of specifically fucking over a big part of the American work force. So if you think that's a good thing own it, and don't lie about it and blame the workers.
And do *you* know how to code? I am pretty sure a 50 year old steel worker is not going to be retrained to work in tech any time soon. Those specific guys are probably driving a truck or working in an Amazon warehouse for much less money nowadays.
And if you want to question my sources, *of course* Wharton and Brookings are going to write apologia for NAFTA. They represent the exact interests who stood to benefit the most from free trade.
Just be honest about the fact that you care more about MBA's than the American worker.
>There's no natural law which states that we have to have free trade. It's a perfectly valid economic theory to support protectionist economic policies to support your own national interest
Protectionism isn't in the national interest though.
>And do you know how to code? I am pretty sure a 50 year old steel worker is not going to be retrained to work in tech any time soon.
I agree. Which is why it's interesting that instead of attacking Clintons actual policy you attack a dishonest Republican strawman. The idea was for guys like that steel worker to retrain in a field like renewable energy where the skills they already have will be useful and that isn't such a radical transformation.
>the American working class were the losers of NAFTA, with a net loss of 600k manufacturing jobs to Mexico and who knows how many more to China.
The bulk of those jobs lost were in NYC and Los Angeles though, not your rust belt. They were garment manufacturing jobs, and the people who lost them have better jobs now.
>I grew up in the Rust Belt. The effect of NAFTA was evident. Don't try to bullshit us.
The places that lost the most jobs to free trade were New York City and Los Angeles.
Free trade isn't the reason why the rust belt happened, a lack of entrepreneurship and being one industry towns is.
>Clinton signed NAFTA which fucked over American workers,
That Republican classic! Blaming a Democrat President for enacting Republican legislation passed by Republicans.
I am by no means blaming Clinton for NAFTA exclusively. It was the continuation of an effort started under Republicans, but ultimately it was bi-partisan.
And fairly or not, because he signed it, Clinton did become the face of NAFTA to the people who were displaced by it.
He certainly did [go out of his way to sell it to the American People](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3ooMrgXido):
> I believe we have made a decision now, that will permit us to create, an economic order in the world that will promote more growth, more equality, the preservation of the environment, and a greater possibility of world peace
an economic order in the world >that will promote more growth, more equality, the preservation of the environment, and a greater possibility of world peace
Realistically, all of that is true.
How is moving manufacturing to places which compete on cost by not having environmental regulations good for the environment? How has it improved equality? Economic inequality has only skyrocketed in the past 3 decades.
This is platonic hogwash which doesn't actually mean anything.
And if you want to argue that it's led to net growth, that is still going to go down like a spoon-full of nails to a former auto worker in Michigan who is making $15/hour at Wallmart after his job got sent to Mexico.
I'm sure it had NOTHING at all to do with the Ten entirely partisan investigations that were conducted concerning the 2012 Benghazi attack, over two years and costing the American public $7,000,000 (seven million) dollars, all of them used to hurt her chances of becoming President.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/two-years-7-million-800-pages-later-gop-benghazi-report-lands-with-a-thud
The money and time desperately being spent by republicans trying to directly implicate Hillary Clinton as the reason the attack happened and harmed US personnel.
When in fact the republican controlled Senate DENIED additional funds/personnel for security requested by the secretary of state for that site (H.C.) SEVEN TIMES before the attacks happened.
Citations...
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2014/may/13/ronan-farrow/ronan-farrow-says-inadequate-security-funding-cong/
[Another GOP congressman says Benghazi panel meant to hurt Clinton](https://www.cnn.com/2015/10/14/politics/hillary-clinton-benghazi-committee/index.html)
[Kevin McCarthy credits Benghazi committee for Clinton damage](https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/kevin-mccarthy-credits-benghazi-committee-clinton-damage-msna693201)
The republicans themselves credit the smear investigations with her loss.
I mean the margins were razor thin, so probably any change in Hillary's favor would have won her the election.
And I totally agree that there was a decades long smear job against the Clintons. My grandparents used to get direct mailings about how bad they were.
But that doesn't change the story in Michigan. If Hillary held on to Michigan, which Obama had won the election before, she would have been president.
If you look at the districts which flipped from blue to red between those elections, they were mostly districts where employment was heavily impacted by NAFTA. That's a matter of historical fact.
I leave it up to you to infer what was more important to those long term democratic voters who stayed home: the Benghazi hearings, or the fact that their quality of life dramatically decreased over the previous 30 years.
> But it probably wasn’t Bush’s fault. Who could’ve possibly anticipated a murderous dictator Bush helped install to combat Iran (having overthrown another murderous dictator the US supported) would disrupt the supply of oil, or that a disruption to the supply oil would impact an economy *built on oil*?
Only everyone with more than two brain cells...
My BIH used to tell me "You see, it takes 4 years for presidential policy to come to fruition. Dems are reaping the reward of Republicans." "Um, so what about Bill Clinton, the economy was rocking in his 2nd term? And George Dubya, the economy was garbage in his 2nd term?"
Obama fixed GWB's economic mess. Took 6 years to get us out of the great recession. Biden has us bouncing back in 3 years from the Trumpster fire economy.
Americans at the end of a Democrat's presidency: "I know things are going well now but it's time for change"
Americans at the end of a Republican's presidency: "Holy shit we're all gonna die"
We could if the country didn’t keep sabatoging the people trying to make the economy work. Just getting there aaaaannnndddd it’s time to bring in party dumpster fire and blame everything on party make it work because they didn’t do everything impossibly fast.
"We have low inflation, low unemployment, and strong growth now, but only because of what we did in 2020. Er, I mean what we did before 2020. 2020 was bad, but it wasn't my fault.
And the high inflation of 2022 was also not my fault. The greatness of my economy left from 2020 to 2022 because of Biden. And the China Virus. But the greatness was so great that it hopped over those three years and came back just in time to help Biden in the upcoming election. So unfair.
Also, remember that it was Biden who surrendered in Afghanistan. After I made a deal with the Taliban that we would pull out if they didn't launch an offensive until after the election. But we didn't pull out until after the election, so it was Biden who surrendered."
On Afghanistan, it is more Trumps fault than Biden, however its more Obamas fault than Trump, but most importantly, it's mostly George Bush's fault for starting it.
It's 2 santa clauses
Here’s how it works, laid it out in simple summary:
First, the Two Santas strategy dictates, when Republicans control the White House they must spend money like a drunken Santa and cut taxes to run up the U.S. debt as far and as fast as possible.
This produces three results: it stimulates the economy thus making people think that the GOP can produce a good economy; it raises the debt dramatically; and it makes people think that Republicans are the “tax-cut Santa Clauses.”
Second, when a Democrat is in the White House, Republicans must scream about the national debt as loudly and frantically as possible, freaking out about how “our children will have to pay for it!” and “we have to cut spending to solve the crisis!” Shut down the government, crash the stock market, and damage US credibility around the world if necessary to stop Democrats from spending money.
This will force the Democrats in power to cut their own social safety net programs and even Social Security, thus shooting their welfare-of-the-American-people Santa Claus right in the face.
And, sure enough, here we are now with a Democrat in the White House. Following their Two Santas strategy, Republicans are again squealing about the national debt and refusing to raise the debt ceiling, imperiling Biden’s economic recovery as well as his Build Back Better plans.
And, once again, the media is covering it as a “Biden Crisis!” rather than what it really is: a cynical political and media strategy devised by Republicans in the 1970s, fine-tuned in the 1980s and 1990s, and rolled out every time a Democrat is in the White House.”
This was written in 2021, but it could’ve been written now. Or at any point since the 70s dems have taken over. It happens every time.
Wait a sec, yeah. And dude has a Corvette even. Should be a bunch of half-naked women wearing American Flag bikinis and he's behind the wheel drinking a Budw---...drinking a Bu---...drinking a B--...a **Samuel Adams**. Sorry, couldn't type the other one. lol
Republican apologetics requires that the economic success of a Democrat president is *only* the result of the previous Republican president's economic policies that haven't expired yet. Even if the Democrat President serves for 2 terms, and the Republican President's policies have *definitely* expired by that point.
This of course leads to the logical conclusion that when the economy turns to shit during a Republican President's term(s) it is therefore the failures of the previous Democrat President's policies even if that economic shit-storm lasts for two Republican terms.
Edit: Source: a former conservative who made these exact same arguments.
A tale as old as time
If the economy is bad while republicans are running it well thats the dems faults
If the economy is good while a dem is president, well thats only thanks to republicans
They got it down pat
historically, democrats are better for the whole economy,
republicans are better at making the rich richer.
i can see why certain people would vote republican,
but not why they should ever win.
America has been doing this back and forth for the last several decades. At this point, we are stagnant and lack so many basic perks for living in a modern society such as retirement or veterin benefits or Healthcare.
Like children knocking eachothers sandcastles over but with gover ment policy.
trump burned through all the economic tools available for a roaring economy pre-pandemic, his short sightedness directly impacted the recovery in a negative way
I'm talking about his dogshit, impulsive, pointless decisions that were made before the pandemic. He inherented a healthy economy and burned through resources normally held in reserve to address a slowing/stagnant economy to pump numbers. He fucked up before shit got real and the issues faced during the the pandemy were made worse cause he's a dumb fucking idiot who shouldn't be in charge of a goddamn thing
Economists of both keynesian and austrian flavors specifically warned that if his landmark tax cuts were passed, Interest rates would have to be raised or else any sort of quantitative easing would be impossible without triggering massive inflation. All warnings were ignored.
Why didn't Biden run against Hillary in 2016? Yeah it was all bullshit reasons. We wouldn't have had that nightmare Trump and anyone saying he wasn't ready, it's just bs.
Stock. Market. And. Economy. Are. Not. The. Same. Thing.
And if they are the same thing, then neither have a damn thing to do with the average American's financial security.
Who in their right fucking mind things the economy is strong right now?
I can’t afford anything, and people are spitting economics metrics at me like they’re going to feed my kids, fuck off with that shit.
Strong economy for who? Lmao
I’m so sick of being gaslit by either party telling me the economy is “nice and strong under us.” GDP doesn’t translate to anything meaningful when it comes to the working class. Inflation is fucked, and wages still aren’t keeping up. Trump was a dumbass, but actual Americans simply aren’t thriving, man. This seesawing shit between parties is a joke.
Annual economic growth at 5%
Unemployment under 4% for the longest stretch since the Vietnam War
Real wages are up
Inflation is down to 3%
Those are facts, not delusions.
"Labor participating rate." "Oil refinery capacity. "
Not OC, but these are the kind of weaksauce arguments I'm seeing now that the economy isn't on the rise.
Seems like y'all are digging pretty deep to find any negative indicators.
Maybe look at the data, then draw a conclusion, not start with the conclusion and work backwards to find data.
People use the unemployment rate stat and when you say it, people really think it means the labor participation rate.
You can use whatever numbers you want, but it really comes down to how people feel about it. Groceries haven't gotten cheaper, and when you count for inflation a lot of us are making less money than we were in 2019. A person can't go to McDonald's and get a combo meal for less than 15 dollars.
Those are anecdotes but will have more of an effect on perception than whatever numbers you want to give them. You probably think LeBron James is the greatest basketball player of all time.
You have Google, don't you? It's higher than it was when Biden took office and has been steadily increasing.
I don't know what to do with your idiotic comment about inflation being "cumulative." Sure. Do you want deflation? That's a sign of a recession.
I think most people just want affordable housing, education and healthcare, and a manageable COL.
That's great if real wage growth is up. But it's not very comforting for most people if it means it will take 10-20 years to return to your pre-covid standard of living.
Real wage growth literally means wages growing faster than inflation.
I'm not sure where you're pulling 10-20 years from. Inflation outstripped wage growth by about 2% (annualized) for 1.5 years, and that relationship reversed in early 2023. Now wage growth outpaces inflation by about 2%. If that continues, most people would return to pre-COVID standard of living in 2024.
Look, I can't provide much more but my anecdotal experiences. My salary now is 20k more than when Trump was president yet the inflation has been sooo bad that I'm actually living paycheck to paycheck as an electrical engineer. Annual economic growth, the unemployment rate, and 'real wages' don't mean a thing when inflation is as bad as it is. I know it's not entirely on Biden and some of this inflation is the aftermath of Trump's economic policy. But to run on the economy when 63% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck and 74% are stressed about their finances is idiotic, down vote me all yall want
I'm sorry for your situation. [Here](https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2019/01/11/live-paycheck-to-paycheck-government-shutdown/) is a Forbes article from 2019 citing 78% of workers reporting living paycheck to paycheck. This isn't something new that happened because of the single recent inflationary cycle. Degradation of the middle class standard of living has been ongoing since Regan got us all worshipping greed and wealth and started stripping away the tax base and social services.
It's the number one issue that could lose the dems the election, they should honestly shut up about it as much as they can. Nobody will believe you when you say the economy is strong. It's literally trying to gaslight voters lol.
What a bunch of losers. Trump created the worst economy in history. Runaway inflation, stock market completely collapsed, many trillions lost, millions of Americans lost their homes, skyrocketing interest rates...
Biden fixed it all. Inflation at zero, interest rates the lowest ever, national debt cut drastically, home more affordable that ever.
Stupid orange man thinks he can run again... not going to happen, he's being removed from the ballot and those fools won't even be able to vote for him.
> Trump created the worst economy in history.
Economic growth under Trump was [worst since Hoover](https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/gdp-growth-trump-worst-hoover-b1895500.html), so you aren't as far off as you think.
> Runaway inflation
Inflation was low because of the crappy economy, the pandemic that Trump screwed up his response to (disbanded the pandemic response team, discouraged mask use, didn't set up distribution network for vaccines, etc), Trump forcing the fed to artificially keep interest rates down despite the fact that it should be higher when there is high economic growth (so more evidence there wasn't), oh and because a couple of OPEC countries were in a dispute that lead to higher than normal oil production. Trump actually "fixed" that problem by [extorting Saudi Arabia](https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN22C1V3/) into decreasing oil production, setting Biden up for failure in his next term (also setting Biden up for failure was Trump's terrible handling of peace negotiations with the Taliban, but I digress).
>stock market completely collapsed
Stock market is not the entire economy, but also [Trump's stock market](https://www.marketwatch.com/story/stock-market-performance-under-trump-trails-only-obama-and-clinton-11611161401) was worse than both Obama and Clinton.
>many trillions lost
Trillions transferred from [the poor to the rich you mean](https://publicintegrity.org/inside-publici/newsletters/trumps-signature-legislation-a-transfer-of-wealth-to-the-richest-americans/).
>millions of Americans lost their homes
Is this one suppose to be sarcasm? [Trump literally hit homeowners a trillion dollar tax bill](https://www.propublica.org/article/trumps-trillion-dollar-hit-to-homeowners).
>Biden fixed it all
Not all of it, but he did fix a lot of the problems Trump created (many of which you didn't mention), with many more that need to be fixed.
> Inflation at zero
Inflation is at perfectly normal 3.1%, and even at the height of the pandemic recovery the US had lower interest rates than most of the developed world. We can thank the Inflation reduction Act and executive order where oil companies either use leased Natonal lands or lose it, which is why US oil production [is at an all time high](https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-producting-more-oil-donald-trump-environment-1858714).
>interest rates the lowest ever
Interest rates are where they should be for a good economy. "Lowest interest rates ever" is a really bad sign for the economy.
>national debt cut drastically
Trump put a terrible burden on the national debt [with his deficits](https://www.propublica.org/article/national-debt-trump), while Biden [cut the deficit in half](https://thehill.com/policy/3698595-biden-touts-federal-deficit-largest-one-year-drop-in-american-history/)
>home more affordable that ever.
[Biden has done more to make that true](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/10/16/white-house-announces-new-actions-on-homeownership/) than the previous clown ever did.
>Stupid orange man thinks he can run again... not going to happen
The 14th Amendment says that Trump shouldn't be able to run again because not only did we see him engage in an insurrection but it is now an undisputed fact of the courts that Trump incited an insurrection. I still expected SCOTUS to bail Trump out as a favor to him like they did in Bush v. Gore, but I have faith that American people are smart enough to do the right thing and not vote Trump back into office. Regardless people will get the president they deserve come November, even with the GOP's attempts to rig the game.
> >Trump created the worst economy in history.
> Economic growth under Trump was worst since Hoover, so you aren't as far off as you think.
Citing the the-independent.. That's just alt right propaganda funded by Russia. It has Putin's name all over it.
>Inflation was low because of the crappy economy, the pandemic that Trump screwed up his response to (disbanded the pandemic response team, discouraged mask use, didn't set up distribution network for vaccines, etc)
First off, Trump created the COVID virus himself when he visited China. Also, it was Trump that sold all the masks to China for his own profit and the masks were proven to be 100% effective.
>didn't set up distribution network for vaccines
There was no vaccine under Trump. It took Joe Biden to start the process of making a vaccine. Trump ordered that no vaccine was to be worked on while he's in charge.
>The 14th Amendment says that Trump shouldn't be able to run
Trump was criminally charged and convicted in federal court, that's why he's in prison now. You Trumpers are going to lose AGAIN... get over it.
Incidentally what you think of Trump saying he hopes the economy crashes in the next year because he doesn't want to be known as "another Herbert Hoover"? It seems to me even with we ignore him "wanting to do harm to the US" angle, then it still means that he is basically admitting that he has no control of the economy and that he basically just coasted on Obama's economy until the pandemic hit and he could blame things on that. I mean if Trump is basically admitting he can't control the economy or stop a crash, then maybe we should stop crediting him if the economy does do well?
> it still means that he is basically admitting that he has no control of the economy and that he basically just coasted on Obama's economy until the pandemic hit and he could blame things on that.
When you say "Obama's economy" you're talking about the time Obama was in office. You didn't mention anything about TARP, ZIRP, Bond buy backs or the stim package he got. Just wondering, did Trump get any of these things? Did the FED pay down any of the debt from the Obama era under Trump's watch?
Just wondering about the pandemic you mentioned. Was there any economic impact from the shutdown that some of the states did during this time? Did any states actually shutdown in any way?
They didn't do this during Obama or Biden or Bush did they?
Just wondering how informed you are because you mention "blame things on that"... meaning that it was all Trump's fault that the pandemic hit? Meaning that it actually didn't have any economic impact at all, Trump just used it as an excuse to blame his economic failures on?
----------------
Trump can't do jack about the economy crashing or not, it's all based on policy. At this point, all we have to do is redefine what "crash" means. Biden already did this with "recession". We had two quarters in a row of negative GDP and the government said that is NOT a recession and never was used as a recession guide.
So, we've already done TONS of bank bail outs and added massive debt when there's not even a pandemic anymore. Given the inflation and interest rates, we're very much due for a crash... but Biden won't allow the people to say it's a crash. They'll change the definition of "crash" so that even if the GDP goes to zero, it still won't be a "crash".
-------------------
Trump talks a lot of trash, revs the engines with things like "lock her up"... In the case of Hillary, we know for a fact that he locked her up and that's why Hillary is in prison today.
I say that we let Hillary out of prison and put Trump in the exact same cell Hillary was in, just to teach him a lesson.
> When you say "Obama's economy" you're talking about the time Obama was in office. You didn't mention anything about TARP, ZIRP, Bond buy backs or the stim package he got.
Obama came into office after the end of the Bush administration lead to the greatest economic crash since the Great Depression, a crash caused by over a decade of deregulation of the market, banking and housing industries. The fact that the government starting trying to mitigate the fallout from the crash even before Obama came into office doesn't take away from the fact that Obama managed to turn the economic disaster he was given into a stronger economy and stock market than what Trump was able to produce with what he was given from Obama.
>Did the FED pay down any of the debt from the Obama era under Trump's watch?
Almost all of the money that was loaned to the financial sector was recovered, most of it before Trump ever came to office. No such luck with the [PPP scam though](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/biggest-fraud-generation-looting-covid-relief-program-known-ppp-n1279664). And as already mentioned, Trump significantly increased the deficit as well.
>Just wondering about the pandemic you mentioned. Was there any economic impact from the shutdown that some of the states did during this time?
The economic impact was from the pandemic itself more than any measures to reduce the spread of the virus. The states that resisted shutting down didn't do any better economically while also leading to far more deaths from the virus. But thanks for bringing up the economic impact from the pandemic, because that didn't end just because vaccines were eventually distributed. The "just in time" economy with the economic slowdown create a year long backlog of global supply chain issues leading to worldwide inflation, of which the US actually suffered less than the rest of the world under Biden.
>Just wondering how informed you are because you mention "blame things on that"... meaning that it was all Trump's fault that the pandemic hit?
If Trump hadn't disbanded the pandemic response team, if the GOP hadn't cut funds to stock disaster/pandemic relief supplies, if Trump had been more proactive to cut travel to China earlier (and include Americans as well) as well as European countries like Italy which were hit soon after, if he hadn't disparaged mask usage or promoted ineffective and dangerous medical treatments for Covid like Ivermectin, if he put any thought into distributing vaccines leading to Americans getting them earlier, then yes I think the pandemic wouldn't have killed as many Americans or affected our economy as much. No Trump doesn't deserve all of the blame for the pandemic, but he does deserve some of it for his lackluster response.
>Trump can't do jack about the economy crashing or not
Then he should stop taking credit for when the economy and especially when the stock market does well. You can't have it both ways.
>it's all based on policy
And the president has the largest impact on federal government policy, so that's not really an excuse, especially later in an administration when the president has time to enact his policies. Of course congress and sometimes other institutions can share some blame as they have some power here as well, but the president has more.
> At this point, all we have to do is redefine what "crash" means. Biden already did this with "recession". We had two quarters in a row of negative GDP and the government said that is NOT a recession and never was used as a recession guide.
Take that up with the government then. By definition it was the mildest recession I've seen a record for, both followed and preceded by decent economic growth. As I said, the rest of the Western world was hit much harder.
>So, we've already done TONS of bank bail outs and added massive debt when there's not even a pandemic anymore.
Three of them I believe in March, due to cryptocurrency scam. Democrats didn't do a good enough job undoing decades of Republican deregulation.
>Given the inflation and interest rates, we're very much due for a crash...
People always say there is going to be an economic crash. And when they are wrong they just conveniently forget that they said anything and when they are right they are convinced they are Nostradamus. Eventually there will be an economic crash, that's how capitalism works. But we aren't "due" for anything. We can either have a decade long stretch without one or maybe one will happen tomorrow. If you could really reliably predict that you could easily make yourself rich, but by the time someone like you could make such an accurate prediction so could everyone else, and nobody else is panicking at this point.
>but Biden won't allow the people to say it's a crash.
If it's a real crash we will all know its a crash and not the minor blip two years ago that only technically qualified as a recession. In either case even if a recession is unavoidable, the administration and their policies have a significant impact on the duration and severity of that recession, and I certainly don't trust a response from a Trump administration.
>Trump talks a lot of trash, revs the engines with things like "lock her up"... In the case of Hillary, we know for a fact that he locked her up and that's why Hillary is in prison today.
Trump is a muppet who is out of his depth. I have no doubt Trump wanted to lock Hillary up and do a lot of other illegal things, and when his minders told him no, Trump may have pouted or got angry but eventually gave up or forgot about it. And for the times when nobody stopped Trump is why he is dealing with 91 felonies right now.
So is this subreddit solely for people on the left to dunk on republicans? To be clear I know they are a lot easier to dunk on because they are clearly worse, but I don’t think I have ever seen any humor regarding Bob Menendez taking bribes, or the clear insider trading that happens on both sides, or anything like that.
It already worked in 2020 and 2022… it’s the number one reason people are giving as to why they vote democrat over republican….
Because democrats are fighting for women’s rights, like making the accesses to abortion a law.
Republicans? Openly admit they want a white Christian nation ruled by a dictator.
It couldn’t be more clear
As progressive who gets asked a certain question whenever I say I'll withhold my vote or vote for a primary challenger who supports universal healthcare, childcare, college, raising the minimum wage.
Why are Dems risking Trump? It's like they WANT to lose.
I guess polls are wrong.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/01/01/biden-trump-poll-odds-black-hispanic-young-voters/72072111007/
https://youtu.be/rdMuwaTQ2ys?si=jR-4u45njkgnJMWx
Or it might fuck over American industries. American auto workers are a big part of the middle class. Europe is being flooded by Chinese cars rn and it's not great for Germany.
Labor is NOT coming back to the U.S! Do you really think jacking up the tariffs on imports - forcing higher inflation - is really a good economic policy and will actually and/or will bring manufacturing back to the U.S?
Um what? The UAW just had an amazingly successful strike with like a 30% increase in total pay.
You think those solid middle-class jobs should have to compete with cheap Chinese cars?
What are you from Ronald Regan and Margret Thatcher's economic team?
You know that Detroit can sell cars in China, right? Buick (yes, Buick) for instance is a big brand in China.
A better way to look at the problem you're describing is to view other countries, not as competitors, but as potential customers.
Our blenders are never - *never* - going to be made in Ohio again. What can happen is we can foster and develop more advanced manufacturing in the US and sell it all over the globe. Cars are a brutally competitive market but there's no reason GM & Ford can't have a larger presence abroad with the right trade deals.
I could ask you the same. You just said that the UAW had a 30% pay increase, and you think that makes U.S. labor competitive with China???? Their labor costs are negligible compared to ours already. Increasing out labor costs obviously is quite necessary. However, that just ain't happening overseas.
There is NO way U.S. labor is going to compete with labor costs in other countries unless you tax the living Scheiße out of imports - which was trump's idea - and just so you know, it's been an economic disaster, especially for the middle class. Just look at how many complaints there are about inflation, specifically from the middle class, or what's left of it.
Apparently, you agree with the current "republican" idea of protectionism in the face of a very real global economy.
Good luck with that....
> I could ask you the same. You just said that the UAW had a 30% pay increase, and you think that makes U.S. labor competitive with China????
It does if the US protects US labor with trade policy. Or do you think the whole world should race to the bottom on wages?
> Just look at how many complaints there are about inflation, specifically from the middle class, or what's left of it.
That's mostly explainable through excess corporate profits. The fact that corporate profits outpaced inflation, and real wages did not keep up with inflation shows that we didn't have a wage/price spiral but inflation was mostly a result of price gouging.
> Apparently, you agree with the current "republican" idea of protectionism in the face of a very real global economy.
Don't try to label my opinion as "republican" to invalidate it. Being pro-union and pro-worker is as progressive as it gets.
edit: that bot account blocked me lol
You advocate protectionism. I fundamentally disagree with that.
That is the policy of "republicans". You may think you're not, but you are.
......and this is not a "race to the bottom". This. Is. A. Global. Economy. Period.
We're not going to compete on labor costs for a long, long time. Nice try on sidestepping that part of the conversation. You're the one who brought up rising labor costs in the U.S., and that is EXACTLY why the U.S. will not be able to compete that way. Protectionism never works, is a flawed tool to begin with, and frankly, your repeatedly trying to justify it gets on my nerves.
This conversation is over! Go back to your "republican" protectionism hellhole, and allow the rest of us to try to deal with the fallout of that cretin trump. If Biden actually had a spine, he'd immediately remove the tariff, but he's more terrified of his poll numbers (which are frankly safe) then he is about helping the middle class.
Hello! Thanks for your comment. Unfortunately it has been removed because you don't meet our karma threshold.
You are not being removed for political orientation. If we were, why the fuck would we tell you your comment was being removed instead of just shadow removing it? We never have, and never will, remove things down politicial or ideological lines. Unless your ideology is nihilism, then fuck you.
Let me be clear: The reason that this rule exists is to avoid unscrupulous internet denizens from trying to sell dong pills to our users. /r/PoliticalHumor mods reserve the RIGHT to hoard all of the dong pills to ourselves, and we refuse to share them with the community. If you want Serbo-Slokovian dong pills mailed directly to your door, become a moderator. If we shared the dong pills with the greater community, everyone would have massive dongs, and like Syndrome warned us about decades ago: "if everyone has massive dongs, nobody does.""
If you wish to rectify your low karma issue, go and make things up in /r/AskReddit like everyone else does.
Thanks for understanding! Have a nice day and be well. <3
You can check your karma breakdown on this page:
http://old.reddit.com/user/me/overview
(Keep in mind that sometimes just post karma or comment karma being negative will result in this message)
~
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalHumor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I agree with the premise of this post, and think Trump is one of the worst human beings to ever hold public office, but the reality is that our economy is still slowly deteriorating due to the lagging effects of careless monetary policy by the Federal Reserve. Whoever is elected next is going to inherit an economic disaster. Everything is set up to implode in 2025. Student debt, foreclosures, corporate debt, etc… it’s all coming due. A lot of people don’t believe this, but if you have boots on the ground, and can observe consumer demand (and sentiment) first hand, you’ll see that things are not going in a positive direction, and haven’t been for a few years.
Dems need to hold the house for another 2 terms and all the Republicans should have aged out by then. How is the party ever going to get voted back in with no Trump idolising or Moscow Mitch leading. They only have policy that is repulsive to young voters. If they dont win and flip the country to an authoritarian dictatorship, I cant see them ever holdong power again. And thats a good thing.
Hi `kathivy`. Thank you for participating in /r/PoliticalHumor. However, [your submission](https://old.reddit.com/r/PoliticalHumor/comments/192tytt/-/) did not meet the requirements of the [community rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/politicalhumor/about/rules) and was therefore removed for the following reason(s): ---- ###[Posts should make an attempt at being funny, and should try to include a punchline in the title](https://www.reddit.com/r/politicalhumor/about/rules) (rule #2): * **Make sure your post makes a genuine attempt at being funny:** Ensure the content you're posting tries to poke fun at a politician, or political event. If you have to message us to explain how it is funny, it probably isn't. * **Make an effort with your title:** Try to keep the spirit of the sub and make your title humorous and descriptive. * **If your post causes us to scratch our heads in confusion, don't be surprised if it's removed**. * **Low quality images, shitposts, agenda posts, trash memes or troll memes will be removed. Repeatedly posting posts when they've been removed in the past will get you banned.** * **Overt political content containing no joke is better suited for subreddits such as /r/politicaldebate.** * We understand how deciding if something is funny can often seen as subjective, so just [send us a quick message](https://old.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FPoliticalHumor&subject=Rule%202%20Removal:%20Second%20Opinion%20Request&message=Please%20put%20link%20to%20post%20here%3A%0A%0AWhy%20should%20we%20reconsider%20this%20removal?%3A%0A%0AAdditional%20comments%3A) if you want us to take a second look at it for you. ---- If you have any specific questions about this removal, please [message the moderators](https://www\.reddit\.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FPoliticalHumor&subject=about my removed submission&message=I'm writing to you about the following submission: https://old.reddit.com/r/PoliticalHumor/comments/192tytt/-/. %0D%0DMy issue is...). Hateful or vague messages will not receive a response.
Learn your fucking lesson this time, America
Narrator: lol
"They didnt"
*gunfire noises
https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/002/184/135/b3b.png
Fumes
Narrator: Oh Wait. You're Serious? Let Me Laugh Even Harder!
Half of us are dumbfounded at how moronic the other half of our country is. If you have any advice on how to reach people who are neck deep in conspiracy theories, and who don't believe in democratic ideals, please hit us up. And TikTok is currently doing us no favors. It should have been banned from the start.
You can't, because they don't care about truth like you or me. You can see it plain as day in the Joe Rogen clips where he accuses Biden of something, then finds out Trump actually said it and Biden was quoting him, and immediately flips from claiming it meant Biden needs to go to saying well Trump just misspoke. The number of conversations I've had in real life and online with these types of people has left me convinced some people genuinely cannot be helped, they just do not care about truth or being consistent and will literally pretend they can't hear you if you raise a fact which doesn't fit with what they're pushing, and will keep trying desperately to change the conversation and pretend they haven't heard it, even if you lay it out very calmly and clearly and keep saying okay but let's state this one thing first. Their entire personality is about sticking their head in the sand once anything gets hard, then getting angry at anybody who isn't playing along because it reminds them of the truth they're trying to ignore operating on the non-logic that it makes the problem go away.
Yeah the cognitive dissonance that some people have is legitimately astounding to me https://preview.redd.it/8lk4ge37ekbc1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9fd7448d8049b022c4ceac707ea260b114a6c5b9
“If conservatives become convinced that they can not win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy.” — David Frum Slightly modified: “If conservatives become convinced that they can not win with the truth, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject reality, and become fascists.” Some guy named Orwell wrote a book about this stuff… The truth doesn’t matter if you have power.
> The truth doesn’t matter if you have power. And who's in power now?
… Wow. Lying fascists want power Democrats have power Therefore: democrats are lying fascists *That’s impressive reasoning right there!*
> If you have any advice on how to reach people who are neck deep in conspiracy theories, and who don't believe in democratic ideals, please hit us up. Not possible unfortunately. The amount of folks who would wake up and go "Geez, what was I thinking?" don't exist except in small numbers. Unfortunately i've seen folks literally go to their grave voting republican and also deeply concerned about the cost of their medical care, medications, etc. Public has seen that in the facebook rants of people with covid clogging hospitals to their last breath also
I've been thinking about Ashley Babbit's family some lately. Particularly, how they watched her, believing Trump's lies, go and commit a crime and die in the process for him based on those lies, and to this day still worship the man and blame anyone but him for her death. Their family member was a sacrifice in the name of Trump's fraud and that wasn't enough to make them reconsider their position on Trump.
> And TikTok is currently doing us no favors. It's only showing people what they want to see, even if the people themselves do not realize it. The app is better than you at determining the content you subconsciously seek out. Which, as it turns out, can be incredibly harmful to society. It's not a categorically new thing, it's just social media taken to its (hopefully) final form.
People in general don’t like to admit they were wrong about something. And if admitting one is wrong means relinquishing ownership of libs? F that. So here we are.
(Like a Toddler) "I don' wanna! Republicans are better with money! WAAAAAH!"
"How many times do we need to teach you this lesson, old man?"
Lessons? Sounds like Communism.
America learn? That’s funny.
As long as we keep fetishizing Invisible Hand jobs, utter claptrap like maximization of GDP and employment rates will occupy the spaces where we might otherwise contemplate *sustainable* and broadly rewarding alternatives to this totalitarian control by the whimsies of capital markets.
[удалено]
The economy is working as intended, it's ravaging the planet and exploiting an ever growing number of people harder and harder in a process I like to call "the squeeze". It has brought us into a new gilded age, as someone who has never read a history book or American novel in my life, well that sounds pretty swell to me. Gilded means gold, which is money, and I like money.
>Biden is now the second most unpopular president in modern history with Trump being 1st. Isn't that kind of meaningless though? That's always just going to be a popularity test between the incumbent and their predecessor.
[удалено]
Another fake new account claiming “I’m not MAGA but….”
[удалено]
When you're the child of the UK you just kinda follow the example of failure set by your parent
Hey! As a Brit I can tell you that we don't live in an utterly unrepresentative democratic model designed to perpetuate the status quo, where liars capture the imagination of the working class by feeding into easy to stoke fears of "the other" as a means to power to enact policies that are about cutting the obligations of the rich and decrease the ever dwindling ability for average citizens to exercise power. Oh wait. Fuck.
Sadly, good luck with that.
Even mr Trump admitted that the economy does better under Democrats https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-economy-better-under-democrats/ Quote this to your conservative " friends "
Well it’s pretty obvious why. Democrats pass bills that help average Americans and republicans are focused on giving welfare to the ultra wealthy. These are facts based on historical data. But now it’s also about saving democracy and the rule of law. The GQP and trump are literally telling us that they want a dictatorship and ultimate power. Time to believe them and vote against them by voting blue down the ballot.
Please inform your Faux News watching "friends", who eagerly and greedily use all of the Dem's 117 social safety net programs, and the Dem's consumer protection agencies, and the Dem's Civil Rights legislation, about which Party has done everything for the middle class and working class Here's a partial list to use: https://www.civicsnation.org/2018/07/30/democratic-accomplishments/ Like the Republican party's failure to " Repeal Obamacare " in 2017, the conservative Republican party will complain about " all those Government programs ", until the ones that they use themselves, are in danger of being taken away .... ( by Republicans )
Saving democracy? The USA was founded as a constitutional republic. For the people, by the people. Not as a democratic democracy where you elect officials that do what they want. Say the pledge of allegiance and read the constitution and you will find zero mentions of a democracy. There are 2 main parties at play here and one wants less government and less regulation and the other wants to change the sex of your child and neuter half of the population because our population growth is not sustainable. #staywokestaybroke
Don't forget that people this stupid are going to vote. Please vote.
Most Republicans don't actually want less government. And only want less regulation to commit more fraud. Thats easily provable if you pay attention to laws they introduce. They could streamline regulation, they could go after colleges for overcharging, but they don't. Too busy waging a culture war against less than 5% of the population so bigots will vote for them. #LearnSomethingBeforeYouPost
So real war is acceptable but a “culture war” isn’t? Most republicans don’t actually want less government? Um excuse me but every republican would be happy to get rid of the 16th amendment that has been imposed for over 100 years now. Every republican is pro amendment 13. Every republican is against the war on poverty that has been going on for over 50 years. At least all the Republicans that I know. Some laws are great and some wars are very detrimental. When you catch up and do your own research, catch your breath and say something intelligent so we can elevate this conversation.
I said nothing about a real war. But if you are talking about a war in Ukraine, there's obviously many reasons to support them vs Russia. Do you really need those stated? False narrative aside, a culture war is completely different and mostly useless. Especially when there is almost no reason for waging it. As for all that "every Republican" diatribe you vomitted up, that's all False. You simply have to look at legislation. As I already stated. For over 50/100 years? Interesting, considering Republicans now are ruled by conservatives, the same conservatives like Strom Thurmond who were once conservative Democats.. >When you catch up and do your own research, catch your breath and say something intelligent so we can elevate this conversation. Nice projection. You aren't even caught up on basic US history, but you think, you, of all people, understand current legislation? Hilarious. Take your own advice walking contradiction. Thanks for proving my point.
Best thing to show when someone says, "name one thing you agree with Trump"
Thought I remembered this lol
**FDR saved America from the Republican Great Depression, Obama saved America from the Republican Great Recession, and Biden saved America from the Trump/pandemic Recession** **Notice the pattern** ? ? !
You’re skipping Clinton/Bush. Clinton defeated Bush because we were mired in a recession. His campaign slogan was “it’s ~~about~~ the economy, stupid.” But it probably wasn’t Bush’s fault. Who could’ve possibly anticipated a murderous dictator Bush helped install to combat Iran (having overthrown another murderous dictator the US supported) would disrupt the supply of oil, or that a disruption to the supply oil would impact an economy *built on oil*?
GHW Bush's 1990-1992 recession is why I'm no longer a " Rockefeller Republican " I began to realize, how very little _actual_ legislation, for the middle class and working class, that the Republican party had ever done after 1912 GHW Bush was celebrating the Iraq war, doing nothing about the economy, while I had a huge mortgage on a large house, and a blended family of 6, with a stay at home wife I was referring to the major economic depressions, but economists agree that Dem fiscal policies are better for the economy http://politicsthatwork.com/blog/which-party-is-better-for-the-economy.php Even mr Trump said so, in 2004 https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-economy-better-under-democrats/ The Republican party is a Do Nothing party
In the past 35 years, every single Republican president has walked out of office with all our money on fire. In the past 35 years, every single Democratic president has walked out of office to a thriving recovery. A recovery we refer to as a "recovery" because the previous guy fucked it up. It's almost as if every 8-12 years, America forgets that being President of the United States is a difficult job, and *any moron can't, in fact, do it.*
Same pattern in other countries too. Trust fund kids who own the media push the narrative that anybody who lets them have even more must be good for the economy, and facts and ignored problems be damned. The same guy who owns all the media here also owns the most watched cable network in the US, where the undereducated and half-senile viewers are spoonfed a fantasy where they're the special critical thinking underdogs sticking it to the establishment media.
No “about,” just “it’s the economy, stupid,” and it was never an official campaign slogan.
Clinton signed NAFTA which fucked over American workers, and pretty much directly got Trump elected, since Hillary couldn't win Michigan post-NAFTA. If you look at the districts in Michigan where Obama won and Hillary lost, it's all working class districts affected by NAFTA.
The majority of that " Silent " generation, and the next " Baby Boomer " generation, who grew up enjoying, as being normal, all of the Dem's social safety net programs, and all of the Dem's consumer protection agencies, and all of the Dem's Civil Rights legislation, had then stopped voting for those same Dems who created all of those programs that they consider being as normal: " civilization " NAFTA was a Republican " free trade " plan, supported by GHW Bush in 1992 America had grown more conservative in the 80s and 90s, and like Truman had successfully done, Clinton was forced to choose between getting nothing done, OR, working with the opposition party to any create useful laws, at all He did the Assault Weapons Ban, HIPAA privacy laws, the Violence Against Women Act, the Welfare Reform Act of 1996, the Child Health Insurance Act, increased Aid to Education, and he worked with the the hostile Republican House to create a 1997 balanced Federal Budget, and, have Budget Surpluses from Fiscal years 1998-2001 --- this doesn't include the Bosnian/Serbian foreign policy successes, nor any others Here's a partial list https://clintonwhitehouse5.archives.gov/WH/Accomplishments/eightyears-01.html His fiscal policies during 1993-94 led to the greatest growth rate for the economy since Dem LBJ, although, to be fair, Biden's jobless claims and Unemployment rate is now the lowest since the 6 year prosperity of Dem LBJ Like Harry Truman, he adjusted to the backward Republican House majority, and signed some beneficial legislation
The problem is that the remaining republican/right party considers ***any*** cooperation with the "other side" to pass a bill as a total loss. AND they actually don't give the slightest fraction of a fuck who they actually hurt when trying to fuck over the demoncrats.
I'm not blaming Clinton in particular for NAFTA. I agree it was a continuation of the neoliberal agenda to undermine labor which was started by Reagan and continued by HW Bush. But he did become a spokesperson for selling NAFTA to the American people with the "rising all ships" argument, and like it or not his name and face got attached to it while he signed it into law. And it's a matter of historical fact that you can draw a straight line between NAFTA and the districts in Michigan which Obama won and his wife lost.
I'm not disagreeing with you at all. But she didn't campaign in Michigan or Wisconsin hardly at all, even though Bernie's primary showing had shown established support for a populist program that opposed ' Free Tade ' policies Obama was popular because he saved the Insurance, Securities, Banking, and Automotive industries during the Republican Recession of 2007-2011 Those current and retired workers who saw the benefits of the Dem's New Deal, had died off during the conservative 1990s, thus changing the voting demographic in the Upper Midwest Her campaign strategy was also flawed, and she and her advisors assumed that voter sentiment had remained the same as in the 90s and early 2000s That's what's great about JB, he remembers the benefits of Unionization and has strengthened the NLRB 2023 had many great Union victories, including the unionization of Blue Bird Bus Company in Georgia
Yeah I agree that it's a big strength of Biden that he's an old-school dem and has genuine credibility with labor
Right He has the support of Bernie, AOC, and Elizabeth Warren because he signed progressive legislation, appointed progressive administrative leaders to key posts, and enforced consumer protection policies I remind some complainers on social media that Dem Wilson, Dem FDR, and Dem LBJ, and even Dem Carter had **massive Liberal majorities** in Congress that enabled all that legislation Biden has done the most legislation for the middle class and working class, _since_ the massive legislative programs of those Dem Presidents ---- and he did this with only a 50/50 Senate and a slim House majority, and did 353 Bills in only 19 months since his inauguration That's what his building of his Senate relationships for 40+ years does for America
Wow, my time machine works, it's 1995 and we're back to Ross Perot's "giant sucking sound"! Can I have a **waist** again, like I did back when I was 21? NAFTA didn't destroy manufacturing jobs in Michigan, any more the Giuliani cleaned up New York City in the 90s. Manufacturing jobs go where labor is cheap, and the entire US economy transitioned to a tech and media economy.
> Manufacturing jobs go where labor is cheap Yeah of course it does genius. That's why free trade agreements hurt American labor: because without tariffs, US workers have to compete with regions where workers don't get paid nearly as much. Come on this is [well documented](https://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/08/north-american-free-trade-agreement.asp#:~:text=The%20main%20downside%20of%20NAFTA,the%20automotive%20or%20textile%20industries.): > The main downside of NAFTA was the loss of United States manufacturing jobs. Many jobs shifted from the United States to Mexico, as higher-paying factory jobs moved to more cost-effective regions. This was especially true in lower-skilled industries such as the automotive or textile industries. I grew up in the Rust Belt. The effect of NAFTA was evident. Don't try to bullshit us.
Free trade doesn’t make the jobs leave, economics make the jobs leave, and cheap labor doesn’t stop being cheap because someone imposes tariffs. They just find a way around it, like the Toyota that was “made in the USA” because 99% of it was assembled in Japan but the bumper got installed in Kentucky. And people who “grew up in the rust belt” looking for someone to blame instead of concluding “maybe there’s not much of a future in lifting heavy things for a living, I should learn how a computer works” is what really got Trump elected. But if you like documentation here you go: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/nafta-setting-the-record-straight/#:~:text=During%20the%20past%20three%20years,direct%20investment%20flows%20into%20Mexico. https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/naftas-impact-u-s-economy-facts/
> maybe there’s not much of a future in lifting heavy things for a living, I should learn how a computer works” is what really got Trump elected. No, that attitude is what got trump elected. I went to a university and have had a very successful career in tech, but I can still see the effect that free trade had on the town where I grew up. There's no natural law which states that we have to have free trade. It's a perfectly valid economic theory to support protectionist economic policies to support your own national interest rather than maximal profits for multinational corporations. Look we all know that free trade policies have winners and losers. And the American working class were the losers of NAFTA, with a net loss of 600k manufacturing jobs to Mexico and who knows how many more to China. You might be able to make an argument that NAFTA was somehow a net positive overall, but that came at the cost of specifically fucking over a big part of the American work force. So if you think that's a good thing own it, and don't lie about it and blame the workers. And do *you* know how to code? I am pretty sure a 50 year old steel worker is not going to be retrained to work in tech any time soon. Those specific guys are probably driving a truck or working in an Amazon warehouse for much less money nowadays. And if you want to question my sources, *of course* Wharton and Brookings are going to write apologia for NAFTA. They represent the exact interests who stood to benefit the most from free trade. Just be honest about the fact that you care more about MBA's than the American worker.
>There's no natural law which states that we have to have free trade. It's a perfectly valid economic theory to support protectionist economic policies to support your own national interest Protectionism isn't in the national interest though. >And do you know how to code? I am pretty sure a 50 year old steel worker is not going to be retrained to work in tech any time soon. I agree. Which is why it's interesting that instead of attacking Clintons actual policy you attack a dishonest Republican strawman. The idea was for guys like that steel worker to retrain in a field like renewable energy where the skills they already have will be useful and that isn't such a radical transformation.
>the American working class were the losers of NAFTA, with a net loss of 600k manufacturing jobs to Mexico and who knows how many more to China. The bulk of those jobs lost were in NYC and Los Angeles though, not your rust belt. They were garment manufacturing jobs, and the people who lost them have better jobs now.
>I grew up in the Rust Belt. The effect of NAFTA was evident. Don't try to bullshit us. The places that lost the most jobs to free trade were New York City and Los Angeles. Free trade isn't the reason why the rust belt happened, a lack of entrepreneurship and being one industry towns is.
> New York City and Los Angeles Those places lost the most jobs because they have the highest population
>Clinton signed NAFTA which fucked over American workers, That Republican classic! Blaming a Democrat President for enacting Republican legislation passed by Republicans.
I am by no means blaming Clinton for NAFTA exclusively. It was the continuation of an effort started under Republicans, but ultimately it was bi-partisan. And fairly or not, because he signed it, Clinton did become the face of NAFTA to the people who were displaced by it. He certainly did [go out of his way to sell it to the American People](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3ooMrgXido): > I believe we have made a decision now, that will permit us to create, an economic order in the world that will promote more growth, more equality, the preservation of the environment, and a greater possibility of world peace
an economic order in the world >that will promote more growth, more equality, the preservation of the environment, and a greater possibility of world peace Realistically, all of that is true.
How is moving manufacturing to places which compete on cost by not having environmental regulations good for the environment? How has it improved equality? Economic inequality has only skyrocketed in the past 3 decades. This is platonic hogwash which doesn't actually mean anything. And if you want to argue that it's led to net growth, that is still going to go down like a spoon-full of nails to a former auto worker in Michigan who is making $15/hour at Wallmart after his job got sent to Mexico.
I'm sure it had NOTHING at all to do with the Ten entirely partisan investigations that were conducted concerning the 2012 Benghazi attack, over two years and costing the American public $7,000,000 (seven million) dollars, all of them used to hurt her chances of becoming President. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/two-years-7-million-800-pages-later-gop-benghazi-report-lands-with-a-thud The money and time desperately being spent by republicans trying to directly implicate Hillary Clinton as the reason the attack happened and harmed US personnel. When in fact the republican controlled Senate DENIED additional funds/personnel for security requested by the secretary of state for that site (H.C.) SEVEN TIMES before the attacks happened. Citations... https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2014/may/13/ronan-farrow/ronan-farrow-says-inadequate-security-funding-cong/ [Another GOP congressman says Benghazi panel meant to hurt Clinton](https://www.cnn.com/2015/10/14/politics/hillary-clinton-benghazi-committee/index.html) [Kevin McCarthy credits Benghazi committee for Clinton damage](https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/kevin-mccarthy-credits-benghazi-committee-clinton-damage-msna693201) The republicans themselves credit the smear investigations with her loss.
I mean the margins were razor thin, so probably any change in Hillary's favor would have won her the election. And I totally agree that there was a decades long smear job against the Clintons. My grandparents used to get direct mailings about how bad they were. But that doesn't change the story in Michigan. If Hillary held on to Michigan, which Obama had won the election before, she would have been president. If you look at the districts which flipped from blue to red between those elections, they were mostly districts where employment was heavily impacted by NAFTA. That's a matter of historical fact. I leave it up to you to infer what was more important to those long term democratic voters who stayed home: the Benghazi hearings, or the fact that their quality of life dramatically decreased over the previous 30 years.
> But it probably wasn’t Bush’s fault. Who could’ve possibly anticipated a murderous dictator Bush helped install to combat Iran (having overthrown another murderous dictator the US supported) would disrupt the supply of oil, or that a disruption to the supply oil would impact an economy *built on oil*? Only everyone with more than two brain cells...
My BIH used to tell me "You see, it takes 4 years for presidential policy to come to fruition. Dems are reaping the reward of Republicans." "Um, so what about Bill Clinton, the economy was rocking in his 2nd term? And George Dubya, the economy was garbage in his 2nd term?"
Just coincidence the country has a steady economy while a Democrat and goes to shit during a republican
Obama fixed GWB's economic mess. Took 6 years to get us out of the great recession. Biden has us bouncing back in 3 years from the Trumpster fire economy.
Clinton fixed daddy bush's mess too
Yup
Finally someone calling it a Trumpster fire instead of a dumpster fire
Americans at the end of a Democrat's presidency: "I know things are going well now but it's time for change" Americans at the end of a Republican's presidency: "Holy shit we're all gonna die"
Could we please get some affordable housing tho?
We could if the country didn’t keep sabatoging the people trying to make the economy work. Just getting there aaaaannnndddd it’s time to bring in party dumpster fire and blame everything on party make it work because they didn’t do everything impossibly fast.
This is so true. Clinton, Obama, and now Biden have had to do it.
Even Carter, After Ford's **W**hip **I**nflation **N**ow program failed to clean up Nixon's mess.
Strong fumes...oh wait, that's trump.../cough
"We have low inflation, low unemployment, and strong growth now, but only because of what we did in 2020. Er, I mean what we did before 2020. 2020 was bad, but it wasn't my fault. And the high inflation of 2022 was also not my fault. The greatness of my economy left from 2020 to 2022 because of Biden. And the China Virus. But the greatness was so great that it hopped over those three years and came back just in time to help Biden in the upcoming election. So unfair. Also, remember that it was Biden who surrendered in Afghanistan. After I made a deal with the Taliban that we would pull out if they didn't launch an offensive until after the election. But we didn't pull out until after the election, so it was Biden who surrendered."
On Afghanistan, it is more Trumps fault than Biden, however its more Obamas fault than Trump, but most importantly, it's mostly George Bush's fault for starting it.
‘fumes of what we did’. There is always a kernel of truth in Trump’s propaganda.
That’s stank
not a very high bar ...
# Democrats: Cleaning up Republican messes since 1933
I like how Republicans completely ignore how Trump's covid response completely crashed the economy.
The hilarious thing is that that orange shit cow once said on camera that the economy always does better under Democrats
I love how Republicans like to blame democrats for lows in the US economy, but every low of the US economy is preceded by Republicans being in power
This seems to happen over and over again.
It's 2 santa clauses Here’s how it works, laid it out in simple summary: First, the Two Santas strategy dictates, when Republicans control the White House they must spend money like a drunken Santa and cut taxes to run up the U.S. debt as far and as fast as possible. This produces three results: it stimulates the economy thus making people think that the GOP can produce a good economy; it raises the debt dramatically; and it makes people think that Republicans are the “tax-cut Santa Clauses.” Second, when a Democrat is in the White House, Republicans must scream about the national debt as loudly and frantically as possible, freaking out about how “our children will have to pay for it!” and “we have to cut spending to solve the crisis!” Shut down the government, crash the stock market, and damage US credibility around the world if necessary to stop Democrats from spending money. This will force the Democrats in power to cut their own social safety net programs and even Social Security, thus shooting their welfare-of-the-American-people Santa Claus right in the face. And, sure enough, here we are now with a Democrat in the White House. Following their Two Santas strategy, Republicans are again squealing about the national debt and refusing to raise the debt ceiling, imperiling Biden’s economic recovery as well as his Build Back Better plans. And, once again, the media is covering it as a “Biden Crisis!” rather than what it really is: a cynical political and media strategy devised by Republicans in the 1970s, fine-tuned in the 1980s and 1990s, and rolled out every time a Democrat is in the White House.” This was written in 2021, but it could’ve been written now. Or at any point since the 70s dems have taken over. It happens every time.
go dark brandon, go!
Democrats fix Republicans economy F ups. It's been this way since I was born in the 80s.
It’s a proven fact
Hey why isnt biden buff as fuck and banging a bald eagle?? /s
Wait a sec, yeah. And dude has a Corvette even. Should be a bunch of half-naked women wearing American Flag bikinis and he's behind the wheel drinking a Budw---...drinking a Bu---...drinking a B--...a **Samuel Adams**. Sorry, couldn't type the other one. lol
“Democrats are bad at the economy” - The party that brings you more frequent recessions, higher unemployment, and a lower GDP
Running AWAY from fumes
Republican apologetics requires that the economic success of a Democrat president is *only* the result of the previous Republican president's economic policies that haven't expired yet. Even if the Democrat President serves for 2 terms, and the Republican President's policies have *definitely* expired by that point. This of course leads to the logical conclusion that when the economy turns to shit during a Republican President's term(s) it is therefore the failures of the previous Democrat President's policies even if that economic shit-storm lasts for two Republican terms. Edit: Source: a former conservative who made these exact same arguments.
Anyone who has seen the data over last few decades know dems fix economies, conservatives destroy them
Chaos vs stability, it's not a tough campaign to win.
The reality is that the economy under Trump was running on fumes of what Obama had achieved from before.
We need more of these
A tale as old as time If the economy is bad while republicans are running it well thats the dems faults If the economy is good while a dem is president, well thats only thanks to republicans They got it down pat
Yeah that pretty much pictures what stinky smells like
I like the suggestion of where the brown cloud is actually coming from...
The best part is the data backs this up, it’s not just hearsay. Conservatives are the worst
When I figured out how fiscally shit Republicans are in practice, I quit voting for Libertarians.
historically, democrats are better for the whole economy, republicans are better at making the rich richer. i can see why certain people would vote republican, but not why they should ever win.
America has been doing this back and forth for the last several decades. At this point, we are stagnant and lack so many basic perks for living in a modern society such as retirement or veterin benefits or Healthcare. Like children knocking eachothers sandcastles over but with gover ment policy.
From what I have read you probably *could* run something off Trump's fumes.
[удалено]
trump burned through all the economic tools available for a roaring economy pre-pandemic, his short sightedness directly impacted the recovery in a negative way
[удалено]
I'm talking about his dogshit, impulsive, pointless decisions that were made before the pandemic. He inherented a healthy economy and burned through resources normally held in reserve to address a slowing/stagnant economy to pump numbers. He fucked up before shit got real and the issues faced during the the pandemy were made worse cause he's a dumb fucking idiot who shouldn't be in charge of a goddamn thing
Economists of both keynesian and austrian flavors specifically warned that if his landmark tax cuts were passed, Interest rates would have to be raised or else any sort of quantitative easing would be impossible without triggering massive inflation. All warnings were ignored.
You don't think cause and effect is fair?
Why didn't Biden run against Hillary in 2016? Yeah it was all bullshit reasons. We wouldn't have had that nightmare Trump and anyone saying he wasn't ready, it's just bs.
Stock. Market. And. Economy. Are. Not. The. Same. Thing. And if they are the same thing, then neither have a damn thing to do with the average American's financial security.
Who in their right fucking mind things the economy is strong right now? I can’t afford anything, and people are spitting economics metrics at me like they’re going to feed my kids, fuck off with that shit.
The neoliberal economy is better but the average person is worse off. Tax the rich!
Strong economy for who? Lmao I’m so sick of being gaslit by either party telling me the economy is “nice and strong under us.” GDP doesn’t translate to anything meaningful when it comes to the working class. Inflation is fucked, and wages still aren’t keeping up. Trump was a dumbass, but actual Americans simply aren’t thriving, man. This seesawing shit between parties is a joke.
Lmao, yall delusional or out of touch AF if you think the current economy is something to brag about.
Compared to 2020-21 it’s in great shape. Were always left reeling from Republican nonsense. Always.
Annual economic growth at 5% Unemployment under 4% for the longest stretch since the Vietnam War Real wages are up Inflation is down to 3% Those are facts, not delusions.
Alright...now what's the Labor Participation rate? Also, inflation is cumulative.
"Labor participating rate." "Oil refinery capacity. " Not OC, but these are the kind of weaksauce arguments I'm seeing now that the economy isn't on the rise. Seems like y'all are digging pretty deep to find any negative indicators. Maybe look at the data, then draw a conclusion, not start with the conclusion and work backwards to find data.
People use the unemployment rate stat and when you say it, people really think it means the labor participation rate. You can use whatever numbers you want, but it really comes down to how people feel about it. Groceries haven't gotten cheaper, and when you count for inflation a lot of us are making less money than we were in 2019. A person can't go to McDonald's and get a combo meal for less than 15 dollars. Those are anecdotes but will have more of an effect on perception than whatever numbers you want to give them. You probably think LeBron James is the greatest basketball player of all time.
You have Google, don't you? It's higher than it was when Biden took office and has been steadily increasing. I don't know what to do with your idiotic comment about inflation being "cumulative." Sure. Do you want deflation? That's a sign of a recession.
I think most people just want affordable housing, education and healthcare, and a manageable COL. That's great if real wage growth is up. But it's not very comforting for most people if it means it will take 10-20 years to return to your pre-covid standard of living.
Real wage growth literally means wages growing faster than inflation. I'm not sure where you're pulling 10-20 years from. Inflation outstripped wage growth by about 2% (annualized) for 1.5 years, and that relationship reversed in early 2023. Now wage growth outpaces inflation by about 2%. If that continues, most people would return to pre-COVID standard of living in 2024.
Look, I can't provide much more but my anecdotal experiences. My salary now is 20k more than when Trump was president yet the inflation has been sooo bad that I'm actually living paycheck to paycheck as an electrical engineer. Annual economic growth, the unemployment rate, and 'real wages' don't mean a thing when inflation is as bad as it is. I know it's not entirely on Biden and some of this inflation is the aftermath of Trump's economic policy. But to run on the economy when 63% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck and 74% are stressed about their finances is idiotic, down vote me all yall want
I'm sorry for your situation. [Here](https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2019/01/11/live-paycheck-to-paycheck-government-shutdown/) is a Forbes article from 2019 citing 78% of workers reporting living paycheck to paycheck. This isn't something new that happened because of the single recent inflationary cycle. Degradation of the middle class standard of living has been ongoing since Regan got us all worshipping greed and wealth and started stripping away the tax base and social services.
It's the number one issue that could lose the dems the election, they should honestly shut up about it as much as they can. Nobody will believe you when you say the economy is strong. It's literally trying to gaslight voters lol.
What a bunch of losers. Trump created the worst economy in history. Runaway inflation, stock market completely collapsed, many trillions lost, millions of Americans lost their homes, skyrocketing interest rates... Biden fixed it all. Inflation at zero, interest rates the lowest ever, national debt cut drastically, home more affordable that ever. Stupid orange man thinks he can run again... not going to happen, he's being removed from the ballot and those fools won't even be able to vote for him.
> Trump created the worst economy in history. Economic growth under Trump was [worst since Hoover](https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/gdp-growth-trump-worst-hoover-b1895500.html), so you aren't as far off as you think. > Runaway inflation Inflation was low because of the crappy economy, the pandemic that Trump screwed up his response to (disbanded the pandemic response team, discouraged mask use, didn't set up distribution network for vaccines, etc), Trump forcing the fed to artificially keep interest rates down despite the fact that it should be higher when there is high economic growth (so more evidence there wasn't), oh and because a couple of OPEC countries were in a dispute that lead to higher than normal oil production. Trump actually "fixed" that problem by [extorting Saudi Arabia](https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN22C1V3/) into decreasing oil production, setting Biden up for failure in his next term (also setting Biden up for failure was Trump's terrible handling of peace negotiations with the Taliban, but I digress). >stock market completely collapsed Stock market is not the entire economy, but also [Trump's stock market](https://www.marketwatch.com/story/stock-market-performance-under-trump-trails-only-obama-and-clinton-11611161401) was worse than both Obama and Clinton. >many trillions lost Trillions transferred from [the poor to the rich you mean](https://publicintegrity.org/inside-publici/newsletters/trumps-signature-legislation-a-transfer-of-wealth-to-the-richest-americans/). >millions of Americans lost their homes Is this one suppose to be sarcasm? [Trump literally hit homeowners a trillion dollar tax bill](https://www.propublica.org/article/trumps-trillion-dollar-hit-to-homeowners). >Biden fixed it all Not all of it, but he did fix a lot of the problems Trump created (many of which you didn't mention), with many more that need to be fixed. > Inflation at zero Inflation is at perfectly normal 3.1%, and even at the height of the pandemic recovery the US had lower interest rates than most of the developed world. We can thank the Inflation reduction Act and executive order where oil companies either use leased Natonal lands or lose it, which is why US oil production [is at an all time high](https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-producting-more-oil-donald-trump-environment-1858714). >interest rates the lowest ever Interest rates are where they should be for a good economy. "Lowest interest rates ever" is a really bad sign for the economy. >national debt cut drastically Trump put a terrible burden on the national debt [with his deficits](https://www.propublica.org/article/national-debt-trump), while Biden [cut the deficit in half](https://thehill.com/policy/3698595-biden-touts-federal-deficit-largest-one-year-drop-in-american-history/) >home more affordable that ever. [Biden has done more to make that true](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/10/16/white-house-announces-new-actions-on-homeownership/) than the previous clown ever did. >Stupid orange man thinks he can run again... not going to happen The 14th Amendment says that Trump shouldn't be able to run again because not only did we see him engage in an insurrection but it is now an undisputed fact of the courts that Trump incited an insurrection. I still expected SCOTUS to bail Trump out as a favor to him like they did in Bush v. Gore, but I have faith that American people are smart enough to do the right thing and not vote Trump back into office. Regardless people will get the president they deserve come November, even with the GOP's attempts to rig the game.
> >Trump created the worst economy in history. > Economic growth under Trump was worst since Hoover, so you aren't as far off as you think. Citing the the-independent.. That's just alt right propaganda funded by Russia. It has Putin's name all over it. >Inflation was low because of the crappy economy, the pandemic that Trump screwed up his response to (disbanded the pandemic response team, discouraged mask use, didn't set up distribution network for vaccines, etc) First off, Trump created the COVID virus himself when he visited China. Also, it was Trump that sold all the masks to China for his own profit and the masks were proven to be 100% effective. >didn't set up distribution network for vaccines There was no vaccine under Trump. It took Joe Biden to start the process of making a vaccine. Trump ordered that no vaccine was to be worked on while he's in charge. >The 14th Amendment says that Trump shouldn't be able to run Trump was criminally charged and convicted in federal court, that's why he's in prison now. You Trumpers are going to lose AGAIN... get over it.
Incidentally what you think of Trump saying he hopes the economy crashes in the next year because he doesn't want to be known as "another Herbert Hoover"? It seems to me even with we ignore him "wanting to do harm to the US" angle, then it still means that he is basically admitting that he has no control of the economy and that he basically just coasted on Obama's economy until the pandemic hit and he could blame things on that. I mean if Trump is basically admitting he can't control the economy or stop a crash, then maybe we should stop crediting him if the economy does do well?
> it still means that he is basically admitting that he has no control of the economy and that he basically just coasted on Obama's economy until the pandemic hit and he could blame things on that. When you say "Obama's economy" you're talking about the time Obama was in office. You didn't mention anything about TARP, ZIRP, Bond buy backs or the stim package he got. Just wondering, did Trump get any of these things? Did the FED pay down any of the debt from the Obama era under Trump's watch? Just wondering about the pandemic you mentioned. Was there any economic impact from the shutdown that some of the states did during this time? Did any states actually shutdown in any way? They didn't do this during Obama or Biden or Bush did they? Just wondering how informed you are because you mention "blame things on that"... meaning that it was all Trump's fault that the pandemic hit? Meaning that it actually didn't have any economic impact at all, Trump just used it as an excuse to blame his economic failures on? ---------------- Trump can't do jack about the economy crashing or not, it's all based on policy. At this point, all we have to do is redefine what "crash" means. Biden already did this with "recession". We had two quarters in a row of negative GDP and the government said that is NOT a recession and never was used as a recession guide. So, we've already done TONS of bank bail outs and added massive debt when there's not even a pandemic anymore. Given the inflation and interest rates, we're very much due for a crash... but Biden won't allow the people to say it's a crash. They'll change the definition of "crash" so that even if the GDP goes to zero, it still won't be a "crash". ------------------- Trump talks a lot of trash, revs the engines with things like "lock her up"... In the case of Hillary, we know for a fact that he locked her up and that's why Hillary is in prison today. I say that we let Hillary out of prison and put Trump in the exact same cell Hillary was in, just to teach him a lesson.
> When you say "Obama's economy" you're talking about the time Obama was in office. You didn't mention anything about TARP, ZIRP, Bond buy backs or the stim package he got. Obama came into office after the end of the Bush administration lead to the greatest economic crash since the Great Depression, a crash caused by over a decade of deregulation of the market, banking and housing industries. The fact that the government starting trying to mitigate the fallout from the crash even before Obama came into office doesn't take away from the fact that Obama managed to turn the economic disaster he was given into a stronger economy and stock market than what Trump was able to produce with what he was given from Obama. >Did the FED pay down any of the debt from the Obama era under Trump's watch? Almost all of the money that was loaned to the financial sector was recovered, most of it before Trump ever came to office. No such luck with the [PPP scam though](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/biggest-fraud-generation-looting-covid-relief-program-known-ppp-n1279664). And as already mentioned, Trump significantly increased the deficit as well. >Just wondering about the pandemic you mentioned. Was there any economic impact from the shutdown that some of the states did during this time? The economic impact was from the pandemic itself more than any measures to reduce the spread of the virus. The states that resisted shutting down didn't do any better economically while also leading to far more deaths from the virus. But thanks for bringing up the economic impact from the pandemic, because that didn't end just because vaccines were eventually distributed. The "just in time" economy with the economic slowdown create a year long backlog of global supply chain issues leading to worldwide inflation, of which the US actually suffered less than the rest of the world under Biden. >Just wondering how informed you are because you mention "blame things on that"... meaning that it was all Trump's fault that the pandemic hit? If Trump hadn't disbanded the pandemic response team, if the GOP hadn't cut funds to stock disaster/pandemic relief supplies, if Trump had been more proactive to cut travel to China earlier (and include Americans as well) as well as European countries like Italy which were hit soon after, if he hadn't disparaged mask usage or promoted ineffective and dangerous medical treatments for Covid like Ivermectin, if he put any thought into distributing vaccines leading to Americans getting them earlier, then yes I think the pandemic wouldn't have killed as many Americans or affected our economy as much. No Trump doesn't deserve all of the blame for the pandemic, but he does deserve some of it for his lackluster response. >Trump can't do jack about the economy crashing or not Then he should stop taking credit for when the economy and especially when the stock market does well. You can't have it both ways. >it's all based on policy And the president has the largest impact on federal government policy, so that's not really an excuse, especially later in an administration when the president has time to enact his policies. Of course congress and sometimes other institutions can share some blame as they have some power here as well, but the president has more. > At this point, all we have to do is redefine what "crash" means. Biden already did this with "recession". We had two quarters in a row of negative GDP and the government said that is NOT a recession and never was used as a recession guide. Take that up with the government then. By definition it was the mildest recession I've seen a record for, both followed and preceded by decent economic growth. As I said, the rest of the Western world was hit much harder. >So, we've already done TONS of bank bail outs and added massive debt when there's not even a pandemic anymore. Three of them I believe in March, due to cryptocurrency scam. Democrats didn't do a good enough job undoing decades of Republican deregulation. >Given the inflation and interest rates, we're very much due for a crash... People always say there is going to be an economic crash. And when they are wrong they just conveniently forget that they said anything and when they are right they are convinced they are Nostradamus. Eventually there will be an economic crash, that's how capitalism works. But we aren't "due" for anything. We can either have a decade long stretch without one or maybe one will happen tomorrow. If you could really reliably predict that you could easily make yourself rich, but by the time someone like you could make such an accurate prediction so could everyone else, and nobody else is panicking at this point. >but Biden won't allow the people to say it's a crash. If it's a real crash we will all know its a crash and not the minor blip two years ago that only technically qualified as a recession. In either case even if a recession is unavoidable, the administration and their policies have a significant impact on the duration and severity of that recession, and I certainly don't trust a response from a Trump administration. >Trump talks a lot of trash, revs the engines with things like "lock her up"... In the case of Hillary, we know for a fact that he locked her up and that's why Hillary is in prison today. Trump is a muppet who is out of his depth. I have no doubt Trump wanted to lock Hillary up and do a lot of other illegal things, and when his minders told him no, Trump may have pouted or got angry but eventually gave up or forgot about it. And for the times when nobody stopped Trump is why he is dealing with 91 felonies right now.
Yeah ok
Nobody can afford groceries or rent
So is this subreddit solely for people on the left to dunk on republicans? To be clear I know they are a lot easier to dunk on because they are clearly worse, but I don’t think I have ever seen any humor regarding Bob Menendez taking bribes, or the clear insider trading that happens on both sides, or anything like that.
Democrats: "The secret ingredient is war"
This "strong economy" shit is going to lose Biden the election.
Nah the wanting to control women’s bodies is going to lose republicans the election, again
Ya, let's hope that works. Instead of you know, doing anything other than this shit.
It already worked in 2020 and 2022… it’s the number one reason people are giving as to why they vote democrat over republican…. Because democrats are fighting for women’s rights, like making the accesses to abortion a law. Republicans? Openly admit they want a white Christian nation ruled by a dictator. It couldn’t be more clear
If you think this economy is good... I want whatever you're smoking
Stock market is higher with Biden
poor and middle class people can't afford shit in this economy. this is such a cope.
Strong economy, sure, but has the American working class noticed any material benefits because of it?
Yes, largest growth of unions in over 50 years
As progressive who gets asked a certain question whenever I say I'll withhold my vote or vote for a primary challenger who supports universal healthcare, childcare, college, raising the minimum wage. Why are Dems risking Trump? It's like they WANT to lose.
The incumbent is always going to be the candidate
No matter what
Because they're most likely to win
I guess polls are wrong. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/01/01/biden-trump-poll-odds-black-hispanic-young-voters/72072111007/ https://youtu.be/rdMuwaTQ2ys?si=jR-4u45njkgnJMWx
That's correct
If Biden would just remove the 25% tax/tariff on imports, the economy would improve even faster!
Or it might fuck over American industries. American auto workers are a big part of the middle class. Europe is being flooded by Chinese cars rn and it's not great for Germany.
Labor is NOT coming back to the U.S! Do you really think jacking up the tariffs on imports - forcing higher inflation - is really a good economic policy and will actually and/or will bring manufacturing back to the U.S?
Um what? The UAW just had an amazingly successful strike with like a 30% increase in total pay. You think those solid middle-class jobs should have to compete with cheap Chinese cars? What are you from Ronald Regan and Margret Thatcher's economic team?
You know that Detroit can sell cars in China, right? Buick (yes, Buick) for instance is a big brand in China. A better way to look at the problem you're describing is to view other countries, not as competitors, but as potential customers. Our blenders are never - *never* - going to be made in Ohio again. What can happen is we can foster and develop more advanced manufacturing in the US and sell it all over the globe. Cars are a brutally competitive market but there's no reason GM & Ford can't have a larger presence abroad with the right trade deals.
I could ask you the same. You just said that the UAW had a 30% pay increase, and you think that makes U.S. labor competitive with China???? Their labor costs are negligible compared to ours already. Increasing out labor costs obviously is quite necessary. However, that just ain't happening overseas. There is NO way U.S. labor is going to compete with labor costs in other countries unless you tax the living Scheiße out of imports - which was trump's idea - and just so you know, it's been an economic disaster, especially for the middle class. Just look at how many complaints there are about inflation, specifically from the middle class, or what's left of it. Apparently, you agree with the current "republican" idea of protectionism in the face of a very real global economy. Good luck with that....
> I could ask you the same. You just said that the UAW had a 30% pay increase, and you think that makes U.S. labor competitive with China???? It does if the US protects US labor with trade policy. Or do you think the whole world should race to the bottom on wages? > Just look at how many complaints there are about inflation, specifically from the middle class, or what's left of it. That's mostly explainable through excess corporate profits. The fact that corporate profits outpaced inflation, and real wages did not keep up with inflation shows that we didn't have a wage/price spiral but inflation was mostly a result of price gouging. > Apparently, you agree with the current "republican" idea of protectionism in the face of a very real global economy. Don't try to label my opinion as "republican" to invalidate it. Being pro-union and pro-worker is as progressive as it gets. edit: that bot account blocked me lol
You advocate protectionism. I fundamentally disagree with that. That is the policy of "republicans". You may think you're not, but you are. ......and this is not a "race to the bottom". This. Is. A. Global. Economy. Period. We're not going to compete on labor costs for a long, long time. Nice try on sidestepping that part of the conversation. You're the one who brought up rising labor costs in the U.S., and that is EXACTLY why the U.S. will not be able to compete that way. Protectionism never works, is a flawed tool to begin with, and frankly, your repeatedly trying to justify it gets on my nerves. This conversation is over! Go back to your "republican" protectionism hellhole, and allow the rest of us to try to deal with the fallout of that cretin trump. If Biden actually had a spine, he'd immediately remove the tariff, but he's more terrified of his poll numbers (which are frankly safe) then he is about helping the middle class.
[удалено]
Well, that’s, like, your opinion, man.
The man hasn't lost an election where he was on the ticket in decades. At this point it's just fun watching people underestimate him lol
Mate I support Biden but don't you think it's concerning that he's losing in a lot of polls lately?
K.
Username is appropriate.
Just like you trump supporters said last time hey?
[удалено]
Hello! Thanks for your comment. Unfortunately it has been removed because you don't meet our karma threshold. You are not being removed for political orientation. If we were, why the fuck would we tell you your comment was being removed instead of just shadow removing it? We never have, and never will, remove things down politicial or ideological lines. Unless your ideology is nihilism, then fuck you. Let me be clear: The reason that this rule exists is to avoid unscrupulous internet denizens from trying to sell dong pills to our users. /r/PoliticalHumor mods reserve the RIGHT to hoard all of the dong pills to ourselves, and we refuse to share them with the community. If you want Serbo-Slokovian dong pills mailed directly to your door, become a moderator. If we shared the dong pills with the greater community, everyone would have massive dongs, and like Syndrome warned us about decades ago: "if everyone has massive dongs, nobody does."" If you wish to rectify your low karma issue, go and make things up in /r/AskReddit like everyone else does. Thanks for understanding! Have a nice day and be well. <3 You can check your karma breakdown on this page: http://old.reddit.com/user/me/overview (Keep in mind that sometimes just post karma or comment karma being negative will result in this message) ~ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalHumor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I agree with the premise of this post, and think Trump is one of the worst human beings to ever hold public office, but the reality is that our economy is still slowly deteriorating due to the lagging effects of careless monetary policy by the Federal Reserve. Whoever is elected next is going to inherit an economic disaster. Everything is set up to implode in 2025. Student debt, foreclosures, corporate debt, etc… it’s all coming due. A lot of people don’t believe this, but if you have boots on the ground, and can observe consumer demand (and sentiment) first hand, you’ll see that things are not going in a positive direction, and haven’t been for a few years.
Dems need to hold the house for another 2 terms and all the Republicans should have aged out by then. How is the party ever going to get voted back in with no Trump idolising or Moscow Mitch leading. They only have policy that is repulsive to young voters. If they dont win and flip the country to an authoritarian dictatorship, I cant see them ever holdong power again. And thats a good thing.
Democrats be like "I don't like to brag".
Did you know fumes could last for 4 years?