You might not agree that it takes time to see the effects of economic policy but the logic follows. If Bush was responsible for Obama's first 6 years. Obama is responsible for Trumps first 6. I think that guy is confused.
NWS Pics that make you :lol: every time you see them NWS
- Thread starter WarNipple
- Start date
You might not agree that it takes time to see the effects of economic policy but the logic follows. If Bush was responsible for Obama's first 6 years. Obama is responsible for Trumps first 6. I think that guy is confused.
how does that make sense when Bush was in office 8 years?
Because Bush's first 6 years were due to the guy before him
but obama only 'served' 4 - the rest of the time he was golfing
what the **** is going on here...so no president is responsible for anything? You Californians confuse me
How is that related if you're arguing the effects carry over 6 years after you're out.
none of it makes any sense, its not related. That's what we're saying.
The economic success is due to Trump's success with his new reforms / policies, not Obamas......
but obama only 'served' 4 - the rest of the time he was golfing
what the **** is going on here...so no president is responsible for anything? You Californians confuse me
Hey easy with the insults I'm from NY
but obama only 'served' 4 - the rest of the time he was golfing
what the **** is going on here...so no president is responsible for anything? You Californians confuse me
As far as economic policies go, people usually do consider the economic growth for the president's first year or so at least partly due to the previous administration. It takes time to build up your administration and then come up with new policy and get it passed. Then it takes time to take effect and show results.
We haven't had any president's who have been viewed nearly as PRO Jobs as Trump in a long time though.
Roger that. Even the Bush's were/are globalists.
I wasn't saying it's true. Just meant the tweet was incongruent. He was trying to be clever but looks stupid.
Obama had no results because he couldn't impose job killing regulations across every aspect of the economy fast enough. He made it crystal clear he was no friend of any kind of business and GDP reflected that fact quarter after quarter. Trump gets elected and businesses of every size know they finally have a friend and the off to the races the economy and the stock market went.
Obama trying to take credit is hilarious.
The writer makes perfect sense.
I think investor confidence is at an all time high with Trump. DT will step out of the way so to speak, de-regulate and let businesses run without interference from the WH. There was way too much regulation and bureaucratic bullshit with Obama, Bush etc..
****, back to funnies and get political discussion in the politics section!
I'm not arguing the politics. I just meant as a simple logic problem if Obama thought the previous administration was responsible for his first 6 years he would think he was responsible 6 years after he left.
Lol so this is Obama's economy then. An economy that gave him mediocre results, but only up until the exact day DT took office, and then it decided to go on a run of record proportions. Got it... makes complete sense. Makes so much sense that I dont think I have ever heard anything more sensible.
Sent from my [device_name] using the svtperformance.com mobile app
Sent from my [device_name] using the svtperformance.com mobile app
That isn't the car Fran wrecked. That one was black.
That’s what I was getting at but I believe it got lost in translation, we really do need a sarcasm font
I believe that concept of delayed results is largely bullshit.
Users who are viewing this thread
