President Trump

[Old Man Jingles]

Was Reagan at 40% approval in ‘88?

I quoted the article. How am I lying?

My quote had nothing to do with 1988. Which means it’s you who was lying.

Like I said a liar or just plain stupid!!!

Read your friendking post nitwit!!!

Geez!!!

.
.
.​

 

[bbsam]

Was Reagan at 40% approval in ‘84?

YES

No.

Ronald Reagan's Presidency: A Polling Retrospective

You said '84 and then provided proof in '88.
In the article, it says, "In January 1983, only 41 percent of Americans approved of the job Reagan was doing".
SMH

View attachment 275164

But as the economy began to rebound and unemployment declined, Reagan's ratings rebounded too. Heading into Election Day in 1984, 58 percent of Americans approved of his job performance, and he was easily reelected carrying 49 states. Reagan received some of his highest ratings in 1985 and 1986. In 1986, he reached an approval rating of 67 percent twice (in June and October) -- matching the rating he received when CBS News first measured it in 1981.

Read the entire article.

Like I said a liar or just plain stupid!!!

Read your friendking post nitwit!!!

Geez!!!

.
.
.​

Reduced to calling names? Brilliant.

 

[Nolimitz]

The 266,000 jobs in the November report included over 50,000 manufacturing jobs. Jobs Obama said were never coming back.

40k of that was striking workers going back. TTKU

 

[vantexan]

When do the trade wars hit home with you and other Trump supporters? Long-term, we aren't winning. Trump has managed to destroy manufacturing and farming alliances with China (and others) that took decades to build. Even if China and the US come to terms, they have already secured other suppliers of soybeans, manufactured goods, and other major Chinese imports that aren't coming back. These are two interdependent economies, a fact that none of you seem to realize. If China tanks, we tank too, because the US is absolutely dependent on trade with them and vice-versa.

Ask the executives at John Deere, Caterpillar, and Boeing how sales to China are going. For Deere and CAT, domestic farming woes are killing domestic sales too. By screwing the farmers, Trump also screws the companies that sell them equipment.

Trump can rail about protectionism and tariffs forever if he wants, but history has shown they don't work. Free trade, which has been a GOP tradition, is going by the wayside, and that isn't a good thing.

I'm so happy that you think Trump's economy has long-term viability, which it doesn't. A lot of the "gains" came through the tax cuts, which have ballooned deficits and lined the pockets of the 1%. Trickle-down isn't happening as described, nor are tax revenues increasing because of a booming eceonomy.

Sooner or later, it will go south. Keep on believing in King Orange though. Let's see how he does when it starts to erode.

You have a fundamental flaw in your logic. China was already buying soybeans and corn from Brazil and Argentina because of their lower prices. Just cheaper to grow there. Why do you think Trump is emphasizing buying our ag products? China made out like a bandit with our $550 Billion annual trade deficit. Trump is trying to get them to open their market to competition that would benefit our workers too. Not to mention stopping them from stealing our intellectual property. And don't forget their human rights abuses that were recently addressed in new laws that have them furious.

 

[vantexan]

40k of that was striking workers going back. TTKU

Are you certain those jobs are counted as new jobs? If so still a very good report.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

Reduced to calling names? Brilliant.

Thanks for playing!
Go get a hug Man!

 

[bbsam]

You have a fundamental flaw in your logic. China was already buying soybeans and corn from Brazil and Argentina because of their lower prices. Just cheaper to grow there. Why do you think Trump is emphasizing buying our ag products? China made out like a bandit with our $550 Billion annual trade deficit. Trump is trying to get them to open their market to competition that would benefit our workers too. Not to mention stopping them from stealing our intellectual property. And don't forget their human rights abuses that were recently addressed in new laws that have them furious.

Unfortunately for Trump, China can drag this out for another 30 administrations if need be.

 

[vantexan]

Unfortunately for Trump, China can drag this out for another 30 administrations if need be.

No, they can't. Right now they are in desperate need of pork. So much so it could possibly bring down their government. And they're seeing more bankruptcies, which, based on how they use collateral, could bring down their financial system. And we aren't the only ones critical of their treatment of Uighurs and Hong Kong. Could hurt their trade.

 

[bbsam]

No, they can't. Right now they are in desperate need of pork. So much so it could possibly bring down their government. And they're seeing more bankruptcies, which, based on how they use collateral, could bring down their financial system. And we aren't the only ones critical of their treatment of Uighurs and Hong Kong. Could hurt their trade.

Or they start killing off some of their billion population.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

Unfortunately for Trump, China can drag this out for another 30 administrations if need be.

Wrong

 

[tonyexpress]

He Grew Up Poor in Chicago. Then Conservative Values Helped Transform His Life.

“After I began to volunteer with this alderman and learn the ways of the Democratic Party … I began to question some of the narratives,” says Gianno Caldwell. “Why is it that although these politicians come every year during election time, why is it the conditions and the communities never get better?”

 

[MrFedEx]

You have a fundamental flaw in your logic. China was already buying soybeans and corn from Brazil and Argentina because of their lower prices. Just cheaper to grow there. Why do you think Trump is emphasizing buying our ag products? China made out like a bandit with our $550 Billion annual trade deficit. Trump is trying to get them to open their market to competition that would benefit our workers too. Not to mention stopping them from stealing our intellectual property. And don't forget their human rights abuses that were recently addressed in new laws that have them furious.

Not true. US soybean sales were lost due to Trump policies, not lower costs. Interesting how you shape the narrative by creating false facts. Simply put, Trump policies cost US farmers soybean and corn sales. Our contracts for these sales now belong to other countries.

There will always be a China trade deficit because the US is a massive importer of cheaply made Chinese products. We simply do not produce what China wants or its people can afford in terms of mass consumer goods.

Trump is emphasizing buying the ag product sales we lost through his insipid trade policies. Trying to get back lost business.

You will support him no matter what he does, which is usually ill-advised or just plain nonsense.

 

[Fred's Myth]

That’s a pretty optimistic idea.

Between trade policies and horrific flooding this spring, farmers have had it rough.

And I’d be willing to suggest that some of those folks professing outward faith in the president, might just not have their vote represent the same. Because those bailout checks to farmers don’t even come close to covering cost.

And when will the tariffs end? According to the president, they probably won’t and will be more after the 2020 election.

How many farmers can afford that gamble for another four years?

Estimated 2.6 million employed on U.S. farms.

Is that enough to swing an election, assuming ALL vote against Trump?

 

[bbsam]

Estimated 2.6 million employed on U.S. farms.

Is that enough to swing an election, assuming ALL vote against Trump?

Is that what I said?

 

[newfie]

Yes. An even stronger economy. Many Wall St. analysts have predicted a jump if Trump leaves, because investors hate the kind of instability characteristic of Trumpanomics.

that's some made up Schiff there .

 

[newfie]

You said '84 and then provided proof in '88.
In the article, it says, "In January 1983, only 41 percent of Americans approved of the job Reagan was doing".
SMH

View attachment 275164

bbsam is the master of deflection and diversion

 

[newfie]

Unfortunately for Trump, China can drag this out for another 30 administrations if need be.

you do realize their economy is tanking?

 

[bbsam]

you do realize their economy is tanking?

Yes. I also realize that the ruling class in China will thrive off the carcasses of 300,000 of their citizens and really not care.

 

[vantexan]

Not true. US soybean sales were lost due to Trump policies, not lower costs. Interesting how you shape the narrative by creating false facts. Simply put, Trump policies cost US farmers soybean and corn sales. Our contracts for these sales now belong to other countries.

There will always be a China trade deficit because the US is a massive importer of cheaply made Chinese products. We simply do not produce what China wants or its people can afford in terms of mass consumer goods.

Trump is emphasizing buying the ag product sales we lost through his insipid trade policies. Trying to get back lost business.

You will support him no matter what he does, which is usually ill-advised or just plain nonsense.

No amigo, China lost half it's pig herd to ASF, thus a huge drop in demand for soybeans.. Meanwhile it's been buying from Brazil and Argentina because they're cheaper. They buy in the U.S. when the others start running out of beans. And China has protectionist policies to protect their industries. We don't sell very many cars in China for example. Trump is negotiating to open up their market to our products but it looks like the Phase 1 deal will be about as good as it gets..

 

[bbsam]

bbsam is the master of deflection and diversion

No. But my reading comprehension is better than the old pothead’s.