For the sake of our country, do you want President Trump to be successful?
Poor butthurt Dems 😝
Failure to support a sitting President is treason! A majority of our Military thought Obama was incompetent, but nobody tried to work against him!
60% of Democrats say no. That says it all right there.
60% of Democrats are not a majority, thank God!
Obviously I want the president to be successful, regardless of his political affiliation. I don’t think Trump has been successful yet, but I have a different definition of success than most Republicans, obviously.
Polster ... I’m glad you want our president to be successful. I recognize that your definition of up is down and your definition of right is wrong. So, I’m not at all surprised that your definition of success is also opposite.
Think...If I’m the one who’s always wrong, then why is it you who finds yourself at odds with mainstream science on a regular basis?
Polster ... I’m consistent with science. But I’m glad you agree that you’re wrong most of the time.
Think...It’s actually you who’s wrong most of the time. You disagree with 97% of climate scientists that humans contribute to global climate change. You disagree with the mental health experts at the APA that being transgender isn’t a mental disorder. You consider a fetus to be a person even though neither the courts nor the majority of scientists agree with you. I could go on, but you’ll just continue to ignore Science that doesn’t confirm what you already believe, so I see little point to keep this thread alive.
Polster ... oh, you meant the government whores who are pseudo scientists. I thought you were referring to real scientists.
You and I both know that real scientists have debunked and discredited the anything but scientific lie about 97%. I’ve already shown you the scientific evidence that confirms that boys who think they’re girls are mentally ill.
Think...I am referring to real scientists. You know, the ones who aren’t paid by oil and gas companies to lie.
Polster ... I’m happy to rely on the independent scientists, who aren’t supported by governments, with their own corrupt agendas.
We’ve been over this many times. I’ll go with Dr Judith Curry and those that stand with her. You go ahead and stand with the Australian non-scientist who counted non-consenting scientists as a part of his 97% lie.
Think...Judith Curry is simply not in the scientific mainstream. I’m sure you could find some nutty scientists who think the Earth is flat. That does not make it so. But it’s well-established that you don’t accept any scientific consensus that doesn’t confirm what you already believe to be true due to your confirmation bias, so having this conversation with you is a giant waste of time.
Polster ... you discount anyone who disagrees with your political position. Dr Curry’s credentials speak for her climatological abilities. She’s neither a shill for oil nor a government whore.
You know that NASA has manipulated the data to prop up their faulty computer models. You know that we are in the eighteenth year of a cooling period — started long before the Balinese volcano eruption. You know that not one of the hysterical calamitous predictions from hair-on-fire climate “scientists” have come to pass. Not one!
You also know that we now have an adult in the White House that is skeptical of the horrible waste of the previous failed president, MrO, and is poised to right size the spending on the climate lies.
Welcome back to reality.
Think...You haven’t stated one fact in that comment. You’re not living in reality. The globe is still warming and has not been cooling for nearly twenty years. Plus, Curry’s position is not a mainstream one. Nearly every climatologist agrees with me and disagrees with you, and it’s not because man-made global warming is some broad government conspiracy. Get a grip.
Plus, any data manipulation that occurred was a normalization of the temperature record and had no impact on the science. In fact, it may have made the Earth appear cooler than it really is. Stop believing in propaganda.
Polster ... wrong. The lies told by the non-scientist in Australia have been debunked. Please continue to lean on that lie of 97%.
Which ridiculously unscientific climate alarmist predicted calamities have occurred as life giving CO2 has skyrocketed in our atmosphere?
Think...Actually, I’m not wrong, you are. 97% of actively-publishing climate scientists agree that man has an effect on global climate. Stop lying.
Think...Here you go:
Polster ... I’m glad you’ve progressed from denying NASA’s temperature manipulation to pathetically attempting to excuse it! This is real progress!
The fact is that by removing the temperature manipulation, the entire framework of climate alarmist lies crumbles, and we see that actually the 1930’s were warmer than recent years. If climate liars were to admit this truth, they know that their funding would evaporate — as it should.
It’s time to give up your lies, and come clean! By the way, I’m still waiting for you to either admit the lies, or point to the climate alarmist ridiculous calamities that have come to pass because of your fairy tales. Please share ... are either Manhattan or Miami under water as of 2015?
Think...The temperature normalization makes the Earth appear cooler today than it really is, yet the Earth has continually warmed since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. The Earth is also warmer than it was in the 1930s. You’ve lied yet again. Post the video of climate scientists who said that Manhattan and Miami would be underwater by 2015, and answer for me this question: “Did a large majority of climatologists say that Manhattan and Miami would be underwater by 2015?”
Polster ... no! The 97% lie has been debunked! The author of that ridiculous non-scientific study, a politician in Australia, lied! His criteria for establishing that a paper supports they myth of man-caused climate warming was that a paper didn’t mention it that man “didn’t cause it”. It is a pathetic attempt to manipulate small minded people to equate the absence of the assertion “man is not the cause of the warming climate” with “man is the cause”. It’s simply pathetic.
Again, I note that you e failed to demonstrate even one of the prophesies of calamity, predicted by hair-on-fire climate Alarmists has occurred.
Think...Actually, you’re wrong. 97% of actively-publishing climate scientists believe that man is contributing to global warming. No matter how many times you deny it, it still remains true. Sorry for you!
Think...I posted the Forbes article. Too bad you ignored it. Now, answer the question. How many, if any, climatologists agreed that Manhattan and Miami would both be underwater by 2015?
Polster ... please post the names of 100% of the climate scientists, and identify individually the climate scientists that you’ve interviewed to confirm that they believe that man is the cause of climate change. Which of those individuals is NOT a government sponsored pseudo scientist?
Think...I have not conducted the interviews, but I believe Cook’s figures because they’ve been peer-reviewed. Why are you so hesitant to accept peer-reviewed science?
Polster ... thanks for admitting your unscientific approach to having faith in the discredited Mr Cook.
I’m still waiting for your response on which of the many ridiculous predicted calamities have come to pass because of the phantom global warming. When are you going to share the list?
Think...There’s nothing unscientific about peer-reviewed science. Also, Mr. Cook has not been discredited. Stop the lying.
Think...Is it possible that things that haven’t happened yet still could happen?
Polster ... your unscientific approach, and your blind faith are only made worse because your blind faith is placed in a man — a non scientist — who lied. Mr Cook purposefully chose to lump the vast majority of papers that didn’t mention the cause of climate change into the category of the delusional who believe man is the cause of change. He lied. He deceived and he has been exposed.
You still have failed to show even one of the many calamities predicted by climate alarmists that have come to pass. Why is that?
Polster ... climate alarmists predicted many calamities would have already occurred. Why do you think these alarmist prophecies failed so miserably?
Do you not understand that Mr. Cook’s paper has been peer-reviewed by many many other scientists?
Name some of the scientists who have made false predictions.
Polster ... Mr Cook’s peers are journalists, not scientists! Many who have reviewed the trash that Mr Cook wrote have exposed the faulty logic of attributing believes to those who never made the assertions that man is the cause of the climate changes.
That is how Mr Cook lied. This is the man in whom you have blind faith.
Polster ... you can’t point to a single calamity that was supposed to have happened because none have come true, even after the dates certain given by the prophets of the Church of Man-Caused Climate Change.
Think... Noted that you cannot name a single climate scientist who predicted these calamities that you’re referring to. Also, Mr. Cook is a scientist, so his peers are also scientists. Keep the delusion alive!
Polster ... Mr Cook lied. If an author doesn’t say that man is the cause of climate change is that equivalent to specifically saying that man is the cause?
I await your response on the MANY calamities that were to have come to pass. Which actually happened? Your prophet, Al Jazeera Gore said that Manhattan and Miami would be under water by 2015. Do I need to post Mr Gore’s inconvenient lie here for you again, or are you now prepared to admit his lie?
Think...Mr. Cook did not lie. Stop lying.
Think...Is Al Gore a climate scientist or a politician?
Polster ... I knew you’d eventually get ther. Your prophet of the Church of Man-Caused Climate Change, Al Jazeera Gore is not a climate scientist. He does however represent the faithful among the climate alarmists.
Your problem is that not one single climate scientist disavowed Al Jazeera Gore’s mindless predictions. Not one! Therefor all of the spineless government whores own Mr Gore’s ridiculous predictions. As do you!
Think...I didn’t know climate scientists had to disavow Al Gore.
Polster ... given their silence on their prophets nonsensical predictions, they are complicit in the lies. You too have remained silent as one prediction after another has failed to come to pass.
Polster ... did the IPCC or the Norwegians ask for the pit Nobel Prize back from the unworthy laureate, Al Jazeera Gore?
For those that only watch MSM. Jobs ( not part time) are coming back.
The strangle hold of regulations are coming off.
We have too many unskilled people that can not fill the job openings. Companies are wanting for skilled labor.
I want him to be successful in helping the working class majority in this country. The people that are the backbone to a strong economy. Unfortunately the policies he is trying to push through will do the opposite...
If trump is successful then this country will be a shithole so no
44 ... I get that you’re hysterical, but try to calmly explain your ridiculous assertion.
I haven’t seen a single trump policy or promise that I liked so If he is successful, these will all be implemented. Thus the country is a shithole
44 ... let’s be clear, your comment is both right and terribly wrong. If it IS a “shithole”, it’s because of the mess that MrO left it on. If it is long to be a “shithole” then it’ll be because MrT wasn’t able to reverse enough of the horrible Obama policies to make it better.
Not in the sense that I want his backwards policies to be enacted, such as a wall or more war, but in the sense that the economy stays afloat and the Union isn’t dismantled.
I can tell you’re nothing but a mouthpiece for the likes of Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly.
JFish ... and that makes you a mouthpiece for the corruption of the Clinton’s.
Think, I’ve never been a supporter of any of the Clintons.
Concern, I can also see that you’re not interested in any conversation taking place. If you’d like to actually have a meaningful discussion, then I advise you to change your attitude.
JFish ... my point exactly! Your silly asset doesn’t make the point you’d hoped it would!
Always a pleasure to talk to you, Think, with your senseless claims and all. I hope you have a wonderful day!
JFish ... who did you vote for last November?
I voted third party, Think.
Whatever you have to tell yourself, Concern. If manners are foolish, then that’s fine by me. It only goes to show your character.
JFish ... there is no candidate named “third party“!
I haven't voted for a winning POTUS candidate since 1988. Regardless, I want POTUS to be successful for all Americans regardless of who they are.
Squid ... good for you. You must realize that you are in the minority of leftists, right?
Drop the labels & namecalling if you ever want to engage in a real dialogue w someone.
Squid ... ha ha! Good one.
Wanting Donald Trump to fail is like wanting the pilot to crash the plane that we are all on.
Absolutely. It is well beyond the time that the never Trumpers stop their BS. It has become dangerous
I want america to be successful
Beachy ... are you willing to acknowledge when MrT’s policies facilitate the success of our country?
Trump’s success = Our failure
I hope Trump fails spectacularly.
Why is MrT’s success our failure? I understand that his success is the reputation of the leftist lies, but that’s all good for the country!
The Trump administrations agenda is to enrich and empower the already rich end powerful. That’s no good for the vast majority of Americans.
UKW ... please dispense with the glittering generalities which mean nothing, and get specific. Please provide even one valid example to prove your point.
The GOP’s proposed tax “reform”, for one thing.
UKW ... again, you may not realize it, but your purposeful ambiguity undercuts your position! What — SPECIFICALLY —about the proposed tax law supports your position?
CA ... I suspect that you and I agree on most things, but simply keeping the campaign promise to “fundamentally change the US” did NOT make MrO great! Fundamentally changing the healthcare to ruin it for hundreds of millions was a campaign promise kept, but the US lost as a result of that kept promise!
CA ... I get that you feel the need to look past my point.
If Trump is successful this country will no longer be.
DS ... methinks you’ve been in a coma for the past year. Have you been to California or at least remained relatively coherent as this topic has been debated?
My apologies, wrong poll.
DS ... please explain how MrT’s success leads to this country dissolving.
No worries and I should of clarified that I don't think the country will continue to be successful not so much that the country will literally collapse.
DS ... what will cause the country to not be successful?
1. Should the tax bill become law in it's current form it'll increase income inequality to dangerous levels. It'll raise the debt by 1.5 Trillion every year which is unsustainable.
2. His acceptance and promotion of the alt-right will poison our political discourse and create dangerous situations for people everywhere. I fear that more Charolettevilles are on the way.
3. He is destroying our reputation abroad by instigating crises in the Korean peninsula and the Middle East for really no reason. He chooses autocrats like Putin and Duerte over our allies.
Well survive Trump but I think he's already damaged our country's ability to be great and I'm skeptical if we can ever correct that damage.
DS ...methinks you misunderstood the projection on the tax prolly! The projection was $1.5 T over ten years, NOT every year! That is a HUGE difference!
It’s also worth noting than in his eight years, MrO raised the debt by mort than $1.5 T. Where were you then?
DS ...MrT has rejected the alt-right. Therefore your assertion necessarily fails. On the other hand, MrO’s embrace of the alt-left led us to short term failure and long term purging of leftist idiots. MrO presided over historic losses of over 1,000 lost Democrat seats in state and federal positions. The embracing of the alt-left didn’t destroy the country, it helped voters see that MrO was taken the country in a direction that they did not want to go!
Fair point on the every year part I spoke (typed? wrong) Obama shrunk the deficit to around 900B every year which was far smaller than when he first got into office. The tax bill will increase the deficit which is where the 1.5T comes from. So either we grow the debt or things need to be cut. It's starting to look like Congress will go after Medicare next so we'll see if that happens.
DS ... you might want to escape the leftist news bubble. MrO was the laughing stock of our friends and dismissed by our enemies.
Having lived in China for 13 years, I know a thing or two about their customs of honor and respect. The fact that they made MrO deplane out of the tail of his aircraft while rolling out the red carpet to MrT is a HUGE indication of how little respect they had for MrO and how differently the feel about MrT. As for our image among leftist European failed states, ya, their views are irrelevant. We certainly don’t want to follow their lead and that offends them. I’m fine with that.
Trump never disowned the alt-right. During his Charolettevilles speech he claimed there were bad people on both sides. I'm sorry but if you're saying Nazis are just as bad as the people fighting them then you're enabling Nazis.
Who are you referring to for the alt-left? No one over here uses that term. As far as seats go, you can't discount how Republicans heavily gerrymandered seats after 2010 to help maintain power. In addition to that many GOP held states made it harder to vote and in many cases courts found it was for political reasons not to limit fraud.
I could say the same for your news bubble. Trump is deranged.
Good for him with China but as you're aware China ain't the only country. Yes the economic union that is the largest economy in the world is a collection of failed states ok... It sounds like you just want to grovel at the feet of daddy Trump.
DS ... shame on you! Do you really think your attempted conflation of deficit and debt is going to work? Pssst, it won’t!
MrO doubled the debt. He added more to the debt than ALL 43 presidents before him COMBINED!
I note that you skirted the question about why you didn’t set your hair on fire when MrO added $1.5 T to the debt EVER one of his eight years , yet you seem beside yourself about MrT POTENTIALLY adding that amount over ten years.
You do understand the conditions required to make that projection happen, right? The only way it would happen is if we fell back into an abysmal Obama economy! With a roaring Teumo economy, there ain’t no way the $1.5T becomes a reality —- even in twenty years!!!
DS ... luckily for you, MrT made several speeches about the leftist inspired violence in Charlottesville! In the first, he accurately pointed out that there were bad hombres on both sides — which is absolutely accurate. When leftists started setting their hair on fire because he spoke the truth, MrT clarified to ensure that no snowflakes could twist his words into somehow an endorsement of the alt-right.
Your promotion of this false narrative suggests that you may be engaged in the promotion of the lies. Is that true?
DS ... you’re the one making the silly assertions about the US being less respected. I refuted your claim. You provided no evidence that we are less respected in ny meaningful way.
It appears that you are conceding the point.
The deficit of how the debt grows. It seems like conservatives do not seem to understand that. The debt peaked under Truman and decreased until Reagan. Even though Obama added huge amounts to the debt, he lowered the deficit meaning if we kept doing what we're we're doing the deficit would go away and we could eventually lower the debt itself. Trump's plan reverses the decline of the deficit. I find it interesting for conservatives were screeching over the debt are now silent.
Again, when you chose neutrality you're siding with the aggressor, in this case Nazis. You still haven't explain who the alt-left are.
Global favorability polls of the US have declined nearly 20% since he's taken office. www.pewglobal.org/2017/06/26/u-s-image-suffers-as-publics-around-world-question-trumps-leadership/
Let me ask you, how do you think Trump will help America?
DS ... I’m not sure why you choose to persist with your arrogant non-fact based posts. I suggest a basic economics and accounting class for you to better understand these adult topics that you’re venturing into!
You want to give MrO a participation trophy for reducing the RATE OF GROWTH of the deficit yet you can’t explain the “magic” that caused the debt to double during the dark Obama years.
Seeing that you refuse to respond to my arguments, it's clear you are unwilling or unable to to make clear points.
It seems you need to go take a basic math class. Even if the deficit shrinks the debt can still grow, it just grows at a reduced rate. Imagine you're willing up a water bottle. You out your faucet to full blast and it fills. However if you turn the knob the other way you bottle fills slowly.
DS ... I responded to your idiocy. You have yet to explain how your messiah, MrO, was able to double the debt while supposedly reducing the deficit. There is no magic to math, even though I get that your leftist middle school teacher told you so.
Explain, if you can, in adult terms, how MrO pulled of this magic!
This graph does a good job of highlighting what happened. As you see the debt spiked under the first years of Obama, but as spending decreased, the deficit increased, which in turn slowed the rate of growth of the debt. Nearly all of the addition debt occurred under Obama was in his first term.
DS ... again you demonstrate your cluelessness!
“Debt” did NOT spike — as you falsely assert —in the early dark Obama years! MrO’s contemptible debt spiked the day we finally purged him from the White House!
Again, you’d do yourself a huge favor if you stopped trying to look smart and simply and quietly educated yourself by taking an economics class and an accounting class. I’m confident that even you are trainable.
DS ... do you deny the fact that even the most generous total was that the national debt as MrO took office was $10.626 trillion. On January 20, 2017, when he left, it was $19.947 trillion. The difference is the $9.321 trillion added as a result of MrO’s failure of a presidency.
I've tried. I can't help it if you're so illiterate you can't read a graph. I guess you'll just have to stay stuck in your falsehoods
DS ... do you ever reread your idiotic words? The Obama National Debt did NOT peak until we purged him from the White House! It’s not a difficult truth to understand!
You appear to be an illiterate 15 year old, so all I can offer is for you to stay in school and educate yourself.
Especially with the repeal to the 2013 net neutrality change.
Do I want him to do good things for the country? Yes. Do I want him to be successful in pushing his current agenda? No.
Goo ... be specific. What is it about MrT’s agenda that you want to fail?
I want America to succeed. I want Trump to succeed in terms of that. Like I don’t want the economy to collapse or World War III on the Korean Peninsula or anything like that.
But I genuinely believe a lot of Trump’s agenda is bad for the country and the world. So I don’t want him to succeed in those particular aspects of his agenda.
As just one example, I think the way he is contributing to the destruction of institutions and norms is extremely corrosive to our society and civilization. I think it’s the definition of penny wise pound foolish (and only penny wise for his personal agenda). I don’t want him to succeed in tearing down the institutions and norms that are the fabric of our society.
Omni ... which institution do you think MrT plans to tear down?
One obvious example would be the press. He calls legitimate news sources “fake news” and “the enemy of the people.”
Omni ... do “legitimate news sources” sometimes make false stories to promote their own political agendas? Does the president have the right to call out those lies and misrepresentations?
Legitimate news sources don’t “make false stories”. Occasionally a new source will make a mistake or publish something that’s inaccurate and then they will issue a correction. On very rare occasions a rogue reporter has fabricated a story or stories, but as far as I know whenever this is happened they’ve been fired and the news source issues retractions, corrections, and apologies.
No industry is perfect. Every industry makes mistakes and has bad actors within its ranks. However balance most legitimate news sources report stories fairly accurately.
What specific instances are you thinking of where legitimate news sources “made false stories”?
Of course. Every American should.
Glux ... Merry Christmas!
For the sake of our country, I would love to see a genie wave a magic wand and make the debt go away but I don’t think that’s gonna happen either.
JD ... do you think MrT will double the debt like MrO did?
Hey JDoe, I provided the WSJ link you asked for. It states that Trumps bank records were not subpoenaed but rather associates of Trump had their accounts subpoenaed. Now will you cease with the ad hominem attacks? An apology is in order also.
Didn’t even look. Your credibility with me took a pretty big hit when it was pretty clear you fibbed. Does that link include the description of the retraction and explain the error?
You mean the article with he headline “Mueller Subpoenas Deutsche Bank Records Related to Trump”
Yep. Trumps records weren't subpoenaed. That's exactly what I said.
Where exactly does it talk about a retraction? Exactly as you stated?
Reread my comment. I never said a retraction was in the article. Changing the entire original article to something completely different is a retraction.
“No. The WSJ retracted it yesterday. The story was and is bogus.”
Your words verbatim.
And they did. The original story isn't anywhere in WSJ. Go ahead and google it, senior smarty pants.
I don’t think you understand how legitimate newspapers handle retraction. This, plus the tone of your comments, makes me think you might be a little young and this exchange is getting pointless.
Newspapers don’t pull all traces of a story. They will correct the story, then note the changes, usually at the end of the story. It would be questionable journalism to just put something incorrect out then yank it without a mention.
The original poll question was about a Reuters reporter, not WSJ. I don’t know how you got down that rat hole but I think you should drop it.
Just admit you're wrong and I was right. Mueller did not subpoena Trump's bank records. I know you are even if you won't admit it. I wouldn't expect someone who doesn't believe truth when it hits him in the eye any way.
Like I said, I’m done.
Yep. I was right and you won't admit defeat and can't change the argument with your straw men. Cower and retreat in true leftist fashion.
Whatever... Just remember I showed you to be a lot less than honest with that fib of yours. When you lose credibility, you lose a lot.
I would like that of course, do I think he is making successful, Hell no!
Secure borders, strong military, healthy economy…yes I’m hoping President Trump is successful.