(05-11-2018 01:04 PM)Machiavelli Wrote: Are you telling the truth on that 55%. The Economist/YouGov poll that I have. Question 43.
FBI framing Trump.
Yes he is being framed Total 29%
No, he is not being framed Total 45%
Not Sure 26%
55% of all Americans believe the President is being framed by the FBI or believe it could be possible. No opinion does not equal could be possible. Use the vernacular in the actual poll. You are being deceitful. You voted for the right guy. You bend the truth just like him.
Okay, I literally laughed out loud at you on THIS one...
According to your quote, the actual vernacular in the poll is 'Not Sure', which isn't the same vernacular that you used when you said 'No Opinion'.
I agree, use the vernacular in the poll and don't be deceitful and bend the truth
55% certainly implies that there are many who said precisely 'no opinion' since 'not sure' almost by definition means 'possible' and 26 and 45% is much more than 55%
I know you know this, I'm just laughing at your admonition to others and complete disregard for it yourself.
(05-11-2018 01:31 PM)Machiavelli Wrote: I don't like replying to you because I believe we are not equal in a battle of ideals. There exists an imbalance of power, but I HAVE TO strike down such an awful ideal.
equal in a battle of ideals? How can a battle of ideals be anything BUT equal, since you have yours and I have mine... unless you're saying somehow that yours are better than or worse than mine.
Quote:Something you NEVER worried about under Obama... If we recovered from HIS trillions, we'll recover from Trump's... and if we don't, then Trump's trillions will be no more (nor less) harmful than Obama's or Bush's or Clinton's or Reagan's or Carter's etc.
One I have always worried about the debt. You presented that I never worried about the debt under Obama. Back up your claims. You said something. Back it up. The challenge is set. Please show where I was never worried about the debt. You can't. You won't. You are a fraud and I'll take away your most obvious reply. An absence of me not saying something about the debt does not constitute not worrying about it. I HAVE advocated about raising taxes to balance the budget along with Obamacare in 2008-2010. However, I am utterly sure you can not find me saying I do not worry about the debt. I have posted on many occasions that the only people who care about the debt are the people out of power. You will find that. However, me personally. I have always cared about it. I've POSTED numerous times we have to raise taxes. Numerous times and even my most ardent critic will attest to that if they have been paying a scant of attention. Your first reply is so blatantly false I don't even want to read the rest of your post.
Show where I have I have said I don't care about the debt.
You might try a remedial english course. Since the words after 'something you never worried about' are 'If we recovered from his trillions....' It should be obvious to anyone that I am responding to your Title that you don't think we will recover from this presidency based on (at least in part) HIS contribution to the deficits.
If I had meant as you claim that you didn't care about deficits, I wouldn't have followed it with an 'either/or' with regard to them.
I can find all sorts of times when you and I (as a fiscal conservative) were aligned in our concerns about the debt. Did you ever similarly say that Obama's debt was a problem FROM WHICH WE MAY NEVER RECOVER?
No.
I stand by my statement as 100% factual, and you've even admitted it.
But that's the GOOD news for you. The BAD news for you is...
Here
https://csnbbs.com/thread-777157.html you had some creative ideas to reduce it. Apparently you thought it was still manageable (meaning we will still recover) in April 2016
In THIS thread
https://csnbbs.com/thread-776862.html you actually predicted your own response... and actually in many ways mirrored mine...
The beholder will see what he wants to see. You can show charts that make the Republicans look like heathens and the D's as responsible and you can show the flip side just as easily. What honest people will realize is you care a heck of a lot more about the debt when the party of your adversary holds office. It's been an unmitigated disaster since Reagan and every party kicks the can down the road.
Obviously again you didn't think we couldn't recover from our debt and were merely concerned about the finger pointing... which is exactly what you're doing.
and of course there is THIS one
https://csnbbs.com/thread-724103.html
Where in a thread about why Obama didn't mention the 18 trillion dollar debt, your response was:
Bless your heart.
You only care about the deficit and debt when a D is in office. What the hell happened to the Deficits don't matter Dick Cheney party? Did I misplace those guys in the seat cushion? Did I leave them in the car?
You guys wouldn't be hypocrites now would you?
I'd ask you the same question
I never said you didn't care about deficits. I said you were never concerned
about the USA recovering from a president's deficits when it was Obama running them up.
You admit that here....
Quote:Second part- Have you ever heard about the straw that breaks the camels back? When you are digging a hole the first thing you need to do is stop digging? Your argument is pathetic.
Yes, there are straws that break camel's backs... however as I said, that last single piece of straw is no more nor less responsible than the first piece. You are engaging in exactly what you chastised others for 2 years ago and calling me pathetic when I make the exact same argument back to you... all the while whining like a 2 year old about people making personal attacks.
You're like the family with $100 to spend on food who blows $99 on a fancy dinner for two and then when the baby needs $5 in formula, you blame the baby for blowing the budget.
Here, let me quote you...
It's been an unmitigated disaster since Reagan and every party kicks the can down the road...
I agree, Yet for some reason, you've decided that despite the fact that Obama had 4 annual deficits of over 1 trillion (3 over 1.3 trillion) and according to the OMB, Trump will be within a hairs breath of $1 trillion, but never over.... that THIS is the breaking point. Not 18 trillion, not 19 trillion, not 20 trillion.... but 22 trillion... That's it. We MAY be done.
It seems quite obvious why you've chosen THIS time and THESE trillions as that breaking point.
You ARE the hypocrite under Trump that you accused others of being under Obama.... the only difference is that after Obama, you KNOW you can't legitimately say that deficits alone are bad, so you have to claim that we're at some sort of arbitrary tipping point.
So tell me how you arrived at the conclusion that it's (as an example) 22 trillion from which we may not be able to recover... and not 15 or 16 (under Obama) or 50 (under the NEXT person)?
I'll hang up and listen