So telling the truth about you is an insult? If I'm wrong tell me where>
Here I'll try this with you. Lets see if you can hold up your end of argument with substance.
Where Am I wrong about anything I just posted? What is it you believe Hillary or Bernie will do that will make the Country a better place. I mean my any objective measure it hasn't become better under the current empty suit. Did you see where they just (again) revised down last qtrs growth rate? And did you know that they've done the same thing in almost every qtr. So lets have at it. No name calling. You in?
Where are you wrong? Your post:
Seriously? Um you're in for a rude awakening. You act as if these two buffoons are some how mainstream. You have two of the biggest radical leftist you can find.
- You have an argument for Bernie... but HIllary isn't leftist. Neither was Obama for that matter... both are centrist candidates. Guys like Dennis Kucinich or Elizabeth Warren are left wing. Clinton and Obama are not.
You're what I call a racialist.
- not true. I put forward statistics on race because that's what the statistics show as being relevant. I believe in demographics.
You need to Balkanize the Country.
- nope
You're not really and American, you're a member of a group.
- I'm both. I'm a white male college educated professional of slavic descent in his 30's with 1 child who's black. I'm also an American. But statistical groupings are how you predict political elections... you find groupings that correlate with voting results and use those correlations to determine how future elections might end up.
The law or the Constitution don't really matter to you. How can any AMERICAN have an issue with enforcing our immigration law? Damn its just dumb.
- Not true. I favor CHANGING immigration law. The constitution allows for changing the law... even the laws in the constitution itself. And the laws that were passed by congress allow the executive branch to prioritize which people are targeted by immigration enforcement. Obama has deported more illegals than any other president. He's certainly not ignoring the law... but he's prioritizing which groups for law enforcement to target... those committing non-immigration crimes as opposed to families leading a non-disruptive life. Congress has passed laws ALLOWING him to set that prioritization.
And regardless of who the GOP puts up. This will be a landslide not seen since Reagan.
- I see nothing suggesting that. I'll call you incorrect about it after the election.
As far as Hillary or Bernie making America better... we have different views on what "better" is. I believe that wider access to college education for those with lower incomes is good. I believe the same when it comes to healthcare access. I think that tax reform (particularly eliminating corporate tax credits and deductions) and cuts to some of the more obscene military spending programs can help to lower budget deficits. I believe that having a president who'll nominate justices and judges who support a woman's right to choose and who don't believe in religious exceptions to the law is important as well.
I realize you probably hate all of those.
Here are some numbers for you.
While I know you may not agree with the employment rate calculation, the same math has been used for pretty much every president since Reagan. There was a slight shift in the calculation during Reagan's presidency, but the numbers before that were static as well.
Only 1 GOP president has left office with a lower unemployment rate than when they took office. Ronald Reagan.
NO Democratic president has ever left offices with a higher unemployment rate than when they took office. The worst was Carter who had the same rate when he left as when he took office... every other democrat has presided over a decrease in unemployment rate (going back to WW2).
As for growth... it's been slow and steady. Using the S&P method of calculation, in no calendar year was the US GDP negative under Obama (even in 2009 he hit 0.11% growth). It's been above 3% every other year. Your statement about adjustments is incorrect... the adjustments constantly happen but move both up and down. The idea that it always gets adjusted down is not correct. For example in the follow up reports to the 3rd quarter GDP growth report, it was revised up .6%. That was the one before this latest one in case you missed it. The latest report did NOT adjust numbers down for the 4th quarter or any prior quarter. It was the initial release and the prior quarters numbers don't generally ever move once the most recent quarter gets published. Adjustments will follow but the initial numbers just came out.
I think you're confusing the unemployment with GDP numbers.
