What will the republicans do?

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Apr 14, 2009
768
133
1,593
#1
The National Debt Increased Under Trump Despite His Promise to Reduce It.
No surprise. He lies about everything.
The debt increased by almost 7.8 trillion.

Economists agree that we needed massive deficit spending during the COVID-19 crisis to ward off an economic cataclysm, but federal finances under Trump had become dire even before the pandemic. That happened even though the economy was booming and unemployment was at historically low levels. By the Trump administration’s own description, the pre-pandemic national debt level was already a “crisis” and a “grave threat.”

This debt was massively increased by the 2017 corporate tax cut that was promoted by the wingers that it would boost revenue to offset the tax cut. Well I guess we know how that worked out.

So now Biden wants to stimulate the economy with one point something trillion. Will the Republicans now act like they are really physical conservatives and not the spend like drunken sailors they have been for the last four years?
What’s it going to be?
My guess they’re going to be obstructionist. Just like they were with Obama. After he inherited the economic collapse of 2008.
It will be revealed.
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,479
2,063
1,743
#3
I was against the spending during the Trump term and if Biden moves forward with some of his stated plans to further increase the national debt...I will be against that as well.

We need leadership that has our future in mind. Unfortunately, we have three hurdles that we cannot seem to overcome;
1) leaders are short-sided. They love doling out dollars to special interests;
2) leaders are power hungry. There is little doubt that cutting spending will have a short term negative effect on the economy — we are drunk on government spending. Leaders want to remain in power so that decide not to lead but to do actions and spend to remain in power.;
3) the electorate does not understand what problem the massive national debt generates and the impacts it has on the future. And frankly most don’t care.

$17M of the $26M national debt has been during the last 12 years (Obama and Trump), but this topic/issue seems to only be important for a few - libertarians, budget hawks, people of conscience.
 

cowboyinexile

Have some class
A/V Subscriber
Jun 29, 2004
17,918
10,630
1,743
41
Fairmont, MN
#4
The National Debt Increased Under Trump Despite His Promise to Reduce It.
No surprise. He lies about everything.
The debt increased by almost 7.8 trillion.

Economists agree that we needed massive deficit spending during the COVID-19 crisis to ward off an economic cataclysm, but federal finances under Trump had become dire even before the pandemic. That happened even though the economy was booming and unemployment was at historically low levels. By the Trump administration’s own description, the pre-pandemic national debt level was already a “crisis” and a “grave threat.”

This debt was massively increased by the 2017 corporate tax cut that was promoted by the wingers that it would boost revenue to offset the tax cut. Well I guess we know how that worked out.

So now Biden wants to stimulate the economy with one point something trillion. Will the Republicans now act like they are really physical conservatives and not the spend like drunken sailors they have been for the last four years?
What’s it going to be?
My guess they’re going to be obstructionist. Just like they were with Obama. After he inherited the economic collapse of 2008.
It will be revealed.
 
Nov 6, 2010
2,301
796
1,743
#6
I was against the spending during the Trump term and if Biden moves forward with some of his stated plans to further increase the national debt...I will be against that as well.

We need leadership that has our future in mind. Unfortunately, we have three hurdles that we cannot seem to overcome;
1) leaders are short-sided. They love doling out dollars to special interests;
2) leaders are power hungry. There is little doubt that cutting spending will have a short term negative effect on the economy — we are drunk on government spending. Leaders want to remain in power so that decide not to lead but to do actions and spend to remain in power.;
3) the electorate does not understand what problem the massive national debt generates and the impacts it has on the future. And frankly most don’t care.

$17M of the $26M national debt has been during the last 12 years (Obama and Trump), but this topic/issue seems to only be important for a few - libertarians, budget hawks, people of conscience.
It's really just your number 3. Sane leadership could navigate numbers 1 and 2, but they'd get voted out before they could make any headway. I'm starting to think our 4 year cycle is too short. I wonder if the president should be elected every 6 years, and only serve 1 term. Heck, even 8 I think would be ok. The fact that sitting presidents have to run for re-election from the time they take office is starting to show to be a big disincentive for true leadership.
 
Jul 5, 2020
585
86
28
57
Broken Arrow
#8
The National Debt Increased Under Trump Despite His Promise to Reduce It.
No surprise. He lies about everything.
The debt increased by almost 7.8 trillion.

Economists agree that we needed massive deficit spending during the COVID-19 crisis to ward off an economic cataclysm, but federal finances under Trump had become dire even before the pandemic. That happened even though the economy was booming and unemployment was at historically low levels. By the Trump administration’s own description, the pre-pandemic national debt level was already a “crisis” and a “grave threat.”

This debt was massively increased by the 2017 corporate tax cut that was promoted by the wingers that it would boost revenue to offset the tax cut. Well I guess we know how that worked out.

So now Biden wants to stimulate the economy with one point something trillion. Will the Republicans now act like they are really physical conservatives and not the spend like drunken sailors they have been for the last four years?
What’s it going to be?
My guess they’re going to be obstructionist. Just like they were with Obama. After he inherited the economic collapse of 2008.
It will be revealed.
And Obama increased it $8.6 trillion, without a pandemic. And your description of Biden’s plan as simply “one point something trillion” is laughable. Only a 90% error, but still laughable.. As if “something” to the tune of an additional $900 billion is insignificant.
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
30,591
32,124
1,743
oklahoma city
#9
And Obama increased it $8.6 trillion, without a pandemic. And your description of Biden’s plan as simply “one point something trillion” is laughable. Only a 90% error, but still laughable.. As if “something” to the tune of an additional $900 billion is insignificant.
Obama had 8 years not 4 years and he had to deal with the GFC.

Obama wasn't good at decreasing spending but he wasn't anywhere near the reckless spender Trump was. Obama improved deficits as the economy improved. As every president this century has done because that is what anyone with a lick of sense would do. But not Trump. "Yuge" economy mainly because he was deficit spending like we were in a recession just to juice the economy. Just like you would expect based on how his businesses implode in debt but certainly not good for the nation's finances.

Screen Shot 2021-01-15 at 8.08.50 PM.png
 
Last edited:
Apr 14, 2009
768
133
1,593
#10
In 2016 the farmers/ranchers where getting 9 billion a year in welfare. In 2020 that number is 23 billion. Those are damn expensive votes. But man oh man they do love the trumper.
“ trade wars are easy to win“
 

Jostate

Bluecolla's sock
A/V Subscriber
Jun 24, 2005
21,416
14,918
1,743
#11
The National Debt Increased Under Trump Despite His Promise to Reduce It.
No surprise. He lies about everything.
The debt increased by almost 7.8 trillion.

Economists agree that we needed massive deficit spending during the COVID-19 crisis to ward off an economic cataclysm, but federal finances under Trump had become dire even before the pandemic. That happened even though the economy was booming and unemployment was at historically low levels. By the Trump administration’s own description, the pre-pandemic national debt level was already a “crisis” and a “grave threat.”

This debt was massively increased by the 2017 corporate tax cut that was promoted by the wingers that it would boost revenue to offset the tax cut. Well I guess we know how that worked out.

So now Biden wants to stimulate the economy with one point something trillion. Will the Republicans now act like they are really physical conservatives and not the spend like drunken sailors they have been for the last four years?
What’s it going to be?
My guess they’re going to be obstructionist. Just like they were with Obama. After he inherited the economic collapse of 2008.
It will be revealed.
Anyone who expected Trump to be a fiscal conservative ignored his entire career over the last 4 decades. I honestly didn't remember him even pretending during his campaign.
 
May 4, 2011
2,269
1,096
1,743
Charleston, SC
#12
Anyone who expected Trump to be a fiscal conservative ignored his entire career over the last 4 decades. I honestly didn't remember him even pretending during his campaign.
I'm not sure it's that as much as it was a signature issue for Republicans that seems now obliterated. Republicans don't really have the high ground there, though maybe they will when they retake Congress in 2022 (just based on history that seems like a lock). Whether coincidence or a causal effect, a budget hawking republican Congress combined with a democratic president have preceded the best improvements in deficit reductions in recent history. The question is, can Republicans beat that drum again now that trumpism is part of the identity? I would very much prefer at least some focus on the deficit, but I don't see that coming anytime soon. Maybe it can be a silver lining of the coming opposition to Biden.
 

Jostate

Bluecolla's sock
A/V Subscriber
Jun 24, 2005
21,416
14,918
1,743
#14
Serious question for the Democrats, and really a pretty easy question that a lot of people struggle with.

In past elections if the guy I didn't vote for won, I just thought, well, most of the American voters thought this was our guy so maybe they know something I don't. I shrug my shoulders and say I hope they're right, let's just see.

This time that's a little different because I don't know if 1000 Americans really voted for Biden. Calm down I'm not talking voter fraud. I'm saying almost all voted against Trump. Which I totally understand. I don't have a problem with that. But did anyone actually vote FOR Biden?
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
30,591
32,124
1,743
oklahoma city
#15
Serious question for the Democrats, and really a pretty easy question that a lot of people struggle with.

In past elections if the guy I didn't vote for won, I just thought, well, most of the American voters thought this was our guy so maybe they know something I don't. I shrug my shoulders and say I hope they're right, let's just see.

This time that's a little different because I don't know if 1000 Americans really voted for Biden. Calm down I'm not talking voter fraud. I'm saying almost all voted against Trump. Which I totally understand. I don't have a problem with that. But did anyone actually vote FOR Biden?
This time is not a little different. Many people voted for Trump merely because they could not stand the thought of President Hillary Clinton. Now many people voted for Biden merely because they can't tolerate the antics of Trump. "Lesser of two evils" is pretty commonly written. I can't remember even one person writing a post claiming that Biden was not only prefered to Trump but an actual preference in himself. I don't understand how you think this is a serious question that anyone struggles with when I thought it was already well covered and common knowledge.
 

Jostate

Bluecolla's sock
A/V Subscriber
Jun 24, 2005
21,416
14,918
1,743
#16
This time is not a little different. Many people voted for Trump merely because they could not stand the thought of President Hillary Clinton. Now many people voted for Biden merely because they can't tolerate the antics of Trump. "Lesser of two evils" is pretty commonly written. I can't remember even one person writing a post claiming that Biden was not only prefered to Trump but an actual preference in himself. I don't understand how you think this is a serious question that anyone struggles with when I thought it was already well covered and common knowledge.
Prior to 2016 lesser of two evils was thrown around some but it wasn't the campaign slogan it has become in the last two. I thought just maybe someone could say something they liked about Biden. It wasn't intended as a troll. The posts over the last few years were always so focused on support Trump / despise Trump discussions I thought maybe someone really had things they liked about Biden that didn't fit into the thread.

Biden had a little bit of a regular guy charm about him even a few years ago, that seems to be giving way to a "get off my lawn" way about him. As far as policy goes, everyone seems resigned to the idea that others around him are the real policy pushers. That's likely what I've seen too much of on TV lately but he is our President now and I'd like to think there is something about him to look forward to.
 
Apr 14, 2009
768
133
1,593
#17
What can I look forward to with Biden?
Just Off the top of my head.

#1 Ending the damn everyday lying about everything!!
#2 Believing in the best science.
#3 Not pandering to racist hate groups.
#4 Not blowing his own horn and thinking he’s the smartest guy in the room..
#5 Not lying and lying and more lying.
#6 Not Embarrassing the USA on the world stage while standing next to other world leaders.
#7 Not telling BIG whopping lies!
#8 not attacking and demeaning the opposition party but instead try to find common ground to work together with the other side to make America better for everyone.
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,479
2,063
1,743
#18
Obama had 8 years not 4 years and he had to deal with the GFC.

Obama wasn't good at decreasing spending but he wasn't anywhere near the reckless spender Trump was. Obama improved deficits as the economy improved. As every president this century has done because that is what anyone with a lick of sense would do. But not Trump. "Yuge" economy mainly because he was deficit spending like we were in a recession just to juice the economy. Just like you would expect based on how his businesses implode in debt but certainly not good for the nation's finances.

View attachment 88387
Can’t we just agree that they both were not outstanding fiscally?

Obama oversaw growth of the national debt in his first 4 years in office of 18.8%, 13.9%, 9.1%, and 8.6%. His last year in office national debt grew 7.8%. BTW, absolutely acknowledge Obama was hamstrung on spending growth his first year due to economy.
Trump grew is 1.8%, 6.8%, and 1.9% his first 3 years. In his 8 years in office, Obama only has one year with national debt growth under Trump’s first and third year.
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
30,591
32,124
1,743
oklahoma city
#19
Can’t we just agree that they both were not outstanding fiscally?

Obama oversaw growth of the national debt in his first 4 years in office of 18.8%, 13.9%, 9.1%, and 8.6%. His last year in office national debt grew 7.8%. BTW, absolutely acknowledge Obama was hamstrung on spending growth his first year due to economy.
Trump grew is 1.8%, 6.8%, and 1.9% his first 3 years. In his 8 years in office, Obama only has one year with national debt growth under Trump’s first and third year.
Can't you just admit you like him when anytime someone points out a failure of his you are the first to rush to his defense?

I already said Obama wasn't good so bring in percentages of an expanding overall debt instead of my chart showing yearly deficit to cover your boy's poor record as discussed in detail above is fitting for you but does nothing to change my mind. When looking at short-term like this, deficits are a better marker than a percentage of overall long term debt. OU's historic win percentage against us tells less than the season's record about a comparison of modern teams.

Again as charted above, Obama dealt with a financial crisis then began DECREASING deficits as the economy improved. Trump took over an already improving economy and INCREASED deficits to pump it more to make himself look good. First president to do so and shows poorer management than others. I have no idea why you want to argue those facts as presented with proof.

If you want to talk debt, this shows debt during each president term and crisis. Don't know where you got those percentages and don't really care. Here is the real story from the gov's own numbers. Trump, worse on deficits, spent more on crisis, and didn't reap the benefit of the good economy to improve our books. That is the fiscally conservative view. You can have a different one if you want.
Screen Shot 2021-01-16 at 1.04.39 PM.png
 
Apr 14, 2009
768
133
1,593
#20
In four years Trump increase farm subsidies from 9 billion to 23 billion. I actually own a ranch tho It’s a hobby. But folks that do this full-time for a living. I am worried that when that free money is finally shut off. Some folks are gonna have a real tough time adjusting.