Kamala Harris's approval rating falls to 28%, a historic low for any modern vice president

antontoo
Well you left wing tools will find a way to rationalize that Barry is responsible for the great economy when Trump was POTUS. Unlike you, I give credit where its due.

Barry left Trump a fair hand and Trump improved on it hugely by getting rid of Barry's business killing EO's. EO's your boy Bidung did away with.

Carry on you biased hack.
 
antontoo
Well you left wing tools will find a way to rationalize that Barry is responsible for the great economy when Trump was POTUS. Unlike you, I give credit where its due.

Barry left Trump a fair hand and Trump improved on it hugely by getting rid of Barry's business killing EO's. EO's your boy Bidung did away with.

Carry on you biased hack.
What Obama EO's were killing business?

The only thing Trump did to give Obama's economy a bump was that stupid tax break he passed. It did not work. That tax bill was supposed to get us 3-5% growth. In 2019 Trump had 2.3% growth. Only .1% better than Obama's 2.2% growth. That tax break added to the debt big time and did nothing. It also caused inflation and widened the gap between the rich and rest of us.

Trump said Obama's economy wasn't good even though the stock market was booming and they gave a list of reasons. The debt, blue collar wages and gdp. Trump's huge tax break barely improved any of these things.

So your solution next time a Republican is POTUS is to give corporations and rich people even more tax breaks? And even if it only improves our economy the slightest bit, you'll be okay with that? Even if it means shifting the tax burden more on to your poor stupid ass?
 
Its also probably why your blob got his mara-lard-ass kicked so badly in 2020...did he ever show any real concern for the people dying on his watch? At least Biden has done that.


Since I'm not a democrat I don't really care that much about the midterms. The party who has the oval usually does poorly. And, from my chair, the Dems electing Nancy Pelosi pretty much guaranteed they would lose ground...it happens every time she becomes the face of the party. They never learn.

The President has zero control over gas prices. Inflation was inevitable coming out of Trump's attempted holocaust.

But getting back to the elections....please explain how your blob managed to lose the House and the Senate if he was doing such a good job.

I'm all ears.
Trump got far more votes in his second election than his first, Candy! Historically he lost far fewer seats than Clinton did in his first mid-term or Obama did in his first mid-term! I can almost guarantee you that Joe Biden is about to lose far MORE seats than Trump did!

As for HOW that happened? For many people it's hard to believe that an idiot like Joe Biden got more votes than Barack Obama or Ronald Reagan. Relaxing voting standards in response to Covid probably had a lot to do with that but it will never be proven so I refuse to waste time on beating a dead horse. We're stuck with the senile old fuck for another three years. I just hope he doesn't do too much damage while he's in office.
 
She's a joke, and if Biden runs in 2024, he would be an utter fool to keep her on the ticket.
Kamala will be POTUS in 2025.

Man, 2024 seems like a long way away. You're stuck with Biden for a long time. Maybe 6 more years. Maybe on 2 and then Kamala for 8.
 
She's a joke, and if Biden runs in 2024, he would be an utter fool to keep her on the ticket.
Please don't tell us who to run or who you think is a joke. You elected Trump. YOu supported Romney. You loved Palin and McCain. You reelected Bush. You should not be allowed to vote.
 
antontoo
Well you left wing tools will find a way to rationalize that Barry is responsible for the great economy when Trump was POTUS. Unlike you, I give credit where its due.

Barry left Trump a fair hand and Trump improved on it hugely by getting rid of Barry's business killing EO's.
Which EOs? Also, include ballpark economic impact estimate.
 
Recent presidential elections have not been won; they have been lost.
One side offers an even less desirable candidate than the other.
 
She's a joke, and if Biden runs in 2024, he would be an utter fool to keep her on the ticket.
How would he get rid of her? It's almost unheard of. Spiro Agnew was going to jail so that was easy; I think FDR ditched one in favor of Truman, but he had served 12 years by then. And I think that's it for junked vice-presidents. And Biden would be 82--86 in his second term. I question if this is viable.
 
Recent presidential elections have not been won; they have been lost.
One side offers an even less desirable candidate than the other.
Good point.

I think 2016 was half and half, though. A lot of people didn't like Hillary and a lot of people really liked Trump.
 
sealybobo
Look em up. I did.

Trump’s Corporate Tax Cut Is Not Trickling Down​

Business investment is slowing, despite lofty promises, and worker bonuses were a mirage.

Two years ago, President Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress cut the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent via the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA). At the time, the Trump administration claimed that its corporate tax cuts would increase the average household income in the United States by $4,000. But two years later, there is little indication that the tax cut is even beginning to trickle down in the ways its proponents claimed.

First, slashing the corporate tax rate would increase corporations’ after-tax returns on investment, inducing them to massively boost spending on investments such as factories, equipment, and research and development. This investment boom would give the average worker more and better capital to work with, substantially increasing the overall productivity of U.S. workers. In other words, they would be able to produce more goods and services with every hour worked. And finally, U.S. workers would capture the benefits of their increased productivity by successfully bargaining for higher wages.

According to President Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers (CEA), this process would “in the medium term boost the average U.S. household income annually in current dollars by at least $4,000, conservatively.” CEA’s “optimistic” estimate of the average household’s raise was $9,000. Then-CEA Chairman Kevin Hassett claimed that it would take “three to five years” for these massive trickle-down effects to materialize. A number of critics noted that the Trump administration’s claims were unlikely to pan out, in part because they hinged on the same supply-side economics that decades of tax cuts for the wealthy have consistently discredited.

These critics emphasized a number of flaws with the CEA’s theory of the case. First, corporations were holding large amounts of cash. Second, they were able to access capital very cheaply with interest rates at historic lows for almost a decade. Third, the effective tax rates on U.S. corporate investment, especially debt-financed investment, were already quite low, indicating that the cost of capital—let alone the portion attributable to taxes—was hardly holding back corporate investment. The critics noted that greater corporate market power meant that corporate profits consisted largely of economic rents, not marginal returns on investment. Therefore, a new corporate tax cut would, even if effective, likely be passed onto shareholders rather than being reinvested by the firms receiving the tax cut. Critics emphasized further that even if the tax cuts sparked an investment boom that increased productivity, it would be far from clear whether workers would be able to capture the gains, given the power imbalances between U.S. workers and employers.



The promised boom in business investment never happened​


Corporate revenue has dropped precipitously since Trump’s tax cut​


Perverse incentives in the TCJA may be encouraging investment overseas rather than in the United States​


The ballyhooed tax cut bonuses were a mirage​


Conclusion

the evidence from the first two years suggests that corporate tax cuts are draining revenue from the U.S. Treasury while doing little that would ultimately benefit U.S. workers. Instead of trickling down to workers, the 2017 tax cuts have largely served to line the pockets of already wealthy investors—further increasing inequality—with little to show for it.

 
Kamala and Joe have done the same thing in office as they did in Iowa.

In Iowa, Kamala blew millions of dollars in ads and other campaign events, held town halls, got the Kenyan Cocksucker to endorse her, and was well over 20% in the beginning. Then the people of Iowa got to meet her. Off a cliff she went. Demonstrating financial management skills of an affirmative action Democrat, she ran out of money and dropped out before the caucus. Low IQ Joe did not run out of money in Iowa, but was out after finishing 5th in NH in the single digits with 100% name recognition... and then begged Bloomberg and his buddies to, yeah, that....

People meet Joe. People hate Joe
People meet Kamala. People hate Kamala


And they want us to believe this ticket outperformed Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton....
 
That would be the 81 million that voted his win by a landslide.

And a reminder. Joe Biden is your President

He's Donald Trumps President too.

And there you are dodging the question as I expected! LOL

Are you among the small minority of 38% of Americans who approve of Joe Biden, and the even smaller 28% minority who approve of Kamala Harris?

It's a simple yes or no question?
 
I like Biden. Don’t care if anyone knows it really. He certainly isn’t perfect, but damn is better than the orange sack of shit before him.

So you're also unable to discuss Biden without mentioning Trump! It's such an interesting pathology!

Donald Trump owns you, just thoroughly owns you. LOL
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top