Moody's Predicts Democrat Landslide

[Synthaholic]

Keep up, it was democrats and their policies that forced banks to give out shady loans to people who weren't qualified.

Which bill? What year?

Go back a few posts and start reading about Barney Franks.

Barney Franks was in the Minority during the subprime mortgage boom.

Try again.

 

[Roudy]

Keep up, it was democrats and their policies that forced banks to give out shady loans to people who weren't qualified.

Which bill? What year?

Go back a few posts and start reading about Barney Franks.

Minority member of the GOP majority House where simple majority ruled? What super powers did Barney have again?

Read my post dumbass. He forced banks to give loans to people in low income areas or else face penalties.

 

[Roudy]

Keep up, it was democrats and their policies that forced banks to give out shady loans to people who weren't qualified.

Which bill? What year?

Go back a few posts and start reading about Barney Franks.

Barney Franks was in the Minority during the subprime mortgage boom.

Try again.

Damn, even after I show in this thread how majority of the blame rested with the Democrats, you totally ignore the truth and go back to repeating the same false propaganda?

 

[Dad2three]

Keep up, it was democrats and their policies that forced banks to give out shady loans to people who weren't qualified.

Which bill? What year?

Go back a few posts and start reading about Barney Franks.

Barney Franks was in the Minority during the subprime mortgage boom.

Try again.

Damn, even after I show in this thread how majority of the blame rested with the Democrats, you totally ignore the truth and go back to repeating the same false propaganda?

YOUR PROJECTION NOTED Bubs

 

[Dad2three]

Keep up, it was democrats and their policies that forced banks to give out shady loans to people who weren't qualified.

Which bill? What year?

Go back a few posts and start reading about Barney Franks.

Minority member of the GOP majority House where simple majority ruled? What super powers did Barney have again?

Read my post dumbass. He forced banks to give loans to people in low income areas or else face penalties.

Sure, just like the Dems can stop the GOP from voting 40+ times to "repeal" Obamacares right Bubs? Hint MINORITY PARTY IN THE HOUSE COULDN'T PUT OUT A FIRE WITHOUT MAJORITY SUPPORT!

Dems WERE in the minority Jan 1995-Jan 2007 Bubba

 

[healthmyths]

Keep up, it was democrats and their policies that forced banks to give out shady loans to people who weren't qualified.

Which bill? What year?

Go back a few posts and start reading about Barney Franks.

Barney Franks was in the Minority during the subprime mortgage boom.

Try again.

Obama was part of the lawsuit. Fact.
Acorn was going to make massive protests if the suit had not been settled out of court which included Obama!
Unqualified loans backed by Fannie/Freddie were supported by investors buying these loans KNOWING that this is what would happen:
Oct. 23,2008 (Bloomberg) --

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have an ``effective'' federal guarantee, not the "full faith and credit'' of the U.S. government, Federal Housing Finance Agency Director James Lockhart said after the hearing. That does give them effectively a guarantee of the U.S. government.''
Lockhart's Fannie, Freddie Guarantee Remarks Stir Up Confusion - Bloomberg

So we had linkage between "flipping-homes-bad-loans" backed by Fannie/Freddie and coupled with the effort Bush tried to get the Democrat Congress to rein in Fannie/Freddie... Bush was laughed at and admonished by Franks/Dodd... facts:

Many prominent Democrats, including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs.
* House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) criticized the President's warning saying:
"these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis .
The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms
of affordable housing."...
(Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," New York Times, 9/11/03)

* Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and called
on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position.
Eric Dash,"Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," NYT, 8/11/07)
Barney Frank's Fannie and Freddie Muddle

 

[Dad2three]

Keep up, it was democrats and their policies that forced banks to give out shady loans to people who weren't qualified.

Which bill? What year?

Go back a few posts and start reading about Barney Franks.

Barney Franks was in the Minority during the subprime mortgage boom.

Try again.

Obama was part of the lawsuit. Fact.
Acorn was going to make massive protests if the suit had not been settled out of court which included Obama!
Unqualified loans backed by Fannie/Freddie were supported by investors buying these loans KNOWING that this is what would happen:
Oct. 23,2008 (Bloomberg) --

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have an ``effective'' federal guarantee, not the "full faith and credit'' of the U.S. government, Federal Housing Finance Agency Director James Lockhart said after the hearing. That does give them effectively a guarantee of the U.S. government.''
Lockhart's Fannie, Freddie Guarantee Remarks Stir Up Confusion - Bloomberg

So we had linkage between "flipping-homes-bad-loans" backed by Fannie/Freddie and coupled with the effort Bush tried to get the Democrat Congress to rein in Fannie/Freddie... Bush was laughed at and admonished by Franks/Dodd... facts:

Many prominent Democrats, including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs.
* House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) criticized the President's warning saying:
"these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis .
The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms
of affordable housing."...
(Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," New York Times, 9/11/03)

* Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and called
on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position.
Eric Dash,"Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," NYT, 8/11/07)
Barney Frank's Fannie and Freddie Muddle

Know who else WASN'T in trouble before Dubya cheered on the Banksters credit bubble AND Dubya hosed F/F?

The five investment banks were not in trouble in 2004

AIG either

WAMU


DOZENS of other banks weren't in trouble BEFORE Dubya ALLOWED and cheered on the Banksters credit bubble




But PLEASE do give me SOMETHING that required this to happen:



"Another form of easing facilitated the rapid rise of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to fully document their incomes. In 2006, these low- or no-doc loans comprised 81 percent of near-prime, 55 percent of jumbo, 50 percent of subprime and 36 percent of prime securitized mortgages."

Q HOLY JESUS! DID YOU JUST PROVE THAT OVER 50 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN 2006 DIDN'T REQUIRE BORROWERS TO DOCUMENT THEIR INCOME?!?!?!?

A Yes.


NAME THE LAW REQUIRING THIS PLEASE?


Q WHO THE HELL LOANS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PEOPLE WITHOUT CHECKING THEIR INCOMES?!?!?

A Banks.

Q WHY??!?!!!?!

A Two reasons, greed and Bush's regulators let them.


What caused the financial crisis? The Big Lie goes viral



One group has been especially vocal about shaping a new narrative of the credit crisis and economic collapse: those whose bad judgment and failed philosophy helped cause the crisis.



Here is the surprising takeaway: They are winning. Thanks to the endless repetition of the Big Lie.

A Big Lie is so colossal that no one would believe that someone could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.

Wall Street has its own version: Its Big Lie is that banks and investment houses are merely victims of the crash. You see, the entire boom and bust was caused by misguided government policies. It was not irresponsible lending or derivative or excess leverage or misguided compensation packages, but rather long-standing housing policies that were at fault.

Indeed, the arguments these folks make fail to withstand even casual scrutiny. But that has not stopped people who should know better from repeating them.


What caused the financial crisis? The Big Lie goes viral

 

[Dad2three]

Keep up, it was democrats and their policies that forced banks to give out shady loans to people who weren't qualified.

Which bill? What year?

Go back a few posts and start reading about Barney Franks.

Barney Franks was in the Minority during the subprime mortgage boom.

Try again.

Obama was part of the lawsuit. Fact.
Acorn was going to make massive protests if the suit had not been settled out of court which included Obama!
Unqualified loans backed by Fannie/Freddie were supported by investors buying these loans KNOWING that this is what would happen:
Oct. 23,2008 (Bloomberg) --

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have an ``effective'' federal guarantee, not the "full faith and credit'' of the U.S. government, Federal Housing Finance Agency Director James Lockhart said after the hearing. That does give them effectively a guarantee of the U.S. government.''
Lockhart's Fannie, Freddie Guarantee Remarks Stir Up Confusion - Bloomberg

So we had linkage between "flipping-homes-bad-loans" backed by Fannie/Freddie and coupled with the effort Bush tried to get the Democrat Congress to rein in Fannie/Freddie... Bush was laughed at and admonished by Franks/Dodd... facts:

Many prominent Democrats, including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs.
* House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) criticized the President's warning saying:
"these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis .
The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms
of affordable housing."...
(Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," New York Times, 9/11/03)

* Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and called
on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position.
Eric Dash,"Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," NYT, 8/11/07)
Barney Frank's Fannie and Freddie Muddle

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse


2004 Republican Convention:

Another priority for a new term is to build an ownership society, because ownership brings security and dignity and independence.
...

Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all- time high.

(APPLAUSE)

Tonight we set a new goal: 7 million more affordable homes in the next 10 years, so more American families will be able to open the door and say, "Welcome to my home."


June 17, 2004


Builders to fight Bush's low-income plan


NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.


Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004


Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime

Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis.

What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge?

Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye

In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative


Eliot Spitzer - Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime


FACTS on Dubya's great recession | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[healthmyths]

Keep up, it was democrats and their policies that forced banks to give out shady loans to people who weren't qualified.

Which bill? What year?

Go back a few posts and start reading about Barney Franks.

Barney Franks was in the Minority during the subprime mortgage boom.

Try again.

Obama was part of the lawsuit. Fact.
Acorn was going to make massive protests if the suit had not been settled out of court which included Obama!
Unqualified loans backed by Fannie/Freddie were supported by investors buying these loans KNOWING that this is what would happen:
Oct. 23,2008 (Bloomberg) --

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have an ``effective'' federal guarantee, not the "full faith and credit'' of the U.S. government, Federal Housing Finance Agency Director James Lockhart said after the hearing. That does give them effectively a guarantee of the U.S. government.''
Lockhart's Fannie, Freddie Guarantee Remarks Stir Up Confusion - Bloomberg

So we had linkage between "flipping-homes-bad-loans" backed by Fannie/Freddie and coupled with the effort Bush tried to get the Democrat Congress to rein in Fannie/Freddie... Bush was laughed at and admonished by Franks/Dodd... facts:

Many prominent Democrats, including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs.
* House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) criticized the President's warning saying:
"these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis .
The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms
of affordable housing."...
(Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," New York Times, 9/11/03)

* Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and called
on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position.
Eric Dash,"Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," NYT, 8/11/07)
Barney Frank's Fannie and Freddie Muddle

Know who else WASN'T in trouble before Dubya cheered on the Banksters credit bubble AND Dubya hosed F/F?

The five investment banks were not in trouble in 2004

AIG either

WAMU


DOZENS of other banks weren't in trouble BEFORE Dubya ALLOWED and cheered on the Banksters credit bubble




But PLEASE do give me SOMETHING that required this to happen:



"Another form of easing facilitated the rapid rise of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to fully document their incomes. In 2006, these low- or no-doc loans comprised 81 percent of near-prime, 55 percent of jumbo, 50 percent of subprime and 36 percent of prime securitized mortgages."

Q HOLY JESUS! DID YOU JUST PROVE THAT OVER 50 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN 2006 DIDN'T REQUIRE BORROWERS TO DOCUMENT THEIR INCOME?!?!?!?

A Yes.


NAME THE LAW REQUIRING THIS PLEASE?


Q WHO THE HELL LOANS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PEOPLE WITHOUT CHECKING THEIR INCOMES?!?!?

A Banks.

Q WHY??!?!!!?!

A Two reasons, greed and Bush's regulators let them.


What caused the financial crisis? The Big Lie goes viral



One group has been especially vocal about shaping a new narrative of the credit crisis and economic collapse: those whose bad judgment and failed philosophy helped cause the crisis.



Here is the surprising takeaway: They are winning. Thanks to the endless repetition of the Big Lie.

A Big Lie is so colossal that no one would believe that someone could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.

Wall Street has its own version: Its Big Lie is that banks and investment houses are merely victims of the crash. You see, the entire boom and bust was caused by misguided government policies. It was not irresponsible lending or derivative or excess leverage or misguided compensation packages, but rather long-standing housing policies that were at fault.

Indeed, the arguments these folks make fail to withstand even casual scrutiny. But that has not stopped people who should know better from repeating them.


What caused the financial crisis? The Big Lie goes viral

But of course NOTHING else was happening in the USA from 2001 to 2008. Just the big bad Bush not reigning in the big bad banks!
YUP all that dummy Bush's fault right? But wait... seems to me there were a few other events going on during this time that kind of put this problem on the
back burner. Events that had never happened in one presidency in USA history.
Just as a reminder as I've had to do numerous times because people forget!


Recession
Are you aware that a recession started under Clinton and became official 3/01 ended 11/01?
Because you don't seem to comprehend... RECESSIONS are like football length tankers... it takes miles to turn one...i.e. so does
a "RECESSION"... it doesn't just start the day NBER states... it is a slow degradation and it started under CLINTON!!!
Source: USATODAY.com - It's official: 2001 recession only lasted eight months

A Major $5 trillion market loss
Are you aware that the dot.com bust occurred and cost $5 trillion in losses?
Again Clinton laid claim BUT someone had to pay and it occurred during Bush's first year! $5 trillion in market losses MEAN lost tax revenue
PLUS JOBS!!!!
According to the Los Angeles Times, when the dot-com bubble burst, it wiped out $5 trillion dollars in market value for tech companies. More than half of the Internet companies created since 1995 were gone by 2004 - and hundreds of thousands of skilled technology workers were out of jobs.
Source: The dot-com bubble: How to lose $5 trillion

The worst attacks on the USA in History.. 3,000 deaths!!!
)Obviously most of you are UNAWARE 9/11 cost 3,000 lives, $2 trillion in lost businesses,market values assets. Jobs lost in New York owing to the attacks: 146,100 JUST in New York.
Are you aware this happened???
Year 2001: September 11 Terrorist Attacks
The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the events that helped shape other financial events of the decade. After that terrible day in September 2001, our economic climate was never to be the same again. It was only the third time in history that the New York Stock Exchange was shut down for a period of time. In this case, it was closed from September 10 - 17. Besides the tragic human loss of that day, the economic loss cannot even be estimated. Some estimate that there was over $60 billion in insurance losses alone. Airlines didn't fly for 3 days!
Approximately 18,000 small businesses were either displaced or destroyed in Lower Manhattan after the Twin Towers fell. There was a buildup in homeland security on all levels. 9/11 caused a catastrophic financial loss for the U.S.
Source: 10 Events That Rocked the Financial World
Anthrax Attacks...
The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on Tuesday, September 18, 2001, one week after the September 11 attacks. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two DemocraticU.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others.

$1 trillion in losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history.
The worst, Katrina made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005. It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages. It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.

Rank Disaster Year Deaths Damage* $250 Billion in damages in the 8 disasters of the top 15 disasters in history!
1. Hurricane Katrina (LA/MS/AL/FL) 2005 1833 $133,800,000,000
6. Hurricane Ike (TX/LA/MS) 2008 112 $27,000,000,000
7. Hurricane Wilma (FL) 2005 35 $17,100,000,000
8. Hurricane Rita (TX/LA) 2005 119 $17,100,000,000
9. Hurricane Charley (FL) 2004 35 $16,500,000,000
12. Midwest Floods 2008 24 $15,000,000,000
13. Hurricane Ivan (FL/AL) 2004 57 $13,000,000,000
14. 30-State Drought 2002 0 $11,400,000,000
Costliest U.S. Weather Disasters | Weather Underground

THESE events OCCURRED!
YET in SPITE of :
a) 400,000 jobs lost due to Hurricanes Katrina/Rita ,
b) 2,800,000 jobs lost in alone due to 9/11,
c) 300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com busts...
In spite of nearly $8 trillion in lost businesses, market values, destroyed property.. IN SPITE of that:

AFTER the tax cuts Federal Tax REVENUES Increased an average of 9.78% per year!!!
Government Revenue Details: Federal State Local for 2008 - Charts

2000 $236.2 billion surplus
2001 $128.2 billion surplus
2002 $157.8 billion deficit.. also 9/11 occurred and tax revenues lowered for years later
2003 $377.6 billion deficit.. BRAND new cabinet Homeland Security, plus loans made to businesses.. again tax revenues down..affect of 9/11
2004 $412.7 billion deficit.. Revenues up by 5.5% spending increased and economy getting back.
2005 $318.3 billion deficit.. revenues up by 14.5% deficit decreasing at rate of 22%
2006 $248.2 billion deficit.. revenues up by 11.7% deficit decrease 22%
2007 $160.7 billion deficit.. revenues up by 6.7% deficit decrease 35%
2008 $458.6 billion deficit.. revenues down and deficit INCREASED TARP loan mostly...
Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Largest Gross Domestic Product in history!!
When Bush took office in 2001 GDP was $12.355,271,000,000
when Bush left office in 2008 GDP was $14,359,490,000,000
A 16% increase in GDP or $2 TRILLION.
So how did those 4 gigantic events affect the Gross Domestic Product from 2000 to 2009?

So starting in 2001 132,548,000 people were working.
At the end of 2008 138,056,000 people working..

So I would say GWB was fairly involved in the above YET his administration tried:
"Over the past six years, the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of failure to reform GSEs but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.
President Bush publicly called for GSE reform at least 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.

Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.
Setting the Record Straight: The Three Most Egregious Claims In The New York Times Article On The Housing Crisis

 

[Dad2three]

Keep up, it was democrats and their policies that forced banks to give out shady loans to people who weren't qualified.

Which bill? What year?

Go back a few posts and start reading about Barney Franks.

Barney Franks was in the Minority during the subprime mortgage boom.

Try again.

Obama was part of the lawsuit. Fact.
Acorn was going to make massive protests if the suit had not been settled out of court which included Obama!
Unqualified loans backed by Fannie/Freddie were supported by investors buying these loans KNOWING that this is what would happen:
Oct. 23,2008 (Bloomberg) --

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have an ``effective'' federal guarantee, not the "full faith and credit'' of the U.S. government, Federal Housing Finance Agency Director James Lockhart said after the hearing. That does give them effectively a guarantee of the U.S. government.''
Lockhart's Fannie, Freddie Guarantee Remarks Stir Up Confusion - Bloomberg

So we had linkage between "flipping-homes-bad-loans" backed by Fannie/Freddie and coupled with the effort Bush tried to get the Democrat Congress to rein in Fannie/Freddie... Bush was laughed at and admonished by Franks/Dodd... facts:

Many prominent Democrats, including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs.
* House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) criticized the President's warning saying:
"these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis .
The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms
of affordable housing."...
(Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," New York Times, 9/11/03)

* Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and called
on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position.
Eric Dash,"Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," NYT, 8/11/07)
Barney Frank's Fannie and Freddie Muddle

Private Wall Street Companies Caused The Financial Crisis — Not Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Or The Community Reinvestment Act


From 2004 To 2006, Fannie And Freddie's Share Of Subprime Market Fell From Almost Half To Just Under One-Quarter.



Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis


Talk radio and the blogosphere are pushing the idea that the stock market meltdown and the freeze on credit was triggered by finance giants Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's lending money to poor and minority Americans. But federal housing data reveal that that charge isn't true. Instead, it was the private sector that was behind the soaring subprime lending at the core of the crisis.

Fannie And Freddie Faced Tougher Regulatory Standards Than The Private Firms. A


"One reason is that Fannie and Freddie were subject to tougher standards than many of the unregulated players in the private sector who weakened lending standards, most of whom have gone bankrupt or are now in deep trouble."


Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis


YEAH DUBYA HOSED F/F HOWEVER BY CHANGING CLINTON'S RULES ON "AFFORDABLE HOUSING GOALS" FROM 50% TO 56% AND ALLOWING SUBPRIMES TO COUNT, THE OPPOSITE OF CLINTON!


ON TOP OF THAT, DUBYA REQUIRED F/F TO PURCHASE $440 BILLION IN MBS'S FROM THE SECONDARY MARKETS, 2003-2008!

The former Federal Reserve chairman, Alan Greenspan, has conceded that the global financial crisis has exposed a "mistake" in the free market ideology which guided his 18-year stewardship of US monetary policy.


"I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organisations, specifically banks and others, were such that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms," said Greenspan.


Greenspan - I was wrong about the economy. Sort of | Business | The Guardian


Regulators and policymakers enabled this process at virtually every turn. Part of the reason they failed to understand the housing bubble was willful ignorance: they bought into the argument that the market would equilibrate itself. In particular, financial actors and regulatory officials both believed that secondary and tertiary markets could effectively control risk through pricing.


http://www.tobinproject.org/sites/tobinproject.org/files/assets/Fligstein_Catalyst of Disaster_0.pdf

 

[Dad2three]

Which bill? What year?

Go back a few posts and start reading about Barney Franks.

Barney Franks was in the Minority during the subprime mortgage boom.

Try again.

Obama was part of the lawsuit. Fact.
Acorn was going to make massive protests if the suit had not been settled out of court which included Obama!
Unqualified loans backed by Fannie/Freddie were supported by investors buying these loans KNOWING that this is what would happen:
Oct. 23,2008 (Bloomberg) --

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have an ``effective'' federal guarantee, not the "full faith and credit'' of the U.S. government, Federal Housing Finance Agency Director James Lockhart said after the hearing. That does give them effectively a guarantee of the U.S. government.''
Lockhart's Fannie, Freddie Guarantee Remarks Stir Up Confusion - Bloomberg

So we had linkage between "flipping-homes-bad-loans" backed by Fannie/Freddie and coupled with the effort Bush tried to get the Democrat Congress to rein in Fannie/Freddie... Bush was laughed at and admonished by Franks/Dodd... facts:

Many prominent Democrats, including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs.
* House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) criticized the President's warning saying:
"these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis .
The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms
of affordable housing."...
(Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," New York Times, 9/11/03)

* Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and called
on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position.
Eric Dash,"Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," NYT, 8/11/07)
Barney Frank's Fannie and Freddie Muddle

Know who else WASN'T in trouble before Dubya cheered on the Banksters credit bubble AND Dubya hosed F/F?

The five investment banks were not in trouble in 2004

AIG either

WAMU


DOZENS of other banks weren't in trouble BEFORE Dubya ALLOWED and cheered on the Banksters credit bubble




But PLEASE do give me SOMETHING that required this to happen:



"Another form of easing facilitated the rapid rise of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to fully document their incomes. In 2006, these low- or no-doc loans comprised 81 percent of near-prime, 55 percent of jumbo, 50 percent of subprime and 36 percent of prime securitized mortgages."

Q HOLY JESUS! DID YOU JUST PROVE THAT OVER 50 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN 2006 DIDN'T REQUIRE BORROWERS TO DOCUMENT THEIR INCOME?!?!?!?

A Yes.


NAME THE LAW REQUIRING THIS PLEASE?


Q WHO THE HELL LOANS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PEOPLE WITHOUT CHECKING THEIR INCOMES?!?!?

A Banks.

Q WHY??!?!!!?!

A Two reasons, greed and Bush's regulators let them.


What caused the financial crisis? The Big Lie goes viral



One group has been especially vocal about shaping a new narrative of the credit crisis and economic collapse: those whose bad judgment and failed philosophy helped cause the crisis.



Here is the surprising takeaway: They are winning. Thanks to the endless repetition of the Big Lie.

A Big Lie is so colossal that no one would believe that someone could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.

Wall Street has its own version: Its Big Lie is that banks and investment houses are merely victims of the crash. You see, the entire boom and bust was caused by misguided government policies. It was not irresponsible lending or derivative or excess leverage or misguided compensation packages, but rather long-standing housing policies that were at fault.

Indeed, the arguments these folks make fail to withstand even casual scrutiny. But that has not stopped people who should know better from repeating them.


What caused the financial crisis? The Big Lie goes viral

But of course NOTHING else was happening in the USA from 2001 to 2008. Just the big bad Bush not reigning in the big bad banks!
YUP all that dummy Bush's fault right? But wait... seems to me there were a few other events going on during this time that kind of put this problem on the
back burner. Events that had never happened in one presidency in USA history.
Just as a reminder as I've had to do numerous times because people forget!


Recession
Are you aware that a recession started under Clinton and became official 3/01 ended 11/01?
Because you don't seem to comprehend... RECESSIONS are like football length tankers... it takes miles to turn one...i.e. so does
a "RECESSION"... it doesn't just start the day NBER states... it is a slow degradation and it started under CLINTON!!!
Source: USATODAY.com - It's official: 2001 recession only lasted eight months

A Major $5 trillion market loss
Are you aware that the dot.com bust occurred and cost $5 trillion in losses?
Again Clinton laid claim BUT someone had to pay and it occurred during Bush's first year! $5 trillion in market losses MEAN lost tax revenue
PLUS JOBS!!!!
According to the Los Angeles Times, when the dot-com bubble burst, it wiped out $5 trillion dollars in market value for tech companies. More than half of the Internet companies created since 1995 were gone by 2004 - and hundreds of thousands of skilled technology workers were out of jobs.
Source: The dot-com bubble: How to lose $5 trillion

The worst attacks on the USA in History.. 3,000 deaths!!!
)Obviously most of you are UNAWARE 9/11 cost 3,000 lives, $2 trillion in lost businesses,market values assets. Jobs lost in New York owing to the attacks: 146,100 JUST in New York.
Are you aware this happened???
Year 2001: September 11 Terrorist Attacks
The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the events that helped shape other financial events of the decade. After that terrible day in September 2001, our economic climate was never to be the same again. It was only the third time in history that the New York Stock Exchange was shut down for a period of time. In this case, it was closed from September 10 - 17. Besides the tragic human loss of that day, the economic loss cannot even be estimated. Some estimate that there was over $60 billion in insurance losses alone. Airlines didn't fly for 3 days!
Approximately 18,000 small businesses were either displaced or destroyed in Lower Manhattan after the Twin Towers fell. There was a buildup in homeland security on all levels. 9/11 caused a catastrophic financial loss for the U.S.
Source: 10 Events That Rocked the Financial World
Anthrax Attacks...
The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on Tuesday, September 18, 2001, one week after the September 11 attacks. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two DemocraticU.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others.

$1 trillion in losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history.
The worst, Katrina made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005. It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages. It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.

Rank Disaster Year Deaths Damage* $250 Billion in damages in the 8 disasters of the top 15 disasters in history!
1. Hurricane Katrina (LA/MS/AL/FL) 2005 1833 $133,800,000,000
6. Hurricane Ike (TX/LA/MS) 2008 112 $27,000,000,000
7. Hurricane Wilma (FL) 2005 35 $17,100,000,000
8. Hurricane Rita (TX/LA) 2005 119 $17,100,000,000
9. Hurricane Charley (FL) 2004 35 $16,500,000,000
12. Midwest Floods 2008 24 $15,000,000,000
13. Hurricane Ivan (FL/AL) 2004 57 $13,000,000,000
14. 30-State Drought 2002 0 $11,400,000,000
Costliest U.S. Weather Disasters | Weather Underground

THESE events OCCURRED!
YET in SPITE of :
a) 400,000 jobs lost due to Hurricanes Katrina/Rita ,
b) 2,800,000 jobs lost in alone due to 9/11,
c) 300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com busts...
In spite of nearly $8 trillion in lost businesses, market values, destroyed property.. IN SPITE of that:

AFTER the tax cuts Federal Tax REVENUES Increased an average of 9.78% per year!!!
Government Revenue Details: Federal State Local for 2008 - Charts

2000 $236.2 billion surplus
2001 $128.2 billion surplus
2002 $157.8 billion deficit.. also 9/11 occurred and tax revenues lowered for years later
2003 $377.6 billion deficit.. BRAND new cabinet Homeland Security, plus loans made to businesses.. again tax revenues down..affect of 9/11
2004 $412.7 billion deficit.. Revenues up by 5.5% spending increased and economy getting back.
2005 $318.3 billion deficit.. revenues up by 14.5% deficit decreasing at rate of 22%
2006 $248.2 billion deficit.. revenues up by 11.7% deficit decrease 22%
2007 $160.7 billion deficit.. revenues up by 6.7% deficit decrease 35%
2008 $458.6 billion deficit.. revenues down and deficit INCREASED TARP loan mostly...
Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Largest Gross Domestic Product in history!!
When Bush took office in 2001 GDP was $12.355,271,000,000
when Bush left office in 2008 GDP was $14,359,490,000,000
A 16% increase in GDP or $2 TRILLION.
So how did those 4 gigantic events affect the Gross Domestic Product from 2000 to 2009?

So starting in 2001 132,548,000 people were working.
At the end of 2008 138,056,000 people working..

So I would say GWB was fairly involved in the above YET his administration tried:
"Over the past six years, the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of failure to reform GSEs but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.
President Bush publicly called for GSE reform at least 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.

Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.
Setting the Record Straight: The Three Most Egregious Claims In The New York Times Article On The Housing Crisis

So NO, you can't refute FACTS


Dubya called for F/F reform? AND THE GOP CONGRESS WHO GAVE HIM 2 UNFUNDED WARS, 2 UNFUNDED TAX CUTS, UNFUNDED MEDICARE EXPANSION THAT FORBID GOV'T FROM NEGOTIATING PRICES AND A BILL TO GET BETWEEN A MAN AND HIS WIFE, TERRI SCHIVVO, WOULDN'T DO IT? Weird


We conclude that these two entities contributed to the crisis, but were not a primary cause. Importantly, GSE [government-sponsored enterprises, i.e., Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac] mortgage securities essentially maintained their value throughout the crisis and did not contribute to the significant financial firm losses that were central to the financial crisis. Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, Conclusions Of The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission

Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission: Fannie And Freddie "Followed Rather Than Led Wall Street And Other Lenders In The Rush For Fool's Gold."



McClatchy: "Federal Housing Data Reveal That Charges" Against Fannie And Freddie "Aren't True."



McClatchy: During Bubble Years, "Private Investment Banks -- Not Fannie And Freddie -- Dominated The Mortgage Loans That Were Packaged And Sold."


Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis


Talk radio and the blogosphere are pushing the idea that the stock market meltdown and the freeze on credit was triggered by finance giants Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's lending money to poor and minority Americans. But federal housing data reveal that that charge isn't true. Instead, it was the private sector that was behind the soaring subprime lending at the core of the crisis.


Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis

 

[Dad2three]

Which bill? What year?

Go back a few posts and start reading about Barney Franks.

Barney Franks was in the Minority during the subprime mortgage boom.

Try again.

Obama was part of the lawsuit. Fact.
Acorn was going to make massive protests if the suit had not been settled out of court which included Obama!
Unqualified loans backed by Fannie/Freddie were supported by investors buying these loans KNOWING that this is what would happen:
Oct. 23,2008 (Bloomberg) --

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have an ``effective'' federal guarantee, not the "full faith and credit'' of the U.S. government, Federal Housing Finance Agency Director James Lockhart said after the hearing. That does give them effectively a guarantee of the U.S. government.''
Lockhart's Fannie, Freddie Guarantee Remarks Stir Up Confusion - Bloomberg

So we had linkage between "flipping-homes-bad-loans" backed by Fannie/Freddie and coupled with the effort Bush tried to get the Democrat Congress to rein in Fannie/Freddie... Bush was laughed at and admonished by Franks/Dodd... facts:

Many prominent Democrats, including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs.
* House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) criticized the President's warning saying:
"these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis .
The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms
of affordable housing."...
(Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," New York Times, 9/11/03)

* Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and called
on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position.
Eric Dash,"Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," NYT, 8/11/07)
Barney Frank's Fannie and Freddie Muddle

Know who else WASN'T in trouble before Dubya cheered on the Banksters credit bubble AND Dubya hosed F/F?

The five investment banks were not in trouble in 2004

AIG either

WAMU


DOZENS of other banks weren't in trouble BEFORE Dubya ALLOWED and cheered on the Banksters credit bubble




But PLEASE do give me SOMETHING that required this to happen:



"Another form of easing facilitated the rapid rise of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to fully document their incomes. In 2006, these low- or no-doc loans comprised 81 percent of near-prime, 55 percent of jumbo, 50 percent of subprime and 36 percent of prime securitized mortgages."

Q HOLY JESUS! DID YOU JUST PROVE THAT OVER 50 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN 2006 DIDN'T REQUIRE BORROWERS TO DOCUMENT THEIR INCOME?!?!?!?

A Yes.


NAME THE LAW REQUIRING THIS PLEASE?


Q WHO THE HELL LOANS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PEOPLE WITHOUT CHECKING THEIR INCOMES?!?!?

A Banks.

Q WHY??!?!!!?!

A Two reasons, greed and Bush's regulators let them.


What caused the financial crisis? The Big Lie goes viral



One group has been especially vocal about shaping a new narrative of the credit crisis and economic collapse: those whose bad judgment and failed philosophy helped cause the crisis.



Here is the surprising takeaway: They are winning. Thanks to the endless repetition of the Big Lie.

A Big Lie is so colossal that no one would believe that someone could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.

Wall Street has its own version: Its Big Lie is that banks and investment houses are merely victims of the crash. You see, the entire boom and bust was caused by misguided government policies. It was not irresponsible lending or derivative or excess leverage or misguided compensation packages, but rather long-standing housing policies that were at fault.

Indeed, the arguments these folks make fail to withstand even casual scrutiny. But that has not stopped people who should know better from repeating them.


What caused the financial crisis? The Big Lie goes viral

But of course NOTHING else was happening in the USA from 2001 to 2008. Just the big bad Bush not reigning in the big bad banks!
YUP all that dummy Bush's fault right? But wait... seems to me there were a few other events going on during this time that kind of put this problem on the
back burner. Events that had never happened in one presidency in USA history.
Just as a reminder as I've had to do numerous times because people forget!


Recession
Are you aware that a recession started under Clinton and became official 3/01 ended 11/01?
Because you don't seem to comprehend... RECESSIONS are like football length tankers... it takes miles to turn one...i.e. so does
a "RECESSION"... it doesn't just start the day NBER states... it is a slow degradation and it started under CLINTON!!!
Source: USATODAY.com - It's official: 2001 recession only lasted eight months

A Major $5 trillion market loss
Are you aware that the dot.com bust occurred and cost $5 trillion in losses?
Again Clinton laid claim BUT someone had to pay and it occurred during Bush's first year! $5 trillion in market losses MEAN lost tax revenue
PLUS JOBS!!!!
According to the Los Angeles Times, when the dot-com bubble burst, it wiped out $5 trillion dollars in market value for tech companies. More than half of the Internet companies created since 1995 were gone by 2004 - and hundreds of thousands of skilled technology workers were out of jobs.
Source: The dot-com bubble: How to lose $5 trillion

The worst attacks on the USA in History.. 3,000 deaths!!!
)Obviously most of you are UNAWARE 9/11 cost 3,000 lives, $2 trillion in lost businesses,market values assets. Jobs lost in New York owing to the attacks: 146,100 JUST in New York.
Are you aware this happened???
Year 2001: September 11 Terrorist Attacks
The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the events that helped shape other financial events of the decade. After that terrible day in September 2001, our economic climate was never to be the same again. It was only the third time in history that the New York Stock Exchange was shut down for a period of time. In this case, it was closed from September 10 - 17. Besides the tragic human loss of that day, the economic loss cannot even be estimated. Some estimate that there was over $60 billion in insurance losses alone. Airlines didn't fly for 3 days!
Approximately 18,000 small businesses were either displaced or destroyed in Lower Manhattan after the Twin Towers fell. There was a buildup in homeland security on all levels. 9/11 caused a catastrophic financial loss for the U.S.
Source: 10 Events That Rocked the Financial World
Anthrax Attacks...
The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on Tuesday, September 18, 2001, one week after the September 11 attacks. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two DemocraticU.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others.

$1 trillion in losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history.
The worst, Katrina made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005. It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages. It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.

Rank Disaster Year Deaths Damage* $250 Billion in damages in the 8 disasters of the top 15 disasters in history!
1. Hurricane Katrina (LA/MS/AL/FL) 2005 1833 $133,800,000,000
6. Hurricane Ike (TX/LA/MS) 2008 112 $27,000,000,000
7. Hurricane Wilma (FL) 2005 35 $17,100,000,000
8. Hurricane Rita (TX/LA) 2005 119 $17,100,000,000
9. Hurricane Charley (FL) 2004 35 $16,500,000,000
12. Midwest Floods 2008 24 $15,000,000,000
13. Hurricane Ivan (FL/AL) 2004 57 $13,000,000,000
14. 30-State Drought 2002 0 $11,400,000,000
Costliest U.S. Weather Disasters | Weather Underground

THESE events OCCURRED!
YET in SPITE of :
a) 400,000 jobs lost due to Hurricanes Katrina/Rita ,
b) 2,800,000 jobs lost in alone due to 9/11,
c) 300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com busts...
In spite of nearly $8 trillion in lost businesses, market values, destroyed property.. IN SPITE of that:

AFTER the tax cuts Federal Tax REVENUES Increased an average of 9.78% per year!!!
Government Revenue Details: Federal State Local for 2008 - Charts

2000 $236.2 billion surplus
2001 $128.2 billion surplus
2002 $157.8 billion deficit.. also 9/11 occurred and tax revenues lowered for years later
2003 $377.6 billion deficit.. BRAND new cabinet Homeland Security, plus loans made to businesses.. again tax revenues down..affect of 9/11
2004 $412.7 billion deficit.. Revenues up by 5.5% spending increased and economy getting back.
2005 $318.3 billion deficit.. revenues up by 14.5% deficit decreasing at rate of 22%
2006 $248.2 billion deficit.. revenues up by 11.7% deficit decrease 22%
2007 $160.7 billion deficit.. revenues up by 6.7% deficit decrease 35%
2008 $458.6 billion deficit.. revenues down and deficit INCREASED TARP loan mostly...
Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Largest Gross Domestic Product in history!!
When Bush took office in 2001 GDP was $12.355,271,000,000
when Bush left office in 2008 GDP was $14,359,490,000,000
A 16% increase in GDP or $2 TRILLION.
So how did those 4 gigantic events affect the Gross Domestic Product from 2000 to 2009?

So starting in 2001 132,548,000 people were working.
At the end of 2008 138,056,000 people working..

So I would say GWB was fairly involved in the above YET his administration tried:
"Over the past six years, the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of failure to reform GSEs but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.
President Bush publicly called for GSE reform at least 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.

Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.
Setting the Record Straight: The Three Most Egregious Claims In The New York Times Article On The Housing Crisis

"President Bush publicly called for GSE reform at least 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted"


Bush talked about reform. He talked and he talked. And then he stopped reform. (read that as many times as necessary. Bush stopped reform). And then he stopped it again

Testimony from Dubya''s Treasury Secretary John Snow to the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS concerning the 'regulation' of the GSE's 2004

Mr. BARNEY Frank: ...Are we in a crisis now with these entities?

Secretary Snow. No, that is a fair characterization, Congressman Frank, of our position. We are not putting this proposal before you because of some concern over some imminent danger to the financial system for housing; far from it.


October 26, 2005

STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY

The Administration strongly believes that the housing GSEs should be focused on their core housing mission, particularly with respect to low-income Americans and first-time homebuyers. Instead, provisions of H.R. 1461 that expand mortgage purchasing authority would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers.

George W. Bush: Statement of Administration Policy: H.R. 1461 - Federal Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005

Yes, he said he was against it because it "would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers"

THAT WAS THE ONLY BILL TO MAKE IT OUT OF EITHER HOUSE OF CONGRESS 2001-2007, ON BIPARTISAN SUPPORT, LOL



June 17, 2004

(CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.


Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004


BUT NO, THOUGH BUSH CRUSHED F/F (AS REGULATOR), THE GSE'S DIDN'T CAUSE THE BUSH SUBPRIME CRISIS

 

[norwegen]

And these models are never wrong ...

Our Moody's Analytics election model now predicts a Democratic electoral landslide in the 2016 presidential vote. A small change in the forecast data in August has swung the outcome from the statistical tie predicted in July, to a razor-edge ballot outcome that nevertheless gives the incumbent party 326 electoral votes to the Republican challenger's 212.

Just three states account for the change in margin, with Ohio, Florida and Colorado swinging from leaning Republican to leaning Democrat. The margin of victory in each of these important swing states is still solidly within the margin of error though, and will likely swing back and forth in Moody's monthly updates ahead, underlining the closeness of the election to come. Furthermore, three of the candidates for the Republican nomination enjoy favorite-son status in Ohio or Florida, potentially making the outcome of those important states even more unpredictable.
​

Democrats to Win in a Landslide in 2016, According to Moody's Election Model

I agree.

The United States is a leftist country.

 

[Synthaholic]

Many prominent Democrats, including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs.

Who gives a shit if they opposed it? They had no power!

All the 'evidence' you rightwingers always show talks about Democratic opposition, but Republicans had all the power. Period.

 

[Synthaholic]

Whenever there's one of these "It wasn't Bush's fault" arguments I like to play this little number . . .

 

[mudwhistle]

And these models are never wrong ...

Our Moody's Analytics election model now predicts a Democratic electoral landslide in the 2016 presidential vote. A small change in the forecast data in August has swung the outcome from the statistical tie predicted in July, to a razor-edge ballot outcome that nevertheless gives the incumbent party 326 electoral votes to the Republican challenger's 212.

Just three states account for the change in margin, with Ohio, Florida and Colorado swinging from leaning Republican to leaning Democrat. The margin of victory in each of these important swing states is still solidly within the margin of error though, and will likely swing back and forth in Moody's monthly updates ahead, underlining the closeness of the election to come. Furthermore, three of the candidates for the Republican nomination enjoy favorite-son status in Ohio or Florida, potentially making the outcome of those important states even more unpredictable.
​

Democrats to Win in a Landslide in 2016, According to Moody's Election Model

I agree.

The United States is a leftist country.

Yup......we have plenty of stupid people and our illegal immigrant population is growing by the hour.

 

[Dad2three]

And these models are never wrong ...

Our Moody's Analytics election model now predicts a Democratic electoral landslide in the 2016 presidential vote. A small change in the forecast data in August has swung the outcome from the statistical tie predicted in July, to a razor-edge ballot outcome that nevertheless gives the incumbent party 326 electoral votes to the Republican challenger's 212.

Just three states account for the change in margin, with Ohio, Florida and Colorado swinging from leaning Republican to leaning Democrat. The margin of victory in each of these important swing states is still solidly within the margin of error though, and will likely swing back and forth in Moody's monthly updates ahead, underlining the closeness of the election to come. Furthermore, three of the candidates for the Republican nomination enjoy favorite-son status in Ohio or Florida, potentially making the outcome of those important states even more unpredictable.
​

Democrats to Win in a Landslide in 2016, According to Moody's Election Model

I agree.

The United States is a leftist country.

Yup......we have plenty of stupid people and our illegal immigrant population is growing by the hour.

Perhaps ship the "illegals" to the red states to up the red states IQ's?

 

[Avorysuds]

Safe to say this thread lost it's way =-)

 

[bravoactual]

Have they factored in Hillary's recent woes....
Wasn't all that long ago she was viewed as a lock for the WH.....
Now she seems to be having a problem getting the nomination.

At this point I'm doubting Hilary Clinton will be the nominee. Both she and Jebbie are damaged goods.

If Senator Sanders runs, Booker of New Jersey would be a good choice or Julian Castro of Texas.

Republicans are shooting themselves in the foot bigtime.

Trump is attacking Hispanics, Asians and Women. With the Republican "Voter Fraud" bull shit that they have used to pass stricter Voter I.D. Laws and those same laws being tossed after judicial review the chances of getting a large African-American Vote are slim, nil and none.

Trump could pick Ted Cruz, who is Tea Party Fav for his V.P. Carly Fiorina is sad joke who stands zero chance of anything. Boxer trounced in the last election and she still has problems from not having paid her campaign staff on time as well.

 

[mudwhistle]

Democrats must be saying to themselves..."Thank God for stupid people.......it gives us hope".