What happened to the tea party?

[otto105]

...

So if the tea party was not a racist movement, where are all the protests now? The same people protesting Obamas spending when it was necessary, support and defend Trumps spending now which is not.

Got any actual example of that? Or do you just think of all white people as one entity?

Well, we have silence now at a white president spending like crazy and with an African-American president we had screaming.....so theres that.

 

[mikegriffith1]

White "conservatives" were all enraged because Obama started his administration by spending big bucks. A move that saved the economy.

Oh, well, if "spending big bucks . . . saved the economy," then you should be thrilled with the spending that Trump has agreed to. So what's the problem?

You guys ducked and dodged all over the place when it came to Obama's spending. Some of you claimed that his tripling of the deficit in a single year saved the economy! So, again, what's the problem with more big spending?

The simple fact of the matter is that if we had a filibuster-proof Republican majority in the Senate and a large majority in the House, we would be spending a lot less money. But we don't. The Democrats are the ones driving the big spending.

 

[Brain357]

White "conservatives" were all enraged because Obama started his administration by spending big bucks. A move that saved the economy.

Oh, well, if "spending big bucks . . . saved the economy," then you should be thrilled with the spending that Trump has agreed to. So what's the problem?

You guys ducked and dodged all over the place when it came to Obama's spending. Some of you claimed that his tripling of the deficit in a single year saved the economy! So, again, what's the problem with more big spending?

The simple fact of the matter is that if we had a filibuster-proof Republican majority in the Senate and a large majority in the House, we would be spending a lot less money. But we don't. The Democrats are the ones driving the big spending.

We are not in a recession...

 

[2aguy]

White "conservatives" were all enraged because Obama started his administration by spending big bucks. A move that saved the economy. They claimed their movement was not about race even as we saw all manner of racist signs and sentiment. The opposition was said to be about spending by Obama.

Trump goes silent on national debt while racking up $1 trillion in 14 months

President Trump has now amassed his first $1 trillion in debt, crossing that ignominious mark late last week — and analysts said it’s just a taste of what’s to come after the tax-cuts and spending spree of recent months.

Indeed, his next $1 trillion could come within a year, and one analyst said he could soon be staring at $3 trillion annual deficits if things go particularly badly in interest rates.

It’s a major reversal for a president who during the campaign had said given eight years he could eliminate the debt entirely, but is instead looking at setting records for red ink.

Trump goes silent on national debt while racking up $1 trillion in 14 months

The US national debt just pushed past $22 trillion — here's how Trump's $2 trillion in debt compares with Obama, Bush, and Clinton

The US national debt passed $22 trillion on February 11, the first time the federal debt had breached that threshold.

The landmark came just over two years after President Donald Trump, who once promised to eliminate the federal debt in eight years, took over the Oval Office.

The US Treasury has been tracking day-by-day debt accumulation since the start of 1993, meaning daily debt figures are available for the presidencies of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Trump.

In raw terms, Trump added the second-most debt of any recent president. According to the Treasury data, the US added $2.07 trillion — $2,065,536,336,472.90 to be exact — in new debt between Trump's inauguration on January 20, 2017, and February 11, when the country pushed past $22 trillion. (The US added another $2.8 billion through February 15, the latest daily figures available.)

That is less than the $3.46 trillion added between Obama's inauguration in January 2009 and February 11, 2011, but it is more than the $676 billion added under Bush and the $617 billion added under Clinton in their first 752 days as president.

One important difference between Trump's debt figures and Obama's is that Trump has added a massive amount of debt while the US economy has been strong, whereas Obama took over during the depths of the financial crisis.

Economists typically recommend that the federal government increase spending, and thus add more debt, during times of economic struggles and then pay down that debt when the economy recovers. So while economic theory would support Obama's spending to help support the economy, Trump's recent debt binge has less support among economists.

The US national debt just pushed past $22 trillion — here's how Trump's $2 trillion in debt compares with Obama, Bush, and Clinton

Possible Budget Deal Will Add $2 Trillion to the National Debt

In a statement, the CRFB said the budget deal "may be the worst in history," given the country's current precarious fiscal condition.

"Members of Congress should cancel their summer recess and return to the negotiating table for a better deal. If they don't, those who support this deal should hang their heads in total shame as they bolt town," says Maya MacGuineas, president of the CRFB. "This deal would amount to nothing short of fiscal sabotage."

If President Donald Trump signs the deal into law, he will have authorized a 22 percent increase in federal discretionary spending during his first term in office—having signed a March 2018 budget deal that similarly jacked up both domestic and military spending.

Possible Budget Deal Will Add $2 Trillion to the National Debt – Reason.com

So if the tea party was not a racist movement, where are all the protests now? The same people protesting Obamas spending when it was necessary, support and defend Trumps spending now which is not.

Race had nothing to do with it numb nuts....

Tea Party is still there...but it was a choice between Trump and Hilary....hilary, a criminal who used her public office for personal gain, and a desire to destroy the country...that left Trump. We have to put up with the spending, which would have been even worse under hilary, and try to get a conservative in office. Between the two, hilary or Trump there was no choice, we had to pick Trump...

 

[xyz]

There never was a ‘tea party.’

It was just a collection of extraordinarily ignorance, stupid, and ridiculous Republicans.

I heard there was also a pee party in Moscow, and Trump participated.

 

[Brain357]

White "conservatives" were all enraged because Obama started his administration by spending big bucks. A move that saved the economy. They claimed their movement was not about race even as we saw all manner of racist signs and sentiment. The opposition was said to be about spending by Obama.

Trump goes silent on national debt while racking up $1 trillion in 14 months

President Trump has now amassed his first $1 trillion in debt, crossing that ignominious mark late last week — and analysts said it’s just a taste of what’s to come after the tax-cuts and spending spree of recent months.

Indeed, his next $1 trillion could come within a year, and one analyst said he could soon be staring at $3 trillion annual deficits if things go particularly badly in interest rates.

It’s a major reversal for a president who during the campaign had said given eight years he could eliminate the debt entirely, but is instead looking at setting records for red ink.

Trump goes silent on national debt while racking up $1 trillion in 14 months

The US national debt just pushed past $22 trillion — here's how Trump's $2 trillion in debt compares with Obama, Bush, and Clinton

The US national debt passed $22 trillion on February 11, the first time the federal debt had breached that threshold.

The landmark came just over two years after President Donald Trump, who once promised to eliminate the federal debt in eight years, took over the Oval Office.

The US Treasury has been tracking day-by-day debt accumulation since the start of 1993, meaning daily debt figures are available for the presidencies of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Trump.

In raw terms, Trump added the second-most debt of any recent president. According to the Treasury data, the US added $2.07 trillion — $2,065,536,336,472.90 to be exact — in new debt between Trump's inauguration on January 20, 2017, and February 11, when the country pushed past $22 trillion. (The US added another $2.8 billion through February 15, the latest daily figures available.)

That is less than the $3.46 trillion added between Obama's inauguration in January 2009 and February 11, 2011, but it is more than the $676 billion added under Bush and the $617 billion added under Clinton in their first 752 days as president.

One important difference between Trump's debt figures and Obama's is that Trump has added a massive amount of debt while the US economy has been strong, whereas Obama took over during the depths of the financial crisis.

Economists typically recommend that the federal government increase spending, and thus add more debt, during times of economic struggles and then pay down that debt when the economy recovers. So while economic theory would support Obama's spending to help support the economy, Trump's recent debt binge has less support among economists.

The US national debt just pushed past $22 trillion — here's how Trump's $2 trillion in debt compares with Obama, Bush, and Clinton

Possible Budget Deal Will Add $2 Trillion to the National Debt

In a statement, the CRFB said the budget deal "may be the worst in history," given the country's current precarious fiscal condition.

"Members of Congress should cancel their summer recess and return to the negotiating table for a better deal. If they don't, those who support this deal should hang their heads in total shame as they bolt town," says Maya MacGuineas, president of the CRFB. "This deal would amount to nothing short of fiscal sabotage."

If President Donald Trump signs the deal into law, he will have authorized a 22 percent increase in federal discretionary spending during his first term in office—having signed a March 2018 budget deal that similarly jacked up both domestic and military spending.

Possible Budget Deal Will Add $2 Trillion to the National Debt – Reason.com

So if the tea party was not a racist movement, where are all the protests now? The same people protesting Obamas spending when it was necessary, support and defend Trumps spending now which is not.

Race had nothing to do with it numb nuts....

Tea Party is still there...but it was a choice between Trump and Hilary....hilary, a criminal who used her public office for personal gain, and a desire to destroy the country...that left Trump. We have to put up with the spending, which would have been even worse under hilary, and try to get a conservative in office. Between the two, hilary or Trump there was no choice, we had to pick Trump...

If they were truly against deficits they would be protesting now. Increasing deficits during a strong economy as bad as it gets.

 

[Papageorgio]

The TEA party movement was more concerned with backing the GOP than actually calling out profligate spending. Where was the TEA party when President GW Bush was blowing up budgets?

The Tea Party didn’t form until after Bush was out of office.

The debt is way to high and neither party really cares and the debt continuing to grow after each President since Coolidge is proof of that.

 

[Brain357]

The TEA party movement was more concerned with backing the GOP than actually calling out profligate spending. Where was the TEA party when President GW Bush was blowing up budgets?

The Tea Party didn’t form until after Bush was out of office.

The debt is way to high and neither party really cares and the debt continuing to grow after each President since Coolidge is proof of that.

Why was it after Bush? Bush went from a balanced budget to huge deficits. Should have started under bush if they had really cared...

 

[otto105]

White "conservatives" were all enraged because Obama started his administration by spending big bucks. A move that saved the economy.

Oh, well, if "spending big bucks . . . saved the economy," then you should be thrilled with the spending that Trump has agreed to. So what's the problem?

You guys ducked and dodged all over the place when it came to Obama's spending. Some of you claimed that his tripling of the deficit in a single year saved the economy! So, again, what's the problem with more big spending?

The simple fact of the matter is that if we had a filibuster-proof Republican majority in the Senate and a large majority in the House, we would be spending a lot less money. But we don't. The Democrats are the ones driving the big spending.

The problem is quite clear mikegrifter1,

President Obama spent money to help pull the nation out of the republic Great Recession. While donny grifter is spending cash in relatively good economic times.


Additionally, the republic party for the first two years of his one term had both the house and senate yet still spent like drunken white guys in a strip club.

 

[Papageorgio]

The TEA party movement was more concerned with backing the GOP than actually calling out profligate spending. Where was the TEA party when President GW Bush was blowing up budgets?

The Tea Party didn’t form until after Bush was out of office.

The debt is way to high and neither party really cares and the debt continuing to grow after each President since Coolidge is proof of that.

Why was it after Bush? Bush went from a balanced budget to huge deficits. Should have started under bush if they had really cared...

I have no idea, do you? I really liked the Tea Party idea, it never went anywhere.

Since Coolidge we have added debt, the party didn't matter and yet everyone continues to vote for the two parties that keep increasing debt. One would think the public would brighten up and realize what we are doing is not working and change our voting habits. I have had those on this board that our debt doesn't matter, if that is really the case then why tax to begin with?

 

[Papageorgio]

White "conservatives" were all enraged because Obama started his administration by spending big bucks. A move that saved the economy.

Oh, well, if "spending big bucks . . . saved the economy," then you should be thrilled with the spending that Trump has agreed to. So what's the problem?

You guys ducked and dodged all over the place when it came to Obama's spending. Some of you claimed that his tripling of the deficit in a single year saved the economy! So, again, what's the problem with more big spending?

The simple fact of the matter is that if we had a filibuster-proof Republican majority in the Senate and a large majority in the House, we would be spending a lot less money. But we don't. The Democrats are the ones driving the big spending.

The problem is quite clear mikegrifter1,

President Obama spent money to help pull the nation out of the republic Great Recession. While donny grifter is spending cash in relatively good economic times.


Additionally, the republic party for the first two years of his one term had both the house and senate yet still spent like drunken white guys in a strip club.

Racial profiling, interesting.

 

[Brain357]

The TEA party movement was more concerned with backing the GOP than actually calling out profligate spending. Where was the TEA party when President GW Bush was blowing up budgets?

The Tea Party didn’t form until after Bush was out of office.

The debt is way to high and neither party really cares and the debt continuing to grow after each President since Coolidge is proof of that.

Why was it after Bush? Bush went from a balanced budget to huge deficits. Should have started under bush if they had really cared...

I have no idea, do you? I really liked the Tea Party idea, it never went anywhere.

Since Coolidge we have added debt, the party didn't matter and yet everyone continues to vote for the two parties that keep increasing debt. One would think the public would brighten up and realize what we are doing is not working and change our voting habits. I have had those on this board that our debt doesn't matter, if that is really the case then why tax to begin with?

It is clear they cared more about being republican than they did the debt. Party over country...

 

[Papageorgio]

The TEA party movement was more concerned with backing the GOP than actually calling out profligate spending. Where was the TEA party when President GW Bush was blowing up budgets?

The Tea Party didn’t form until after Bush was out of office.

The debt is way to high and neither party really cares and the debt continuing to grow after each President since Coolidge is proof of that.

Why was it after Bush? Bush went from a balanced budget to huge deficits. Should have started under bush if they had really cared...

I have no idea, do you? I really liked the Tea Party idea, it never went anywhere.

Since Coolidge we have added debt, the party didn't matter and yet everyone continues to vote for the two parties that keep increasing debt. One would think the public would brighten up and realize what we are doing is not working and change our voting habits. I have had those on this board that our debt doesn't matter, if that is really the case then why tax to begin with?

It is clear they cared more about being republican than they did the debt. Party over country...

No different than the Democrats, I really have no use for either party. We need a third party that works for the average American, not Wall St.

 

[Correll]

...

So if the tea party was not a racist movement, where are all the protests now? The same people protesting Obamas spending when it was necessary, support and defend Trumps spending now which is not.

Got any actual example of that? Or do you just think of all white people as one entity?

Well, we have silence now at a white president spending like crazy and with an African-American president we had screaming.....so theres that.

So, no actual examples, as claimed. Got it. Just lumping all white people together because, white.


And you guys claim to be the anti-racists..


I've said it before. I'll say it again.


Liberals. All the self awareness of a potted plant.


A dead potted plant.

 

[Brain357]

The TEA party movement was more concerned with backing the GOP than actually calling out profligate spending. Where was the TEA party when President GW Bush was blowing up budgets?

The Tea Party didn’t form until after Bush was out of office.

The debt is way to high and neither party really cares and the debt continuing to grow after each President since Coolidge is proof of that.

Why was it after Bush? Bush went from a balanced budget to huge deficits. Should have started under bush if they had really cared...

I have no idea, do you? I really liked the Tea Party idea, it never went anywhere.

Since Coolidge we have added debt, the party didn't matter and yet everyone continues to vote for the two parties that keep increasing debt. One would think the public would brighten up and realize what we are doing is not working and change our voting habits. I have had those on this board that our debt doesn't matter, if that is really the case then why tax to begin with?

It is clear they cared more about being republican than they did the debt. Party over country...

No different than the Democrats, I really have no use for either party. We need a third party that works for the average American, not Wall St.

That is true, but the tea party didn't show up till the black guy was in office even though the debt was out of control under Bush. Then the tea party disappears when trump starts running up the debt. Pretty clear they were a bunch of repub hacks.

It was sad to see when Perot died. We need another like him to get the country straight. Too much corruption now....

 

[Papageorgio]

...

So if the tea party was not a racist movement, where are all the protests now? The same people protesting Obamas spending when it was necessary, support and defend Trumps spending now which is not.

Got any actual example of that? Or do you just think of all white people as one entity?

Well, we have silence now at a white president spending like crazy and with an African-American president we had screaming.....so theres that.

During the Clinton Administration there was a lot noise about the Clinton debt then after Newt and the GOP led House passed the balanced budget the Republicans took credit for that. So there was a lot of noise on the right when Clinton was in office. The GOP and Clinton gave us a budget surplus, Congress passed it and Clinton signed off. I don't hold Presidents solely responsible it takes two to reduce or increase.

 

[rightwinger]

White "conservatives" were all enraged because Obama started his administration by spending big bucks. A move that saved the economy.

Oh, well, if "spending big bucks . . . saved the economy," then you should be thrilled with the spending that Trump has agreed to. So what's the problem?

You guys ducked and dodged all over the place when it came to Obama's spending. Some of you claimed that his tripling of the deficit in a single year saved the economy! So, again, what's the problem with more big spending?

The simple fact of the matter is that if we had a filibuster-proof Republican majority in the Senate and a large majority in the House, we would be spending a lot less money. But we don't. The Democrats are the ones driving the big spending.

What a laugh

Republicans moaned about spending for eight years

Spending to rescue the economy, spending to create jobs, spending on healthcare, spending on natural disasters, raising the debt ceiling

Once Trump was pulling the strings, they didn’t care
Why would you increase the deficit to a trillion dollars in a booming economy?

 

[rightwinger]

The Tea Party didn’t form until after Bush was out of office.

The debt is way to high and neither party really cares and the debt continuing to grow after each President since Coolidge is proof of that.

Why was it after Bush? Bush went from a balanced budget to huge deficits. Should have started under bush if they had really cared...

I have no idea, do you? I really liked the Tea Party idea, it never went anywhere.

Since Coolidge we have added debt, the party didn't matter and yet everyone continues to vote for the two parties that keep increasing debt. One would think the public would brighten up and realize what we are doing is not working and change our voting habits. I have had those on this board that our debt doesn't matter, if that is really the case then why tax to begin with?

It is clear they cared more about being republican than they did the debt. Party over country...

No different than the Democrats, I really have no use for either party. We need a third party that works for the average American, not Wall St.

That is true, but the tea party didn't show up till the black guy was in office even though the debt was out of control under Bush. Then the tea party disappears when trump starts running up the debt. Pretty clear they were a bunch of repub hacks.

It was sad to see when Perot died. We need another like him to get the country straight. Too much corruption now....

Bush started two unnecessary wars and cut taxes to pay for it
Tea party never said a word

 

[IM2]

The TEA party movement was more concerned with backing the GOP than actually calling out profligate spending. Where was the TEA party when President GW Bush was blowing up budgets?

The Tea Party didn’t form until after Bush was out of office.

The debt is way to high and neither party really cares and the debt continuing to grow after each President since Coolidge is proof of that.

Why was it after Bush? Bush went from a balanced budget to huge deficits. Should have started under bush if they had really cared...

I have no idea, do you? I really liked the Tea Party idea, it never went anywhere.

Since Coolidge we have added debt, the party didn't matter and yet everyone continues to vote for the two parties that keep increasing debt. One would think the public would brighten up and realize what we are doing is not working and change our voting habits. I have had those on this board that our debt doesn't matter, if that is really the case then why tax to begin with?

It is clear they cared more about being republican than they did the debt. Party over country...

No different than the Democrats, I really have no use for either party. We need a third party that works for the average American, not Wall St.

Both sides are not the problem.

 

[otto105]

The TEA party movement was more concerned with backing the GOP than actually calling out profligate spending. Where was the TEA party when President GW Bush was blowing up budgets?

The Tea Party didn’t form until after Bush was out of office.

The debt is way to high and neither party really cares and the debt continuing to grow after each President since Coolidge is proof of that.

Why was it after Bush? Bush went from a balanced budget to huge deficits. Should have started under bush if they had really cared...

I have no idea, do you? I really liked the Tea Party idea, it never went anywhere.

Since Coolidge we have added debt, the party didn't matter and yet everyone continues to vote for the two parties that keep increasing debt. One would think the public would brighten up and realize what we are doing is not working and change our voting habits. I have had those on this board that our debt doesn't matter, if that is really the case then why tax to begin with?

It is clear they cared more about being republican than they did the debt. Party over country...

No different than the Democrats, I really have no use for either party. We need a third party that works for the average American, not Wall St.

Wall street will co-op any 3rd party. The problem lays in two things, first the Citizens United decision by a conservative court pushed by conservative fronting for Wall St. Second, the dumbing down of the republic party to basic stupidity.