Economy is roaring

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why has Trump moved to cut the food stamp program if we’re doing so well. why can’t we support those who aren’t?

700,000 people losing their food security right before the holidays. What a grinchy thing to do.

It's not being cut. It's being tightened. And, why should those who are able to work be subsidized by the government?

Under current rules, work-eligible, able-bodied adults between 18 and 49 and without dependents can receive only three months of SNAP benefits in a three-year period if they don't meet the 20-hour work requirement. States with high unemployment rates or a lack of sufficient jobs can waive those time limits.

Under the new rule, states can only issue waivers if a city or county has an unemployment rate of 6 percent or higher. The waivers will be good for one year and will require the governor to support the request.

The final rule will be published in the federal register Thursday and go into effect in April.

Why? Because many of them are homeless or have transportation issues where they can’t get to jobs.
You know little about the lowest on the economic rung, so you.

The effect will be many more hungry in America including children. You cannot deny that will happen.



https://www.foxnews.com/politics/white-house-tightens-food-stamp-requirements

The bolded statement proves to me you are just spouting off and that your likely sources of information about the changes are left-wing media that are whipping you into a frenzy.
You know nothing about the proposal.

"The change, which takes effect on April 1, 2020, does not apply to children and their parents, those over 50 (including the elderly), those with a disability or pregnant women."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/12/04/food-stamps-trump-administration-tightens-snap-work-requirements/2608297001/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why has Trump moved to cut the food stamp program if we’re doing so well. why can’t we support those who aren’t?

700,000 people losing their food security right before the holidays. What a grinchy thing to do.

It's not being cut. It's being tightened. And, why should those who are able to work be subsidized by the government?

Under current rules, work-eligible, able-bodied adults between 18 and 49 and without dependents can receive only three months of SNAP benefits in a three-year period if they don't meet the 20-hour work requirement. States with high unemployment rates or a lack of sufficient jobs can waive those time limits.

Under the new rule, states can only issue waivers if a city or county has an unemployment rate of 6 percent or higher. The waivers will be good for one year and will require the governor to support the request.

The final rule will be published in the federal register Thursday and go into effect in April.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/white-house-tightens-food-stamp-requirements

Why? Because many of them are homeless or have transportation issues where they can’t get to jobs.
You know little about the lowest on the economic rung, so you.

The effect will be many more hungry in America including children. You cannot deny that will happen.

Yes, I can. Read 14:09

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Doesn’t matter. The economy, or better yet the public’s perception of the economy, is what wins elections. The President knows that. Why do you think he’s focused now on the China trade deal?

And this is the explanation for the whole impeachment nonsense. The Democrats are going to impeach Trump knowing full well that the Senate will not remove him from office .......... and the presidential election is less than a year away. All that this impeachment drive is seeking to achieve is to damage Trump.

With a roaring economy, it will not work: most Americans are more concerned about their economic welfare and not some esoteric nonsense about abuse of power, etc.

What they will understand, if Biden is the nominee, is when Trump incessantly drums the message that Biden's son who had zero background in energy and pretty much a failure in everything that he has done, and yet he gets $1 million annually. Was it illegal? No it was not. But it stinks to high heaven and that is what the average voter in those swing states will understand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Doesn’t matter. The economy, or better yet the public’s perception of the economy, is what wins elections. The President knows that. Why do you think he’s focused now on the China trade deal?

And this is the explanation for the whole impeachment nonsense. The Democrats are going to impeach Trump knowing full well that the Senate will not remove him from office .......... and the presidential election is less than a year away. All that this impeachment drive is seeking to achieve is to damage Trump.

With a roaring economy, it will not work: most Americans are more concerned about their economic welfare and not some esoteric nonsense about abuse of power, etc.

What they will understand, if Biden is the nominee, is when Trump incessantly drums the message that Biden's son who had zero background in energy and pretty much a failure in everything that he has done, and yet he gets $1 million annually. Was it illegal? No it was not. But it stinks to high heaven and that is what the average voter in those swing states will understand.

+100
I would argue that we don't know enough about the whole Ukraine situation to know if anything illegal was or wasn't done.......

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
+1. I did not vote for Trump in 2016, but I am too scared not to vote for him in 2020 for one reason only: the economy. I would never tell anyone that, though. I’m sure there are millions like me. I think he’s gonna win by a landslide.

I am in the same boat. I did not vote for Trump and would have to hold my nose and vote for him if I did. But I just don't believe that the Democrats will sustain this economy if we end up with a Democrat in the Oval office.

I can't say that I am sold on Trump because of his nutty behavior but I do believe that he and his economic team have a good handle on the economy. You grow an economy by creating an environment for business to grow. This is what Trump has done and all credit to him. Will I vote for him? I am not sure but if the Democratic nominee espouses some of the nonsensical policies that the left wants, I will reluctantly vote for him. I am in one of the swing states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Doesn’t matter. The economy, or better yet the public’s perception of the economy, is what wins elections. The President knows that. Why do you think he’s focused now on the China trade deal?

And this is the explanation for the whole impeachment nonsense. The Democrats are going to impeach Trump knowing full well that the Senate will not remove him from office .......... and the presidential election is less than a year away. All that this impeachment drive is seeking to achieve is to damage Trump.

With a roaring economy, it will not work: most Americans are more concerned about their economic welfare and not some esoteric nonsense about abuse of power, etc.

What they will understand, if Biden is the nominee, is when Trump incessantly drums the message that Biden's son who had zero background in energy and pretty much a failure in everything that he has done, and yet he gets $1 million annually. Was it illegal? No it was not. But it stinks to high heaven and that is what the average voter in those swing states will understand.

The DOW is roaring; the economy isn't. Obama had more growth in the last 30 months of his administration that Trump had in the first 30 of his; and it has been slowing from there while the debt and deficit are ballooning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
+1. I did not vote for Trump in 2016, but I am too scared not to vote for him in 2020 for one reason only: the economy. I would never tell anyone that, though. I’m sure there are millions like me. I think he’s gonna win by a landslide.

I am in the same boat. I did not vote for Trump and would have to hold my nose and vote for him if I did. But I just don't believe that the Democrats will sustain this economy if we end up with a Democrat in the Oval office.

I can't say that I am sold on Trump because of his nutty behavior but I do believe that he and his economic team have a good handle on the economy. You grow an economy by creating an environment for business to grow. This is what Trump has done and all credit to him. Will I vote for him? I am not sure but if the Democratic nominee espouses some of the nonsensical policies that the left wants, I will reluctantly vote for him. I am in one of the swing states.

Look at the DOW charts from 1993-2000 and from 2009-2016. Those were democratic administrations, since y'all seemed concerned about the DOW and democratic administrations. Look who actually sustains growth! It was GHB or GHWB. And Trump is using the wealth/corporate tax cuts to goose his "economy" at the expense of virtually all of the normal metrics that measure a healthy outlook.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yup. The Democrats will lose because of it. It alwayyyyyys comes down to jobs and the economy. Pelosi can keep blathering like the bloated red balloon she looks like about the impeachment inquiry. It won't matter because the economy is fantastic. And we havent seen anything yet. Everyone's 401ks will explode upward once Trump signs a grand trade deal with the Chinese.

It is also hilarious how badly liberals and Democrats want the economy to tank and for people to be out of jobs just so that they can gain political points. Remember back when liberals and the liberal media were predicting economic armageddon because of the trade war? Oooopsie, hasn't happened and the economy continues to rip. The S and P 500 continues to rise and the US actually appears to be gaining the upper hand on the Chinese, whose economy is now slowing and who are now dealing with a lot of unrest. Democrats and liberals can't stand Trump because he is so unorthodox and does not gaf. At least we finally have someone in office who has a spine to stand up for American interests rather than continuing to allow the Chinese to run roughshod over us.

Are you dumb? We dislike Trump because he's an embarrassing baffoon. We want the economy to do great. Think about it, the money is in blue states - NOT RED STATES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Doesn’t matter. The economy, or better yet the public’s perception of the economy, is what wins elections. The President knows that. Why do you think he’s focused now on the China trade deal?

And this is the explanation for the whole impeachment nonsense. The Democrats are going to impeach Trump knowing full well that the Senate will not remove him from office .......... and the presidential election is less than a year away. All that this impeachment drive is seeking to achieve is to damage Trump.

With a roaring economy, it will not work: most Americans are more concerned about their economic welfare and not some esoteric nonsense about abuse of power, etc.

What they will understand, if Biden is the nominee, is when Trump incessantly drums the message that Biden's son who had zero background in energy and pretty much a failure in everything that he has done, and yet he gets $1 million annually. Was it illegal? No it was not. But it stinks to high heaven and that is what the average voter in those swing states will understand.

The DOW is roaring; the economy isn't. Obama had more growth in the last 30 months of his administration that Trump had in the first 30 of his; and it has been slowing from there while the debt and deficit are ballooning.

The Trumpers won't listen. They're beyond caring about facts. It's all about defending the cult for them. When you point out that there's more to the economy than Wall Street, and that Wall Street has ben in a state of near-constant growth since well before their Orange messiah took office, that's when they start with the whatabouts (see above re: impeachment and Hunter Biden).

The kneepad bill in Trump households must be substantial.

[Anonymous]

+1. I did not vote for Trump in 2016, but I am too scared not to vote for him in 2020 for one reason only: the economy. I would never tell anyone that, though. I’m sure there are millions like me. I think he’s gonna win by a landslide.

You seem like a reasonable person. Are you worried about climate change?

[Anonymous]

Oh please. Dems keep going on and on and on about 'those left behind'. Newsflash: there will ALWAYS be a fraction of people left behind. Familiarize yourself with a bellcurve. However, by almost every single peice of objective macro econ data available, the economy is rip roaring right now, most people have jobs, and wealth for your overall typical household has increased. Dems can be negative all they want, it doesn't change the fact that Americans are getting richer as we speak and are making out like bandits. Every single sweeping wide socialist bent economic policy the Dems are currently running on would destroy the red hot economy overnight. Dems can't stand the fact that the economy is doing well.

[Anonymous]

The unemployment rate is down by a full percentage point in MI, WI, OH and PA - now that is what matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The unemployment rate is down by a full percentage point in MI, WI, OH and PA - now that is what matters.

+1000000

Dems are terrified of the implications. They have zero on the economy and therefore need to try to get people to focus on flimsy impeachment nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The unemployment rate is down by a full percentage point in MI, WI, OH and PA - now that is what matters.

Tell it to the thousands of small family farmers, particularly dairy farms, in Wisconsin alone, who have lost their farms in the past year and then had to listen to the USDA Sec. tell them in Madison to "get over it" earlier this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Since we’re doing so well, it’s time to give police, firemen, teachers, librarians, social workers, and others employed by the state and feds raises. And also fine to end homelessness and hunger.

Actually, federal workers DID get raises last year AND there is already plans in the work for a raise this year for fed workers. Funny, actully public employees have gotten more raises under GOP govts run by Bush and Trump than govts under Democrats. Obama gave 0 raises while in office.