Reply to A "new, softer, introspective" Trump? What a joke!

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "A "new, softer, introspective" Trump? What a joke!"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]All brown people look like the enemy to Trump, even though this guy was actually a supporter:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/19/politics/indian-man-ejected-trump-rally/index.html[/quote]

Actually...his speech was great and brought up a good point!  Have the old political class and failed economic polices of Obama helped anyone?  Median income is down and black unemployment is up.  The staid quo isn't working.  The democrat polices have failed the inner-city[/quote]

Actually, black unemployment is lower now that it was before the recession.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/08/news/economy/black-unemployment-falls-hits-8-year-low/

[/quote]
Unemployment numbers are skewed when you don't count people who are under-employed.

The seasonally adjusted labor-force-participation rate for black teenagers also sagged from 29.6 percent to 28.8 percent — down 2.7 percent.

During Obama’s tenure, the percentage of black Americans struggling below the poverty line has advanced, according to the most recent Census Bureau data, from 25.8 in 2009 to 26.2 in 2014 — up 1.6 percent.

Real median income among black households during those years, according to the Census Bureau, sank from $35,954 to $35,398 — down 1.5 percent.

The number of black food-stamp participants exploded across that time frame from 7,393,000 to 11,699,000, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reports — up 58.2 percent.

Also, from Obama’s oath of office through the fourth quarter of 2015, the percentage of black Americans who own homes foundered from 46.1 percent to 41.9 percent, according to the Census — down 9.1 percent.

Source:  census bureau 
http://c9.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/NRO-black-americans-worse-off-under-obama-1.xlsx

Looks like CNN is being biased...again.

[/quote]

No you are being biased.  You offered a statistic without any number or backing.  I gave the actual statistic to prove you wrong.  Then you offered a bunch of other statistics  so you could ignore that your original assertion wrong.  You could at least say, "my bad.'[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics