ant wrote: Manufacturing jobs rose by 482,000

Accurate, but CNN gives some perspective.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/08/economy/ ... index.html

Most of the half-million new manufacturing jobs over the past three years are in the Sun Belt or around Silicon Valley. Meanwhile job losses in the Rust Belt are accelerating. That could be key to the 2020 race.
Trump won Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin in 2016, promising working-class voters he would revive US manufacturing. But all four states have lost more than 16,000 factory jobs in the past year alone.
And many new production jobs are non-union with lower pay, according to Pew Research. That translates to the loss of good wages for Americans without a college degree, the majority of which voted Trump into office.

The article also points out that a post-recession growth in auto purchases played a large role, which means it would have happened under Hillary as well. And shale oil played a big role, which was already collapsing before Covid kicked the stuffings out of the oil and gas market.

ant wrote:Less overseas job outsourcing

Probably true, but it was already declining before Trump. If he has anything to claim credit for, it is a fall in replacement of U.S. manufacturing by Chinese and Mexican exports. But those were also slowing, and it is hard to know whether they would have slowed further, or even stopped (the academic work showing China competition had a big role was just coming out in 2016) with a Democrat in the White House.

ant wrote:Economy grew faster under Trump than Obama

This did not sound right to me. I have not yet found a definitive answer, but this discussion from Business Insider sheds some light:
https://markets.businessinsider.com/new ... n-steady-1

The unemployment rate hovered between 4% and 6% for most of the Bush presidency, spiking dramatically during the 2008-09 financial crisis to 7.8% just as he left office in January 2009.

As a result, Obama inherited an economy in free-fall. The unemployment rate peaked at 10.2% in October 2009 during the recession and 8.7 million jobs were lost from early 2007 and 2010, according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. But it started falling steadily in 2011 and that trend continued for the rest of the Obama presidency.

The graph at that page is particularly useful. Unfortunately I could not get it to copy. It shows that "Growth in the Obama administration" is particularly biased because the first two quarters were very negative due to the fallout from the Bush collapse. After that his rate of growth compared favorably to Trump's (I am not sure whose was actually higher, if you leave out the time of disaster in each) Looks like a simple continuation under DT.

ant wrote:Much less federal regulation under Trump

His deregulation has been really bad for the environment and bad for U.S. workers as well. Maybe there was some good deregulation but I am unaware of it.

ant wrote:Under Trump, deportation is synonymous with racism. Under Obama, known during his presidency as "The Deporter in Chief" it scarcely was even a blip on the map.
Mexican / American advocacy groups were knocking on Obama's door his entire presidency about his mass deportations. Where was the support from Obama's shills?
If I was a undocumented immigrant, why would I feel better about a black man deporting me instead of a white man?

I think this is a fair point but the rhetoric matters as well. Trump has gone out of his way to insult and demonize Mexicans, and it is clear that his wall is aimed at people whose skin is too brown, not at people who are coming to America. I think you can make a fair case for Trump's real policies, such as freezing DACA and getting rid of the lottery for immigration so that rich and educated immigrants once again get priority. The trouble is the way he advocates for these policies is really, genuinely racist. I think you would have trouble making that case about Obama's deportations (which he did take quite a bit of flak for, including before 2016).

This side issue also seems to have entirely been missed by liberals. I find it incredible no other president in the last 20 years even so much as considered passing an animal cruelty law like this:

Under Federalism this has traditionally been a state issue. We might all hate cockfighting and lax regulation of horseracing, but if some states want to allow them, there is not an interstate commerce issue that the U.S. should step in for.

Again, why would I vote for Biden and not for someone that was in fact generating some positives for the country?

We could start with Trump's avowed goal of eliminating the Affordable Care Act, for which he has still not come up with the promised alternative. With Covid in the air it should be clear that tens of millions of uninsured citizens is no less than a threat to my life. Not to mention theirs.

Then we could talk about corruption, and the way Trump has sold energy policy and environmental policy to the corporate bidders. And the way he is happy to use the law enforcement powers of the government to excuse people who support him (or even just say nice things about him) and to persecute those who don't. We passed a bunch of laws after Watergate and J. Edgar Hoover to stop that sort of thing, but Trump thinks they are terribly unfair and bad and the government doesn't have to obey them. Which is horrible in itself, aside from what he wants to do if he is given free rein.

ant wrote: Putting aside a global pandemic that originated oversees (including related things as an unprecedented quarantining of millions of healthy people and a near full stop of the economy) here is a snapshot of how the country was doing:

My contention that Donald Trump is one of our worst presidents doesn't depend on his performance during the pandemic. You apparently think he has done well, or that the circumstances would have overwhelmed any president, but I believe his deficiencies are shown in the record of January, February, and March, in particular. You've already claimed that he has been blamed for every death from covid-19, which is a straw-man approach to his defense. Not a single critic of his who I have listened to has said that. But again, the judgment of Trump as one of the worst presidents stands very securely if you look at 2019 and earlier.

The economy added 6 million jobs, and the unemployment rate dropped to the lowest level in nearly 50 years.

Presiding over an economy with some good indicators is all that's needed, then, for a good job rating. We might need to look at the tax cut whose greatest benefit was to the wealthy and that has further ballooned our federal debt. Under Trump, fiscal responsibility has suddenly vanished from the Republican agenda, except that they continue to fear that poor people might receive lavish benefits from Medicaid or SNAP. But let's not see socialism for the rich as any problem at all.

The Obama administration, not the Trump administration, built the cages that hold many immigrant children at the U.S.-Mexico border.

While Obama's deportations weren't held against him by mainstream liberals, he did not mismanage family separations in the disastrous and cruel manner of the Trump administration.

Trump is a bane for celebrity and self proclaimed armchair intellectuals who despise his off the cuff, poor oratory skills.

It amuses me the way Trump apologists excuse his behavior in the highest job in the land as a matter of "style," or, here, as poor "oratory." It's as if what a president says and and how he says it don't matter at all. Since his election, we've seen multiple instances that cry out for the question asked of Joe McCarthy: "Have you no sense of decency left, at long last?" And yet all of that that relates to character doesn't matter, we're told.

Trump's competence as a manager is severely in doubt. If he ran his companies with the same skill level, no wonder he became a serial bankrupt. Trump is the undisputed king of falsehoods as well. Another statement we hear regarding that is, "all politicians lie"--a cynical and lazy defense of this president who has rarely served a day without misleading us or lying to us.

If you want a decent read on how a whackjob like KindaScholarly is incapable of being convinced of his wrongness,look here.

It's the last part of a series, which I would recommend reading in its entirety. He pulls from many sources, including Haidt and other books we've read.

My proxy server won't open that link. Is it porno? About Biden? These guys have the right idea. Imagine if the Secret Service wasn't around to protect that old perv:



And here's a blast from the past. A sweet bit of video in which Biden says "We could build a wall forty stories high..." lol

Joe Biden Rails Against "Illegals," Calls For 700 Mile Border Fence In Resurfaced 2006 Video
https://youtu.be/rR6wdwkaWGA

Oh, and Biden has already sealed away his documents from his days as a senator, archived them. And now he won't pull them out to let reporters search them for sex crimes. He says that Trump might use the info from the files against him. lol. Do ya' think so, Sherlock?

Tara Reade calls for release of Biden's Senate records: 'Why are they under seal?'
Tara Reade, the woman who has accused Joe Biden of sexual assault, is calling on the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee to release the records from his 36 years as a senator, which are currently inaccessible to the public and are kept at the University of Delaware....
foxnews.com/politics/tara-reade-calls-o ... te-records

Biden: Sealed Senate Records Could Be "Taken Out Of Context" And Used As Campaign Fodder
"The fact is, that there’s a lot of things that of speeches I’ve made, positions I’ve taken, interviews that I did overseas with people, all of those things relating to my job. And the idea that they would be made public and the fact while I was running for public office, they could be really taken out of context. The papers are position papers, they are documents that existed and that for example when I go, when I met with Putin or when I met with whomever. And all of that to be fodder in a campaign at this time," Biden said Friday.
realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/05/01/ ... odder.html

We taxpayers PAID Biden's salary while he was in the Senate. We have a right to see the records. It's preposterous that they're sealed anyway. Public money, public records.

I first thought Biden needed to open up the U of Delaware records, too. Now I think he has a good reason not to allow it. How many of Trump's records, on taxes, education, can Biden's side see? None. There are over 1,700 boxes. Giving carte blanche to go through all of those could take months, dragging this issue out until the election and giving the opposition other fodder. They aren't entitled to it.

By the way, Biden giving his rationale makes sense in a way Donald Trump rarely does. A couple of people around here should stop alleging Biden has Alzheimer's or some other dementia. It's irresponsible. Even a medical doctor wouldn't make a diagnosis without examining the patient. If you've had anyone close to you suffer from dementia, you also will know that Biden doesn't have it. It is a rare 77-year-old who hasn't lost a step or two. It's called age-related cognitive decline.

I don't think he's ever coming out of his basement again. And if he does he'll be wearing a mask. They'll probably patch together his speaking parts from some old tapes and then electrically stimulate him so his lips move beneath the mask, to make it appear that the neurons are still firing. The dribble stains on his mask should be amusing. And how's he going to grope from the 6 feet required for social distancing?

I will vote for Biden if he stays true to his claim that women who accuse men of sexual misconduct ought to be believed and admits he has sexually harassed 7 women

“For a woman to come forward in the glaring lights of focus, nationally, you’ve got to start off with the presumption that at least the essence of what she’s talking about is real, whether or not she forgets facts, whether or not it’s been made worse or better over time,”

~ Joe Biden

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-bide ... 313fbe8f84

Hilary Clinton feels strongly about this as well:

"Today I want to send a message to every survivor of sexual assault," Clinton said. "Don't let anyone silence your voice. You have the right to be heard. You have the right to be believed and we're with you."

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... ntion.html#!



Seven women, Joe.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/201 ... -list.html



Sunlight is the best sanitizer.

ant wrote:I will vote for Biden if he stays true to his claim that women who accuse men of sexual misconduct ought to be believed and admits he has sexually harassed 7 women

If not, who you voting for? Because the other guy has been accused by 23 women.

Just so I understand you correctly:

This is kind of like a poker game to you - you'll see my 7 victims and raise me 23?

Considering I didn't vote for the guy the first time I'm not likely to support him this time around. either. Although I might because i am so sick of white people virtue signaling, telling people of color (like me) how very bad we have it under Trump.

Are you voting for Biden?

A lefty who votes for Biden has beyond a reasonable doubt shown they have no principles or morals to speak of.
Any attempt at justification is sheer unabashed hypocrisy.

I haven't heard about 7 sex harassment claims, but will keep listening. Did you also decide Brett Kavanaugh was guilty based on the charge from his accuser?

Business Insider has this: "Eight women, including Reade, have accused Biden of touching them inappropriately or invading their personal space in ways that made them feel uncomfortable. Seven of the women said Biden's behavior did not amount to sexual harassment or assault."

How many of the 23 women accusing Trump have said his actions were not sexual harassment?