Rand Paul: Reagan vs Carter

[momonkey]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

except your facts are wrong. You did this the last time we debated as well.

the 1947 fiscally year started in October of 1946, And that budget was passed if February of 1946. meaning it is a Democratic budget, not a Republican one.

You also skipped the 1951 surplus in your argument, I guess simply not mentioning it means it didnt happen.

That was a Democratic year as well, we are tied 2-2 if you are keeping score.

You also skipped 1956 and 1957 for some odd reason, you did the same thing last time.

Those were Democratic surpluses as well. Now it is 4 - 2.

There was a surplus in 1960 as well, guess who controlled Congress then ...

score is now 5-2

The next surplus was in 1969, guess who still controlled congress.

Score is 6-2

The score doesnt even up until 2001.

As for your 1990's republican control argument. You fail to see your own flaw.

The Deficit fell every year from 1992 onward. Democrats controlled the house up until 1995 budget remember.

Democrats also didnt take over Congress in 2001, at best you are talking about the 51 to 49 senate that year, but even then you would be completely negating the fact that Republicans still controlled the House by a 222-210 margin. Republicans controlled both Houses of congress from 1995 to 2007 excluding 2001.

you are blaming Democrats for Republican/Bush deficits.

but again, we already had this debate. You posted the same wrong information back then as well.

Prior to 1976, the FY started on July 1 and ended June 30 splitting the year in half.

Congress was seated in January and their budget went into effect in July.

It was changed to give them more time to create and implement a budget.


Republicans didn't control both houses in 1951.

Do you remember what I said?


On the three occasions Republicans controlled both houses of Congress, the running deficits were reduced or the budget was in balance.


You don't get to change my assertion just because I made you look like a tool.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by momonkey

Republicans didn't control both houses in 1951.

Do you remember what I said?


On the three occasions Republicans controlled both houses of Congress, the running deficits were reduced or the budget was in balance.


You don't get to change my assertion just because I made you look like a tool.

You didnt make me look like a tool, you made yourself look like one.

in each of your examples. the deficits had already been falling before republicans took over congress.

You didnt even get which years republicans took over congress right. By the premise of your own post you were wrong. 2001 to 2007 alone negates your entire argument. 6 years of complete Republican control and deficits skyrocketed.

[Motion]

Has Rand Paul ever said anything about the amount of jobs that had been created under Reagan?

[middle-aged mom]

Originally Posted by Motion

Has Rand Paul ever said anything about the amount of jobs that had been created under Reagan?

Or that Walmart overtook IBM as the nation's largest private sector employer during the 80's?

It was another shift from middle class jobs with good benefits to part time employment with few benefits.

And here we are 25 +/- years later...........

[momonkey]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

You didnt make me look like a tool, you made yourself look like one.

in each of your examples. the deficits had already been falling before republicans took over congress.

You didnt even get which years republicans took over congress right. By the premise of your own post you were wrong. 2001 to 2007 alone negates your entire argument. 6 years of complete Republican control and deficits skyrocketed.

Democrats controlled the Senate in 2001 and 2002 (fy 2002 and 2003).

That was when those surpluses became deficits again.

Those falling Democrat deficits are like bragging about getting a D- on your report card because it's an improvement over the F you got last semester.

[Loveshiscountry]

Originally Posted by texdav

Then again Ron Paul introduced a lot of pork for his district. People figured out pretty quickly he was all mouth and had done little except take republican money in promise to vote with them in the end. He liked his seat made possible from it.

He's not the one who is all mouth here. He was getting his constituents money back, period. Educate yourself. He didn't vote with republicans in the end, he was always voted on policy and if the constitution gave him the authority to do it.
Anyone who doesn't have a twisted agenda knows that.

[Old Gringo]

Reagan won back in 1980.

To Randy Paul: Thanks for that tidbit of info, senator...