Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
conservatives are wrong about everything. I know people reading will think that I'm being hyperbolic, but no when it comes to predictions about policy outcomes, conservatives are wrong about everything.
Since 2001 starting with the Bush killing the momentum to do something about Global climate change, the War on Terror, the War in Iraq, The GWBush tax cuts, deregulation of banks, the stimulus, exploding inflation, weak dollar, depressed stock market, run away debt, auto bailout, financial regulation of banks, ending dadt, the ACA, the irs phony scandal, the phony Benghazi scandal, all the way through to the Ebola and Central American crisis, every major U.S. event was meet with predictions from conservative none of which have been accurate.
Like Since 2001 I dare anyone to look at the major events in America and read what conservatives said would happen, look at what actually happened and show where they were right about anything.
These 4 predictions are just par for the course.
Would this relate to the democrats prediction that the Republican would cease to exist after both the 2008 and 2012 elections? That the democrats would gain back any election loss by 2014?
Seems that the democrats were non to accurate (surprise) in their predictions either.
Not a matter of believing. It's a matter of whose policy ideas more align with reality.
If conservatives make a set of predictions about the impact that the stimulus will have on the economy based on their economic ideology, and they get everything wrong, that matters.
If conservatives make a set of predictions about the impact of the GWBush tax cuts will have on the economy based on their economic ideology, and they get everything wrong, that matters.
If conservatives make a set of predictions about the Global war on terror and the war in Iraq based on their geopolitical ideology, and they get everything wrong, that matters.
Again a number of major events have happened in the U.S./world since 2001, conservatives have been wrong about everything. I can't find one thing where conservatives were saying ok this is going to happen and that prediction was accurate.
conservatives are wrong about everything. I know people reading will think that I'm being hyperbolic, but no when it comes to predictions about policy outcomes, conservatives are wrong about everything.
Since 2001 starting with the Bush killing the momentum to do something about Global climate change, the War on Terror, the War in Iraq, The GWBush tax cuts, deregulation of banks, the stimulus, exploding inflation, weak dollar, depressed stock market, run away debt, auto bailout, financial regulation of banks, ending dadt, the ACA, the irs phony scandal, the phony Benghazi scandal, all the way through to the Ebola and Central American crisis, every major U.S. event was meet with predictions from conservative none of which have been accurate.
Like Since 2001 I dare anyone to look at the major events in America and read what conservatives said would happen, look at what actually happened and show where they were right about anything.
These 4 predictions are just par for the course.
Liberals are so predictable "it's bushs fault" in every thread no matter the topic. Liberals are wrong about everything, and mostly at fault for everything wrong with the country today. A broken clock is at least right twice a day, that's twice more than the average liberal.
But this thread isn't about lying. You are attempting to bs. It's about ideology and making sense of the world.
IE conservatives and Democrats make predictions about the world based on their ideological understanding of the world.
It matters whose views more closely align with the real world.
I have just found when measuring conservative predictions about the future based on their conservative ideology, they have been wrong about everything.
From the war on terror all the way to Putin invading Crimea.
What have conservatives gotten right in well over a decade?
To me that's the question.
NO, you statements are for the purpose of trying to make your biases the only thing that matters. No attempt to research or expose anything that republicans have done as being beneficial. Being one sided only goes to show support for a dictator who has maintained power by extending republican policies and tried to take credit for them.
IMHO - Conservatives believe there is ONE RIGHT WAY to handle all problems. Liberals try a bunch of things and then support the ones that improve the situation and then call it acceptable. When you are dealing with systems as complex as the US economy that cannot be accurately modeled, despite what a the legions of economic modelers declare, experimenting, observing and correcting is the only way of obtaining useful results.
Conservatives believe in what should absolutely be while Liberals observe and correct until they achieve good enough. That will do for now.
Sounds as if you are trying to explain the Obama policy of "my way or the highway" in dealing with all problems.
I understand what your saying but trying to get a moonbat to think and reason for themselves is impossible. The can't process anything that Osama doesn't feed them through his media.. If daddy tell them something it must be true..
I suspect that you just exposed your actual beliefs. After all, anyone who resists the will of Obama is a racist nutjob. Must be comfortable for you to fan the flames of stupidity and bigotry.
Actually businesses are making good profits. Which conpanies have announced the are not even trying to make a profit because of Obama? Apple? Google? Ford? Fracking companies? It sounds you have been lied to, and you believed every word.
As you believe every word that your party tells you to believe.
Recently each of these eminent economists was asked whether the unemployment rate was lower at the end of 2010 than it would have been without the stimulus bill. Of the 44 economists surveyed, 37 responded, yielding a healthy response rate of 84 percent.
Among those who responded, 36 agreed that the stimulus bill had lowered the unemployment rate, while one disagreed. That lone disagreeing economist, Harvard’s Alberto Alesina (who was one of my thesis advisers), has been a virulent opponent of the stimulus, although the research that he’s based this upon has come under sustained criticism, particularly from the International Monetary Fund, which views the study as flawed.
It's no surprise that the administration would proclaim its own policies a success. But its verdict is backed by economists at Goldman Sachs, IHS Global Insight, JPMorgan Chase and Macroeconomic Advisers, who say the stimulus boosted gross domestic product by 2.1% to 2.7%.
It's impossible to determine precisely how many jobs or how much growth the stimulus program caused. In a nearly $14 trillion economy, economists can't go employer to employer counting new hires. And there are too many moving parts to confidently link any single factor with individual hiring decisions. Roughly one-third of the stimulus, for example, came in the form of tax cuts, which are designed to boost demand for a wide array of products and eventually result in related hiring.
But to estimate the answers to such questions, economists rely on models based on historical relationships between various policies and real-world results. Earlier this month, Zandi and co-author Alan Blinder, former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve, released the most detailed assessment of the government's efforts to combat the so-called Great Recession. Neither economist is regarded as a partisan firebrand. Zandi, for example, backed John McCain in the 2008 presidential campaign and has advised members of both parties.
Their conclusion: The fiscal stimulus created 2.7 million jobs and added $460 billion to gross domestic product. Unemployment would be 11% today if the stimulus hadn't been passed and 16.5% if neither the fiscal stimulus nor the banks' rescue had been enacted, according to Zandi and Blinder. "It's pretty hard to deny that it had a measurable impact," Zandi said. Economists agree: Stimulus created nearly 3 million jobs - USATODAY.com
Who’s poor in America? 50 years into the ‘War on Poverty,’ a data portrait | Pew Research Center
"Fifty years ago, President Lyndon Johnson used his first State of the Union Address to urge “all-out war on human poverty and unemployment in these United States.” The War on Poverty, as the set of social programs enacted in 1964-1965 came to be called, was arguably the most ambitious domestic policy initiative since the Great Depression. But for decades, politicians and social scientists have argued about whether Johnson’s antipoverty programs have lifted people out of destitution, trapped them in cycles of dependency, or both."
The "Ifs" are propping people in poverty up.
Paying the bills does not destroy poverty.
As you believe every word that your party tells you to believe.
Like what? I'm independent.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
