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.
Imagine that. The Stock Market is up. Consumer confidence is up and so far Trump hasn't nuked the world.
I think we are all gonna have a MERRY CHRISTMAS. Isn't it nice to be able to say that and not be considered a Nazi spreading Hate Speech.
We are gonna be fine folks.
I don't want to spoil your party - but when markets climb, they rise on an escalator. But when they fall, they take the express elevator down.
Trump on numerous, numerous times during the campaign reminded everyone we were merely floating on a bubble.
One man.....no matter how great he is can not change the law of mathematics. Bull markets never climb forever. Or better yet, every Bull market ends with the beginning of a Bear.
Last edited by At-Chilles; 11-30-2016 at 07:40 AM..
The sources you mention here are so far Left and have been for years that they certainly can be considered "fake news." They decide what the "narrative" should be, and write accordingly. If you're still getting "news" from those sources, you're being robbed of your intelligence. They are all propagandists.
And, please specify which Web sites you are referring to that have connections with Russian Intelligence and provide the evidence. You're engaging in conspiracy theories.
At least the news sites you are dismissing got the story correct vs the inaccuracies in the story from Zero Hedge.
The sources you mention here are so far Left and have been for years that they certainly can be considered "fake news." They decide what the "narrative" should be, and write accordingly. If you're still getting "news" from those sources, you're being robbed of your intelligence. They are all propagandists.
And, please specify which Web sites you are referring to that have connections with Russian Intelligence and provide the evidence. You're engaging in conspiracy theories.
Thirty or forty years ago, Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously stated that "you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts." How quaint that seems now.
As far as "facts" are concerned, there's nothing that I could cite, that you would believe, or even read. If you go to the step of believing that everything printed in the MSM are lies, where's the common source that either side would believe?
I still believe the MSM in the sense that I read different sources and make my own judgement. When you throw out opinion pieces and stick to hard news generally the facts match up. There may be different points of emphasis brought up to reflect a particular political stance, but they rarely totally contradict each other. I still give the benefit of the doubt to the integrity of reporting; of verifying facts through multiple sources before printing something as factual.
The sources I rely on are ones with actual reporters placing their own names on their articles; placing their reputations behind the facts they present
The sources that I tend to question are those that are written on unknown websites, rather than well known institutions, written by total unknowns under fictitious names.
Quote:
"I can’t be a 24-hour cheerleader for Hezbollah, Moscow, Tehran, Beijing, and Trump anymore. It’ s wrong. Period. I know it gets you views now, but it will kill your brand over the long run,” Lokey texted Ivandjiiski. “This isn’t a revolution. It’s a joke.”
The above quote comes from one of the stable of "writers" using the nom de plume of "Durden" on Zero Hedge who couldn't continue to write lies just to get web hits.
Now of course, you'll question the source, so we're back to the same endless pattern of separate realities.
"while the majority of consumers were surveyed before the presidential election, it appears from the small sample of post-election responses that consumers’ optimism was not impacted by the outcome."
Thanks.
I have to admit that I only open threads started by this OP to see how badly whatever is being linked to has been misinterpreted.
LOL!!! You're aware that Wikipedia is not a credible source, are you not? Wikipedia is funded by George Soros. You can't believe anything it publishes on anything political.
That's convenient.
Are you going to chastise every conservative who cites Wiki as a source from now on?
The stock market has increased by approximately 240% from 1/20/09 to today, with BO as our President as It is 19,171 today, so for Donny to match BO assuming the market is about where it is today on 1/20/17 it would have to hit - wait for it 45,600 by 1/20/25. Think that is going to happen?
Also if the Dow increases between now and 1/20/17 then BO's percentage increase will be greater than 240% thus making it even more difficult for DT to come close to BO. He also produced over 9,000,000 new jobs and when you factor out the mess the last repub left him(losses of 800,000 per month) he has created over 13,000,000 new jobs. Just saying, and doubtful gas will be at $2.00 per gallon as it is now, when your guy get's booted out of office.
Great that DT just saved 1,000 jobs (not created) but he has got a loooong way to go.
Maybe that has something to do with 8 years of competent administration of the federal government (plus business cycles, foreign affairs, etc.).
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilful
The stock market has increased by approximately 240% from 1/20/09 to today, with BO as our President as It is 19,171 today, so for Donny to match BO assuming the market is about where it is today on 1/20/17 it would have to hit - wait for it 45,600 by 1/20/25. Think that is going to happen?
Also if the Dow increases between now and 1/20/17 then BO's percentage increase will be greater than 240% thus making it even more difficult for DT to come close to BO. He also produced over 9,000,000 new jobs and when you factor out the mess the last repub left him(losses of 800,000 per month) he has created over 13,000,000 new jobs. Just saying, and doubtful gas will be at $2.00 per gallon as it is now, when your guy get's booted out of office.
Great that DT just saved 1,000 jobs (not created) but he has got a loooong way to go.
Carrier was planning to close a plant that employed 1,400. Now they are going to keep 1,000 jobs? So they'll terminate 400? This looks like "adding" jobs to the press release.
Remind me, how many US jobs did the auto bailout save?
Thirty or forty years ago, Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously stated that "you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts." How quaint that seems now.
As far as "facts" are concerned, there's nothing that I could cite, that you would believe, or even read. If you go to the step of believing that everything printed in the MSM are lies, where's the common source that either side would believe?
I still believe the MSM in the sense that I read different sources and make my own judgement. When you throw out opinion pieces and stick to hard news generally the facts match up. There may be different points of emphasis brought up to reflect a particular political stance, but they rarely totally contradict each other. I still give the benefit of the doubt to the integrity of reporting; of verifying facts through multiple sources before printing something as factual.
The sources I rely on are ones with actual reporters placing their own names on their articles; placing their reputations behind the facts they present
The sources that I tend to question are those that are written on unknown websites, rather than well known institutions, written by total unknowns under fictitious names.
Great quote, and great post. Here's a quote by Noam Chomsky in a 2014 interview that's quite relevant to these internet political debates in that it illustrates another problem in our political discourse:
"I sometimes turn on the radio and I find very often that what I'm listening to is a discussion of sports. These are telephone conversations. People call in and have long and intricate discussions, and it's plain that quite a high degree of thought and analysis is going into that. People know a tremendous amount. They know all sorts of complicated details and enter into far-reaching discussion about whether the coach made the right decision yesterday and so on. These are ordinary people, not professionals, who are applying their intelligence and analytic skills in these areas and accumulating quite a lot of knowledge and, for all I know, understanding. On the other hand, when I hear people talk about, say, international affairs or domestic problems, it's at a level of superficiality that's beyond belief."
So, not only can we not agree on the same set of facts, the fact is that most people don't bother to make a real effort to educate themselves on the facts that form the substance of a political debate. Most of what you see thrown around on CD forums are likely sound bites parroted by users from their favorite news sources. The average person has no clue what they're talking about.
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.
