US Politics/2016 Election Pick Your Poison Master Thread

[ChaimMoskowitz]

As you can see, facts have no meaning to Maddow drinkers. Even the MSM talked about this as a win for Trump.

@ChaimMoskowitz doesn't understand (due to his TDS) that proportionally, looking back what Obama lost, losing 39 seats in the house and gaining 3 seats in the senate is NOT considered a huge loss.

Instead of your childish banter look at the facts. Other president had massive losses and some worse than Trump. That does not change the fact his loss was MASSIVE and worse than the average with what he calls the best economy of all time. Now try and dispute those facts with facts instead of your Hannity drinking Kool-Aid response.

Another post of @ilherman  leading the sheep to the slaughter!!! 

[BP16]

Instead of your childish banter look at the facts. Other president had massive losses and some worse than Trump. That does not change the fact his loss was MASSIVE and worse than the average with what he calls the best economy of all time. Now try and dispute those facts with facts instead of your Hannity drinking Kool-Aid response.

Another post of @ilherman  leading the sheep to the slaughter!!! 

The loss is not MASSIVE even if he would have lost 60 seats in the house, as he still has the Senate. (And he gained seats)
The Dems would rather have one seat majority in the house and taken the senate, then gaining 39 seats but lose the house!

[ChaimMoskowitz]

The loss is not MASSIVE even if he would have lost 60 seats in the house, as he still has the Senate.

So a 60 seat loss in the house is not MASSIVE. What are you all drinking? 

[BP16]

So a 60 seat loss in the house is not MASSIVE. What are you all drinking? 

A MASSIVE lose in the house but not a MASSIVE lose in general as he still has the Senate! No one is saying that is wasn't a big loss in the house, but to say it was a terrible mid term election loss is wrong! The Rs freakin gained seats in the house! and not just that the Rs in the house became stronger Trump supporters.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

A MASSIVE lose in the house but not a MASSIVE lose in general as he still has the Senate! No one is saying that is wasn't a big loss in the house, but to say it was a terrible mid term election loss is wrong! The Rs freakin gained seats in the house! and not just that the Rs in the house became stronger Trump supporters.

Who said it was a terrible mid-term loss? I said he took a MASSIVE defeat in the house. Try and accept that simple fact.
Yes he did WIN the senate. The problem is look how many D seats were up and how many R seats. Next time it will be reversed.

[springles]

Who said it was a terrible mid-term loss? I said he took a MASSIVE defeat in the house. Try and accept that simple fact.
Yes he did WIN the senate. The problem is look how many D seats were up and how many R seats. Next time it will be reversed.

this is key. The Senate was not set up for the Dems, anyone can see that. The fact that the R's gained seats may have saved them from losing it in 2020 but it would have been shocking had the Dems taken control of the senate

[BZ12]

I said he took a MASSIVE defeat in the house. Try and accept that simple fact.
Yes he did WIN the senate. The problem is look how many D seats were up and how many R seats. Next time it will be reversed.

I assume being under the influence of Maddow Kool-Aid and TDS wouldn't allow you to apply your logic to the fact that the amount of House Republicans retiring in droves in 2018 played a major factor in the 39 seat loss.

[yitzgar]

I don't usually agree with cm in this thread, but why is it difficult to accept that it was a big loss for R's/Trump? How many Obama lost is irrelevant. True it could have been worse, but that doesn't mean it wasn't a big loss. Also true was that the senate map favored R's this time. Again, the amount of seats lost under Obama is irrelevant.

[yitzgar]

I assume being under the influence of Maddow Kool-Aid and TDS wouldn't allow you to apply your logic to the fact that the amount of House Republicans retiring in droves in 2018 played a major factor in the 39 seat loss.

Why is that relevant? They still had R's running in those districts. Losing incumbency only takes away an advantage, but it still was possible to win.

[BZ12]

Losing incumbency only takes away an advantage, but it still was possible to win.

It definitely takes away the advantage, and therefore has no comparison to the losses during any other Midterms.

[justaregularguy]

heres a piece from wall street journal that shows neither Trump nor Xi pulled off historic wins during the G20 (read "the bottom line")

There are discrepancies between what the U.S. and China are saying following the Trump-Xi meeting. High Frequency Economics's Carl Weinberg dissects some of the bigger gaps:

What's China going to buy? Beijing may use this new “agreement” to lobby for the United States to make more industrial and high-tech goods available for export to China... without tariffs, of course. There is no good news for U.S. farmers in this “deal."

What Will They Talk About Next? China sees the next round of talks as aimed at ending existing tariffs, while the U.S. side sees them as aimed at unresolved trade issues. These are very different perspectives.

Bottom line: China has conceded no ground. Xi wins domestic political points for standing up to the United States. For President Trump, the takeaway is that he does not have to impose new taxes on U.S. consumers and other users of goods made in China.

everyone chill out here we have a long way to go here especially since China and US have very different perspectives on how this truce should end

[BP16]

Who said it was a terrible mid-term loss? I said he took a MASSIVE defeat in the house. Try and accept that simple fact.
Yes he did WIN the senate. The problem is look how many D seats were up and how many R seats. Next time it will be reversed.

No one is denying that the house was a big lose, but to say it was a terrible mid-tern for Trump is wrong! Yea Yea next time.

[aygart]

I assume being under the influence of Maddow Kool-Aid and TDS wouldn't allow you to apply your logic to the fact that the amount of House Republicans retiring in droves in 2018 played a major factor in the 39 seat loss.

Their retiring in droves did not occur in a vacuum. That was part of the loss. Very specifically the retirements themselves can be blamed ENTIRELY on Trump.

[aygart]

As you can see, facts have no meaning to Maddow drinkers. Even the MSM talked about this as a win for Trump.

@ChaimMoskowitz doesn't understand (due to his TDS) that proportionally, looking back what Obama lost, losing 39 seats in the house and gaining 3 seats in the senate is NOT considered a huge loss.

Why is huge defined only by what Obama lost? So Obama's loss was super huge and Trumps was plain huge (or attach adjectives as needed)

[aygart]

Actually I don't know it.
This guy broke the scumbag meter!!!

Then you haven't been paying attention. This guy has been my go to example of a slimeball for 30 years.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

For the Kool-Aid drinking Hannity disciples. BO loss was not MASSIVE!!! It was MASS MURDER. He got KILLED!!! That is why they call me MR Goalpost. It doesn't matter who is president my goalpost does not change. None of this relevant or changes the fact Trump suffered a MASSIVE loss in the house!!!

[sguitarist18]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2018/06/29/trumps-lean-white-house-2018-payroll-on-track-to-save-taxpayers-22-million/#714d69014e4f

[chinagel]

That is why they call me MR Goalpost.

Link?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

For the Kool-Aid drinking @ilherman. Here is another fact. There was no agreement to reduce tariffs on cars by China!!!

"We don't yet have a specific agreement on that, but I will just tell you ... we expect those tariffs to go to zero," Larry Kudlow, Trump's top economic adviser, told reporters in a conference call from the White House.

[ilherman]

For the Kool-Aid drinking @ilherman. Here is another fact. There was no agreement to reduce tariffs on cars by China!!!

"We don't yet have a specific agreement on that, but I will just tell you ... we expect those tariffs to go to zero," Larry Kudlow, Trump's top economic adviser, told reporters in a conference call from the White House.

Don't throw the Kool-Aid here. Leave it for the no fact people. Now in regards to China, where did I say that we have a final agreement? I just said, look how Canada and Mexico went and there is more to come.

Poor media, you never see them talking about these major new deals. All they are busy is wolf! wolf! russia!