President Joe Biden - Kamala Harris Administration

#24,001
#24,001
  • Like
Reactions: CABVOL, norrislakevol, davethevol and 1 other person
#24,002
#24,002
LouderVol said:
Death by slideshow.

The two active guys i know, said that since Obama they spend more time in the classroom learning about non mission critical crap than they do all other training combined. Was the same under Trump.
Click to expand...

Imagine how effective our military could be if we could just force the enemy to face PowerPoint briefings rather than guns and bombs. Wonder if anybody ever trended military suicides with the escalation of PowerPoint briefings and training.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbwhhs, StarRaider, norrislakevol and 1 other person
#24,003
#24,003
AM64 said:
Imagine how effective our military could be if we could just force the enemy to face PowerPoint briefings rather than guns and bombs. Wonder if anybody ever trended military suicides with the escalation of PowerPoint briefings and training.
Click to expand...
That would be interesting.

I would think you also need to throw in the general pop excluding the military as well, because that has been going up too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#24,017
#24,017
Bassmaster_Vol said:
Click to expand...


The media's credibility is at an all time low. There is a chance Durham looks into some of the leaks to see who was funneling knowingly false information to the media. I think most were in on it. Now they have to stay quiet. This is the worst of America. Growing up it would've been difficult to expect anything like this out of this country. The education system, the family and laws have failed us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbwhhs, ButchPlz, Bassmaster_Vol and 2 others
#24,020
#24,020
volinbham said:
Interesting data presentation - claims to cover a year (best year in...) but uses entire term(s) of other POTI.

Assuming Biden survives 4 years we'll watch this graph come down
Click to expand...
As you know the cat lady’s endpoint selection in her data presentations knows no bounds on her shilling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#24,021
#24,021
AM64 said:
That really says it all. Biden was all the dems had/have. Everybody else was too radical for anybody but hardcore dem left or not radical enough for the dem left. Joe had to be the answer because he'd been around and had a somewhat pleasing image (despite the gaffs) to independents; basically all he offered was a non threatening and reasonably presentable appearance to moderates and independents - form over function even though joe had obviously exceeded his expiration date. The moderates and independents apparently made up the 81M (allegedly anyway) who decided joe was less threatening than a guy with a more crude demeanor and mean tweets.

The weird thing - demeanor in the WH has to be "correct" and polished, but key appointees to other places in the administration can show up in drag despite years of defining what behavior is appropriate in the office - even in private business. Sure hope all those 81M realize when you buy a POS, it just sits there and stinks.
Click to expand...
And maskless no less
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#24,022
#24,022
85SugarVol said:
The man can’t walk off of a flat stage under his own power.

They knew what they were doing.
Click to expand...

Yes, they certainly did. But biden and Dr Jill got their names in the record book. The powers that be are probably not real happy that it turned out to be a complete sham on full display rather than a well staged Charlie McCarthy (ventriloquist's dummy) act. They should have listened to obama's warning about joe.
 
#24,023
#24,023
volinbham said:
Interesting data presentation - claims to cover a year (best year in...) but uses entire term(s) of other POTI.

Assuming Biden survives 4 years we'll watch this graph come down
Click to expand...

I've always wondered how presidents create jobs since they don't run companies or hire people. Few even really set the stage; past job growth that politicians claimed credit for has probably been more reflective of population growth which now appears to be stable or maybe even reversing. The numbers can go up credibly enough, but you have to manufacture percentage growth by manipulating who is looking for a job vs how many people aren't actually employed - government is good at statistical games. It's like thinking the stock markets reflect much except a huge influx of retirement money driving prices when competing places to park the money don't even provide an opportunity to keep up with inflation. Good numbers often don't reflect what presenters of "good news" claim. There's just no way in hell with all the industrial capacity that we had in the past (now residing in China) that employment numbers can be good qualitatively speaking.
 
#24,024
#24,024
AM64 said:
I've always wondered how presidents create jobs since they don't run companies or hire people. Few even really set the stage; past job growth that politicians claimed credit for has probably been more reflective of population growth which now appears to be stable or maybe even reversing. The numbers can go up credibly enough, but you have to manufacture percentage growth by manipulating who is looking for a job vs how many people aren't actually employed - government is good at statistical games. It's like thinking the stock markets reflect much except a huge influx of retirement money driving prices when competing places to park the money don't even provide an opportunity to keep up with inflation. Good numbers often don't reflect what presenters of "good news" claim. There's just no way in hell with all the industrial capacity that we had in the past (now residing in China) that employment numbers can be good qualitatively speaking.
Click to expand...

Not sure we have ever had to differentiate being jobs created and people going back to work. They used to follow closely, but pandemics pretty much made the metric obsolete. When they run out of Daddy Sam dollars they have to go back to the positions that were open the whole time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#24,025
#24,025
Orangeburst said:
Not sure we have ever had to differentiate being jobs created and people going back to work. They used to follow closely, but pandemics pretty much made the metric obsolete. When they run out of Daddy Sam dollars they have to go back to the positions that were open the whole time.
Click to expand...

Agree. We know, but politicians always have to scheme ways to make themselves look good - usually with meaningless statics. This administration isn't about to put an asterisk next to the covid years, present it as an anomaly, and compare current to pre covid years. The official numbers mean nothing anyway since they use a manufactured unemployment number rather than simply how many people between say 18 and 65 aren't working.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol, tbwhhs and Orangeburst
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top