President Donald Trump - J.D. Vance Administration


"On Monday’s broadcast of “CNN NewsNight,” Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX) stated that while there will be investigations to look into the flooding in Texas, from what we know so far, the National Weather Service did what it was supposed to do, and even sent out notices on Thursday.
Republican Strategist Lance Trover said, “I do think the National Weather Service followed through on everything that they were supposed to do, based off of all of the current reporting.”

Cuellar responded, “Yeah, and that’s right. I think on Thursday night, they did send out the notices on it. But what happened on the ground, that’s something different. But you’re right about that, about the notices going out on Thursday on that.”


"The AP cited NWS meteorologist Jason Runyen, who said the agency’s office in New Braunfels, serving Austin, San Antonio, and the surrounding areas, had more people on duty than normal just before the flash floods occurred before sunrise on Friday.

“There were extra people in here that night, and that’s typical in every weather service office — you staff up for an event and bring people in on overtime and hold people over,” Runyen said, explaining that the office had up to five people on staff, when they would typically have two."

Even meteorologist Matt Lanza, described by Politico as a “critic of the NWS/NOAA cuts,” wrote for his Substack blog, “In this particular case, we have seen absolutely nothing to suggest that current staffing or budget issues within NOAA and the NWS played any role at all in this event.”


He continued:

Anyone using this event to claim that is being dishonest. … In fact, weather balloon launches played a vital role in forecast messaging on Thursday night as the event was beginning to unfold. If you want to go that route, use this event as a symbol of the value NOAA and NWS bring to society, understanding that as horrific as this is, yes, it could always have been even worse.
 
I am, rightfully, criticizing him for saying he wants to end a program which he then in turn uses within 30 days of saying that. He deserves to be criticized for saying it in the first place.
At this moment, what option does he have that would satisfy your insistence that he should have stuck to a stated intent to do away with FEMA 25 days ago?
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
If that's your attitude? Fine ..... just be consistent about it, and don't start crying when Donald Trump gets attacked and directly blamed for the natural disasters which occur while he is in office. You can't have it both ways. If it's wrong for one party to politicize a natural disaster? Then it is wrong for both to do it.

.... and everyone knows you will start crying every time Trump is blamed. Your positions are completely grounded in political tribalism.
Your fingers must be sore from all the pointing you've done lately.
 
More good news that flys in the face of ”experts”….

A new report from the Council of Economic Advisors (CEA) found that the prices of imported goods have fallen this year and have dipped faster than overall goods prices since February.

 
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol
More good news that flys in the face of ”experts”….

A new report from the Council of Economic Advisors (CEA) found that the prices of imported goods have fallen this year and have dipped faster than overall goods prices since February.


Lmfao okay….he just announced even more tariffs for August.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
At this moment, what option does he have that would satisfy your insistence that he should have stuck to a stated intent to do away with FEMA 25 days ago?


Nothing. He shouldn't have said it.

The only thing he could say now is that he's willing to revisit the issue given how useful it has turned iut to be. Instead, when asked, he refuses to discuss it.
 
Lmfao okay….he just announced even more tariffs for August.
Good! …..tariffs have already been in place and yet it does not seem to be impacting imports. AGAIN, what happened in the first term with tariffs that indicate they are going to negatively impact the economy?

Libs cannot accept any good news. Does it not get old? Do you not see any good in life?
 
Good! …..tariffs have already been in place and yet it does not seem to be impacting imports. AGAIN, what happened in the first term with tariffs that indicate they are going to negatively impact the economy?

Libs cannot accept any good news. Does it not get old? Do you not see any good in life?

Lmfao you’re living in a fantasy land if you believe Trump can make things more expensive without causing negative economic impact.
 
  • Like
Reactions: swampfoxfan

"On Monday’s broadcast of “CNN NewsNight,” Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX) stated that while there will be investigations to look into the flooding in Texas, from what we know so far, the National Weather Service did what it was supposed to do, and even sent out notices on Thursday.
Republican Strategist Lance Trover said, “I do think the National Weather Service followed through on everything that they were supposed to do, based off of all of the current reporting.”

Cuellar responded, “Yeah, and that’s right. I think on Thursday night, they did send out the notices on it. But what happened on the ground, that’s something different. But you’re right about that, about the notices going out on Thursday on that.”


"The AP cited NWS meteorologist Jason Runyen, who said the agency’s office in New Braunfels, serving Austin, San Antonio, and the surrounding areas, had more people on duty than normal just before the flash floods occurred before sunrise on Friday.

“There were extra people in here that night, and that’s typical in every weather service office — you staff up for an event and bring people in on overtime and hold people over,” Runyen said, explaining that the office had up to five people on staff, when they would typically have two."

Even meteorologist Matt Lanza, described by Politico as a “critic of the NWS/NOAA cuts,” wrote for his Substack blog, “In this particular case, we have seen absolutely nothing to suggest that current staffing or budget issues within NOAA and the NWS played any role at all in this event.”


He continued:
 
Nothing. He shouldn't have said it.

The only thing he could say now is that he's willing to revisit the issue given how useful it has turned iut to be. Instead, when asked, he refuses to discuss it.
Didn't FEMA spend millions on a non core mission to house and locate illegal migrants around the country? Maybe that was the part he was talking about doing away with, as he should.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dovervolz
Nothing. He shouldn't have said it.

The only thing he could say now is that he's willing to revisit the issue given how useful it has turned iut to be. Instead, when asked, he refuses to discuss it.
ARe you familiar with the way utility providers handle widespread damage from storms?
 
Last edited:
45

Go take a deep breath and find something that makes you happy today.


More good news that flys in the face of ”experts”….

A new report from the Council of Economic Advisors (CEA) found that the prices of imported goods have fallen this year and have dipped faster than overall goods prices since February.


Your study only looked at data up until May
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
Nothing. He shouldn't have said it.

The only thing he could say now is that he's willing to revisit the issue given how useful it has turned iut to be. Instead, when asked, he refuses to discuss it.
"Nothing." TDS. Full blown on display. He literally cannot do anything you would approve of or not castigate him for.

You may disagree with the intent and decision to do away with FEMA and devolve that to the responsibility of the states. Completely legitimate disagreement and a valid discussion.

But this take of yours seems to be on a completely stupid, incomprehensible level. We disagree a lot on policy, but this is just pure nuts. Your take is once he said he wants to get rid of FEMA, regardless of timeline or what happens, he is no longer allowed to make use of the remaining resources in that department or he is a liar and whatever other epithets you decide to hurl at him.

I'm serious. This is a sick, sick take.
 
Nothing. He shouldn't have said it.

The only thing he could say now is that he's willing to revisit the issue given how useful it has turned iut to be. Instead, when asked, he refuses to discuss it.

Why can’t states do the work? What is special about fema that state agencies are incapable of
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
Didn't FEMA spend millions on a non core mission to house and locate illegal migrants around the country? Maybe that was the part he was talking about doing away with, as he should.

Now we can use FEMA for other non core missions like protecting Mar-a-lago.
 
Good! …..tariffs have already been in place and yet it does not seem to be impacting imports. AGAIN, what happened in the first term with tariffs that indicate they are going to negatively impact the economy?

Libs cannot accept any good news. Does it not get old? Do you not see any good in life?
The first term? China stopped buying our soybeans and Trump had to bailout the farmers to the tune of 50 billion. Automotive companies had to furlough employees because we couldn't get enough of the type of steel we needed to make certain parts

Trump has no clear understanding of how to negotiate international trade. He tries to negotiate in a distributive manner rather than negotiating in the integrated manner that's required for international trade. You should look those terms up because I know you have no clue as to what I am talking about
 
Lmfao you’re living in a fantasy land if you believe Trump can make things more expensive without causing negative economic impact.
I think it's fair for the pro-Trumpers to do a little bit of gloating right now, but they need to understand why Trump's tariffs haven't resulted in an inflation increase yet .... and why that could change in the next 6 months.


The article up above isn't political, and it gives concise explanations.
 
I think it's fair for the pro-Trumpers to do a little bit of gloating right now, but they need to understand why Trump's tariffs haven't resulted in an inflation increase yet .... and why that could change in the next 6 months.


The article up above isn't political, and it gives concise explanations.
OK, that article gave 3 reasons why experts were wrong about these tariffs causing inflation. My question is why didn't the experts figure those 3 reasons into their predictions? Are they really experts if they can't do that?

I'm no expert but I predict there'll be more excuses later in the yr when inflation still doesn't happen
 
OK, that article gave 3 reasons why experts were wrong about these tariffs causing inflation. My question is why didn't the experts figure those 3 reasons into their predictions? Are they really experts if they can't do that?

I'm no expert but I predict there'll be more excuses later in the yr when inflation still doesn't happen

I don’t think they were wrong at all.
 
I don’t think they were wrong at all.
By saying they were wrong I was referencing their predictions that the tariffs would cause inflation. Specifically I referenced this sentence in that article:

Here are three reasons why tariffs haven't driven up inflation as much as many economists expected, at least for now.
 
The first term? China stopped buying our soybeans and Trump had to bailout the farmers to the tune of 50 billion. Automotive companies had to furlough employees because we couldn't get enough of the type of steel we needed to make certain parts

Trump has no clear understanding of how to negotiate international trade. He tries to negotiate in a distributive manner rather than negotiating in the integrated manner that's required for international trade. You should look those terms up because I know you have no clue as to what I am talking about
Biden vs Trump

Inflation = Trump
Real Job Growth (not including going back to work after COVID or Govt jobs) = Trump
Unemployment = Trump
Wages = Trump
Gas Prices = Trump

Case Closed.
 
Last edited:
By saying they were wrong I was referencing their predictions that the tariffs would cause inflation. Specifically I referenced this sentence in that article:

Hard to proclaim they’re wrong though when one of there reasons the predictions have yet to realize is that Trump continually changes the terms such as his numerous exemptions.

If I were trying to access the impact of tariffs I wouldn’t even know what date to start because he announces, delays, exempts, it’s been all over the map
 
Biden vs Trump

Inflation = Trump
Real Job Growth (not including going back to work after COVID or Govt jobs) = Trump
Unemployment = Trump
Manufacturing combing back to US = Trump

Case Closed.
You asked about Trump's first term. I laid out the facts for you. Biden was never mentioned.

Nice deflection away from Trump's incompetent trade negotiations. Hit the books, son
 
Advertisement

Back
Top