Bidon is Senile

[Immanuel Can]

Perhaps you would like to offer your own argument instead of lazy links.

A good argument might well require that. Yours required only a link.

[Sculptor]

Reagan and Thatcher.

Both are honoured as superheroes of an economic miracle. But you have to ask who is writing the news.
Since 1980 several things have happened that look great on paper if you are a property developer; a share holder; a business leader or a banker.
Sadly for most of us things are not so good.
Less working rights.
Fewer working contracts.
More zero hours contracts - practically unknown before 1980.
Lack of union support. No union rights.
More inequality.
People have less working security, and more part time and temporary jobs.
More poverty - I mean not only dirt poverty - but working poverty.
More food banks,
Less social housing.
Student grants GONE.
Student loans IN

You might say things are better even so. But the technical advances that have made our lives "easier", would have happened regardless and you have to ask what the world might have been like if we had not thrown the baby out with the bathwater.

I can't speak for the US, but in the UK in the last ten years alone the number of billionaires has TRIPLED, whilst the number of food banks, mortgage repossessions and homelessness has rocketed.
SO yeah Thatcher/Raygun.
No thanks.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Perhaps you would like to offer your own argument instead of lazy links.

A good argument might well require that. Yours required only a link.

What did you disagree with, and why? I was only stating facts. How can you disagree with facts???

[Immanuel Can]

I was only stating facts. How can you disagree with facts???

Apparently, The New York Times disagrees with you. Given that they are staunchly anti-Republican, their admission of Reagan's achievements, no matter how equivocal they would wish to make them to be, is clearly significant. Even they have to admit your assessment is inaccurate. And they surely would not wish to.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I was only stating facts. How can you disagree with facts???

Apparently, The New York Times disagrees with you. Given that they are staunchly anti-Republican, their admission of Reagan's achievements, no matter how equivocal they would wish to make them to be, is clearly significant. Even they have to admit your assessment is inaccurate. And they surely would not wish to.

Right. So you are too moronic to make your own argument. And here you are, a hater of the NY times, citing it because it has said something you approve of (I can only take your word for that). Are you serious? Honestly, I couldn't give a flying fuck about 'any' of your loathesome presidents, Republican or Democrat. I only state something that I know to be true when I see someone writing crap. Only sociopathic kunts admire 'neo-liberal' politicians.

[Immanuel Can]

I was only stating facts. How can you disagree with facts???

Apparently, The New York Times disagrees with you. Given that they are staunchly anti-Republican, their admission of Reagan's achievements, no matter how equivocal they would wish to make them to be, is clearly significant. Even they have to admit your assessment is inaccurate. And they surely would not wish to.

Right.

Hey, wonderful. I'm glad we see it the same way.

[Dubious]

The only hope for America are those Americans who'd rather vote for someone with horns growing out of his head than another 4 years of Trump.

[henry quirk]

The only hope for America are those Americans who'd rather vote for someone with horns growing out of his head than another 4 years of Trump.

TRUMP '20

[Dubious]

If one judges people by the company they keep then you and half the population are write-offs. There isn't a single thing about Trump which isn't thoroughly disgusting on every level. There are also those who think he has charisma. If incredibly stupid and vulgar facial expressions together with a vocabulary of 150 words = charisma it would equal the hype of insisting that 30 rolls of toilet paper are equal to sixty...which may be true, but only if you use BOTH sides.

[Immanuel Can]

If one judges people by the company they keep then you and half the population are write-offs.

As an outsider looking in, I think this is the same mistake the Democrats and the media made in the last election. They "wrote off" large sections of the electorate in just this way. Consequently, they never saw what was coming.

Venting spleen may be exciting and dramatic, but it just blinds one to what's really going on.

[henry quirk]

If one judges people by the company they keep then you and half the population are write-offs. There isn't a single thing about Trump which isn't thoroughly disgusting on every level. There are also those who think he has charisma. If incredibly stupid and vulgar facial expressions together with a vocabulary of 150 words = charisma it would equal the hype of insisting that 30 rolls of toilet paper are equal to sixty...which may be true, but only if you use BOTH sides.

I didn't hire him to be nice; I hired him to wreck shit.

[Dubious]

If one judges people by the company they keep then you and half the population are write-offs. There isn't a single thing about Trump which isn't thoroughly disgusting on every level. There are also those who think he has charisma. If incredibly stupid and vulgar facial expressions together with a vocabulary of 150 words = charisma it would equal the hype of insisting that 30 rolls of toilet paper are equal to sixty...which may be true, but only if you use BOTH sides.

I didn't hire him to be nice; I hired him to wreck shit.

If shit is what wanted then shit is what you got.

[henry quirk]

If one judges people by the company they keep then you and half the population are write-offs. There isn't a single thing about Trump which isn't thoroughly disgusting on every level. There are also those who think he has charisma. If incredibly stupid and vulgar facial expressions together with a vocabulary of 150 words = charisma it would equal the hype of insisting that 30 rolls of toilet paper are equal to sixty...which may be true, but only if you use BOTH sides.

I didn't hire him to be nice; I hired him to wreck shit.

If shit is what wanted then shit is what you got.

that's not what I wrote

[Dubious]

That's true. It's not what you wrote though in a way it amounts to the same thing. "Wreck shit" on who? The U.S. has never been so divided since the Civil War. Putin must love what's happening in your country going exactly according to plan.

In spite of my extremely low opinion of humans, I always thought a degree of integrity is what most would expect from others especially from a nation as self-righteous as yours presumes to be. But I was wrong, completely wrong in thinking that only very few would want to re-hire for another term someone who has unequivocally proven himself to be such a loathsome disgusting coward and liar...and I mean coward in the full sense of the word. He's exactly of the kind depicted in the old westerns ready to shoot you in the back the moment you give him the opportunity.

His reactions to John McCain after being dead for nearly a year proves precisely, among many instances, what a walking piece of human filth Trump really is, President or not. And therein lies the quandary that anyone who thinks in a normal human manner would vote for a slime bucket like Trump.

[henry quirk]

"Wreck shit" on who?

More accurately: wreck whose shit?

All the folks who'd put a leash on me: the whole of both major parties, as well as all the dupes, sympathizers, and card carriers.