Gallup: Trump Job Approval On The Economy Reaches New High

Loading

No incumbent president pulling 55 percent on the economy and unemployment can be counted out for reelection, however anemic his overall job approval might be.

SEE ALSO: AOC comes to Rep. Omar’s defense

In fact, this poll is a reminder of how solid Trump’s 2020 prospects would look if he was a bit less … Trumpy, for lack of a better word.


 
It’s mostly Republicans driving that number but he’s at 53 percent approval on the economy and 56 percent on unemployment among independents, a group that gives him an overall job approval of just 35 percent. Those are also the only two out of 14 categories tested in which Trump has majority approval among indies. Maybe my point above should be reframed: Given how dimly independents view him on most matters, the economy and jobs are the only things giving him a fighting chance next year.



His overall job approval in the RCP poll of polls is also on the rise, and not just relative to the lows of the shutdown period. Since mid-March 2017 the highest number he’s posted in average job approval was 44.7 percent, which he touched briefly before the midterms last year thanks (I assume) to intensifying partisan fervor before the big vote. He’s at 44.2 percent today, though, and was at 44.4 percent yesterday. A few more good polls and he’ll touch 45 percent for the first time in two years. A clean-ish bill of health from Mueller might do it for him.


 
Why now? The economy’s been terrific since he was sworn in. There’s no obvious reason why his economic approval should be hitting new highs lately based on the GDP or unemployment numbers alone. Could it be the rebound in the stock market since December that’s driving it? The shutdown briefly drove the S&P 500 beneath 2,400 points on Christmas Eve but since then it’s regained more than 10 percent.

Alternate theory: Maybe this is the first stirrings of the 2020 dynamic in action. Trump benefited enormously in 2016 from facing an opponent who was widely disliked and distrusted herself. For the first two years of his presidency he lacked that contrast; his job approval was a pure referendum on him. Now, with the Democratic presidential field starting to fill out, his job approval may not be entirely a reflection of his own performance but also partly a measure of how voters think he compares to the top tier of the other party.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
152 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The troll Nadler and the rest of his legion of liars will be trying to keep the impression of corruption high, though the corruption lies in their attempts to undue a legal election.

Dont care much about polls I can make up my own mind not feel. Dont need to know if I am part of a bigger tribe or herd.

The national debt just broke the $22 trillion mark. We’re now back to annual budget deficits in excess of a trillion dollars, and our nation’s trade deficit, which was already problematic, has just hit a 10-year high. (In other words, worse than it ever was during the Obama administration.) What is it we’re celebrating?

@Greg: We just couldnt afford to buy anything foreign or domestic on part-time shitty jobs, stronger dollar, there are causes and effects. The dems have the purse strings now hope they are not as traitorous as Ryan.

@Greg:

The national debt just broke the $22 trillion mark. We’re now back to annual budget deficits in excess of a trillion dollars

Which party is it that will not support a budget unless it contains all their vote-buying pork and blames Trump if he refuses? Tell me.

@Deplorable Me: What budget all we get are continuing resolutions, from both sides. Huge spending omnibus bills shoved at the President at the last minute. Congress refuses to do its job.

@kitt: When Republicans had the House they would propose budgets but since it takes some Democrats to support it in the Senate, emergency funding is all we get. Democrats love that because they can pad them up with liberal waste and dare the President to refuse it. Then the call goes out to whiny liberals to blame Republicans.

@Deplorable Me: An the senate was in control an could at any point go nuclear, but it must get to the president in such a time he can actually have his staff go through it an at least pull out a few thousand reasons to veto and threaten to publish the piggy porky reasons why, or strongly suggest changes.
All Federal money spent should benefit the entire nation billions for 1 train in 1 state does not benefit the entire nation.

@Deplorable Me, #7:

Which party is it that will not support a budget unless it contains all their vote-buying pork and blames Trump if he refuses? Tell me.

What I’ll tell you is that the GOP buys votes payed for with irresponsible tax cuts, and then doles out the loot in nickels and dimes to Trump’s rally crowd, while handing thousands and millions to those like Trump himself. I’ll tell you that the heaping helpings of cake passed out to the wealthiest will go on forever or until the system goes bust, while the crumbs allocated to everyone else are scheduled to stop in the very near future. I’ll also tell you that when the system does go bust, the wealthiest will take to well-appointed lifeboats, while everyone else will be left holding a bag of broken promises. They may shout back through megaphones to those left behind that it’s all the fault of democrats and socialism.

Tell me what am I only imagining here. The foregoing is more in the way of a direct observation. They’ll shake you down until there’s nothing left to take.

@Greg: So, that’s ANOTHER question you will dodge and never answer? Well, it’s the DEMOCRATS. When Republicans had the House under Obama, they proposed budgets with cut deficits but the Democrat Senate would never bring them up. Republicans proposed balanced budget laws but the Democrats would not support them. When Pelosi was speaker, she implemented “PayGo”… which she promptly violated. No liberal anywhere in the country can sermonize about where the debt is going; they added MOST of it. Hypocrisy.

When Democrats raise taxes, they also raise spending, so raising taxes is NEVER the answer.

It’s another artificial, unsustainable boom that precedes an inevitable bust, folks. The recipe for this sort of collapsing layer cake is simple:

Take one recovered but slowly growing economy. Add the following unnecessary stimulus factors:

Enormous tax cuts, at the cost of a return to unsustainable trillion-dollar-a-year deficits; and

Lower interest rates, which were gradually being returned to higher levels to ward off inflation and to slightly moderate the severe damage being inflicted on non-gamblers (formerly known as financially conservative “savers”).

Mix well, bake for 30 minutes in an overheated oven, and serve quickly, beginning with generous portions for your special favored Party Guests, before the collapse sets in.

July 31, 2019 – The Fed has enabled an army of debt-laden ‘zombie’ companies — and its expected rate cut could make the situation even worse

Maybe no one has noticed owning to all the distractions in the news, but the Federal Reserve Bank has been under great pressure from Trump to lower rates, despite the lack of any real need to do so. He’s already responsible for the appointment of four of the Feds five currently sitting governors and is in a position to fill the remaining two empty seats, so it was only a matter of time before they complied with his wishes and reversed the shift toward higher and more responsible interest rates.

In addition to stimulating an already hot economy, lower rates will allow the Trump administration to sustain rising annual deficits and the burgeoning national debt for a while longer—something which “conservative” propagandists like Rush Limbaugh are now pronouncing irrelevant. The consequences won’t be their problem to deal with, when it finally all hits the fan.

@Greg: So, this ISN’T Obama’s economy now?

@Deplorable Me, #12:

It was Obama’s recovery. This is Trump’s binge, which will be followed by Trump’s bust.

Hopefully it will only end in recession, but it could prove far worse since wholesale debt default might only be addressable by increasing the cash supply at the risk of triggering run-away inflation. Who ever deals with it will have very few remaining tools at their disposal. The sad thing is that all the danger signs are there, but no one seems to be paying any attention to them. The excitement of the party is too distracting.

@Greg: Ohhh….. so just the GOOD parts are Obama residue. I get it. He kept his economy in the 1% growth range while he was in office because he was too humble to accept credit for bringing all the economy back. He wanted others to have the benefits.

What a guy.

You keep dreaming that dream.

Obama reversed an economic downturn that could have become a national catastrophe, left in the wake of the previous republican administration. He did so while receiving nothing but resistance and prophesies of inevitable doom from the same party now glorying in the set up for a repeat of that disaster. A party, by the way, that has once again lost all concern about having unnecessarily brought back trillion-dollar annual deficits and a national debt which is once again growing at a corresponding rate.

The binge is once again being paid for with a credit card, exactly as it was before. The same results will follow. The same people will make out like highly successful bandits, and the same people will be left holding a bag filled with IOUs.

@Greg: Obama didn’t reverse anything. He put his “policies”, including “stimulus” in place and the downturn continued until it hit bottom and the economy began to heal itself. Hell, he even wanted to bring the Community Reinvestment Act, the CAUSE of the collapse, back!! He added $10 trillion to our debt with nothing to show for it. All Trump had to do in order to cause the economy to come roaring back was to simply not be Obama.

@Greg:

Greggie Goebbels, who is now in charge of the House?

@retire05, #17:

Greggie Goebbels, who is now in charge of the House?

It sure as hell isn’t the same majority party that enacted Donnie Boy’s budget busting tax cuts, is it?

There wasn’t one single, solitary republican vote in the House opposing those tax cuts, while 192 Democratic Party representatives voted nay, despite the simple-minded, knee-jerk popularity of tax cuts. So you tell me who was taking the side of fiscal responsibility.

Maybe I should consider nominating your comment for the Twisters of the Truth Weekly Recognition Medal.

@Greg:

There wasn’t one single, solitary republican vote in the House opposing those tax cuts, while 192 Democratic Party representatives voted nay, despite the simple-minded, knee-jerk popularity of tax cuts.

That’s because tax cuts were necessary and equitable. Raising taxes brings in LESS tax as jobs are lost and businesses leave. Obama PROVED how well that worked.

@Deplorable Me, #19:

There are the ever-popular republican fairy tales, and then there’s reality as revealed by the actual numbers. This certainly isn’t the first time that their “tax cuts pay for themselves” has been demonstrated to be a bogus premise. Endless repetition may create and reinforce a belief, but it certainly doesn’t create a truth.

From the Wall Street Journal, July 31, 2019 – U.S. Tax Revenues Fall, Deficit Widens in Wake of New Tax Law

There was an actual decline in total tax dollars the federal government collected following the tax cuts. More dollars collected before, fewer dollars collected after. There was already a deficit before, and the collection of fewer dollars helped make it bigger. That’s a cause and effect relationship that is totally independent of how many dollars you spent, before and after.

@Greg:Obama’s economy was a disastrous failure, Trump is bringing it back to life.

Economists say the economic surge is Trump’s accomplishment, not Obama’s
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/stephen-moore-arthur-laffer-us-economy/2018/06/08/id/864998/

Trump tax cuts will likely pay for themselves

It’s Official: Trump Tax Cuts Are Boosting Growth And Mostly Paying For Themselves

Trump’s tax cuts doing what they were intended to do; spending is the problem
https://hotair.com/archives/2018/11/16/tax-cuts-produce-record-tax-revenues-from-business/

Manufacturing jobs growing 714% faster under Trump than under Obama
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckdevore/2019/01/04/312000-jobs-added-in-december-manufacturing-growing-714-faster-under-trump-than-obama/?fbclid=IwAR1s3i5VhVh7YRawtv8sh9WI2omil_wbb65nRfL25DuSOxnv_8NT0M6sSGU#7626c1745b50

Tax revenues up 9% due to Trump’s tax cuts

Income Tax Revenues Are Up 9% This Year — Is Trump Tax Cut Paying For Itself?

Trump’s economy continues to grow

More Trump Miracles! Latest Data Shows Job Openings and New Hires Reached Historic All-Time Highs in 2018!

@Greg:

Maybe I should consider nominating your comment for the Twisters of the Truth Weekly Recognition Medal.

First, you should learn the difference between a comment and a question, d!psh!t.

@retire05: He knows. Comments are to be responded to with rants about how Trump is a con man and questions are to be avoided and evaded at all costs.

@retire05, #22:

First, you should learn the difference between a comment and a question, d!psh!t.

I didn’t really expect that the factual observations made in post #18 would elicit a polite or thoughtful response.

July 31, 2019 – Stocks fall sharply after the Fed’s first rate cut in more than 10 years

A decline that coincides with a cut in the interest rate is a flashing yellow caution light.

@Greg: The first time any one of your dire warnings about the economy, Trump, the climate or national security comes true, we’ll be sure to let you know.

What’s hilarious is how Dem candidates act like the now-roaring economy would stay the same even if they got elected then enacted huge new taxes on businesses and anyone else with two nickles to rub together.

Have they not learned from Obama’s example?
Increase uncertainty and businesses begin to hoard cash.
Increase taxes and some of them flee the country.
Really wealthy individuals will do the same.
The size of the pie will shrink substantially.
Then they will be forced to either drop their fantastic plans of tax downstream into the middle class and even the working poor.

Not a good optic.

Have they not learned from Obama’s example?

Has no one learned from what Obama had to deal with? That worsening situation was well over a year along when he walked in the door.

Obama’s recovery—which involved the transformation of an economic train wreck to 75 straight months of job growth at the point he left—was turned into the present roaring economy by way of high-end tax cuts that have pushed the deficit back up to one trillion dollars per year. Rush Limbaugh is now asserting that deficits and debts might not matter after all. I think common sense says otherwise.

Common sense also suggests that mainstream American voters are going to have an epiphany when their own tax cuts soon expire, those of corporations and the wealthiest Americans continue, and republicans tell them, “Hey, we’re going to have to do take a hard look at Social Security and Medicare, because we just can’t afford these socialist programs anymore.”

Of course by then the serious pirates may have already retreated to their offshore refuges taking their loot with them, having asserted it was all Obama and the Democratic Party’s fault as they hurried out the door.

A flagging market that coincides with a Fed rate cut is definitely something that should be noticed. If nothing else, it suggests that one of the emergency response tools in the tool box may not work as reliably as it once did. It’s supposed to be used to stimulate a flagging economy, not to stimulate one that’s already breaking the speed limit. Particularly when rates were so low already that you’re robbing conservative savers of every incentive to create an environment conducive to the Wall Street gambling casino.

The Fed didn’t want to do it to begin with. They were coerced in the hope that a rate cut might counteract a tariff strategy that doesn’t seem to be making China do as we wish.

That’s my own take, at least. I don’t pretend to know much about economics. I just think common sense still has its applications, and sometimes wins out over fast talk and fancy theories. A debt of over $22.5 trillion that’s growing by one trillion per year when economic times are about as good as they’re going to get spells coming trouble.

@Nan G:

What’s hilarious is how Dem candidates act like the now-roaring economy would stay the same even if they got elected then enacted huge new taxes on businesses and anyone else with two nickles to rub together.

Well, this is how economically ignorant liberals are. They think people working to build a successful life will just sit back while a bunch of hateful liberals tax them back into poverty and give the money away in exchange for votes. No, they react; they move, they shut down, they leave the country. The government drives away all the tax revenue sources but we are left with the wasteful, costly, failed programs and the debt. Just like a national California.

Not only does no liberal see the failure of Obama to allow a recovery to happen, they want to duplicate it on steroids. The situation Obama had to deal with was created by left wing social engineering. Hell, Obama didn’t even learn anything; he wanted to re-start the Community Reinvestment Act. No, a liberal is incapable of learning economic lessons because they rarely work to achieve wealth. Obama go wealthy by putting his name on book covers and political benefactors. What kind of understanding does he have of working hard to scrape together a few thousand dollars, then risking all that in a business venture? Obama doesn’t care if he pays more taxes; he did NOTHING for the millions that rolls in; he can’t understand the guy that can’t afford his electric bill because taxes on small businesses are exorbitant.

No, socialists will NEVER understand people working for a future. They think THEY OWN the future and can dole it out as they see fit.

@Deplorable Me, #29:

No, socialists will NEVER understand people working for a future. They think THEY OWN the future and can dole it out as they see fit.

Tell me again how republicans respect those working for a future after they’ve explained why working families should be taxed at a higher rate for each dollar they earn than those who live off their investments and capital gains.

@Greg:

Tell me why you are moving on to another thread. Don’t like your own hateful rhetoric being pointed out?

@Greg:

Tell me again how republicans respect those working for a future after they’ve explained why working families should be taxed at a higher rate for each dollar they earn than those who live off their investments and capital gains.

You mean like… RETIREMENT FUNDS?

More socialistic, “Oh, that guy has more than I do, so it’s not fair” crap. The ONE thing that can provide the opportunity for economic prosperity for MORE, if not all, is capitalism and every Democrat candidate wants to erase it.

@Deplorable Me, #32:

More like the wealthiest 1 percent of families in the United States hold about 40 percent of all wealth while the bottom 90 percent of families hold less than one-quarter of all wealth,, that same 1 percent just got huge permanent tax cuts that the government must borrow billions per year to provide, many poor children are going hungry, many poor veterans are homeless—and that’s unfair.

Unless you’re part of that top 1 percent, which I rather doubt, I don’t know what it is about more rational and higher top end tax rates that you find so objectionable. We never had such absurd disparity between the richest and everyone else, nor such potentially catastrophic deficits and accumulating debt, when the tax rate schedule made sense.

@Greg:

More like the wealthiest 1 percent of families in the United States hold about 40 percent of all wealth while the bottom 90 percent of families hold less than one-quarter of all wealth,

Oooo! GO, BERNIE, GO!!! Power to the PEOPLE! RISE UP!

That socialist, spoiled envy is totally played out. That 1% provides about 30% of the tax revenue, the top 10% provides 75%, but that doesn’t matter. It plays good with the STUPID to whine about someone being richer than they are.

The tax cuts go to small businesses, too, and they drive the economy but not a single liberal understands how earning a living works. Like Bernie, they preach about the wealthy paying more taxes… unless it’s THEM.

No, I am DEFINITELY not part of the 1%, but I have what I earned just like they have what they earned. I don’t whine, cry, bitch and throw a tantrum because some guy that gave up his life with his family to build a business has more than I do.

@Greg:

the wealthiest 1 percent of families in the United States hold about 40 percent of all wealth while the bottom 90 percent of families hold less than one-quarter of all wealth,,

Would those be the families of people like George Soros, Bill Gates and all the other the lefties that own Google, Facebook, Amazon, etc?

With all that money, and all those tax cuts you claim they got, I don’t see any of the lefties, including extremely wealthy Nancy Pelosi building medical clinics, day care centers, job training centers or any thing else that could benefit poor Americans out of their own pockets. .

Unless you’re part of that top 1 percent, which I rather doubt, I don’t know what it is about more rational and higher top end tax rates that you find so objectionable.

Some of us, who are thankful for what we do have, do not suffer from wealth envy as you seem to.

You’re beginning to sound like the shooter’s manifesto.

@Deplorable Me, #34:

No, I am DEFINITELY not part of the 1%, but I have what I earned just like they have what they earned. I don’t whine, cry, bitch and throw a tantrum because some guy that gave up his life with his family to build a business has more than I do.

You’re probably not a homeless veteran or a hungry child, either. Nor do I dislike wealth or the rich.

You assume super-wealth correlates with super-achievement. That is not necessarily the case at all. The wealthiest 1 percent aren’t necessarily creating a damn thing other than ever bigger pile of money. A super-wealthy person may just as readily stifle creativity and innovation to maintain a status quo that is serving them very, very well. They’re not an Elon Musk or a Bill Gates.

I would prefer that there be 1,000 new millionaires rather than one new billionaire.

@retire05:

Some of us, who are thankful for what we do have, do not suffer from wealth envy as you seem to.

I have enough and envy no one’s wealth. There’s a wise quote. I don’t know who said it, but it’s true:

Happiness is not about getting all you want, it’s about enjoying all you have.

Those with an insatiable appetite for more and more can never truly be happy. They are sometimes the cause of much unhappiness for others.

@Greg:

You’re probably not a homeless veteran or a hungry child, either.

What the F**K does that have to do with the argument? You saying there was no homeless before Trump’s tax cuts? How many homeless are in those liberal utopias like San Francisco, LA, Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit and New York City? Are there no wealthy liberals there, that cry themselves to sleep every night because of the plight of the homeless or hungry children that can resolve the problems? No, they care far more about potential illegal immigrants and their votes th care about a homeless US citizen. Hell, a liberal can’t take the risk of helping them; they might be one of those murdering, baby-killing veterans.

The wealthiest 1 percent aren’t necessarily creating a damn thing other than ever bigger pile of money.

They provide a disproportionate share of tax revenue. You attack them with your onerous taxes and you’ll see the same thing we saw before; they simply move away and take their revenue with them. Revenues are UP with tax cuts, they drop with oppressive taxes.

A super-wealthy person may just as readily stifle creativity and innovation to maintain a status quo that is serving them very, very well.

MAY. Or, may not. Like your baseless accusations against Trump, you liberals like to imagine some justification to do the things you do and more often than not, you do far more harm than good. The 2007 recession is an excellent example.

So, you have all you want, but you take offense that other have what they have;THEY don’t deserve to have theirs. That’s worse than envy.

@Greg:

Those with an insatiable appetite for more and more can never truly be happy. They are sometimes the cause of much unhappiness for others.

When is anyone responsible for another persons happiness? How many stories of tragic lives of those that won the lottery have to be told before people figure out money does not equal happiness.
Content is the most difficult feeling to achieve, the boob tube constant droning that you cant be happy without the mercedes with a giant bow on top in the driveway for Christmas when all you need is a sound reliable car.
I wish people would turn off the TV, and work on their own form of happiness.
If a persons happiness is vast wealth , that is sad but only for them, not the person who wishes and doesnt work for it.

What don’t some people understand about the the trouble that’s coming when the wealthiest 1 percent already own 40 percent of everything, the bottom 90 percent owns only 1 percent, and the top 1 percent have just been gifted with hefty permanent tax cuts what will rapidly make that disparity even worse, while simultaneously running up deficits and debts that will make the bottom 90 percent’s social safety net programs increasingly unsustainable?

Yelling socialist! doesn’t ward off the eventual consequences—which are getting a lot less eventual than they used to be. It’s just a means for drowning out any voices asking the question. It’s being used as a delaying tactic so another epic cash-grab can continue for as long as possible.

@Greg: When will you understand that the only reason the middle class tax cuts were not permanent was because DEMOCRATS would not support it? And how about all that “income equality” that came about during the Obama administration? Oh… that’s right. It got WORSE under Obama because, you know… all his economic growth and stuff.

And DEMOCRATS have made Social Security and Medicare close to insolvent. It has been THEY that have stolen from the programs.

@Deplorable Me, #41:

When will you understand that the only reason the middle class tax cuts were not permanent was because DEMOCRATS would not support it?

That would be an example of putting fiscal responsibility ahead of political pressure. None of the tax cuts should have been permanent. This will become shockingly apparent when the economy flags, as it invariably does at some point. We’re running trillion-dollar annual deficits with the economy roaring.

And DEMOCRATS have made Social Security and Medicare close to insolvent. It has been THEY that have stolen from the programs.

Really? How, exactly, did this robbery perpetrated entirely by democrats take place?

@Greg: Yet that’s not what you were arguing. You were bemoaning the fact that part of the tax cuts were permanent (because they targeted businesses) but the other part wasn’t. You intentionally left out the part about Democrats KEEPING them from being permanent. Democrats only believe in taxation, they have no idea how to grow revenue.

If you don’t have enough revenue coming in to pay the bills, you have a problem. A trillion a year shortfall when times are good is a very big one—the GOP and Rush Limbaugh’s newly found indifference to skyrocketing debt notwithstanding.

If you’re not cutting spending, which republicans have demonstrated they’re no more likely to do than their democratic counterparts, you have to collect more taxes to balance things out.

If republicans were honest, they would acknowledge they’re following Grover Norquist’s scheme for destroying federal programs they philosophically oppose by making them insolvent—and stuffing their own and their patron’s pockets in the process.

@Greg: Perhaps the problem is not that the people working are not being allowed to keep as much of their own money; maybe it is OVER SPENDING. How about $200 billion a year to subsidize illegal immigration? How about endless, worthless projects and pork that feed graft and corruption? How about expecting federal workers to WORK instead of relying on all the duplicate, overlapping, redundant programs and agencies to do their jobs for them? We’ve seen what continuing to feed the government more money whenever they can’t live within their means works.

Waste and overspending is the problem, but few in government want to address it.

If you’re not cutting spending, which republicans have demonstrated they’re no more likely to do than their democratic counterparts

Spending can’t be cut unless one party has a super majority or both agree to cut. Democrats have been the obstruction there, even when Pelosi had her “Pay-Go” farce in place.

@Greg: What federal programs were cut? Many should be trimmed as they tend to go on spending sprees to justify getting as much or more than they were given the year before.

@Greg: If he wasn’t lying MSNBC would not waste their time on him.

The “financial genius” in the White House is an economics idiot. He has over-stimulated the hell out of a recovered economy with totally irresponsible tax cuts that have brought back trillion-dollar-a-year deficits, even with the economy in the midst of an unsustainable surge. Any fool should be able to figure out what will happen when such a binge predictably flames out, recession predictably follows, revenue predictably plunges, and interest rates are already so damn low they can’t be sufficiently reduced further as an effective stimulus or inflation-reduction tool. This fool is running the risk not only of crashing the stock market, but of tanking the value of the dollar and wiping out the savings of the nation’s conservative traditional savers, who are the only ones who have demonstrated any common sense, and who have already been robbed by way of savings interest rates that are nothing less than an insult—a factor that has also served the purpose of driving them into the Wall Street gambling casinos like cattle hemmed in with electric cattle prods.

There’s nothing remotely fiscally “conservative” about any of this. It’s just a conman’s jar of fast empty talk and scam with a deceptive conservative label stuck on it.

Where do you run for cover, if you can’t abide any Democratic Party alternative? Maybe that’s what Mark Sanford is asking. As a democrat, I can at least recognize him as a glimmer of republican common sense and sanity. There’s got to be a lot more of it out there. They just haven’t been allowed to speak any of it lately. Trump is the reason for that.

@Greg: It is the weak economy of the rest of the world that is the drag on ours right now. You and Maher should not get your hopes up too high for a recession ushering one of your dumbasses into the White House.

1 2 3 4