Comments by "Hobbs" (@hobbso8508) on "Sky News Australia"
channel.
-
17
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Lonewanderer30
Keystone XL would not have saved money. We already have a pipeline going north and this new pipeline would have only exported oil, causing domestic oil prices to increase, not decrease.
None of the 1.9 trillion is leaving the country, literally none of it. Seriously, if you actually believe that the aid package for vaccine deployment, schools, stimulus checks, financially vulnerable households and businesses is somehow going overseas then you're watching too much fake news.
Obama literally created more jobs than Trump, both after and before COVID. In fact, Obama got the unemployment rate so low, it would be mathematically impossible for Trump to create more jobs than Obama, since Obama reduced unemployment by 5.2%, causing it to go to 4.7%. Unless Trump could somehow create so many jobs that unemployment was a -0.5%, which is obviously ridiculous, then Obama will always be the leading job creator.
Can you list these destroyed jobs. The only ones I've seen substantiated are the Keystone XL ones, but they were all temporary and would do little for the economy. Only 35 permanent jobs were actually lost, and for a pipeline that's already in court for breaking Native American treaties.
I posted a quote from the journalist you linked to in your "evidence" of a strong Trump economy from another one of his articles. Median household income growth was higher under Obama's last 2 years than in Trump's first 3.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@backalleyburrito1815 No, it isn't. The US is democratic constitutional republic.
Democratic: The vast majority of citizens have the right to vote and decide who leads the nation. The more people who can vote, the more democratic somewhere is. Arguably the US was not really a democracy for a very long time, really only finally crossing that threshold in 1965, or I suppose 1975 depending on your stance.
Constitutional: We have a body of fundamental principles or established precedents according to which a state or other organization is acknowledged to be governed.
Republic: A state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch. The word "republican" is commonly used to specify that someone is anti-monarch, such as during the French revolution.
Or, in short, we vote in leaders, have an established foundation for the government and have representatives. A nation could easily use any collection of these 3 separate things, or none of them at all, but we as a nation use all 3.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1