Republican President

>Republican President
>Republican Senate
>Republican Congress
>Conservative Supreme Court

Who will the republicans blame this time?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_policy_of_the_George_W._Bush_administration
theguardian.com/business/2008/oct/24/economics-creditcrunch-federal-reserve-greenspan
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_United_States_Congress
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland_Supreme_Court_nomination
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivanka_Trump
foxnews.com/opinion/2016/11/20/trump-is-headed-to-white-house-did-just-elect-our-first-jewish-president.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Having control didn't stop Obama blaming Bush and Congress Republicans.

Obama

Obama didn't have the senate, house and supreme court on his side at one time, though.

The US is literally in the hands of the republicans now. If they don't improve the life of working class Americans now it will be the end of the GOP.

Yes he did, you motherfucking retard

Feel free to look at who controlled the government from 2009-2011.

>have super majority
>still blame the Republicans and Bush
I don't think you understood the question nor the answer.

...

2 years of absolute Democratic control was enough to guarantee a full Republican landslide not just at the federal level, but they lost the majority of state governorships as well.

People got sick of Democrats and the shitshow they were turning our country into in less than a single presidential term.

What is your pic even mean? He had both the House and the Senate during one term. Time to kill yourself.

Things will improve now, right?

That's my whole point. Republicans wanted their chance, and now they have it. They have no one to blame for their failures but themselves.

Wow, thanks Obama. I'm glad you could give us the slowest economic recovery on our history while doubling the national debt. What a swell guy.

Democrats still blamed Bush the entire time they controlled both houses and the White House....

Shouldn't you be making Argentina not shit again?

To be fair, the debt was due to the wars Bush started in Afghanistan and Iraq.

What failures are you talking about?

The debt had nothing to do with the war. The wars were winding down by the time he got in office.

The inevitable drop in employment and overall living standard of working class Americans.

When you adjust for changes in inflation, the economy does better under Republicans.

The thing is, Democrats boost their numbers with inflation, and then Republicans come in and lower the inflation (lowering the inflation also takes a toll on economic growth)

That's why Carter and Obama got blown the fuck out despite their magic pretty numbers (not adjusted with the rise in prices). The numbers add up on paper but the changes in the speed of inflation makes it so that the average Joe doesn't notice it.

Blame for making America great again?

So you are saying there will be problems and the Republicans, who control pretty much everything right now, will blame it on other people?

Aren't you like 20 steps too early here?
What if shit gets better? Are you going to find somebody else to praise other than Republicans?

THE INTEREST RATE NEVER CHANGED
THATS the only number you ever fucking need to look at.
It is the most accurate demonstration of how the economy is doing these numbers mean nothing if we have been giving free money out to banks for close to a decade.

Yes. They will get all the glory from successes and all the shame from failures.

Last Republican wasn't too good with economics.

>The 2008 housing and financial crashes caused the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression under George W. Bush's watch.

>During his first term (2001–2005), he sought and obtained Congressional approval for tax cuts: the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, the Job Creation and Worker Assistance Act of 2002 and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003. These acts decreased all tax rates, reduced the capital gains tax, increased the child tax credit and eliminated the so-called "marriage penalty", and were set to expire in 2011.

>The last two years of his presidency were characterized by the worsening subprime mortgage crisis, which resulted in government intervention to bail out damaged financial institutions and a weakening economy.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_policy_of_the_George_W._Bush_administration

Eat shit.

Hi where the source? :DDDD

And can you not wait for a problem to occur before you try to smugly call out any republicans online?

Do you want a written promise they are not going to blame anyone but themselves?
What kind of response do you want?

caused by Clinton's housing bubble and Democrats' modernization act

>THE INTEREST RATE NEVER CHANGED
>THATS the only number you ever fucking need to look at.
>It is the most accurate demonstration of how the economy is doing these numbers mean nothing if we have been giving free money out to banks for close to a decade.

Alan Greenspan, the chairman of the Fed admitted himself he doesn't know how the interest rate works.

theguardian.com/business/2008/oct/24/economics-creditcrunch-federal-reserve-greenspan

Am I the only one who seems to notice Liberals accusing Conservatives of exactly the shit they do all the time? It's getting so bad, I can't tell who's trolling, and who's not.

Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Roberts, Alito.

How exactly did the Democrats control the supreme court?

Also Souter and Stevens were picked by Republican presidents.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_United_States_Congress

Which party was forcing banks to issue toxic loans to minorities again?

You are so misinformed you could only be a european poking his nose into us politics for the first time

Trump won't control the Supreme Court either. It's a tie.

>Trump
>Republican

he's a populist nationalist isolationist that hijacked the party.

Neo-cons (Bush lackeys) all hate him.

It's a tie because Republicans blocked Obama from filling the vacant seat. You think Democrats are going to do the same to Trump now?

I liked bush and trump

Neocons hijacked the party. If they can speak for republicans now, then so can Trump and the teabaggers.

SCOTUS isn't as partisan as the other branches. It doesn't really matter that one more Republican appointee was on it. They never struck down any significant Obama legislation, even when they had a chance to.

Who did Obama appoint?

Democrats can't block it for 4 years.

Garland

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland_Supreme_Court_nomination

>Garland's mother Shirley (née Horwitz)[5] was a director of volunteer services at Chicago's Council for Jewish Elderly (now called CJE SeniorLife

thank godness

>SCOTUS isn't as partisan as the other branches
SCOTUS is even more partisan than the other branches because it's the only one that actually counts since judicial activism is sanctioned by the American public. It's extremely benificial for those on the right to have originalist judges where liberals prefer living document judges (for reasons which should be obvious). Seriously fuck off.

>They never struck down any significant Obama legislation, even when they had a chance to.
That's because the majority living document judges upheld Obama legislation while minority originalists dissented. See the ACA and Gay marriage rulings. It was always 5:4.

So Republicans want to follow the law and Democrats want to bend it. Interesting.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivanka_Trump

>Trump sends her daughter to kindergarten at a Jewish school in New York City. She says that “It’s such a blessing for me to have her come home every night and share with me the Hebrew that she’s learned and sing songs for me around the holidays."

foxnews.com/opinion/2016/11/20/trump-is-headed-to-white-house-did-just-elect-our-first-jewish-president.html

I didn't know Ivanka was appointed to the Supreme Court. Thanks for playing.

Was your complaint not the Jewish connection?

(((Trump))) played you and you know it.

It's amazing how easy was to bait you into revealing your true positions

>SCOTUS is more partisan than other branches, but Justices made their decisions based on their beliefs about the Constitution instead of party politics

hurr durr

I have true positions?

Without Democrats in power, there won't be a need to blame anyone for anything.

How can Trump be Jewish if he's a Nazi racist who wants to start WW3?

conservative and progressives* There are some Southern Democrats that are originalists and some Republicans that are in favor of living document. But yeah, that's pretty much the gist. The vast majority on the right are originalists and the vast majority on the left fall under living document. Originalists fall under the idea that the Constitution says what the government can do and everything else is off limits. Living document people think that the Constitution only lists what the government can't do and everything else is free game. It's been like this ever since the Constitution was written. The irony of it is that the author of the constitution, James Madison, lost a SCOTUS case regarding the document that he fucking wrote in what was the first case of judicial activism in the country and also set the precedent for it (Marbury v. Madison).

Party politics fall along those lines so hurr durr yourself, plebbit.

media, obviously

I never said he was a nazi racist.

Besides, he's trying to break up Europe to revenge them for the Holohoax.

Party politics obviously don't fall along those lines if a Republican Supreme Court signed off on Obamacare.

>if a Republican Supreme Court
It wasn't a Republican Supreme Court. SCOTUS was still a living document majority when Bush was president.

No, everyone else on your side did.

He's not breaking up Europe, he's saving them from the mudslime invasion that Merkel hoisted onto the entire continent.

Oh, so you mean party politics isn't as important as judicial beliefs?

(((everyone)))
nice try, shill

>implying the entire democratic party isn't freaking out about Trump being a "racist Nazi blah blah blah."

Nice of you to ignore my point though.

I'll say it again because you're retarded: party politics and judicial beliefs follow the same line. Also, I relooked up the case and it occurred in 2012, after Obama had appointed Sotomayor which just affirms the living document majority of appointed progressives. Eat shit.

If party politics and judicial beliefs lined up, then you would have seen the Republican majority in the Supreme Court challenge the Obama administration.

I'm not a Democrat, but was this weekend not an absolute shit show!? It's gonna be a crazy 4 years.

You probably would have... if they had a majority in the Supreme Court. I don't know why you're digging your heels in here like you actually have an argument. SCOTUS is just as partisan as the other branches and everyone knows it which is why appointing judges is a big fucking deal for the "ruling" party and why the Obama admin tried so fucking hard to get a judge appointed before he left office while the GOP blocked him at every turn. This has been known since 1789. FDR knew it so well in the 1930's that he tried to illegally stack SCOTUS and when congress told him to eat shit, he just bullied judges until they resigned. Seriously, you have neither leg to stand on nor pot to piss in.

Republicans had a majority in the Supreme Court until 2011, so almost the whole first Obama term and they didn't repeal any of his legislation.

SCOTUS is partisan, but it's absurd to say they're more partisan than the Executive or Legislative branches.

>so almost the whole first Obama term and they didn't repeal any of his legislation
They didn't hear any of his legislation until so your point is fucking moot.

>The 2008 housing and financial crashes caused the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression under George W. Bush's watch.

You understand that Bill Clinton's Glass-Steagall Act fuckup led to the 2008 hopusing bubble right??

ABSOLUTE DUMBFUCK

OK, then why did a Democrat majority SCOTUS strike down Obama's immigration plan?