HAHAHA...this is our "savior?" Gee wiz Donald, you econ genius, all of that crash happened precisely because of what "Democrats would have done' and what they DID with Fannie, Freddie, the EPA, Community Reinvestment Act...etc. More proof that the ability to become personally wealthy, while a damned good ability,hasn't got anything to do necessarily with understanding the macro economy.
When he said that, I shrugged and switched channels.
Got to agree
This is very disconcerting that he doesn’t realize what caused the crash
I understand the Trump hysteria around here, I do, Trump is saying what must be said and saying what no other politician will not say. And if polled, even I would say I would vote for Trump. If only to promote the talking points he is making.
But what I do not understand - especially among FReepers - is the blind and rabid devotion that Trump is truly a great conservative and really, honestly is the better choice over Cruz, Walker and so on.
Those people are scary, nutty individuals.
That is true. But Jorge was responsible for bailing out failed companies with public money right before the election, Jorge looked the other way as the army of illegals grew and pandered to Vicente Fox. Jorge screwed up the aftermath of our victory in Iraq. Jorge ignored the mess involving Ginny Mae and Freddy Mac. Jorge caved to the Dems on the issue of a Homeland Security Department and supported the idiotic “Patriot” Act. I don’t like the Bushes one bit either. But I will more closely scrutinize the Donskd’s comments in the future on Democrats. At this point I give him a pass on trying to do what any candidate does, trying to get s one support from the other side.
This won't satisfy Freepers who long for an ideologically pure candidate. Personally, I'm pretty comfortable with him, especially since he is the ONLY Republican who so far can get away with telling the media and the Left off on any issue and not only getting away with it but prospering.
I keep saying, if he and I agree on 3/10 issues---but the only three he focuses on are mine---I could care less what he thinks about the other seven.
It was democrat programs as you mentioned AND policies of GW Bush TOGETHER; it wasn’t one or the other.
There were many reports posted here on FR of how SEC investigators were shut down by the Bush Administration when prosecuting banking crimes.
Bush had the enforcement powers and stood down while the bankers looted the country. This is why I turned on him. Because I could see the democrats were corrupting everything in their path which is nothing new and is to be expected. But Bush let them and he had the power to stop them.
I’m giving Donald Trump a fair pass on this. I wish he would form an independent party though. It would align the optics from double vision to to proper focus.
Saved me a post with content.
On the surface I don’t like it. But neither do I think Bush handled it like a true conservative. Trump’s statement that the Democrats would not have done what Bush did is just plain wrong unless he means (and it does not sound like it) they would have done something even worse.
Bush was a big government big spender. He talked conservative talk but he walked a liberal walk, at least economically. I think he also joined the massive political deceivers wing on the social issues. He said one thing. He often did another.
“Gee wiz Donald, you econ genius, all of that crash happened precisely because of what “Democrats would have done’ and what they DID...”
I agree. GWB made some dumb decisions too, but the structure for the bubble and crash was rooted in laws passed by Democrats.
That is why I’m not a Trumpster. I’d vote for him against a Democrat in the general election. But I think it has been obvious at least since Bill Clinton that Democrats, as a rule, loathe what made America great and have no clue whatsoever about how the real world operates. They have no clue how their “fairness” policies CREATE bigger problems than the ones the are supposed to solve (but don’t).
“... the ability to become personally wealthy, while a damned good ability,hasn’t got anything to do necessarily with understanding the macro economy.”
More true words. Stuff going on under Obama with housing is setting up huge problems for us 10-20 years from now. If someone cannot understand that, they won’t understand how to head them off. If Trump couldn’t figure out in 2000 what problems were being created, then he won’t be much help now.
Now, of course, the immediate precipitant of the 2008 crash was the trading by big banks in bundled mortgages, that should never have been even considered, much less financed. Granted further, that the many year push to have banks finance such mortgages, arose in vote buying programs, largely pushed by Democrats on the far Left.
That said, it is also clear that the Bush II Administration went along with proposals to allow the grossest over-leveraging of bank assets; that Hank Paulson was himself an advocate of that ridiculous over-leveraging of banks that we were later told were too big to be allowed to fail.
Trump's statement, here, is an obvious effort to play on his celebrity appeal to Democrats that are unhappy--many very unhappy with the efforts to force a bad tempered female on their Party. Trump is still an evolving act. I believe that his heart is in the right direction, and that he could prove a major asset to our cause. And the fact that he is smart enough to explore approaches to win over some unhappy Democrats, by not coming across as someone who thinks that the Republicans under George W. Bush could do no wrong, is encouraging.
Reagan won decisively because he knew how to appeal to lifelong Democrats. The Reagan Democrats more than replaced the Rockefeller Republicans who abandoned Reagan as they had abandoned Goldwater.
I’m curious to know why you think Dubya never requested any alteration in the Community Reinvestment Act while he was President. Why he supported the American Dream Downpayment Initiative that provided “free” downpayments to minority homebuyers, a program that added rocket fuel to the housing bubble.
The only reforms of Fannie and Freddie that he asked for was concerning their capital ratio and sheer size. The reforms that he advocated never addressed subprime lending, non-conforming lending, or the massive subprime lending going on in the shadow banking system.