Donate SIGN UP
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 20 of 31rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
so back where it was under Obama, is it?
well his sense of history isn't great or his foreign relationships - latest one the Prime Minister of Japan.....

This is from the NY Daily. I quote...

"President Trump is not exactly a history buff.

During intense trade negotiations in June with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, Trump made a bizarre reference to the 1941 bombing of Pearl Harbor, according to a report Tuesday by the Washington Post.

"I remember Pearl Harbor," the President said, before launching into a rant about Japan's trade policies.

Trump has made other odd references to the 1941 attack that left 2,403 Americans dead and prompted the U.S. to join World War II.

The President, born five years after the bombing, flubbed a quote from Franklin Delano Roosevelt last year as he attempted to honor the 76th anniversary of the solemn day.

"National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day -- 'A day that will live in infamy!' December 7, 1941," he tweeted.

When Roosevelt addressed a Joint Session of U.S. Congress nearly eight decades ago, he actually declared Dec. 7 as "a date which will live in infamy."

Trump, while signing a presidential proclamation last year also called the surprise bombing a "pretty wild scene."

Using historical references appears to be a common technique for Trump. In May, Trump reportedly had a testy exchange with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau over tariffs.

Trudeau pressed Trump on how he could justify tariffs on steel and aluminum as a "national security" issue.

The President responded by asking Trudeau, "Didn't you guys burn down the White House?"

The War of 1812 reference didn't quite work as it was British troops who torched the White House following an attack by Americans on York, Ontario, a British colony at the time."

Jerk.
Well done Mr President. Signed: A. Trumpster !
Question Author
jno

/// so back where it was under Obama, is it? ///

No, the economy, must have lower under Obama for it to rise under Trump's Presidency.

/// best growth in FOUR YEARS ///
ah jno, bless, it was 1.2 when the Trumpster started. Well done Mr President very impressive. No doubt the ATB will be along in a minute to tell us it's all an illusion.
Oh dear. :o)
Considering the number of threads and posts regarding Trump, he's certainly been a boon to The AnswerBank economy. I read on one of the sites on Google regarding this site that each post generates (I have no idea how) 10p for the business.
Ed - you owe us a fortune.
I don't remember the site, DTC. I just remember Googling "the answerbank" and reading a couple of them.
Back to where it was under Bush, if anything.

It's not clear to me that Trump directly has much to do with this, apart from the tax cut bill -- and anyway it's also pretty much a continuation of trendlines that were established under Obama -- but welcome news all the same.
^ :o)
Glad to see you as erudite as ever, N :)

I'm merely questioning how much of this is to do with Trump and how much of it is a continuation of underlying US economic strength. A fairly reasonable question in the circumstances, as Trump has only been president for two years, leaving him little time to have had much impact. Even his tax cuts are only a few months old and the full effects are therefore unlikely to have been felt yet.

:o)
I'll take that as a sign that you have nothing worthwhile to actually say.
Not really - I'm laughing too much. :o)
Well, have a go anyway.
I get my Trump/economic news from John Oliver.
Laughs too.

I can't help but see the prez's big grinning gormless dish when I look at Naomis smileys
-- answer removed --
I mean, let's put it this way: when Trump announced his campaign, he made the rather interesting claim that:

"Our Gross Domestic Product -- a sign of strength, right? But not for us. Below zero! Never below zero."

Who knows what he meant, since (a) Gross domestic product can never be below zero, by definition! and (b) even if he meant "quarterly GDP growth", then it goes below zero rather often, actually, making his claim doubly false.

-- answer removed --

1 to 20 of 31rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Congratulations Mr President, The American People Must Be Proud Of You.

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.