Trump's not trying to respond as much as he was just trying to "divert" the conversation. Clinton was obviously the better choice, the more experienced candidate, someone willing to stand up to Putin.
We'll need someone with her experience to put America back together again, if there is anything left after MAGA.
One indicator of how well we're doing; let's remember where the stock market was when Trump was elected. The honeymoon is over. His tariffs are beginning to be applied, and the stock market is tanking. The economy will follow, unemployment will increase, along with inflation. Let's see if the orange genius has an answer, other than, "Biden caused it!".
Drilling activity has been up because the price of oil has stayed in the mid-70s. Trump plans to drill, drill, drill. That will drive the oil price down to the mid-50s, which will cause oil & gas companies to cancel future projects, and the boom will come to a screeching halt, but MAGA will claim victory because the price at the pump might get to $2.50 for a while.
Trump and MAGA don't have a "plan", other than to appease Putin. Their "strategy" is to throw shit at the wall and hope some of it sticks.
Posts: 13930 | Location: Texas | Registered: 10 May 2002
Originally posted by Kensco: Trump's not trying to respond as much as he was just trying to "divert" the conversation. Clinton was obviously the better choice, the more experienced candidate, someone willing to stand up to Putin.
We'll need someone with her experience to put America back together again, if there is anything left after MAGA.
One indicator of how well we're doing; let's remember where the stock market was when Trump was elected. The honeymoon is over. His tariffs are beginning to be applied, and the stock market is tanking. The economy will follow, unemployment will increase, along with inflation. Let's see if the orange genius has an answer, other than, "Biden caused it!".
Drilling activity has been up because the price of oil has stayed in the mid-70s. Trump plans to drill, drill, drill. That will drive the oil price down to the mid-50s, which will cause oil & gas companies to cancel future projects, and the boom will come to a screeching halt, but MAGA will claim victory because the price at the pump might get to $2.50 for a while.
Trump and MAGA don't have a "plan", other than to appease Putin. Their "strategy" is to throw shit at the wall and hope some of it sticks.
Cheap oil or energy independence, pick one. I am constantly amazed how little people understand about the petroleum industry, but have all kinds of opinions
Posts: 1156 | Location: oregon | Registered: 20 February 2009
Of course, if the Democrats had not insisted on running Hilary, instead of an electable candidate, they could have won. They didn't learn the lesson though and doubled down with Kamala. So, Dems need to do two things, move toward the conservative end of the scale a bit, socially and fiscally, and find a candidate who is not solely a DEI selection. Can they do it? Probably not, if what I see on here is any indicator. Bill
Cheap oil or energy independence, pick one. I am constantly amazed how little people understand about the petroleum industry, but have all kinds of opinions
I’ve been in the oil business since 1966, right from the bottom to the top, I think I have a fairly good grasp of it.
The key to both of your issues is trustworthy, reliable partners in responsible trade agreements. Need I say more?
Posts: 6192 | Location: Alberta | Registered: 14 November 2002
Originally posted by Bill Leeper: Of course, if the Democrats had not insisted on running Hilary, instead of an electable candidate, they could have won. Bill
This 100%.
Posts: 6831 | Location: United Kingdom | Registered: 18 November 2007
Originally posted by Bill Leeper: Of course, if the Democrats had not insisted on running Hilary, instead of an electable candidate, they could have won. Bill
This 100%.
You could say If in every election so what’s your point?
Posts: 816 | Location: Idaho & Montana & Washington | Registered: 24 February 2024
