You guys talk too much! Try to keep your posts down to 500 words or less!

I think you are getting your answer from the Liberal posts. H**E, combined with CONSPIRACY THEORIES and F**E NEWS seems to rule the day.

This is an excellent point! In my little precinct in Cleveland, we had only 29 registered Republicans vs. over 300 registered Democrats. In the Primary E******n, the Republican roles surged to 42! I know for a fact that many of these were people who had formerly v**ed in Democratic Primaries.

It seems to me that the recent jobs increase was in fact due to the e******n of Trump. This is not due to any policy changes, but to a sudden shift in attitude. It is only a slight bump so far, but all indicators from polls suggest that the business community and working people in general have had a surge in their optimism about our economic future since Trump was elected. I consider this a temporary high that does not need anywhere near six months in order to take effect. Companies can make hiring decisions within days if they are on top of their game. The Stock Market can respond even quicker. The real test will be if Trump can sustain the job growth over the long term by not doing something stupid.

I'm not sure what you are getting at, Walsh. Under Obama, the Official Unemployment Rate has fallen, only because they do not count all the people who stopped looking for a job and are now on welfare. The real story comes from the Labor Participation Rate which counts everybody eligible for a job, regardless of whether or not they stopped looking for a job or are on welfare. This went down 4% under Obama's tenure, t***slating to about 10 million less people working today.

Trump has managed to expand the total jobs added in February by a whopping 100,000 more (50% more) than was expected. I am guessing that the people eager to find a job will take advantage of the rising market and snap up jobs right away. I think this will eventually level out when the rest of the dead beats are the only ones left and they will just stay at home, collecting benefits. Neither Trump, nor any other of the 16 Republican Candidates addressed the issue of free government hand-outs during the e******n.

This has been going on for quite some time. I first heard about it about two years ago. A big driver of the unfilled jobs is that there are so many people on welfare now, that many have gotten comfortable and are not willing to go back to work. Due to the immense government programs of handing out money and even seeking out people to give money to, we are gradually training the populace to become deadbeats!

On top of that, there is a little known phenomenon going on for the last several years. The U.S. has a record amount amount of unfilled jobs. They can't find enough people who are willing to work.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-08/has-america-run-out-of-workers-to-fill-its-open-jobs

This is just anecdotal evidence in a country full of 320 million people. The numbers that really count are the net job gains or losses, which in February, exceeded expectations by more than 100 thousand jobs on the plus side. http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/08/private-sector-jobs-february-2017-adp.html

Interesting that your anecdotal list includes Pepsi in Philadelphia. The Democratic administration in Philly just enacted a monstrous soda sales tax of close to 100% of the retail cost of beverages that is crippling all grocery and beverage stores within the city. Not only Pepsi, but many other food retailers in Philly are beginning to lay off workers due to the loss of business.

Perhaps Trump would be protected by the orange "cloaking device" on his head?

Please, don't throw cold water on the Liberals' conspiracy theory. It's all they've got to keep hope alive!

This is pretty bold of the New York Times to admit the Clintons role in giving U.S. uranium mining rights over to the Russians, and the huge contributions the Clintons received. Kind of sounds exactly like what the Press is trying to tag Donald Trump with, without having any evidence at all!

What the Hell does that mean?

I've got one more scenario to show the lunacy of this situation. What if the entire U.S. Women's Olympic Weightlifting team took steroids to train for the 2020 Games and simply told Olympic officials "We are all in t***sition to become men, but for now we want to compete with the women, so this should be allowed." What do you think the outcry from the international community would be??

I used to wrestle in High School. At the time, East German women dominated the Olympic games in 1972. It was later found out that the entire East German swimming team and most other East German female Olympians had been taking steroids as a routine part of the established East German sports program. Almost no one besides the East Germans considered this to be fair play.

I don't think this has anything to do with g****r issues per se. It has to do with giving one person an unfair advantage over everybody else. The increase in strength from steroid use is way more effective in women than in men. That is why the East German Government chose not to give their male athletes steroids because the gains to be had were not worth the risk of getting caught.

In almost any sport where there are inherent performance advantages for men, the sport is divided into men's and women's groups, such as tennis, basketball, soccer, even sometimes chess. Usually, the women participants are free to advance into the male group if they are sufficiently competitive and willing, but never the other way around. No sane person would ever call that fair.

People who think that Mackenzie would be at an unfair disadvantage if she were forced to wrestle boyz would probably be right. But they never think that the hundreds of other girls who are forced to participate with steroid-using Mackenzie are also at a disadvantage. Which is more beneficial to society? Causing one person to be at a disadvantage, or hundreds of people?

This kind of unfair stupidity of letting a steroid user compete in high school is just going to lead to a huge backlash against the organizers.

A man once said "I discovered one time in my life that I was wrong about something, but later learned that I was mistaken about that.