Gas prices

Link appears to be broken.

I think this is where the link was supposed to go.

What did the NYT say when Biden took credit for decreasing gas prices in December?

That's a loaded question. "They" didn't say anything other than reporting on what he said. Today they're quoting history and experts. Your implied bias is unfounded.

(Free article link above fixed.)

It is because of THIS President. He shut down the pipeline AND stopped drilling on federal land. When the LAST President was in office we were exporting more oil than importing. You can thank THIS president for $5.09 per gallon prices now. Go buy an electric car and burn coal to support it. sorry but it is THIS PRESIDENT'S fault, they want to eliminate gas, they've stated it numerous times. Wake up........We were oil independent under the last administration and exporting more then we were importing. THIS president is in bed with the Mid East......

All because we couldn't handle some "mean tweets".

What happened to the says of "sticks and stones will break my bones and names will never hurt me?"

Of course there is bias. You would have to be naïve or not very bright to think otherwise.

Given that you have said on CB that you are totally fine with bias in journalism, seems odd you would even bring it up.

Gas powered cars are going away whether everyone likes it or not. Auto companies are already investing what they need to to make this happen. If you want to have a climate change debate on how the power will be generated to facilitate that we can do that too.

BlueGemini said:
It is because of THIS President.

First of all, we are still exporting oil, so nothing has changed in that regard. Also, it's clear that you have done nothing to better educate yourself on the basics of supply and demand when it comes to oil prices. You could educate yourself, but you choose to maintain and even double down on your ignorance, which is sad.

BlueGemini said:

All because we couldn't handle some "mean tweets".

I've seen the "all because we couldn't handle mean tweets" nonsense many times, and I suspect it comes from Tucker Carlson or some similar moronic "news" outlet, but it's the worst kind of political doublespeak I have seen in my lifetime. Trump isn't dangerous only because of his impulsive, ignorant, incendiary comments. He's dangerous also, and primarily, because he:

• committed multiple acts of criminal obstruction of justice in efforts to obscure unethical or illegal behavior
• broke the law when he withheld Congressionally-approved funds from Ukraine in order to benefit himself politically (there is a specific law against this, pity that there has to be)
• attempted to extort/bribe/coerce Secretaries of State to illegally fabricate votes and/or appoint alternate electors in order to illegally maintain his power
• attempted to coerce the Vice President into rejecting the valid electoral results in order to illegitimately maintain his presidency
• incited a deadly terrorist attack against the US government with the goal of overturning the election, so that he could illegitimately maintain his role as President. This is known as an autocoup.

Trump is, either by accident or by nature, an autocratic fascist. He, and the modern GOP, would sooner burn the Republic to the ground than lose elections. No one gives a s*** about Trump's tweets, but some of us are concerned about the coordinated effort to subvert our democracy by a minority party that wants to maintain power by any means necessary.

Also, you have to be a special kind of willingly ignorant if you think that any policy change inside of 18 months would affect anything, and that, you know, there's a war, ever increasing oil consumption in China, supply and demand, you know, all of the things that we've talked about but BlueGemini doesn't care to consider, let alone understand. As long as he can shake his fist at Biden.

GoBucks89 said:

Given that you have said on CB that you are totally fine with bias in journalism, seems odd you would even bring it up.

If I said any such thing, it was in the context of bias toward truth. There's still a difference between imagination and reality. The Times had no issue taking down the Cuomos, so don't sit there and pretend you don't know the difference between journalism and opinion.

One thing is for certain, Biden's poll numbers in reference to the economy are awful. And his incoherent ramblings aren’t helping his cause either.

Cedar point. That’s why we’re on this forum.

Master D said:

One thing is for certain, Biden's poll numbers in reference to the economy are awful. And his incoherent ramblings aren’t helping his cause either.

Not at all. There's a reason the current President's approval ratings are as bad, if not worse, than Trump's. Biden has always been an absolutely horrendous politician. His record speaks for itself.

https://www.nytimes.com/1985/04/14/travel/seeking-the-lost-amusement-park.html

SuperS0nicSam said:

Master D said:

One thing is for certain, Biden's poll numbers in reference to the economy are awful. And his incoherent ramblings aren’t helping his cause either.

Not at all. There's a reason the current President's approval ratings are as bad, if not worse, than Trump's. Biden has always been an absolutely horrendous politician. His record speaks for itself.

This is what astounds me. Our great country, all the great people and great minds we have and this is the best our two parties can offer: Donald Trump and Joe Biden. Wow.

Biden isn't making anything worse, he's just not making anything better. Sadly, the bar is not-anti-democratic-fascist. And I voted for Mayor Pete in the primary.

Meanwhile, my EV-driving self spends 3.5 cents to drive one mile, while a typical SUV driver spends 35 cents. I'm going to be smug AF about it, too. I remember 2011 when everyone was scrambling to buy a Prius. People forget too easily.

it was in the context of bias toward truth.

This made me laugh. No, you said you didn't care about "journalists" being neutral; just factual. But you can drive a truck through that. But as I noted, even the NYT doesn't go to the extreme of your view.

Its comical watching the Biden Administration trying to take credit for any positive in the economy (higher wages (though as noted above they are down on an inflation adjusted basis--though they never mention that for some reason), low unemployment and the stimulus) while running away from anything bad (inflation, supply chain issues, etc) pointing the finger at someone else (blame the Fed). As if all of these things are totally unrelated.

There's still a difference between imagination and reality.

Given the article you posted earlier its ironic you say this in response to what Biden said in December.

And I am not pretending anything; just pointing out facts and reality (two things you say you support). And of course the problem is far too many "journalists" who totally ignore the difference between journalism and opinion and those who are all in favor of it.

A leader of the MeToo Movement was fine taking down an arrogant ass accused of sexual harassment and his brother who was shown to have used his place in the media to defend said arrogant ass brother and later was accused of sexual harassment himself. And now you are going to be smug AF about something? Wow. Alert the media. LOL

BlueGemini said:

It is because of THIS President. He shut down the pipeline AND stopped drilling on federal land. When the LAST President was in office we were exporting more oil than importing.

As someone who works in the oil industry and has for years I can tell you with 100% certainty that shutting down a pipeline that never carried any product in the first place has zero to do with the current situation. Also, Keystone was designed to deliver heavy Canadian crude to the large refinery base in the Gulf states. The refined products from this would mostly be exported overseas as the pipelines that carry refined products North and East from these refineries are usually running at capacity.

The Covid lockdowns resulted in the weakest demand for refined products that we had seen in decades. Over time this caused numerous domestic drilling operations to go out of business as the price of crude was lower than the cost to pull it out of the ground. As demand rebounded the supply could not keep up as we cannot bring these facilities back online with the flip of a switch.

It is easy to blame a president for these things but if the other guy had won we would be in the same situation we are in now when it comes to the crude oil and refined products market.

If anything, that whole thing with the price of crude oil actually going negative in 2020 should have been some kind of a wake-up call that the current structure...if you can call it that...for setting the price of a real-world good is somehow broken. I don't have a fix for it (mostly because I barely understand the problem..) but like so much other stuff in the financial world, to have the price and supply of such an important commodity determined largely by people who (at least professionally) don't care about the price or value of the thing they are buying and selling...they only care about their margin on that price.

As for our current President...there were many times during the Obama administration when some foaming-at-the-mouth anti-Democrat would point out something that Obama had done as grounds for impeachment. I would usually point out that Obama was pretty much unimpeachable no matter what he did for one simple reason: "President Joe Biden." Back then, that was mostly unthinkable to thinking people on both sides (by which I mean people who have two brain cells to rub together, not necessarily our brightest and best thinkers). And somehow he ended up being the least objectionable option in a pretty crowded field. To me, that's a pretty sad state of affairs.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

Relax people.

We all know that before you can "Build Back Better" you must first raze it to the ground.
Destroying America is just phase one of this masterminds master plan.
All is well. Nothing to see here. Biden 2024!!!