This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
HannibalAteMeOut · 22-25, F
I don't understand why people need someone to "blame the most". Blame all of them. If 4 years aren't enough to get rid of debt then 4 years aren't enough to accumulate all of it either. Don't discriminate, blame them all, make them all take responsibility and don't be lenient with any of them.
bijouxbroussard · F
@HannibalAteMeOut It’s not all equal, though. We had a president whose primary intent was to use the presidency to enrich himself and his cronies. So his four years (and the number of people affiliated with him who were charged with actual crimes) was different from the administrations of his predecessor and his successor.
HannibalAteMeOut · 22-25, F
@bijouxbroussard hmm maybe I'm just used to politicians whose primary intent is always just to enrich themselves and launder crimes to the point that I don't think that any administration does not do that... So as for the debt I think it's fair to blame them all. Usually blamimg someone a bit more than others is translated into that someone not winning the next election, but then they can win the next of the next and nothing really gets done to them.
bijouxbroussard · F
@HannibalAteMeOut I don’t think it can be argued that 45 took that to the nth degree and ran with it. Like I said, the number of people associated with him who ended up arrested is pretty significant. So "they all do it" isn’t valid when one is still experiencing legal fallout as a result of his actions.