Trumps major opponents continue their hatred largely because they themselves have been shown to be total fools.

runner,

You should not blame the major companies and the
economists - in the US.
They don't hate the US President - they're merely
telling Trump the economic damage his actions
will cause to the country. You also have to realise
that criticism of someone does not equate to "hatred."

better to remain silent Foxy than to sprout such nonsense.

Foxy all the economists & other swamp dwellers have been telling Trump he could not win, could not sort out most of Obamas stuff ups, intentional & accidental, & could not do any of the things he has done, like cut illegal immigration for over a year. They have been wrong almost every time.

I think perhaps they need to shut up, & stop telling him what he can't do, as each time he proves them wrong, they look more stupid, so when if ever they are actually right, & he needs some guidance or help, he & his lot will be much less likely to listen.

As I mentioned in another thread, the parable of the boy who cried wolf really does apply. The more they shout & scream, the less relevant to the US, Trump & the world they become.

Yes everyone will fail, or get it wrong at times, even Trump, but being proven wrong every time they open their mouths leads to irrelevancy.

Dear Armchair Critic,

Mate you really do look like a rambling fool sometimes banging on about Soros.

Here is a list of the world's billionaires;

http://www.forbes.com/billionaires/list/5/#version:static

Soros is listed at 190th position.

Gina Reinhart on the other hand is pegged at 69th and has been recently revealed as the major secret donor to the IPA, an avowedly anti-climate change Australian think tank.

You have someone under your nose spending millions upon millions of dollars to alter public thinking to line their own pockets yet you keep bleating on about Soros.

I'm fine with you being a conspiracy theorist because you lot can sometimes make connections that have some currency, but you really need to get off your bloody arse and do it properly.

Foxy,

I really can't tell if this is all too complex for you or if you really don't care how silly you look as long as you can continue to exhibit your TDS.

So here we find you asserting that Trump IS creating more poor people and offering evidence of that some articles that assert that Trump's policies, if they are implemented, might, perhaps sometime somewhere in the FUTURE create some unemployment in some industries. Any possibility that those maybe perhaps job losses will be made up for elsewhere?

And then one of your pieces of 'evidence' (such as it is) is what'll happen IF the car tariffs are implmeneted. Are you aware that recently, the EU has offered to reduce their car tariffs as a result of the Trump threats. Lower EU tariffs means more US exports to EU which means more US car jobs. But let's ignore that because we don't want to see anything, absolutely anything, positive about Trump's policies, right?

BTW, since the EU already has car tariffs to reduce, that must mean that they've been suffering job losses for ages. I bet you're really angry at that nasty Frau Merkel for trying to create so many poor people via tariffs, or doesn't your logic (such as it is) work that way?

But if the basis of your assertion that Trump is creating more poor because of job losses, then you can calm down because, rather than loosing jobs, Trump's US is creating them at unforeseen rates...

http://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/01/upshot/we-ran-out-of-words-to-describe-how-good-the-jobs-numbers-are.html

"We Ran Out of Words to Describe How Good the Jobs Numbers Are". And that's from the Trump-hating NYT. Imagine what the unbiased press is saying. You should appraise yourself of the unbiased press one day.

So less poor people, not more. I bet you're relieved to hear that.