all along has been that claiming the tax cuts added to the debt is a lie, especially when revenues grew and spending grew more than deficits grew. This is not just a semantic point, it's basic math.

And the ones shifting to theoretical revenues are those wanting to perpetuate that lie, not me, as they have no part in calculating actual deficit. I only brought it up here because that article showed where even that claim was false, at least now that we're coming out of a pandemic.

Same for comparing to what theoretical revenues would be had the cuts not happened, again irrelevant when calculating actual deficit, and projections that could very well be wrong.

Additionally for those shifting the discussion to whether tax cuts led to all the revenue growth, again a claim made by those wanting to perpetuate, not me, even if there's little doubt those tax cuts played a substantial role. Also irrelevant when calculating the actual deficit, and from where that came.

I've never said you can't claim the deficit would've been smaller without the cuts. It's not provable or relevant either way, but have at it if you want. But you can't claim they added to the actual debt, which is what Sleepy Joe and others want to lie about.

This should not be a difficult concept, or even debatable. It's basic math.