There are reports that it was true.
Right, because that's how a serious presidential candidate get's their information, from the internet.
When a presidential candidate expresses that he believes his political opposition to be "the enemy from within" and that we should use the military against them, is this hyperbole?
Probably
Then he's unserious.
When a presidential candidate says he's going to impose an across the board 20% tariff on all imported goods (something he would have the authority to do unilaterally), is that hyperbole?
Now this is definitely hyperbole. Negotiating tactic 101
You can't have it both ways. If he's serious, then we would take him seriously. By calling it a negotiating tactic you're saying that he's obviously not really going to do it, at which point it has no negotiating power.
This is a tired excuse by MAGA to just ignore what this man actually says and insert whatever virtue in him you decide to make up. But this particular example is even worse because the president has unilateral authority to impose tariffs so there's nothing to negotiate. At best, you can claim he's using these as a threat to push lawmakers into concessions, in which case you're literally arguing that he's threatening to take a wrecking ball to the economy if he doesn't get what he wants.
It’s about what he has already done. Economy was great under Trump until COVID, which was out of his control. If he says he can make the economy work again, I’m inclined to believe him because he has shown how to do it.
The economy being great isn't an action so this answer has nothing to do with this thread.
But to address it anyway, Trump didn't make the economy great. It had already been growing for the prior 7 years and when Trump came into office nothing changed, all we did was continue the same trajectory we were already on. In fact we gained more jobs in the last three years under Obama than the first three years under Trump, so one could even argued things slowed down.
But what's really egregious here is to talk about how great things things were in the first three years but to just exclude the last one because it's inconvenient to your narrative. Again, you can’t have it both ways. Either we exclude Covid or we don’t. If we don’t, then his last year counts. If we do, then you don’t get to pretend Covid ended at noon on January 20th 2021 and everything that occurred as a result of the damage it caused is all Biden’s fault.