2012 Election Thread

[quote name='slidecage']yea right show me how obama has made it better in the last 3 + years.

gas has doubled

almost doubled our debt

more people out of jobs (if he made so many jobs that is why unemployment is still over 8%)

so you can stay on your parents health care what you going to do when you hit 27 cry and demand to stay on till your 35

and just wait till your parents health bill doubles or triples and they dont have it either ...

I love how people think your health care isnt going to go up a cent but allow everyone to be covered....so if someone needs a million dollar operation they can wait up to the month before .. Pay the first month get it done and then pay 100 bucks per month for a million bucks... the company would go bankrupt in no time (what obama wants)


you know damn well these debates wont do a damn thing to anyone

whoever wants obama will say he won everything
who wants Romney will say he won everything[/QUOTE]

Gas was over $4 a gallon the summer of 2008. Gas is below those prices. Our debt went up from the wars. Tha ACA hasn't even really kicked in yet. Unemployment is the lowest in 4 years.
 
[quote name='DurbanBrown']romney used a cheat sheet. he must be racist[/QUOTE]
No, but we all know that you are, so it all works out!:booty:
 
[quote name='Blaster man']Gas was over $4 a gallon the summer of 2008. Gas is below those prices. Our debt went up from the wars. Tha ACA hasn't even really kicked in yet. Unemployment is the lowest in 4 years.[/QUOTE]

until next week when the say they got the numbers wrong just like everyweek..

how many Real jobs were made vs how many people ran out of their 99 weeks and was dropped

and how many are seasonal.

sorry but i dont belive something that was falling month after month after month Just makes a major turn around right before the election. but like i said whatever i hope it is coming back




gas was 1.89 avg in nov 2008



does not really matter cause how badly they fucked it in the last 4 years no mater who wins we are fucked

and what was up with obama with the paper he was writing on.. making out a Grocery List
 
[quote name='chibamm']Just curious as to what your take is on the excess reserves interest?
Getting away from politics and definitely more economical nuts and bolts.[/QUOTE]

It's kinda bullshit. It serves little purpose and incents reserves which we don't want in central monetary bodies. As much as I hate the false equivalence of my personal finances vs national finances, paying down debt is always a good thing. As such, the reserves have been up to as much as 10% of the national debt over the last few years. When 10% of your debt is your own equity that's just foolish practice. Combine that with ridiculously low interest rates on savings (the reserve interest rate is what, 0.0025%?) there's no benefit to holding that instead of paying off a debt that has a 4% interest rate or whatever.
 
I've come to the conclusion after talking to a conservative co-worker, that conservatives think they're beyond reproach. They spout half trues like they're fact (he mentioned the whole thing about Obama waiving work requirements for welfare). I just can't take it anymore, I'm not going to sit there and be lectured to by someone who can't even get their facts straight and cite fox news as a reliable source.
 
[quote name='slidecage']until next week when the say they got the numbers wrong just like everyweek..

how many Real jobs were made vs how many people ran out of their 99 weeks and was dropped

and how many are seasonal.

sorry but i dont belive something that was falling month after month after month Just makes a major turn around right before the election. but like i said whatever i hope it is coming back




gas was 1.89 avg in nov 2008



does not really matter cause how badly they fucked it in the last 4 years no mater who wins we are fucked

and what was up with obama with the paper he was writing on.. making out a Grocery List[/QUOTE]
You must have not had a car back in 2008 because I did and I remember well e price of gas. It was over $4 a gallon. Just because you say it wasn't doesn't make it true. Have you really forgotten people talking about a barrel of oil possibly hitting 150? The only way you would not remember this is if you were not a driver then. Are you old enough to remember 4 years ago? I was and I remember paying for gas. Please provide a link proving your point. Don't try too hard though because you are wrong. I expect you to come back here, admit you were wrong and apologize.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/03/05/flashback-fox-news-on-gas-prices-in-2008/157979

Gas didn't fall until the economy went off the rails and demand dried up. Surely you, a republican, understand supply and demand. If you think gas will ever again be cheap during boom times, you are fooling yourself. The US isn't driving (pun not intended) prices right now, it's hundreds of millions of people in India and China that all want to own cars now.
 
[quote name='Blaster man']You must have not had a car back in 2008 because I did and I remember well e price of gas. It was over $4 a gallon. Just because you say it wasn't doesn't make it true. Have you really forgotten people talking about a barrel of oil possibly hitting 150? The only way you would not remember this is if you were not a driver then. Are you old enough to remember 4 years ago? I was and I remember paying for gas. Please provide a link proving your point. Don't try too hard though because you are wrong. I expect you to come back here, admit you were wrong and apologize.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/03/05/flashback-fox-news-on-gas-prices-in-2008/157979

Gas didn't fall until the economy went off the rails and demand dried up. Surely you, a republican, understand supply and demand. If you think gas will ever again be cheap during boom times, you are fooling yourself. The US isn't driving (pun not intended) prices right now, it's hundreds of millions of people in India and China that all want to own cars now.[/QUOTE]

He is 37 :shock:
 
So I guess the revised numbers from July and August has dropped the unemployment rate below 8%. It is now 7.8%. I know that number is a little misleading to the overall jobs situation but Republicans kept focusing on the 8% idea and now it is below that so I will be interested to see how they spin it.
 
[quote name='Clak']I've come to the conclusion after talking to a conservative co-worker, that conservatives think they're beyond reproach. They spout half trues like they're fact (he mentioned the whole thing about Obama waiving work requirements for welfare). I just can't take it anymore, I'm not going to sit there and be lectured to by someone who can't even get their facts straight and cite fox news as a reliable source.[/QUOTE]

We've gone way beyond Faux News. That Conservative co-worker is being told a lot of those lies directly from the candidates mouths. That entire "Put the work back into welfare" line is coming from the GOP and being picked up by Fox News , Not the other way around.
It's frustrating I know , but have some mercy. That dude is being lied to at every turn. From small shit like Obama closed a GM plant in Wisconsin to big Fantasies like every-single-thing Romney claimed in the debates on Medicare.
Trust me I live in the redest of red states so I know how it can get maddening. But it really isn't that dudes fault for being "misinformed" or simply even "uninformed". We're way way beyond that.
He was straight up assaulted. They raped his brain. Cant blame the victim. Cant say "He needs to check his facts ." Because now we have 2 "versions" of the facts.(like we have 2 "versions" of science.) I'm still waiting for the other shoe to drop and for Ryan to claim "The science isnt in on Math."

Seriously. When Romney looks dead at the president and says "I got a tax break for shipping jobs overseas? You must know something I dont." At hat point , Hes campaigning on the hope that none of us have common knowledge or common sense.
 
[quote name='cancerman1120']So I guess the revised numbers from July and August has dropped the unemployment rate below 8%. It is now 7.8%. I know that number is a little misleading to the overall jobs situation but Republicans kept focusing on the 8% idea and now it is below that so I will be interested to see how they spin it.[/QUOTE]

Romney just said "It's not enough" in his speeches today apparently.

Not much they can say. Economy is still down, but the slow recover is clearly marching onward. Jobs are slowly coming back, the stock market has bounced almost all the way back etc. All they can try to say is that there proposed policies would have led to a stronger recovery.
 
Good News? Nothing will set crazy people off like good news. No surprise here. It doesn't surprise me either that Jack Welch thinks that jobs should be reflected in the GDP. Thats his school.(Cave man old -school) The only time Jack Welch meets short term growth is when he gets his prescriptions filled. Its like explaining the chicken and the egg to this guy. When the Economy first started to pick up we all asked "wheres the jobs?" Now that the jobs are pickin up Welch asks "Wheres the Economy?" Someone needs to tap dude on the shoulder and whisper "Hey , its called a recovery."

Thats what I'm talking about when I say we're in a strange new land. "It doesn't add up" Isn't enough. Has to be a conspiracy.

Romney has been smart on this. He's already been hitting that note that any improvement is: "In spite of Obama's policies" for a while now. Somebody gave him good advice.
 
[quote name='Spokker']That story is from The Atlantic Wire, which is a liberal-leaning publication.[/QUOTE]

My issue was less about who wrote the story and more about thinking those polls actually mean anything.
 
[quote name='Clak']I've come to the conclusion after talking to a conservative co-worker, that conservatives think they're beyond reproach. They spout half trues like they're fact (he mentioned the whole thing about Obama waiving work requirements for welfare). I just can't take it anymore, I'm not going to sit there and be lectured to by someone who can't even get their facts straight and cite fox news as a reliable source.[/QUOTE]
Its been my experience that everyone who feels strongly one way or the other tends to believe their own bullshit. It feels just like sports, the call that goes against you is always wrong and the other team is always playing dirty.
 
What a bunch of garbage. We Ask America is completely dismissible as a right-wing mouthpiece and Rasmussen is kinda reliable but still with a noted slant.
 
[quote name='dafoomie']Its been my experience that everyone who feels strongly one way or the other tends to believe their own bullshit. It feels just like sports, the call that goes against you is always wrong and the other team is always playing dirty.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. This forum has a solid history of this.
 
Republicans should be happy since Obama and Romney are both right-wing candidates. Sure Obama has some "left-leaning" social policies (DOMA, Don't Ask Don't Tell, pro-choice etc.), but they're both pawns of big-business and the military-industrial complex.

All of you Romney fans who think he gives a lick about the deficit are hilarious. Republicans love deficits when they're in office.
 
[quote name='cancerman1120']My issue was less about who wrote the story and more about thinking those polls actually mean anything.[/QUOTE]

You ask 800-1,000 people what they think and then you report the results. The ultimate, most costly poll will be in November, with a sample size of around 126 million.
 
[quote name='willardhaven']Republicans should be happy since Obama and Romney are both right-wing candidates. Sure Obama has some "left-leaning" social policies (DOMA, Don't Ask Don't Tell, pro-choice etc.), but they're both pawns of big-business and the military-industrial complex.

All of you Romney fans who think he gives a lick about the deficit are hilarious. Republicans love deficits when they're in office.[/QUOTE]

They don't love them, they just don't give a shit about them.
 
[quote name='willardhaven']Republicans should be happy since Obama and Romney are both right-wing candidates. Sure Obama has some "left-leaning" social policies (DOMA, Don't Ask Don't Tell, pro-choice etc.), but they're both pawns of big-business and the military-industrial complex.

All of you Romney fans who think he gives a lick about the deficit are hilarious. Republicans love deficits when they're in office.[/QUOTE]

I'm not sure I could have said it better myself.

If I can find the source I'll post it, but entitlement spending has gone up an average of 8% faster since LBJ (I think?) under Republican libertarian anarcho-capitalist presidencies than it has under Democratic socialist communist presidencies. Even by their own standards, the Republican party is a complete and utter failure.
 
I would be a lot more interested in seeing entitlement spending under Democratic vs Republican congresses since they're the branch of government who actually passes legislation. I would also like to know how much of that was due to cost increases of previously existing programs.
 
If Romney does win I'm keeping track of all the bullshit for the next 4 years, and anyone I know who voted for him as the "lesser of two evils" (their own words) is getting a damned mouthful.
 
[quote name='Clak']If Romney does win I'm keeping track of all the bullshit for the next 4 years, and anyone I know who voted for him as the "lesser of two evils" (their own words) is getting a damned mouthful.[/QUOTE]

Why don't you track what Obama has been doing for these four years and how much everything improved, since apparently you think we are in the best place as a country ever.:roll:
 
hey i mostly stream crap online to watch or watch dvds or other on demand comcast crap but this is the first time i seen this in a ad but i remember watching ads in 04 and 08 and dont remember this


it was an obama ad telling how bad mitt is and how he invested in a company that hired only people in china or sometime like that .... was not really paying attention

but at the end of the ad it in

Something like in BIG LETTERS

Want to give obama MONEY TEXT @#@)*#@$## to #$)*$)#*#$# and you will give him 10 bucks



thought he was not hurting for money but begging people in ads lol whatever
 
That attack ad is particularly humorous since much of Obama's investments are in a mutual fund whose biggest holdings are Apple, GE, and IBM. But you're only a lying hypocrite if you have an R next to your name I guess.
 
Shit, if you donated to Obama you get hit with 2-3 emails asking for $5 every day. They happened soon as his push for healthcare started and haven't let up since.

Today, Obama decided to honor Cesar Chavez. Hispanics will now vote for him for sure.
 
[quote name='dafoomie']That attack ad is particularly humorous since much of Obama's investments are in a mutual fund whose biggest holdings are Apple, GE, and IBM. But you're only a lying hypocrite if you have an R next to your name I guess.[/QUOTE]
Having money in a mutual fund and directly investing in a company that corporations outsource to are different things. They're so different that only a political luddite would make that comparison.

[quote name='eldergamer']Shit, if you donated to Obama you get hit with 2-3 emails asking for $5 every day. They happened soon as his push for healthcare started and haven't let up since.[/QUOTE]
Do you think that Republican affiliated groups are any different? Cause they're not. Assuming you're talking about yourself and you donated to Obama's campaign, your email address has probably already been sold to other Democratic affiliated groups as well. This is SOP when you make a donation to any political group.

Today, Obama decided to honor Cesar Chavez. Hispanics will now vote for him for sure.
Click to expand...
I'm also sure that it being Hispanic Heritage Month doesn't have anything to do with it either.:roll:
 
[quote name='dohdough']Having money in a mutual fund and directly investing in a company that corporations outsource to are different things. They're so different that only a political luddite would make that comparison. [/quote]

So different that he wouldn't make money off it?
 
[quote name='dohdough']Thanks for proving my point and I'll let nasum handle this one.


"Look! They do it too!":roll:[/QUOTE]

It was a simple question...

Also, you guys are the kings of "look! they do it too!". I can't think of a discussion where you haven't said that.....
 
[quote name='Knoell']It was a simple question...[/quote]
If it was so simple, then you'd fucking understand that directly being involved and instrumental in investing in ONE SPECIFIC COMPANY is different than picking a specific mutual fund, if you even had that option, that has money invested in a diverse group of companies.

Also, you guys are the kings of "look! they do it too!". I can't think of a discussion where you haven't said that.....
Click to expand...
You are dumb as a fucking rock. The whole point op-ed was about liberals "doing it too." All you have isn't even "gotcha" moment and no broader point. I can only assume that you'd burst into flames if you ever came close to context.
 
[quote name='Knoell']It was a simple question...

Also, you guys are the kings of "look! they do it too!". I can't think of a discussion where you haven't said that.....[/QUOTE]

for real
 
in a way im shocked people don't demand Receipt after they vote so they can have proof who they voted for

you vote you hit the cast button and then a little paper pops out you can take home... then again so many people are too lazy to take them at the gas station they probally be laying all over the floor at the voting place
 
[quote name='slidecage']in a way im shocked people don't demand Receipt after they vote so they can have proof who they voted for

you vote you hit the cast button and then a little paper pops out you can take home... then again so many people are too lazy to take them at the gas station they probally be laying all over the floor at the voting place[/QUOTE]

The problem is that out of the thousands voting in your area, you wouldn't know if yours was missing.
 
[quote name='dohdough']Having money in a mutual fund and directly investing in a company that corporations outsource to are different things. They're so different that only a political luddite would make that comparison.[/QUOTE]
The point is that to criticize someone for investing in a company who manufactures products in China is an absurdity given how dominant that practice is. Obama bought GM with taxpayer dollars, has he demanded that they bring manufacturing back to the US? Only 20% of their vehicles are made here. 2/3rds of its jobs are overseas. What is he doing about it as President?

Somebody must be a little snippy today after seeing the latest polls.
 
actually you sort of lose on that one dohdough. Mitt's money is some high amount over 75% in a blind trust which is even further removed than a mutual fund in bluechips.

On the other hand, both are 1%ers and have little to no direct management of their money. It's so managed that if you actually asked either one what they're invested in you'd likely get a blank stare.

In the end I call it a draw.
 
[quote name='dafoomie']The point is that to criticize someone for investing in a company who manufactures products in China is an absurdity given how dominant that practice is. Obama bought GM with taxpayer dollars, has he demanded that they bring manufacturing back to the US? Only 20% of their vehicles are made here. 2/3rds of its jobs are overseas. What is he doing about it as President?[/QUOTE]
First, you said it was about personal mutual funds and now, you're shifting goal posts to making it about the auto bailout. "They both do it" is an insipid point when all three actions involve different levels and types of involvement.

Somebody must be a little snippy today after seeing the latest polls.
Click to expand...
I'm only as snippy as people are dumbshits and I don't follow polls.

[quote name='nasum']actually you sort of lose on that one dohdough. Mitt's money is some high amount over 75% in a blind trust which is even further removed than a mutual fund in bluechips.

On the other hand, both are 1%ers and have little to no direct management of their money. It's so managed that if you actually asked either one what they're invested in you'd likely get a blank stare.

In the end I call it a draw.[/QUOTE]
I refuse to let your facts get in the way of my ideology.;)

It's simply a stupid point to be hung up on when they really don't have that much direct management over their personal finances. It's one thing to have a bunch of investment vehicles and another to purposely direct your disaster capital firm to directly invest in a specific manufacturer, which is my entire point.
 
which sort of invalidates your point as most people in the political realm have little to no control over their private finances. It's pretty semantic at any rate.

As far as where cars are made, it's also sort of pertinent to recall that more than 50% of GM's cars are sold in foreign countries. China buys more GM cars per month than the US does. Would you rather the vehicles be built here then shipped over there and eventually sold at a loss (thus increasing the big scary chinese trade defecit) or built and sold there for a profit? A profit which eventually comes back to the US as taxable repatrioted income?
 
[quote name='nasum']which sort of invalidates your point as most people in the political realm have little to no control over their private finances. It's pretty semantic at any rate.[/QUOTE]
I was under the impression that the whole "Romney investing in Chinese companies" was a Bain thing; not a personal finances one. I think that's where we're missing each other. dafoomie and knoell didn't really clarify it when I brought up the examples of personal vs directorship, so I just ran with it because they're treating it as the same thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top