Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
And Here. We. Go. 2012 Presidential Election: Obama v. Romney And Here. We. Go. 2012 Presidential Election: Obama v. Romney

09-13-2012 , 06:52 AM
I now see why Obama is for the little guy. Under his policies, this is an ever increasing sector of the population.

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/...a-took-office/

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/ed14f...44feabdc0.html

Hey, I thought things were getting better?

Do you see that these are just failed policies that never work?
09-13-2012 , 07:37 AM
Spike the ball on the 10 yard line much?

And lol at repubs collapsing. Even if they don't reclaim the white house they will have the house and MAYBE the Senate.
09-13-2012 , 07:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by raradevils
I now see why Obama is for the little guy. Under his policies, this is an ever increasing sector of the population.

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/...a-took-office/

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/ed14f...44feabdc0.html

Hey, I thought things were getting better?

Do you see that these are just failed policies that never work?
The failed policies thing is probably the main Romney talking point of this election. Honest question, which policies that Republicans were against are the ones that destroyed the economy?
09-13-2012 , 07:45 AM
Any chance that the ambassador was wearing a bulletproof vest and has been playing possum just for the lulz?

09-13-2012 , 07:57 AM
Never been in the military but bulletproof vests only offer limited protection against smoke inhalation, to my knowledge.
09-13-2012 , 08:01 AM
Romney is done.

But I think the GOP takes the Senate.

Honestly, any ****ing idiot knows what to say after terrorism. Does he have to twist the knife into Obama? Does he not know that that would backfire so terribly?

Romney: The American people condemn terrorism and I stand with the President and all others that want the perpertrators brought to justice.

so ez game
09-13-2012 , 08:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dunkman
The failed policies thing is probably the main Romney talking point of this election. Honest question, which policies that Republicans were against are the ones that destroyed the economy?
Over regulation.

Health care. I have yet to see a reduction in the cost of my health care. But then I wasn't given one of those sweat heart exemptions like so many were given.

The Dodd-Frank Act just screws the lower class. I now have to pay .10 cents more at the pump (a tax) if I use my credit card. I have no free checking ($5 / month tax). All this to prevent the banks from over charging people who over drafted. I don't even know what that charge is (I don't ever over draft my accounts). Credit is so much harder to come by. So construction projects that would have moved forward in the past are stuck on the drawing boards.

EPA's war on fossil fuels. They are shutting down coal fired generators. This pushes up the cost of electricity. We are not allowed to drill for oil in the gulf all while other countries are doing it. Do to over regulation we are paying $3.65 per gallon ( a tax on the working poor).
09-13-2012 , 08:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
ikes, what are your thoughts on Intrade moving from 61-39 Obama to 63-37 Obama yesterday alone? Must have been some really good economic data we missed amirite?
Lol que massive movement

Meanwhile, ras R+1.

Ras is the three day poll and first one that will show up on rcp post 9/11 Romney 'disaster'. Gallup is slower moving due to 7 day, be interesting to see if it follows.
09-13-2012 , 08:54 AM
If the GOP goes, it won't go easily or bloodlessly. All the intellectual reasoning and claims of a society of laws are not germane to a trapped animal. The Sharron Angles (but of a more persuasive ability) won't just step aside.
09-13-2012 , 08:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cres
If the GOP goes, it won't go easily or bloodlessly. All the intellectual reasoning and claims of a society of laws are not germane to a trapped animal. The Sharron Angles (but of a more persuasive ability) won't just step aside.
They will make up something even more absolutely outrageous than we've seen so far about Obama soon enough.
09-13-2012 , 09:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikestoys
Lol que massive movement

Meanwhile, ras R+1.

Ras is the three day poll and first one that will show up on rcp post 9/11 Romney 'disaster'. Gallup is slower moving due to 7 day, be interesting to see if it follows.
Poverty increase in USA. If you think that is good news.....yea.
09-13-2012 , 09:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by raradevils
Poverty increase in USA. If you think that is good news.....yea.
http://today.yougov.com/news/2012/09...obama-welfare/
09-13-2012 , 09:19 AM
New Esquire/Yahoo News poll Obama 58, Romney 22

Spoiler:
In "Who would win in a fistfight?"
09-13-2012 , 09:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13ball
New Esquire/Yahoo News poll Obama 58, Romney 22

Spoiler:
In "Who would win in a fistfight?"
clearly the most important question of this election is

Spoiler:
how many five year olds could each candidate take in a fight?
09-13-2012 , 09:43 AM
Why do you think if Romney attacks Obama it's always about race? So you gleen an article that supports yoour view point, so what does that prove? There are more white people as a percentage on welfare than there are people of color.

Do you wake up every day and see black & white?
09-13-2012 , 09:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Low Key
clearly the most important question of this election is

Spoiler:
how many five year olds could each candidate take in a fight?
Second most relevant

http://faceintheblue.wordpress.com/2...d-win-and-why/
09-13-2012 , 09:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by raradevils
Why do you think if Romney attacks Obama it's always about race? So you gleen an article that supports yoour view point, so what does that prove? There are more white people as a percentage on welfare than there are people of color.

Do you wake up every day and see black & white?
RIF

Quote:
The single attitude that far more powerfully than any other predicts whether a person believes that there is no work requirement for welfare is resentment towards African Americans. And controlling for these same variables, resentment towards African Americans is the factor that most powerfully, by far, predicts whether a person believes Obama really did gut the work requirement.
09-13-2012 , 09:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
The real issue now is the chaos that will erupt from the Republican party in 9 weeks. They have very serious issues to contend with. Their demographic is shrinking, their candidates are laughable, and their policies are very questionable.
Do not weep for republicans -- they will still have plenty of power if Obama wins (as you will see when approx. 0% of Obama's legislation gets passed).

Also, the republicans have way too much money to cease being competitive nationally.

All they really need to do is have their money guys smack the religious guys around and tell them to be quieter, remind the old guys to relax because we already won the cold war, and then nominate someone who can at least present a plausible appearance of competence.

The one thing I wonder (as I don't follow it very closely) is, "how deep is their bench?" I mean, they seem to have a few young rising stars who are charismatic and smart, but I'm not sure if they outnumber the incompetents and loons who seem to have the power in the party.
09-13-2012 , 10:11 AM


Yeah, **** this piece of ****
09-13-2012 , 10:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by raradevils
Why do you think if Romney attacks Obama it's always about race? So you gleen an article that supports yoour view point, so what does that prove? There are more white people as a percentage on welfare than there are people of color.

Do you wake up every day and see black & white?
If you are being genuine then America would be a better place if more Republicans thought like you.

Unfortunately, when you're the first black president in a country rife with racism and racial tension then it's always going to be a huge aspect of your presidency. This is especially true when you seek reelection against a weak party with a substance-less candidate who has no real values of his own, other than 'money' of course. Seriously, it's sad that you can't see the dog whistles and subtle racial tactics in use by the Romney camp, but I can guarantee you that they are there, and you would see them if you knew what to look for.

I'm also curious, you used the word 'always', does that mean you admit that some attacks by the Romney camp are about race, if so, what does that make you as a Romney supporter?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashington


Yeah, **** this piece of ****
The guy is an ******* who exploits tragedy and doesn't consider people poorer than him to be human. But I don't think the use of photos changes that. He would be smirking regardless, what do you expect him to have, a sad face? Anyway, I don't think we should buy into the meaningless photo game and we should leave it to faux news and Rush Limbaugh.
09-13-2012 , 10:26 AM
The best part of that article was the SIGNIFICANT percentage of 'high resentment' people who thought that there was no work requirement for welfare also thought that Obama gutted it.
09-13-2012 , 10:39 AM
Come on- there's enough legit reasons to trash Romney without being upset that his face didn't look like you think it should at the right time. Maybe his dick just rubbed his pants in a nice way or something. Maybe that's how he copes with horrible things.
09-13-2012 , 10:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dids
Come on- there's enough legit reasons to trash Romney without being upset that his face didn't look like you think it should at the right time. Maybe his dick just rubbed his pants in a nice way or something. Maybe that's how he copes with horrible things.
09-13-2012 , 10:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeedz
1. Unfortunately, when you're the first black president in a country rife with racism and racial tension then it's always going to be a huge aspect of your presidency. This is especially true when you seek reelection against a weak party with a substance-less candidate who has no real values of his own, 2. other than 'money' of course. 3. Seriously, it's sad that you can't see the dog whistles and subtle racial tactics in use by the Romney camp, but I can guarantee you that they are there, and you would see them if you knew what to look for.

I'm also curious, you used the word 'always', does that mean you admit that some attacks by the Romney camp are about race, if so, 4. what does that make you as a Romney supporter?



The guy is an ******* who exploits tragedy and 5. doesn't consider people poorer than him to be human. But I don't think the use of photos changes that. He would be smirking regardless, what do you expect him to have, a sad face? Anyway, I don't think we should buy into the meaningless photo game and we should leave it to faux news and Rush Limbaugh.
1. Agreed, but do you think his race has helped or hurt him get elected as well as through out his term.
2. I assume when you say his values include money you mean that he believes in capitalism and you attribute this to be a good thing.
3. I can't see them either. Please point a few out.
4. Are you implying that if someone votes for Romney that they are racist?
5. Any kinda of evidence to support this would be beneficial. Also add in something that would hint at the fact that Obama has done/ plans to do something that will help the lower class than Romney will do. It doesn't count if his intentions were good, but his action ended up hurting the lower class.
09-13-2012 , 10:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeedz
The guy is an ******* who exploits tragedy and doesn't consider people poorer than him to be human. But I don't think the use of photos changes that.
Of course it doesn't change that. If anything, it confirms it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeedz
He would be smirking regardless, what do you expect him to have, a sad face?
He didn't seem to have a problem appearing all concerned when he was bumping his gums in front of the cameras.



I'll go re-watch the video to make sure, but I don't recall him smirking a lot while speaking.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeedz
Anyway, I don't think we should buy into the meaningless photo game and we should leave it to faux news and Rush Limbaugh.
Meh, you're entitled to your opinion. To me it just further highlights what many have said all along about him: Not even HE believes the **** he shovels.

      
m