In the face of defeat? As one conservative to another, allow me to remind you that the Obama machine is much, much more powerful than the Clinton machine. If you think Romney is going to win, you're in for a depressing wednesday.
I'm prepared for either eventuality but I believe there's a possibility that Romney will win in a landslide.
America hasn't fallen so far that they will make the same mistake vtwice. Especially after seeing what he did these last four years.
This coming from someone who supports the candidate the presided over thee longest consecutive monthly stretch of 8% or higher of unemployment.
This coming from someone who supports the candidate who presided over the record number of Americans living in poverty and on food stamps.
This coming from someone who advocates the candidate who's watched the meridian income plunge and credit rate reduced twice, the most of any American president.
Keep living in your fantasy world. If and when your joke wins on Tuesday, I'd love to seek refuge because this reality is flat out BRUTAL.
ROTFLMAO
I must say I admire your bravado in the face of defeat and your absurdist humor in the face of reality.
Yup, manipulation of reality where you leave out the fact there has been over 30 consecutive months of recovery, and we are not in the freefall he ended that was started by bush.
Yup, the Bush recession or depression hit us hard. still, he didn't put those people there.
Again the effects of the Bush recession which he has brought us out of. might I say it was sooner than i thought we would be here 4 years ago. i figured at least a decade of recovery from the damage of bush.
You are just all pissy because i don't want to be your friend.
Well, we will see tuesday who wins. Either way it is not my defeat. No matter who is president i will get by. i do not do the wasteful spending i used to. I take responsibility for my life. i will also be living life tomorrow and the next day no matter who wins. It is not the end of the world either way. in fact i have learned that most of the people who have been effected by this latest recession were people who were living on the bubble anyway. Those were people who spent more than they should and lived on credit. those were middle management people earning an overinflated salary for playing farmville. those were day traders who did nothing productive by gambling on a fixed system meant to put their money in the pockets of the rich. I may wish for a better life for hard working people, but i cannot say i am too bothered to see those people fall.
Remember one of the 2008 slogans, "We're not going to make excuses"? The failed record seems to make that null and void. Not surprising however. We were promised that unemployment would be around 5% and the debt would be cut in half after the Messiah's first term. Neither promise is even close, yet all you have is to blame Bush; laughable!
I'm prepared for either eventuality but I believe there's a possibility that Romney will win in a landslide.
America hasn't fallen so far that they will make the same mistake vtwice. Especially after seeing what he did these last four years.
I didn't believe those promises so your point is not going to get to me. I would have probably voted mcCain if he had not chosen palin as his running mate. I might have voted for obama in the future, but he was inexperienced and McCain had a better idea of what was going on, and i thought that he would go back to the ideas that he had before he was running for president and had to play to the radical right tea party. I was pretty sure he was saying what he had to to get elected, and I liked him more than obama. I could not possibly put that woman anywhere near a powerful political office. that is why I voted for obama despite my reservations about his inexperience.
I have come out pleasantly surprised in him. I did not expect him to be anything great, and I think he did a damned good job. So you are going to need to alter your argument because I am not backing any of these promises or perceptions you have. I am saying that from my point of view he has done a good job as a president compared to the past few we have had, and he has done some actions I really am impressed by. He lagged on DADT but he came out to support gay marriage. He tried to cut back our war efforts and gitmo, but not at the expense of an all out retreat. he allowed the rest of the world to do the job in libya with assistance from us. he pushed through medical insurance reform. It is not the levels it should be but he got something done despite opposition from his own party and a hardline fight from the republicans.
i see his first term as a great success, and i am not worried about the promises that were not accomplished because there was clear effort to get there. I know he is not a dictator who can do all those things himself.
Now what do you have to say to that?
Hey, I would love to see all the Romney people get what they wish. After all they deserve him more than anyone and the destruction he will give. You know if i could ship you all off to a country where you could all live under his rule and intelligence you would be the fist to beg to stay under obama. Don't worry if your hero wins i will be happy to laugh at your folly when he is done stealing everything he can from you. If you think i was not laughing at the republican base in 2012 when they were pissing their pants over the recession you are wrong. 4 more years of bush wrecked any number of republican's lives. that was awesome, but it is too bad he hurt a lot of other people while doing it. You know as well as i do that despite your arguments you go to sleep at night praying for obama to win.
I am unschooled in the processes of the high end financial marketing. I do know that people take advantage of the rules that are set up by the government, just like in any other 'game.' I don't understand why you get mad at the people who 'exploit' the laws instituted by congress rather than placing the blame where it belongs - the congress that passed the laws.
If you are in a basketball game, is it considered 'bad' to shoot from beyond the tree-point circle and get an "extra" (undeserved?) point for making it compared to the guy standing under the basket who makes an uncontested layup?
Seems to me you are making the similar 'right' and 'wrong' judgements to money, where the participants are only maximizing their 'score' relative to the rules of the game they are playing.
Yes - I am pissed at the thought of hedge fund managers (whatever the hell that is) making millions (billions?) of dollars for just pushing buttons that transfer huge amounts of money from one account to another. Just as I would be pissed about playing a basketball game where the other team's players were a foot taller than our team and could run faster.
Life ain't fair.
Yes - there was a huge financial crisis when Obama took office, due in large part to the collapse of the housing market. That collapse was nowhere the fault of President Bush. The cause for that crisis lies SQUARELY with the DEMOCRAT party - starting with Carter, and exacerbated greatly by Clinton. When Bush came to office he RECOGNIZED the problem and tried SEVENTEEN times to get the regulations fixed that allowed the crisis to develop. Each time OBSTRUCTED by the DEMOCRAT party - your heroes Chris Dodd and Barney Frank were the standard bearers in this malfeasance.
If there is blame to be passed for the collapse of the housing market it lay on the cold hearts of the DEMOCRAT party.
As for the auto industry. Companies were losing money due to the exorbitant contracts by the auto workers unions - the very same unions that have historically funded every DEMOCRAT politician, because the DEMs always allow the unions to proceed in their thuggish thievery.
The cure for the auto industry was inevitable. They should have followed Romney's advice and proceeded into a structured bankruptcy earlier - a bankruptcy that would have followed normal rules and allowed the companies to restructure themselves in a more survivable way by renegotiating the ruinous union contracts which caused the problems in the first place. Instead, Romney was seriously attacked by lying ads that pronounced he had 'wanted to bankrupt Detroit.'
Well, what happened - Detroit went bankrupt. Obama's 'bailout' of the auto industry relied on what? - bankruptcy of course, just as Romney had suggested years earlier (and earlier the remedy would have been a lot less painful.) However there was a BIG difference in Obama's bankruptcy than what Romney's bankruptcy would have been. Obama created a 'favored' interest in the process, whereby everybody had to undergo pain - EXCEPT for the auto workers unions that caused the problem in the FIRST place.
Yet Obama's big deal is "saving the auto industry" - well, except for FORD who said 'no thanks' and are going great guns without government interference, whereas GM (now owned by the government and run by the unions) are still struggling.
I believe you are glossing over the pain that Obama's mismanagement has caused by concentrated on the 'greedy' upper class. Recessions like this hurt everybody - except for two classes of people
- first, those who don't have to do anything but cash the government check that comes in without fail regardless of the pain and suffering of the rest of the nation. These folks are in a BETTER position than they were prior to the recession - their guaranteed income makes them invulnerable to the pain of the recession and certainly does not motivate them to want to change anything - they LIKE 'recessions' that do nothing more than make all those 'workers' uncomfortable.
- second, those favored by the government. Union workers don't sweat recessions - that is as long as they keep funding the DEMs who legislate to allow them to continue their ruinous policies that cause the recessions. They are 'protected' the same way the govt-dependent are.
No - the people who are really negatively impacted by the recession are the normal working folks who have to face (and pay for) all the unfair practices that work to put them out of a job - and the small business shop owners who rely on a prosperous economy to earn their living.
What Obama has given us is millions of people who have just given up looking for work - there are not any jobs out there for them to get. This massive failure is now working in FAVOR of Obama's unemployment rate.
Mathematically, you can decrease the unemployment rate by increasing the number of people who get jobs (the number in the numerator) OR by decreasing the number of people who don't even try to get a job (the number in the denominator.) Obama's MARVELOUS trend in getting the unemployment rate down is NOT by increasing the number of people working, but by DECREASING the number of people who are even TRYING to get work.
And any increases in JOBs have come about by temporary workers - Those hardy souls who lost their 'real' jobs due to the OBAMA screw-up, but have too much PRIDE to join the mouth-breathers on welfare and have taken part time jobs to feed their families. THEY are the ones you should have the sympathy for - Someone who once proudly worked in his chosen profession, who is now reduced to sweeping up convenience stores after hours for minimum wage and part time.
There is pain out there - and I share your opinion that none of if should be wasted on the hedge-funders who are reduced to living off the millions of dollars they banked in the good times. But I do feel genuine sympathy for the untold millions of people who are trying to figure out how to make the next house payment and pay for the groceries.
Your logic is laughable. Especially since the left plays to dividing demographics and make them feel oppressed. In this case, we're supposed to believe in what is an actual distraction, but packaged as a fabricated "war on women," you're telling me you didn't vote for McCain because of Sarah Palin? Where do I begin? First and foremost, NOBODY votes on the issue of vice presidents. So on the surface, you seem to be anti-woman. Ohhhhh, I get it, it's only anti-woman if we're talking about a liberal woman, gotcha. But nevertheless, you got yourself a winner in the embarrassing walking gaffe in Biden. Good choice.
To say you're pleasantly surprised in Obama truly shows how anti-woman you are. If Palin caused you to vote for Obama, through your own admission did not generate much ambition or expectations, it truly shows how you either truly did not buy into the "Hope and Change" B.S., or just showed up on election day without living with a television for at least 6 months. I don't know what's more hysterical... that, or the fact that you call 43 straight months of 8% unemployment and record number of Americans on federal aid and food stamps a success. That my friend, is a hack. YOU.
Good try but I was actually a hillary supporter. that was a lot of fail.
Hillary huh? Standards not too high are they? :lol:
you cannot support leftist policies unless you believe an enlightened elite are more qualified to decide for the masses than the masses themselves
This is nonsense. The "masses", whatever that means, only decide directly in a participative democracy, at the local level sometimes. We live in representative democracies, where we elect an elite, whether left or right, to decide for us. In fact the American constitution was drafted with the idea that the masses were not educated or reliable enough for direct democracy.
In case we live in complex societies and the idea the masses could decide for everything is ludicrous. Do corporations ask their employees what strategy should be followed? They don't because they assume a worker is not "enlightened" enough to make such decisions. The same applies to politics. There is no democracy, direct or not, without education. I think most people are happy they do not have to get informed to make important decisions. Unless of course they are made to believe they don't need to know in order to decide. The old common sense myth.
It sounds like you boys either didn't read Krauthammer's piece or you don't want to believe it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?