Why would most moderate Democrats want to vote for someone who doesn't appeal to so many in his own party?
Hell, who knows Romney better than his own state of Massachusetts? And they don't want him!
:lol::lol::lol:
Well according to many on this site we need moderates you are willing to negotiate with the other side. Now we will see. Romney was able to get things done in a legislature dominated by the other party. Obama has proven a failure in this regard.
He does dance rather all over the place.
Well according to many on this site we need moderates you are willing to negotiate with the other side. Now we will see. Romney was able to get things done in a legislature dominated by the other party. Obama has proven a failure in this regard.
It's called the Etch-A-Sketch Dance.
Oh geesh. I get so tired of these argument that say that the guy earning 300,000 a year and only getting to keep 200,000 of it for personal use(ie. vacation homes, fancy cars, maids, gardeners and yachts) is somehow getting a raw deal over the person who makes 20,000 a year and gets to keep a whopping 15,000 of it for personal use(ie pay for food, rent, transportation, clothing and a few small luxuries). That means the guy earning the 300G can afford to buy a new house, IN CASH, nearly every frickin' year of almost his entire life and the guy making 20G will probably NEVER be able to purchase a house in his entire lifetime. Cry me a river for the 300k guy! The ultra wealthy are paying less in taxes than they have in decades, so why are so many people demanding they pay even less?! It just makes no sense, neither moral nor economic.Oh so now you are talking about local roads and state things-not the things Oblama uses to justify higher FEDERAL taxes
most of the sales taxes paid by the bottom 30% comes from money GIVEN to them by the government which gets that money from people like ME. So in reality I am paying for their "contributions"
NOT THEM
the bottom 20% get three dollars from the federal government for every dollar they actually make
the top one percent are paying an effective tax rate of about 28C on every dollar they make
its not until you hit the top 40% that there is a net tax payment rather than a negative tax payment (meaning money back)
Okay. Nothing there I can disagree with. Carry on.we should all be hostile to tyranny over the mind of man, and LYING about your opponent to get votes is tyranny.
What does it say about us when we are eager and willing to believe ANYTHING BAD said about the politicians we don't like.
It is laziness at the least, especially when there is so much truth that is even more damaging. But a lot of politicians have so many skeletons in their closets that they have to be careful what they say as backlash is always a possibility.
Clear enough?
okay, let's talk aboutit. Examples and evidence(facts would be nice) to back up your assertion. Thank you, TurtleDude
Oh geesh. I get so tired of these argument that say that the guy earning 300,000 a year and only getting to keep 200,000 of it for personal use(ie. vacation homes, fancy cars, maids, gardeners and yachts) is somehow getting a raw deal over the person who makes 20,000 a year and gets to keep a whopping 15,000 of it for personal use(ie pay for food, rent, transportation, clothing and a few small luxuries). That means the guy earning the 300G can afford to buy a new house, IN CASH, nearly every frickin' year of almost his entire life and the guy making 20G will probably NEVER be able to purchase a house in his entire lifetime. Cry me a river for the 300k guy! The ultra wealthy are paying less in taxes than they have in decades, so why are so many people demanding they pay even less?! It just makes no sense, neither moral nor economic.
You are new here. Allow me to help. You know the joke how a cleaning service will tell you that they don't do windows? That is a lot like Turtle with evidence.
But keep asking. I do. WHo knows - maybe someday somehow..... probably right after somebody captures a real unicorn.:roll:
Romney is a RINO.
What we need is the understanding that good work comes through compromise.
What is "good work"?
Sounds like you are saying that Democrats are more willing to compromise and work with the other party than are Republicans.
:shrug:
:roll::roll::roll:
No, but then, that has nothing to do with what I said either. Are you also deflecting from what I said in order to avoid answering my question?
Problem solving, a functioning government. I realize that to support government doesn't work, there is a need to sabotage the process. But, to reach conclusions, and do the people's work, which they were hired to do, compromise is neccesary.
But he ain't Obama, right?
And you see Obama as good at that? Compromising?
engaging in class warfare and demonizing success to cover up for a lack of competency
Okay. Nothing there I can disagree with. Carry on.
Then it should be easy for you to quote his words where he did that.
OK here are a couple off the top of my head.
During the auto bailouts, Obama called bondholders of Chysler debt greedy speculators. How about when he asked how much is enough when talking about certain CEO pay.
Then it should be easy for you to quote his words where he did that.
Did I miss the part where you reproduced the quotes and then offered analysis as to how that proves he demonizes success as Turtle alleges?
Without seeing the exact quotes I could not say for sure, however, it seems you are confusing a dispute about tax policy or the worth of ones labor with the hyperbolic over the top charge of demonizing success.
You are telling me you do not remember these comments. I know you work for a politician but lets be childish.
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?