Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Sign in to follow this  
DAS

2012 American Presidential Election

Cast your vote  

84 members have voted

  1. 1. Who are you for?

    • Obama (US Citizen)
      25
    • Romney (US Citizen)
      25
    • Other Candidate (US Citizen)
      8
    • Not Voting (US Citizen)
      5
    • Obama (Non-US Citizen)
      15
    • Romney (Non-US Citizen)
      1
    • Other Candidate (Non-US Citizen)
      1
    • Don't Care (Non-US Citizen)
      4


Recommended Posts

There wasn't much support at all for invading Iraq until bush put SoS Powell and his reputation out there with misleading, and I use that term loosely, information - to Congress and the UN. One of the reasons people were drawn to supporting this invasion was because there was an extreme amount of patriotism being capitalized on after 9-11 and an attitude of either you're with us or unpatriotic and against us. There was never room for debate during those times...this WAS only 10 years ago mind you. How can you not remember that DAS?

Bush made up the intelligence reports, Bush Sr. aided foreign countries in holding American hostages, Reagan sold nukes to Iran and Ford ate babies. Every Republican President is just another incarnation of Satan himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, you've got some seriously f*ed up history books out there DAS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BTW, if Romney's record with Bain is so strong for everyone, outside of his cronies of course, then why is his campaign manager distancing the campaign from it and why also not referring to him as Govenor Romney?

You see that as significant? As for the Bain stuff, it's only July. Some of Obama's own surrogates like Booker and Clinton have contradicted Obama's Bain attacks anyway. Besides, many of the lines of attack on Bain are false anyway, which is part of Obama/Axelrod's strategy to make Mitt prove wrong a false negative claim. If he indulges them every time they do this he's letting them dictate the terms of the campaign, I think he's shown discipline. The latest example is the call for Mitt's tax returns in the name of transparency. Ptretty much along the lines of "When did you stop beating your wife, Mr. Romney? :-)

Ironic coming from arguably the least transparent President ever!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mitt did file an extension this year....for a multi-millionaire with a team of accountants, I find that to be interesting. But he was in a tight GOP race and it may have hurt him. Who knows?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that what Romney says for the most part sounds good. However, what he says now and how he governed Massachusetts are two different things. I just don't see him doing the things he says. Especially repealing the healthcare act he passed in his state. I'll be happier to see him win just because of how bad Obama is but I don't want my fingerprints on the train wreck known as the 2012 election. I'll watch from the sidelines.

I don't understand why this is so confusing for people. Romneycare was meant to be a Massachusetts solution. He feels it's not the business of the federal government to address healthcare as another massive federal entitlement. If you're in Massachusetts and you don't like Romneycare, you can go to 49 other states. If you don't like Obamacare, tough. Obamacare is NOT the healthcare plan Romney passed in his state, it's federal overreach. I don't trust politicians either but the idea that Romney would get elected and reverse course on repealing Obamacare is a real stretch. Of course if the Repubs cam't win the senate it may be a moot point anyway.

If you don't like Obama, and you sit it out in November, your fingerprints will be on this train wreck if he wins!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yeah, I do find that significant he distances himself to his past...Govenor is a pretty prestigious position. Making a hundred million on buying, milking, bankrupting and then selling off businesses is pretty amazing as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mstork, Kansas is going Romney with or without DAS!

It's Florida you want....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yeah, I do find that significant he distances himself to his past...Govenor is a pretty prestigious position. Making a hundred million on buying, milking, bankrupting and then selling off businesses is pretty amazing as well.

Come on, Bain's success rate was near 80%! To say it was their intention to milk and bankrupt companies is like saying Detek Jeter strides to the plate with the intention of striking out!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on, Bain's success rate was near 80%! To say it was their intention to milk and bankrupt companies is like saying Detek Jeter strides to the plate with the intention of striking out!

Really?

I have an acquaintance who does the same thing and has made millions upon millions doing it. It's legal, true. Just don't see how that translates to being a president in a political situation where you can't just write off a region of your business, err country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really?

I have an acquaintance who does the same thing and has made millions upon millions doing it. It's legal, true. Just don't see how that translates to being a president in a political situation where you can't just write off a region of your business, err country.

What if your friend also saved the Olympics and had experience as a Governor? And I'd still say if a community organizer is Presidential material maybe your friend is too! :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if your friend also saved the Olympics and had experience as a Governor? And I'd still say if a community organizer is Presidential material maybe your friend is too! :-)

I said he was an acquaintance, but I'm sure we would have a warm meeting if and when we should reuinite again. As far as governor goes, I would hope he would at least admit it....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Respectfully, I think you're attaching some things that have no relation to Romney, such as the Iraq vote, to his record. No, he's not the second coming of Reagan. But his stated goals include repealing Obamacare, true tax reform, and enacting business-friendly policies that will encourage growth and raise tax revenues the right way. Obama's stated goals include the biggest tax hike ever in Obamacare, another tax hike for couples making over $250K (hey, what happened to "millionaires and billionaires"?) and nearly 900,000 small businesses killing their ability to create jobs. And those are just the goals he's talking about, care to guess what he was alluding to in his "hot mic" moment with Medvedev?

You keep hearing this BS talking point that Massachusetts was "47th in job creation" under Romney. Pure spin from Axelrod and company, give this a look:

http://bostonglobe.c...7mNI/story.html

If Romney goes after his goals and fails, at least he tried. Obama has already done great damage and it can get worse. Again, Romney's no Reagan but if you see what Obama has in store for the next four years you may kick yourself for voting to reelect him. Romney's shortcomings aside, let's stay on topic; there is no similarity in the two candidates stated views, track records, or philosophies. You can't make it sound like there's no difference between voting for one or the other. There's a reason no President has ever been reelected with unemployment over 7.4%. And the REAL unemployment number right now is actually in the teens! A fact Rachel Maddow and her ilk would be pointing out every night if McCain was in the White House.

My first hope was Mitch Daniels but he didn't run. But my boss, an ardent democrat and businessman, is considering Romney because Obama is hostile to business while Romney's track record with Bain and the Olympics is that of a winner and problem solver, regardless of what Obama and his mouthpieces have been saying. If you still think their track records are the same I'd advise you to dig a little deeper because they're not at all.

Reagan was reelected in 1984 while unemployment was at 10.1%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reagan was reelected in 1984 while unemployment was at 10.1%

You mean after the GOP had the WH for 75% prior years (12 of 16)? Those 4 years of Carter must've been a bitch!

That reminds me....DAS said that Congress should be held accountable for treason for the ACA vote, what about Reagan for trading arms to Iran while they held our citizens hostage, and he was only president elect, so they would release them once he was sworn in? Imagine if Clinton or Obama had done that???

:blink:

Edited by Walter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone please explain to me why I'm supposed to care what Romney does with his own money MORE than I'm supposed to care what Obama does with MY money? :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Those 4 years of Carter must've been a bitch!

You don't remember?

Double-digit inflation, economic stagnation, the "crisis of the American spirit" malaise speech, slapped around by Iran.

What a telling insult to Carter that the hostages were released the day Reagan was inaugurated.

One of the worst, most ineffectual presidents ever, and Obama is practically modeling his term.

That's why Carter has become such an outspoken critic (heretofore unheard-of behavior in a former POTUS) - to distance himself from his pathetic performance in office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said....8 years prior and 4 years post - yet still 10.1% unemployment, but it was that POS Carter, lulz. Reagan runs up the highest debt to date during his presidency. At the end of the Reagan/Bush 12 years...recession again. Trickle down working well, just like '07. What was the definition of insanity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mstork, Kansas is going Romney with or without DAS!

It's Florida you want....

Very true! On the other hand, my vote for Romney in NY will fall into the abyss!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said....8 years prior and 4 years post - yet still 10.1% unemployment, but it was that POS Carter, lulz. Reagan runs up the highest debt to date during his presidency. At the end of the Reagan/Bush 12 years...recession again. Trickle down working well, just like '07. What was the definition of insanity?

You're cherrypicking again.

The 10% was a peak.

And it came in the 8th quarter (2nd year).

By the time of his re-election it was under 8%, and at the end of his 2 terms it was at 5.4%.

Reagan had a net reduction in unemployment of over 2% from the beginning of his terms to the end.

http://economyinpers...om/unemployment

Those numbers come from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

And again, Trickle-Down always gets mocked, but it's a proven, sound principle.

Just like tax cuts are a proven method of reviving a stalled economy, but the Democrats/Liberals revert to their chants of "tax cuts for the wealthy!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reagan was reelected in 1984 while unemployment was at 10.1%

Actually the average unemployment rate in 1984 was 7.5%. Unemployment under Reagan peaked at 9.7% in '82. It was down to 5.6% by the end of his second term in 1990. So his first term was stormy on the unemployment front but he did show enough progress to give hope, unlike Obama.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're cherrypicking again.

The 10% was a peak.

And it came in the 8th quarter (2nd year).

By the time of his re-election it was under 8%, and at the end of his 2 terms it was at 5.4%.

Reagan had a net reduction in unemployment of over 2% from the beginning of his terms to the end.

http://economyinpers...om/unemployment

Those numbers come from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

And again, Trickle-Down always gets mocked, but it's a proven, sound principle.

Just like tax cuts are a proven method of reviving a stalled economy, but the Democrats/Liberals revert to their chants of "tax cuts for the wealthy!"

In 82' unemployment was 10.08% at it's peak. Strangely enough the unemployment trends from 81' - 84' are almost identical to 09' - 12'. Also, the tax cuts Reagan did in 81' is what caused the stalled economy in the first place, once he started raising taxes (which he did 11 times) the economy began to improve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In 82' unemployment was 10.08% at it's peak. Strangely enough the unemployment trends from 81' - 84' are almost identical to 09' - 12'. Also, the tax cuts Reagan did in 81' is what caused the stalled economy in the first place, once he started raising taxes (which he did 11 times) the economy began to improve.

The economy was stalled before he ever took office.

The tax cuts were to stimulate the economy, which they did.

He raised taxes as the economy continued to improve.

You don't increase the tax burden when people are already struggling.

Kinda like the prime rate - they lower it to try and stabilize things, then raise it as things improve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean after the GOP had the WH for 75% prior years (12 of 16)? Those 4 years of Carter must've been a bitch!

That reminds me....DAS said that Congress should be held accountable for treason for the ACA vote, what about Reagan for trading arms to Iran while they held our citizens hostage, and he was only president elect, so they would release them once he was sworn in? Imagine if Clinton or Obama had done that???

:blink:

First of all those four years of Carter were a bitch, thank you! Secondly, our economy is going to go into recession sometimes, no amount of utopian hope and policy can change that fact. So you can only blame Presidents so much when the economy goes south. What I can blame a President for is what they do to get out of a bad economy. Carter did a horrible job trying to turn things around, and so is Obama. Obama is proposing "solutions" that are not solutions. The millionaires tax was sold by him a few years ago as a way to pay down the deficit. It's been proven that this tax hike will do nothing of the sort but he's committed to it anyway as a means of "divide and conquer". Furthermore, he's on the record as saying that he'd want to raise capital gains taxes even if it didn't raise revenue because of "fairness".

As for Iran-Contra, your timetable is off. It had nothing to do with the hostages who were freed in January of '81, it happened in Reagan's second term and involved different hostages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mitt did file an extension this year....for a multi-millionaire with a team of accountants, I find that to be interesting. But he was in a tight GOP race and it may have hurt him. Who knows?

Almost everyone with a tax return as complicated as his files an extension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're cherrypicking again.

The 10% was a peak.

Using SR's quote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and I am thinking of voting libertarian this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×