login
Presidential Debate (Page 6)
-
No new posts
|
 2012-10-04 10:02 AM in reply to: #4440443 |
Elite  6387    |  Subject: RE: Presidential Debatemrbbrad - 2012-10-04 8:49 AM GomesBolt - 2012-10-04 10:37 AM mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 10:28 AM GomesBolt - 2012-10-04 10:09 AM mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 9:51 AM The few minutes I watched both guys were lame, but Lehrer was worse. So the Obama supporters have tried "Romney lied about the $5T..." Every fact check shows that "no, he didn't. He has $5T in cuts offset by removing loopholes." So now, they try to throw Jim Lehrer under the bus. What was he supposed to do? Stop Obama from rambling-on for over 4 extra minutes and looking outclassed? Ok, I'll bite since you quoted me... which loopholes exactly? I don't recall any specificity around that so it's just lip service right now, like every politician. On Lehrer, I saw a moderator who did not have command of the forum. Period. He came-out with his "deduction buckets" approach. Where you get $X for each bracket that you can deduct from your taxes. If you cap the deductions for the top earners, they're less able to shield their money or make money on losses that aren't really losses. It only came-out two days ago. Now your turn, what are the specifics of Obama's plan? Rich people need to pay 50%+ of their income in taxes? I'm all for them having a little more authority to cut-off a mike. If Lehrer cut off the mike, it would've been Obama that got cut-off most of the time. Dude, neither guy is being specific, but you quoted me and brought up the "tax loophole" thing which I just happen to have heard about this morning when NPR had a Fact Checker round table of sorts. Frankly, I don't see how anybody can be excited about either one of these guys. It's like being on an airplane when they used to serve food and being offered your choice of two crappy meals. Sure, you're gonna pick one or go hungry, but does anybody get jazzed up about commercial airline food? The only way Obama got elected in the first place is due to one of the worst Presidents in history and one of the worst hangovers from irresponsible spending in history. Bush indeed did serious damage. Yet Obama has been one of the worst performing Presidents in history and it is really a toss up who wins between him and Carter. With the backdrop of Carter...Regan won in a monumental landslide. We can debate Regan, but he was one of the best Presidents we have had. At least by popularity and what he did... Clinton can be in the same conversation. I'm not partisan. With the backdrop of Obama, we get Romney.... and it is a tight race with Obama having an slight edge...WOW! That's the problem with Romney... not that it is hard to get excited about him... but that he should be mopping the floor with Obama and he is not. Even with the media bias... he should still be mopping the floor. The GOP has lost it's way and it's platform. They have done nothing to repair the damage of Bush and the social conservatives and all they have is McCain/Palin and Romney/Ryan... and they can't even beat a guy that has not accomplished a single meaningful thing in his life, other than give a couple good speeches. |
| 2012-10-04 10:05 AM in reply to: #4440449 |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate GomesBolt - 2012-10-04 8:51 AM powerman - 2012-10-04 10:40 AM GomesBolt - 2012-10-04 8:27 AM JoshR - 2012-10-04 10:10 AM I wouldn't be surprised at all if we end up invading Iran at some point in the next 4 years, despite the claims from our own intel that Iran isn't close to a nuke. Neither candidate will do anything to fix Wall Street. I can't disagree with most of what you said, but I really cringe seeing this. What intel report are you seeing that Iran isn't close? I fought in and lost friends in Iraq over a hunch that Saddam had WMD (he did have enough chemical weapons to kill a bunch of folks if set-off in a major city, I know, I inventoried it) so I don't want to see us invade Iran or any other country because life is too precious for it. However, if Iran gets a nuke, that'll destabilize that whole region even further. Shia (Iranians) hate Sunnis and Israel. Sunnis (Saudi, west Iraq, Syria, Egypt) hate Shia and Israel. One gets a nuke, either we just arm the other two or one will take a dominant position over the others. I'm hoping that the Mossad is keeping close tabs on Iran and will let Netan-yahoo know when to launch the jets. If you start seeing major mobilization of the IDF to secure the border areas, keep an eye out for the mushroom cloud over Bushehr.
Iran having a nuke has ZERO military value. Yes, maybe just one day someone is crazy enough to launch it for giggles... and he accomplishes turning his own country into a parking lot within 30 minutes. The only value Iran gets from having one is bargaining power... and the only proof you need of that is the fact that we are even paying attention to the idiots when we just think it's possible. They are getting the only thing they want, attention at the table. Israel can talk all they want, producing a mushroom cloud over Iran assure the equivalent of WWIII in the ME. We do indeed have the authority to bomb their facilities from the non-proliferation treaty they would be violating if indeed they were trying to build a bomb. So far I have not seen the genuine effort to produce one... other than enrichment facilities. The bargaining value is huge don't you think? As for military value, I think it would just keep the iranians under the thumb even if they wanted to rise up and overthrow the regime. Like you said, they'd self-nuke if they got really desperate and crazy... World Wars never start as a huge action, they're always strange little things that result in over-reaction. So yeah, maybe an attack on Bushehr when they're not actually weaponizing uranium, that could start it. Well it isn't the ultimate trump card as everyone thinks... they have to think you will actually use i. At least in the Cold war it was mutual destruction... Iran launching a nuke only assures self destruction. And I didn't mean an actual WWIII, I meant the equivalent of one contained in the ME. And as much as they love talking tough in the ME, there is a stale mate there and nobody has been willing to kick that little party off. |
| 2012-10-04 10:07 AM in reply to: #4438403 |
Pro 5761  Bartlett, TN | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate Mitt's flag was bigger than Obama's flag! |
| 2012-10-04 10:16 AM in reply to: #4440486 |
Extreme Veteran 705 | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate powerman - 2012-10-04 10:02 AM mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 8:49 AM GomesBolt - 2012-10-04 10:37 AM mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 10:28 AM GomesBolt - 2012-10-04 10:09 AM mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 9:51 AM The few minutes I watched both guys were lame, but Lehrer was worse. So the Obama supporters have tried "Romney lied about the $5T..." Every fact check shows that "no, he didn't. He has $5T in cuts offset by removing loopholes." So now, they try to throw Jim Lehrer under the bus. What was he supposed to do? Stop Obama from rambling-on for over 4 extra minutes and looking outclassed? Ok, I'll bite since you quoted me... which loopholes exactly? I don't recall any specificity around that so it's just lip service right now, like every politician. On Lehrer, I saw a moderator who did not have command of the forum. Period. He came-out with his "deduction buckets" approach. Where you get $X for each bracket that you can deduct from your taxes. If you cap the deductions for the top earners, they're less able to shield their money or make money on losses that aren't really losses. It only came-out two days ago. Now your turn, what are the specifics of Obama's plan? Rich people need to pay 50%+ of their income in taxes? I'm all for them having a little more authority to cut-off a mike. If Lehrer cut off the mike, it would've been Obama that got cut-off most of the time. Dude, neither guy is being specific, but you quoted me and brought up the "tax loophole" thing which I just happen to have heard about this morning when NPR had a Fact Checker round table of sorts. Frankly, I don't see how anybody can be excited about either one of these guys. It's like being on an airplane when they used to serve food and being offered your choice of two crappy meals. Sure, you're gonna pick one or go hungry, but does anybody get jazzed up about commercial airline food? The only way Obama got elected in the first place is due to one of the worst Presidents in history and one of the worst hangovers from irresponsible spending in history. Bush indeed did serious damage. Yet Obama has been one of the worst performing Presidents in history and it is really a toss up who wins between him and Carter. With the backdrop of Carter...Regan won in a monumental landslide. We can debate Regan, but he was one of the best Presidents we have had. At least by popularity and what he did... Clinton can be in the same conversation. I'm not partisan. With the backdrop of Obama, we get Romney.... and it is a tight race with Obama having an slight edge...WOW! That's the problem with Romney... not that it is hard to get excited about him... but that he should be mopping the floor with Obama and he is not. Even with the media bias... he should still be mopping the floor. The GOP has lost it's way and it's platform. They have done nothing to repair the damage of Bush and the social conservatives and all they have is McCain/Palin and Romney/Ryan... and they can't even beat a guy that has not accomplished a single meaningful thing in his life, other than give a couple good speeches. I disagree. I have two sons, 20 and 21, neither in college this semester, and without Obamacare, they would both be uninsured. That may not be an impressive achievement to those without college age kids, but I don't know one person, even hard core right wingers, whose kid is insured who wants to see that die. Nancy |
| 2012-10-04 10:19 AM in reply to: #4440486 |
Champion 11989 Philly 'burbs | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate powerman - 2012-10-04 11:02 AM mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 8:49 AM GomesBolt - 2012-10-04 10:37 AM mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 10:28 AM GomesBolt - 2012-10-04 10:09 AM mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 9:51 AM The few minutes I watched both guys were lame, but Lehrer was worse. So the Obama supporters have tried "Romney lied about the $5T..." Every fact check shows that "no, he didn't. He has $5T in cuts offset by removing loopholes." So now, they try to throw Jim Lehrer under the bus. What was he supposed to do? Stop Obama from rambling-on for over 4 extra minutes and looking outclassed? Ok, I'll bite since you quoted me... which loopholes exactly? I don't recall any specificity around that so it's just lip service right now, like every politician. On Lehrer, I saw a moderator who did not have command of the forum. Period. He came-out with his "deduction buckets" approach. Where you get $X for each bracket that you can deduct from your taxes. If you cap the deductions for the top earners, they're less able to shield their money or make money on losses that aren't really losses. It only came-out two days ago. Now your turn, what are the specifics of Obama's plan? Rich people need to pay 50%+ of their income in taxes? I'm all for them having a little more authority to cut-off a mike. If Lehrer cut off the mike, it would've been Obama that got cut-off most of the time. Dude, neither guy is being specific, but you quoted me and brought up the "tax loophole" thing which I just happen to have heard about this morning when NPR had a Fact Checker round table of sorts. Frankly, I don't see how anybody can be excited about either one of these guys. It's like being on an airplane when they used to serve food and being offered your choice of two crappy meals. Sure, you're gonna pick one or go hungry, but does anybody get jazzed up about commercial airline food? The only way Obama got elected in the first place is due to one of the worst Presidents in history and one of the worst hangovers from irresponsible spending in history. Bush indeed did serious damage. Yet Obama has been one of the worst performing Presidents in history and it is really a toss up who wins between him and Carter. With the backdrop of Carter...Regan won in a monumental landslide. We can debate Regan, but he was one of the best Presidents we have had. At least by popularity and what he did... Clinton can be in the same conversation. I'm not partisan. With the backdrop of Obama, we get Romney.... and it is a tight race with Obama having an slight edge...WOW! That's the problem with Romney... not that it is hard to get excited about him... but that he should be mopping the floor with Obama and he is not. Even with the media bias... he should still be mopping the floor. The GOP has lost it's way and it's platform. They have done nothing to repair the damage of Bush and the social conservatives and all they have is McCain/Palin and Romney/Ryan... and they can't even beat a guy that has not accomplished a single meaningful thing in his life, other than give a couple good speeches. Do you mean Mitt personally, or the Republican candidate? I agree that Obama was ripe for knocking off, but as you noted, the GOP has really dropped the ball. I was close to voting Republican last time until Palin, and there's no way I go with Romney/Ryan. I don't feel good about voting for Obama either. Ugh! |
| 2012-10-04 10:21 AM in reply to: #4440519 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate nancylee - 2012-10-04 10:16 AM powerman - 2012-10-04 10:02 AM I disagree. I have two sons, 20 and 21, neither in college this semester, and without Obamacare, they would both be uninsured. That may not be an impressive achievement to those without college age kids, but I don't know one person, even hard core right wingers, whose kid is insured who wants to see that die. Nancymrbbrad - 2012-10-04 8:49 AM GomesBolt - 2012-10-04 10:37 AM mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 10:28 AM GomesBolt - 2012-10-04 10:09 AM mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 9:51 AM The few minutes I watched both guys were lame, but Lehrer was worse. So the Obama supporters have tried "Romney lied about the $5T..." Every fact check shows that "no, he didn't. He has $5T in cuts offset by removing loopholes." So now, they try to throw Jim Lehrer under the bus. What was he supposed to do? Stop Obama from rambling-on for over 4 extra minutes and looking outclassed? Ok, I'll bite since you quoted me... which loopholes exactly? I don't recall any specificity around that so it's just lip service right now, like every politician. On Lehrer, I saw a moderator who did not have command of the forum. Period. He came-out with his "deduction buckets" approach. Where you get $X for each bracket that you can deduct from your taxes. If you cap the deductions for the top earners, they're less able to shield their money or make money on losses that aren't really losses. It only came-out two days ago. Now your turn, what are the specifics of Obama's plan? Rich people need to pay 50%+ of their income in taxes? I'm all for them having a little more authority to cut-off a mike. If Lehrer cut off the mike, it would've been Obama that got cut-off most of the time. Dude, neither guy is being specific, but you quoted me and brought up the "tax loophole" thing which I just happen to have heard about this morning when NPR had a Fact Checker round table of sorts. Frankly, I don't see how anybody can be excited about either one of these guys. It's like being on an airplane when they used to serve food and being offered your choice of two crappy meals. Sure, you're gonna pick one or go hungry, but does anybody get jazzed up about commercial airline food? The only way Obama got elected in the first place is due to one of the worst Presidents in history and one of the worst hangovers from irresponsible spending in history. Bush indeed did serious damage. Yet Obama has been one of the worst performing Presidents in history and it is really a toss up who wins between him and Carter. With the backdrop of Carter...Regan won in a monumental landslide. We can debate Regan, but he was one of the best Presidents we have had. At least by popularity and what he did... Clinton can be in the same conversation. I'm not partisan. With the backdrop of Obama, we get Romney.... and it is a tight race with Obama having an slight edge...WOW! That's the problem with Romney... not that it is hard to get excited about him... but that he should be mopping the floor with Obama and he is not. Even with the media bias... he should still be mopping the floor. The GOP has lost it's way and it's platform. They have done nothing to repair the damage of Bush and the social conservatives and all they have is McCain/Palin and Romney/Ryan... and they can't even beat a guy that has not accomplished a single meaningful thing in his life, other than give a couple good speeches. I'm not a hard core right winger, but if I had two sons, 20 and 21, and neither was in school, or had a job that provided at least some percentage of insurance, they'd be in the military. I'm not saying that's what you should do, they are your kids, just don't try to tell me that Obamacare is the only answer. |
| 2012-10-04 10:21 AM in reply to: #4440357 |
Extreme Veteran 705 | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate GomesBolt - 2012-10-04 9:09 AM mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 9:51 AM The few minutes I watched both guys were lame, but Lehrer was worse. So the Obama supporters have tried "Romney lied about the $5T..." Every fact check shows that "no, he didn't. He has $5T in cuts offset by removing loopholes." So now, they try to throw Jim Lehrer under the bus. What was he supposed to do? Stop Obama from rambling-on for over 4 extra minutes and looking outclassed? I would love to see your links, because every single economic report I have read showed that Romney DID lie about the 5 trillion dollars. You might start with factchecks.org? If he cuts 5 trillion dollars, as he has said he will do for 8 MONTHS, he will put a HUGE hole in the budget, and he will have to raise taxes on the middle class. Please do some research, don't just repeat right wing talking points. And Romney will kill Big Bird!! Seriously, this is such a tiny fraction of his budget, but this was red meat for those who hate NPR, because it actually uses facts, as opposed to Faux News. And that lip smacking, and sideways odd smile of Romney's? Weird. The man is weird. He has hardly been doing any campaigning, because he has been rehearsing for this debate. Meanwhile, Obama has been running the country, so of course Romney was Slick Willard. He has his lies down pat. But who amongst you doesn't get the feeling that there is something seriously off with Romney? Even his wife said her biggest fear if he is elected is for his mental health. The man is off. |
| 2012-10-04 10:24 AM in reply to: #4439971 |
Extreme Veteran 705 | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate tuwood - 2012-10-03 9:59 PM mehaner - 2012-10-03 9:52 PM GomesBolt - 2012-10-03 10:43 PM Meh, next debate, "Billion" is another drinking word. next debate is veeps...that's not even worth watching but next pres debate...billion is ON That's the one I'm most excited to watch. But admittedly it's because I'm pretty confident Ryan is going to make Biden walk off the stage halfway through the debate. Is this snark?? Biden has been in politics, talking to people, for over 40 years. The man is likable and personable. Ryan is a sociopath, who wants to hurt poor people and kids; even the Catholic Church has disavowed his plan. I think he is very wonky, also, and doesn't connect. Joe Biden may not be a genius, but he is smart enough, and will certainly connect with people. And just wait until he goes after all of Romney's lies from last night!! I am getting the popcorn ready!! Nancy |
| 2012-10-04 10:25 AM in reply to: #4438403 |
| Austin, Texas or Jupiter, Florida | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate Nancy, I may be wrong, but I thought under the pre-obamacare model, a 22 yo was allowed to stay on the parents' insurance as long as they're still registered as a dependent to those parents and live in their house. If they're not a dependent, then why aren't they in their own home and paying for their own insurance? Correct me if I'm wrong. |
| 2012-10-04 10:26 AM in reply to: #4438403 |
Extreme Veteran 705 | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate Wow!! Like 90% conservatives on here! Who knew triathletes were such right wingers?? Do you all know Romney plans to sell off our national parks?? Maybe his rich friends will buy them, and you all can do your training amongst condominiums and amusement parks. The laugh will be on anyone who cares one whit about the environment. Nancy |
| 2012-10-04 10:35 AM in reply to: #4440536 |
| San Diego, CA | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate nancylee - 2012-10-04 8:24 AM tuwood - 2012-10-03 9:59 PM Is this snark?? Biden has been in politics, talking to people, for over 40 years. The man is likable and personable. Ryan is a sociopath, who wants to hurt poor people and kids; even the Catholic Church has disavowed his plan. I think he is very wonky, also, and doesn't connect. Joe Biden may not be a genius, but he is smart enough, and will certainly connect with people. And just wait until he goes after all of Romney's lies from last night!! I am getting the popcorn ready!! Nancymehaner - 2012-10-03 9:52 PM GomesBolt - 2012-10-03 10:43 PM Meh, next debate, "Billion" is another drinking word. next debate is veeps...that's not even worth watching but next pres debate...billion is ON That's the one I'm most excited to watch. But admittedly it's because I'm pretty confident Ryan is going to make Biden walk off the stage halfway through the debate. Good analogy! I totally think that Paul Ryan is the equivalent of a serial killer! You may not agree with his policies or ideas but you have to admit that he is an intelligent guy. I'm not saying Biden isn't, but he has a serious history of sticking his foot in is mouth. It will be an entertaining event seeing what these two have to say to eachother. And as for "all of Romney's lies," I hate to be the one to break it to you but all politicians lie. Obama had equally as many. As an example, he stated that the cost of health insurance is rising at it's slowest rate in 20 years under Obamacare. B.S!!!!! My health insurance has tripled in the past 3 years. Before that, the largest increase per year was $20. |
| 2012-10-04 10:36 AM in reply to: #4438403 |
| Austin, Texas or Jupiter, Florida | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate So let me see if I get this straight: -Biden Smart, savvy, connects. -Romney wants to kill Big Burd (sic) -Romney hates kids, Ryan hates old people. -Ryan can't connect (which is tough when he's been packing stadiums of people who want to hear him) -Romney wants to tax the poor and male the rich richer. And sell the national parks to his rich friends (no idea where you get this from) -Obama is too classy and respectful to fight in a debate. -Jim Lehrer has always been a closet Republican. -Everyone on BT a right wind but job? Nancy, anything else to add? |
| 2012-10-04 10:37 AM in reply to: #4440540 |
Elite 4564 Boise | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate GomesBolt - 2012-10-04 9:25 AM Nancy, I may be wrong, but I thought under the pre-obamacare model, a 22 yo was allowed to stay on the parents' insurance as long as they're still registered as a dependent to those parents and live in their house. If they're not a dependent, then why aren't they in their own home and paying for their own insurance? Correct me if I'm wrong. I believe you have to be in school to get it. |
| 2012-10-04 10:37 AM in reply to: #4440542 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate nancylee - 2012-10-04 10:26 AM Wow!! Like 90% conservatives on here! Who knew triathletes were such right wingers?? Do you all know Romney plans to sell off our national parks?? Maybe his rich friends will buy them, and you all can do your training amongst condominiums and amusement parks. The laugh will be on anyone who cares one whit about the environment. Nancy Me thinks somebodies been spending a little too much time on the liberal blog sites. Feel free to prove me wrong, but I don't believe Romney has proposed selling any national parks. If he does, I call dibs on Yosemite. |
| 2012-10-04 10:38 AM in reply to: #4440519 |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate nancylee - 2012-10-04 9:16 AM powerman - 2012-10-04 10:02 AM I disagree. I have two sons, 20 and 21, neither in college this semester, and without Obamacare, they would both be uninsured. That may not be an impressive achievement to those without college age kids, but I don't know one person, even hard core right wingers, whose kid is insured who wants to see that die. Nancymrbbrad - 2012-10-04 8:49 AM GomesBolt - 2012-10-04 10:37 AM mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 10:28 AM GomesBolt - 2012-10-04 10:09 AM mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 9:51 AM The few minutes I watched both guys were lame, but Lehrer was worse. So the Obama supporters have tried "Romney lied about the $5T..." Every fact check shows that "no, he didn't. He has $5T in cuts offset by removing loopholes." So now, they try to throw Jim Lehrer under the bus. What was he supposed to do? Stop Obama from rambling-on for over 4 extra minutes and looking outclassed? Ok, I'll bite since you quoted me... which loopholes exactly? I don't recall any specificity around that so it's just lip service right now, like every politician. On Lehrer, I saw a moderator who did not have command of the forum. Period. He came-out with his "deduction buckets" approach. Where you get $X for each bracket that you can deduct from your taxes. If you cap the deductions for the top earners, they're less able to shield their money or make money on losses that aren't really losses. It only came-out two days ago. Now your turn, what are the specifics of Obama's plan? Rich people need to pay 50%+ of their income in taxes? I'm all for them having a little more authority to cut-off a mike. If Lehrer cut off the mike, it would've been Obama that got cut-off most of the time. Dude, neither guy is being specific, but you quoted me and brought up the "tax loophole" thing which I just happen to have heard about this morning when NPR had a Fact Checker round table of sorts. Frankly, I don't see how anybody can be excited about either one of these guys. It's like being on an airplane when they used to serve food and being offered your choice of two crappy meals. Sure, you're gonna pick one or go hungry, but does anybody get jazzed up about commercial airline food? The only way Obama got elected in the first place is due to one of the worst Presidents in history and one of the worst hangovers from irresponsible spending in history. Bush indeed did serious damage. Yet Obama has been one of the worst performing Presidents in history and it is really a toss up who wins between him and Carter. With the backdrop of Carter...Regan won in a monumental landslide. We can debate Regan, but he was one of the best Presidents we have had. At least by popularity and what he did... Clinton can be in the same conversation. I'm not partisan. With the backdrop of Obama, we get Romney.... and it is a tight race with Obama having an slight edge...WOW! That's the problem with Romney... not that it is hard to get excited about him... but that he should be mopping the floor with Obama and he is not. Even with the media bias... he should still be mopping the floor. The GOP has lost it's way and it's platform. They have done nothing to repair the damage of Bush and the social conservatives and all they have is McCain/Palin and Romney/Ryan... and they can't even beat a guy that has not accomplished a single meaningful thing in his life, other than give a couple good speeches. Big deal. I can't say the same...at 20 and 21 I had health care because I earned it serving my country. After leaving the military, I did not have health insurance until about 26... I didn't actually start using it until about 10 years later. Somehow magically I managed to live through it. I'm sorry, I most certainly want to see that die. |
| 2012-10-04 10:40 AM in reply to: #4440527 |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 9:19 AM Do you mean Mitt personally, or the Republican candidate? I agree that Obama was ripe for knocking off, but as you noted, the GOP has really dropped the ball. I was close to voting Republican last time until Palin, and there's no way I go with Romney/Ryan. I don't feel good about voting for Obama either. Ugh! Both. If you can't mount a serious campaign against Obama's second term... then you are simply more incompetent than Obama, and that is hard to imagine. |
| 2012-10-04 10:42 AM in reply to: #4440564 |
Elite 4564 Boise | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate jasonatkins - 2012-10-04 9:35 AM nancylee - 2012-10-04 8:24 AM tuwood - 2012-10-03 9:59 PM Is this snark?? Biden has been in politics, talking to people, for over 40 years. The man is likable and personable. Ryan is a sociopath, who wants to hurt poor people and kids; even the Catholic Church has disavowed his plan. I think he is very wonky, also, and doesn't connect. Joe Biden may not be a genius, but he is smart enough, and will certainly connect with people. And just wait until he goes after all of Romney's lies from last night!! I am getting the popcorn ready!! Nancymehaner - 2012-10-03 9:52 PM GomesBolt - 2012-10-03 10:43 PM Meh, next debate, "Billion" is another drinking word. next debate is veeps...that's not even worth watching but next pres debate...billion is ON That's the one I'm most excited to watch. But admittedly it's because I'm pretty confident Ryan is going to make Biden walk off the stage halfway through the debate. Good analogy! I totally think that Paul Ryan is the equivalent of a serial killer! You may not agree with his policies or ideas but you have to admit that he is an intelligent guy. I'm not saying Biden isn't, but he has a serious history of sticking his foot in is mouth. It will be an entertaining event seeing what these two have to say to eachother. And as for "all of Romney's lies," I hate to be the one to break it to you but all politicians lie. Obama had equally as many. As an example, he stated that the cost of health insurance is rising at it's slowest rate in 20 years under Obamacare. B.S!!!!! My health insurance has tripled in the past 3 years. Before that, the largest increase per year was $20. They actually have increased more slowly. Premiums rose 4% last year vs the average of 10%+ over the last decade. I spent 2 minutes googling for a chart but couldn't find one so I gave up. |
| 2012-10-04 10:43 AM in reply to: #4440574 |
Elite 4564 Boise | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate powerman - 2012-10-04 9:40 AM mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 9:19 AM Do you mean Mitt personally, or the Republican candidate? I agree that Obama was ripe for knocking off, but as you noted, the GOP has really dropped the ball. I was close to voting Republican last time until Palin, and there's no way I go with Romney/Ryan. I don't feel good about voting for Obama either. Ugh! Both. If you can't mount a serious campaign against Obama's second term... then you are simply more incompetent than Obama, and that is hard to imagine. Ha! I'm going to have to use that one. |
| 2012-10-04 10:46 AM in reply to: #4440530 |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate nancylee - 2012-10-04 9:21 AM GomesBolt - 2012-10-04 9:09 AM I would love to see your links, because every single economic report I have read showed that Romney DID lie about the 5 trillion dollars. You might start with factchecks.org? If he cuts 5 trillion dollars, as he has said he will do for 8 MONTHS, he will put a HUGE hole in the budget, and he will have to raise taxes on the middle class. Please do some research, don't just repeat right wing talking points. And Romney will kill Big Bird!! Seriously, this is such a tiny fraction of his budget, but this was red meat for those who hate NPR, because it actually uses facts, as opposed to Faux News. And that lip smacking, and sideways odd smile of Romney's? Weird. The man is weird. He has hardly been doing any campaigning, because he has been rehearsing for this debate. Meanwhile, Obama has been running the country, so of course Romney was Slick Willard. He has his lies down pat. But who amongst you doesn't get the feeling that there is something seriously off with Romney? Even his wife said her biggest fear if he is elected is for his mental health. The man is off. mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 9:51 AM The few minutes I watched both guys were lame, but Lehrer was worse. So the Obama supporters have tried "Romney lied about the $5T..." Every fact check shows that "no, he didn't. He has $5T in cuts offset by removing loopholes." So now, they try to throw Jim Lehrer under the bus. What was he supposed to do? Stop Obama from rambling-on for over 4 extra minutes and looking outclassed? Wow... we are talking facts with personality critiques and mental health inuendos??? I hope he does blow a hole in the budget AND raise taxes on the middle class because it is the only legitimate way to change things... but neither will which just means they are pandering..lying. And Obama has been busy running the country...OMG!!! What was Senator Obama doing for two years on the Presidential campaign trail completely ignoring his job in the Senate and the people who voted him in as their representative. Wow, that's rich... he has had the bully pulpit for 3.5 years. If you have the truth, you do not need to practice. |
| 2012-10-04 10:48 AM in reply to: #4440574 |
Champion 11989 Philly 'burbs | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate powerman - 2012-10-04 11:40 AM mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 9:19 AM Do you mean Mitt personally, or the Republican candidate? I agree that Obama was ripe for knocking off, but as you noted, the GOP has really dropped the ball. I was close to voting Republican last time until Palin, and there's no way I go with Romney/Ryan. I don't feel good about voting for Obama either. Ugh! Both. If you can't mount a serious campaign against Obama's second term... then you are simply more incompetent than Obama, and that is hard to imagine. So that's sort of my point (but less on the "Obama is incompetent" side); The Republicans could have done better, but by going with Mitt they did poorly. Mitt is not the guy to mop the floor with Obama, unless you mean actually mop the floor, but an actual mop. |
| 2012-10-04 10:51 AM in reply to: #4440585 |
Elite 4564 Boise | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 9:48 AM powerman - 2012-10-04 11:40 AM mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 9:19 AM Do you mean Mitt personally, or the Republican candidate? I agree that Obama was ripe for knocking off, but as you noted, the GOP has really dropped the ball. I was close to voting Republican last time until Palin, and there's no way I go with Romney/Ryan. I don't feel good about voting for Obama either. Ugh! Both. If you can't mount a serious campaign against Obama's second term... then you are simply more incompetent than Obama, and that is hard to imagine. So that's sort of my point (but less on the "Obama is incompetent" side); The Republicans could have done better, but by going with Mitt they did poorly. Mitt is not the guy to mop the floor with Obama, unless you mean actually mop the floor, but an actual mop.
For the people who think there is a clear difference, can you give the skeptical among us some concrete examples? |
| 2012-10-04 10:51 AM in reply to: #4440530 |
Pro 4277 Parker, CO | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate nancylee - 2012-10-04 9:21 AM GomesBolt - 2012-10-04 9:09 AM I would love to see your links, because every single economic report I have read showed that Romney DID lie about the 5 trillion dollars. You might start with factchecks.org? If he cuts 5 trillion dollars, as he has said he will do for 8 MONTHS, he will put a HUGE hole in the budget, and he will have to raise taxes on the middle class. Please do some research, don't just repeat right wing talking points. And Romney will kill Big Bird!! Seriously, this is such a tiny fraction of his budget, but this was red meat for those who hate NPR, because it actually uses facts, as opposed to Faux News. And that lip smacking, and sideways odd smile of Romney's? Weird. The man is weird. He has hardly been doing any campaigning, because he has been rehearsing for this debate. Meanwhile, Obama has been running the country, so of course Romney was Slick Willard. He has his lies down pat. But who amongst you doesn't get the feeling that there is something seriously off with Romney? Even his wife said her biggest fear if he is elected is for his mental health. The man is off. mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 9:51 AM The few minutes I watched both guys were lame, but Lehrer was worse. So the Obama supporters have tried "Romney lied about the $5T..." Every fact check shows that "no, he didn't. He has $5T in cuts offset by removing loopholes." So now, they try to throw Jim Lehrer under the bus. What was he supposed to do? Stop Obama from rambling-on for over 4 extra minutes and looking outclassed? ??Nancy, below is a link to factcheck. Both candidates made some questionable statements. My wife feels pretty much the way you do...she just does not like something about Romney. He blinks too much...he is weird looking...blah, blah, blah. Personally I don't like his hair style but I like his ideas for the country much more than Obama's. Besides, Obama has failed as POTUS. He made many promises and has not delivered. The economy is still in the dump, oil is abput the same price as it was when he weas elected, yet we pay more for a gallon of gas. I could go on and on. Romney came across very well last night...Obama did not. And didn't you hear Michael Moore "Obama has been rehearsing with John Kerry". http://factcheck.org/2012/10/dubious-denver-debate-declarations/
|
| 2012-10-04 10:53 AM in reply to: #4440582 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate powerman - 2012-10-04 10:46 AM nancylee - 2012-10-04 9:21 AM GomesBolt - 2012-10-04 9:09 AM I would love to see your links, because every single economic report I have read showed that Romney DID lie about the 5 trillion dollars. You might start with factchecks.org? If he cuts 5 trillion dollars, as he has said he will do for 8 MONTHS, he will put a HUGE hole in the budget, and he will have to raise taxes on the middle class. Please do some research, don't just repeat right wing talking points. And Romney will kill Big Bird!! Seriously, this is such a tiny fraction of his budget, but this was red meat for those who hate NPR, because it actually uses facts, as opposed to Faux News. And that lip smacking, and sideways odd smile of Romney's? Weird. The man is weird. He has hardly been doing any campaigning, because he has been rehearsing for this debate. Meanwhile, Obama has been running the country, so of course Romney was Slick Willard. He has his lies down pat. But who amongst you doesn't get the feeling that there is something seriously off with Romney? Even his wife said her biggest fear if he is elected is for his mental health. The man is off. mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 9:51 AM The few minutes I watched both guys were lame, but Lehrer was worse. So the Obama supporters have tried "Romney lied about the $5T..." Every fact check shows that "no, he didn't. He has $5T in cuts offset by removing loopholes." So now, they try to throw Jim Lehrer under the bus. What was he supposed to do? Stop Obama from rambling-on for over 4 extra minutes and looking outclassed? Wow... we are talking facts with personality critiques and mental health inuendos??? I hope he does blow a hole in the budget AND raise taxes on the middle class because it is the only legitimate way to change things... but neither will which just means they are pandering..lying. And Obama has been busy running the country...OMG!!! What was Senator Obama doing for two years on the Presidential campaign trail completely ignoring his job in the Senate and the people who voted him in as their representative. Wow, that's rich... he has had the bully pulpit for 3.5 years. If you have the truth, you do not need to practice. To add on, the Fundraiser in Chief has spent most of his time traveling the country, going on talk shoes, and living the celebrity lifestyle the past several months. If he were actually in Washington trying to get things done I'd agree with you, but he hasn't and that's part of the problem. Hence the Republican joke referring to the empty chair running the country. He's never in Washington, our country is underway with nobody at the helm. |
| 2012-10-04 10:56 AM in reply to: #4440585 |
Veteran 1019 St. Louis | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 10:48 AM powerman - 2012-10-04 11:40 AM mrbbrad - 2012-10-04 9:19 AM Do you mean Mitt personally, or the Republican candidate? I agree that Obama was ripe for knocking off, but as you noted, the GOP has really dropped the ball. I was close to voting Republican last time until Palin, and there's no way I go with Romney/Ryan. I don't feel good about voting for Obama either. Ugh! Both. If you can't mount a serious campaign against Obama's second term... then you are simply more incompetent than Obama, and that is hard to imagine. So that's sort of my point (but less on the "Obama is incompetent" side); The Republicans could have done better, but by going with Mitt they did poorly. Mitt is not the guy to mop the floor with Obama, unless you mean actually mop the floor, but an actual mop. About a year ago, I thought the only chance Obama had to get reelected was if he ran against Palin. Boy, did the Republicans prove me wrong. Not just with Mitt, but the top three that battled it out. Santorum, Newt, you got to be kidding me. Is this really the best the Rep's have to offer? I'm undecided on who I actually want to win, they're both worthless and neither one will take our country in a better direction than where it's headed now. But I'm not undecided on who I'll be voting for. Gary Johnson! |
| 2012-10-04 11:01 AM in reply to: #4438403 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Presidential Debate Anybody got any idea how much a National Wildlife Refuge will go for under Romney's "planned sell-off"? I'd like to have one if I can get it at a reasonable price. Edited by Left Brain 2012-10-04 11:01 AM |
|
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK