What do you guys think?

I think it was a more of an even playing field this time around. Obama did much better than the first one (how could he have done worse?) But he didn't do good enough. I think Romney did just as well and enough to keep his momentum going.

Agree 100%, Obama Definitely better, but he had to be. Romney solid. Should stop Romneys extended bounce from the last debate but IMO not enough to push back.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The performances were much more even. The debate, and the questions asked, were a joke, and what you'd expect when the moderator (Candy what's her face) once referred to the Romney-Ryan ticket as the "death ticket".

A black guy asks Obama why he should vote for him again
.A woman asks about equal pay for women.
A hispanic challenges Romney about immigration reform.
A question about assault rifles.
A question suggesting that abortion is about women's rights.
A woman (claiming to be undecided!!) telling Romney that she blamed Bush for the failed economy.

The questions went right down the liberal playbook. Where was the Catholic priest asking Obama why he doesn't believe that the Catholic Church has the first amendmwnt rights? Where was the crippled abortion survivor asking Obama why he supported infanticide?

Unfreakin-believable.

But it was a draw, which probably means Obama didn't make up much lost ground. I liked one part where Obama tried to interrupt Romney, and Romney called him on it. Obama started to say :"governor, if you're gonna ask me a quiestion..." to which Romney said "I didn't ask you a question, I made a statement". After which, Obama sat down like a child told to go in time-out.

The questions were ridiculous, about what you'd expect from a committed Obama supporter getting to pick the questions. One of these days, Republican candidates have to refuse to set themselves up for this kind of bias.

(Candy what's her face) once referred to the Romney-Ryan ticket as the "death ticket".


From the looks of it, she should lay off the Candy for a while.........,
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Romney preformed well. Obama seems tired.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Obama lies when he claims that the day after the Libyan attack, that he referred to it as an act of terror in the Rose Garden. The transcripts show that's not what he said. That Obama lied, did not stop the moderator from claiming that what Obama said was true.

That's not what a moderator does (perpetuate a lie told by one candidate). That's the act of a campaign worker, which is what that fat slob is.

I loved it when Obama claimed that Romney is a "social extremist". This from the guy who pals around with Bill Ayers, whose spiritual advisor says the feds invented AIDS to kil blacks, a guy who supports infanticide, and a guy who denies First Amendment Rigts to teh Catholic Church. But Romney is the social extremist?

so 15% on dividends is not low enough- he wants zero. He wants zero tax on capital gains. Who has dividends and capital gains? Not me- not you.

The argument for no capital gains tax is that you were already taxed on that money once when you earned it. And why should you be taxed again after you invested it.. I see both points
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I tend to agree with him on the capital gains. You take a liquid asset that you earned and paid taxes on and put it back out there to invest in the US ec
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I tend to agree with him on the capital gains. You take a liquid asset that you earned and paid taxes on and put it back out there to invest in the US economy. And you gotta pay an additional 15% on the gains? Why you could have held on to the money and paid less to keep it in your matress. Of course you would be losing money because we now print money like it is toilet paper
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

ever since Al Gore coiffing his hair to look like Regan and switching to "earthtones" and going all "alpha male", these things seem so phony and produced that I can't stand to watch them, I turned it on for about 5 seconds last night searching for the Yankees game and saw Mitt striding up to intercept a "very outstanding"question from an "undecided" and that's all I could take...Gordon Gecko vs. Erkel being refereed by Rosanne came to mind....I saw her referred to as "Eye Candy":rotf2:....oops....anyway, I'll usually try to listen on the radio to avoid the distraction of the setting and makeup and posturing, last night I found a Tweet Tracker that was tremendous fun, so much so that I couldnt stop watching/reading...it included notable lefties like Ezra Klein and righties like Michelle Malkin and many in between from the major publications...it was fascinating to watch the real time comments, most were clearly rooting one way or the other and a few were equal opportunity in their praise or criticism, most on the left were troubled that Obama had not answered this way or that with one of the many standard talking points that we've heard for years, most on the right we troubled about the supposed "undecided" status of the questioners...both sides liked the fact that the candidates ignored the "rules" in many cases and went at it pretty good and felt that Obama was benefitting from both the nature of the questioning and the clock....the left was very quiet as time went on in the debate and most tweets were to offer the answer or statement that they wished Obama had said at various points, there were points where both sides thought that Obama had an opening on a topic and was about to pounce and it never happened which led to either lament or relief....

everyone is waiting for a major mistake in these things, candidates, press, observers, if none occurs...ahhh..it wasn't that great, it's all part of the big dog and pony show beginning with the conventions and ending with the innauguration...90% is unnecessary:uhuh:


WOW!?#

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/10/16/luntz_focus_group_of_mostly_former_obama_voters_sw itch_to_romney.html

. Of course you would be losing money because we now print money like it is toilet paper
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

and the dollar is further devalued and I think our credit rating was just whacked again because the Fed keeps pumping liquidity into the markets, China is at zero growth and Europe is in shambles, the Middle East is on fire...but hey..."have you seen the stock market lately???":) we are currently running on illusion :uhuh:


with regard to the fairness or unfairness of the nature and questions of the debate I look at it this way....if you want to be President of the United States you should have your metal tested, when a fawning media coddles you, excuses you and promotes and protects you, we end up with the inept current occupant, rather see a candidate run the gauntlet in both the primaries and general and show us why they deserve or can earn the honor of being President, we should be looking for leaders and not shiny idols that we can put on a pedestal and polish when they're not (looking)doing so well...


who said this recently? "he doesn't have a big ego":)

"I mean, he is very open to other people's opinions. And he's always willing to compromise and he's always, always listening. So that would kind of be the last thing that I would think of when I talk about my husband is big ego. Because he just doesn't have that."

Obama lies when he claims that the day after the Libyan attack, that he referred to it as an act of terror in the Rose Garden. The transcripts show that's not what he said. That Obama lied, did not stop the moderator from claiming that what Obama said was true.

Jim?
Will YOU ever stop lying and/or distorting fact to meet your agenda?

No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation

Jim?
Will YOU ever stop lying and/or distorting fact to meet your agenda?

But he did not specifically call the Libyan attack an act of terror. And long after that moment in the Rose Garden, Obama went on Letterman and once again presumed a connection with the youtube video.

In the debate last night, Obama claimed that in the rose garden the day after the attack, that he referred to the attack as an act of terror. I don't see that specific reference in the quote you posted. I have no doubt that Obama was referencing the Libyan attack in that comment, but he did not specifically call it an act of terror. On top of that, for days after that, members of his administration specifically said that there was no evidence suggesting it was an act of terror. It's one thing to say "let's wait till the facts are in before we call it an act of terror". It's quite another thing to say "there is no evidence that it was an act of terror", because every shred of evidence pointed to nothing other than an act of terror.

I'm not lying whan I bash Obama. Obama gives us more than enough irrfutable facts to bash him with.

Gordon Gecko vs Erkel. LMAO...

I also wanted to puke when Obama whined to Romney that "my pension is smaller than yours". Romney should have said "please explain to the public how that's my fault".

Obama chastised Romney for investing oversees. Romney fired back that Obama's pension has Chinese investments. I'd love to know if that's true, cuz if it is, it negates that argument completely. If Obama can personally profit from Chinese investments, so can Obama.

so 15% on dividends is not low enough- he wants zero. He wants zero tax on capital gains. Who has dividends and capital gains? Not me- not you.
If you a 401K or any money invested..... even an investment property....the profit on the sale of the asset is generaly subject to capital gains tax.
Romney said he would drop the rate to zero for people making less than 200k. But the wealthy would still pay.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Interesting debate. Not as decisive as the first but Obama certainly had the edge.

Romney didn't seem prepared with a game plan like before, and he was easily irritated. Really came off as petulant for most of the debate. His incessant bickering with the moderator and disrespect for the President will likely be a turn off to women and independents.

Obama made a few small mistakes and Romney several bigger ones. Romney really blew it with the Libya attack. Obama looked pretty comfortable and confident the entire time.

The next debate is all about foreign policy and it should be good.

-spence

Interesting debate. Not as decisive as the first but Obama certainly had the edge.

Romney didn't seem prepared with a game plan like before, and he was easily irritated. Really came off as petulant for most of the debate. His incessant bickering with the moderator and disrespect for the President will likely be a turn off to women and independents.

Obama made a few small mistakes and Romney several bigger ones. Romney really blew it with the Libya attack. Obama looked pretty comfortable and confident the entire time.

The next debate is all about foreign policy and it should be good.

-spence

It was interesting, I thought it was more of a draw.

Obama could not have been worse than 2 weeks ago, and he wasn't. I thought Ronmney clobbered Obama on energy (denying Obama his claim that he's responsible for increased drilling on private land, which he has nothing to do with) and on the economy. Romney blew a chance on Libya, though Obama got some help from the moderator there, which was ridiculous. Obama came across better on the social issues.

Again, I thought the questions were insanely left-leaning. If someone is going to ask Romney why he's different than Bush, then someone should ask Obama why he's different than Jimmy Carter. If a Hispanic gets to challenmge Romney on immigration, how about having the widow of a Texas rancher murdered by an illegal alien, asking Obama about his stance on immigration..I don't see how anyone can claim teh questions wre eanywhere near balanced...women's compensation and assault rifles? We spend 20% of the allocated time on those issues?

It's a tight race.

Romney said he would drop the rate to zero for people making less than 200k. But the wealthy would still pay.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Now, don't go shredding a favorite liberal talking point with silly little things like truth and facts.

so 15% on dividends is not low enough- he wants zero. He wants zero tax on capital gains. Who has dividends and capital gains? Not me- not you.

only for people making less than 200K
why is that bad? Are you for Obamas tax incrfease for people over 200K?
This will encourage middle class people to SAVE for retirement, education, etc.
and yes, I do have dividends and capital gains. Anyone with $50 and can buy a mutual fund does

I think Obama came out ahead. I thought both sucked. It was tiring to hear the same BS over and over. I could predict what they were goign to say before they say it.
Romney could have done much better on the question on the difference between him and Bush. that was a slam dunk and he had the opportunity to set the record straight.
I also cant believe a college kid stood up and said "my parents and teachers tell me I wont get a job" Man, I would have tore into that. What a way to lead! tell your kids or students they're goign to fail. Romney should have seized that and tied it to it 47% remark - victims. I wonder if anyone told Mark Zuckerburg he wont get a job? I felt like Obama got the last word every time. Seemed off balance to me, for most of teh debate he had over 3 minutes more air time than Romney. he also never gave any plan for the future.
Pretty sad overall.

I felt like Obama got the last word every time. Seemed off balance to me, for most of teh debate he had over 3 minutes more air time than Romney. he also never gave any plan for the future.
I think the Obama strategy was to use the clock precisely for that reason. He intentionally saved his more effective shots for the end of his response time so Romney would be forced to choose between responding or ignoring the next town hall question.

Neither candidate did a good job of their vision for the next term.

-spence

It was interesting, I thought it was more of a draw.

Obama could not have been worse than 2 weeks ago, and he wasn't. I thought Ronmney clobbered Obama on energy (denying Obama his claim that he's responsible for increased drilling on private land, which he has nothing to do with) and on the economy. Romney blew a chance on Libya, though Obama got some help from the moderator there, which was ridiculous. Obama came across better on the social issues.

Again, I thought the questions were insanely left-leaning. If someone is going to ask Romney why he's different than Bush, then someone should ask Obama why he's different than Jimmy Carter. If a Hispanic gets to challenmge Romney on immigration, how about having the widow of a Texas rancher murdered by an illegal alien, asking Obama about his stance on immigration..I don't see how anyone can claim teh questions wre eanywhere near balanced...women's compensation and assault rifles? We spend 20% of the allocated time on those issues?

It's a tight race.
Blame the media, blame the moderator, blame the questions blah blah blah...

It was a town hall in New York. I doubt there are too many widows of Texas ranchers mulling about.

-spence

The moderator was wrong about Barry saying that he called it an attack in the rose garden.... after the debate she admitted that she was wrong.... that's like being in a court room and a judge striking down what someone had said and U R suppose to forget about it....moderator should have never said anything except ask the question

why is it that barry and biden claim that the other side had more time....when in both debates they had the most time

Bottom line is there was no winners....... BORING

I think neither looked very presidential and I would call it a draw. Obama was more engaged than last time, was more persuasive in his arguments, and carried the ball more with fewer fumbles this time. Romney was not the dominant player last night.

Both ground out and ugly time last night.

Obama did not categorize Libya as an Act of Terror in that speech and is being misleading stating otherwise.

Really getting sick of both parties and the spin.

Interesting debate. Not as decisive as the first but Obama certainly had the edge.

Romney didn't seem prepared with a game plan like before, and he was easily irritated. Really came off as petulant for most of the debate. His incessant bickering with the moderator and disrespect for the President will likely be a turn off to women and independents.

Obama made a few small mistakes and Romney several bigger ones. Romney really blew it with the Libya attack. Obama looked pretty comfortable and confident the entire time.

The next debate is all about foreign policy and it should be good.

-spence

Speaking of spin, Obama was his usual mix of Von Clausewitz, Mahan, JFK, Einstein, and Hamilton, Adams, and Washington, eh Spence?

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

that,s why I,m heading out fishing :fishin:

Ya get more truth & honesty @ a back ally drug deal :buds:

I remembered why I never go into this forum >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this whole post is as much a waste as last nights debate .

Bottom line >IMO either way .whoever gets the screws & gets elected ><><>< WEEEEEEEEEEEEEE are #^&#^&#^&#^&ed .

PS .I,ll catch a couple for ya all ><><><><><:drool: PS >JPI You s/b getting laid instead of spending all the time your have left in this forum .,., OLD GOAT ><><:devil2:

I think it was a boring draw. Learned nothing new.

IMHO, cut through all the BS and it still comes down to what you want America to be, a
capitalistic country where people are independent, make their own decesions and choices,
or a socialistic country where government makes the decisions and choices for you.

In the end,the vote will come down to how many people want to be independent vs
how many want a government to provide for them and tell them what to do.

BTW, about spending time here?, the Clam Man has the answer. :hihi: :buds:

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

that,s why I,m heading out fishing :fishin:

Ya get more truth & honesty @ a back ally drug deal :buds:

I remembered why I never go into this forum >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this whole post is as much a waste as last nights debate .

Bottom line >IMO either way .whoever gets the screws & gets elected ><><>< WEEEEEEEEEEEEEE are #^&#^&#^&#^&ed .

PS .I,ll catch a couple for ya all ><><><><><:drool: PS >JPI You s/b getting laid instead of spending all the time your have left in this forum .,., OLD GOAT ><><:devil2:

:) :) :) :) :)

Mike.
No offense but you probably look at things quite different at your age being older.
If I were older I probably wouldn't give a rats ass either.
Being 48 and with 3 kids between 11th & 6th grade I have to pay attention as hopefully I have another 30-40 years to go.

My take on last night.
Pretty even on delivery & performance.
Not even close on the facts.
Obama is so full of #^&#^&#^&#^&.





QUOTE=Clammer;963931]&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

that,s why I,m heading out fishing :fishin:

Ya get more truth & honesty @ a back ally drug deal :buds:

I remembered why I never go into this forum >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this whole post is as much a waste as last nights debate .

Bottom line >IMO either way .whoever gets the screws & gets elected ><><>< WEEEEEEEEEEEEEE are #^&#^&#^&#^&ed .

PS .I,ll catch a couple for ya all ><><><><><:drool: PS >JPI You s/b getting laid instead of spending all the time your have left in this forum .,., OLD GOAT ><><:devil2:[/QUOTE]
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The cow knew the truth when she helped Obama with Libya
I shut it off after that
She didn't just eff up she chose to perpetuate the lie.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Mike.
No offense but you probably look at things quite different at your age being older.
If I were older I probably wouldn't give a rats ass either.
Being 48 and with 3 kids between 11th & 6th grade I have to pay attention as hopefully I have another 30-40 years to go.



Bingo. My boys are ages 6, 2, and 1. This election will have real consequences on my ability to provide for them the way I want (and to pay for college), and on their ability to have the chance to get off to a good start when they go out on their own, and on my ability to retire comfortably.

Sometimes (often) I really wish I was born in my Dad's generation...spend 35 years with 1 company; wife not expected to have to work; pension in retirement; housing, healthcare, and college SO MUCH less expensive relative to income than today.

The moderation was absolutely horrible. Horrible!

Obama did show up this time but the whole subject matter just seemed like a rehash of the last time. Except for the very brief spat over Lybia (where the moderator showed she was firmly there to support Obama) you could have just watched a rerun of the last debate.

I hate how when one of the questioners asks a specific question both guys just dance around it instead of giving an answere.

Anyway , no real blood spilled IMO but what a lack of Presidencial Dignity on the part of both candidates. Its too bad there are no statesmen left for us to vote for. Its in the gutter politics now and it makes us look like fools all around the world.

The cow knew the truth when she helped Obama with Libya
I shut it off after that
She didn't just eff up she chose to perpetuate the lie.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I cannot recall the last time I saw a debate moderator take it upon herself to come to the rescue of one candidate. It was ridiculous.

One thing I forgot. I really hate this percent business. Obama keeps saying Romney only paid 14% while lower income people paid more in taxes. Well this percent bull is a classic sales tool. Fact is , romney paid more dollars (forget percent) that Obama's total income. You don't pay taxes with percent certificates. You have to write a check in dollars.

So ask the question....who paid the most dollars in taxes last year and Romney certainly paid more thanb Obama and likely more than anyone else in that whole room last night.

The Dems never mention percent when talking 44% for small business top brackets. Add to that 11% state taxes in RI and about 10% Social security taxes and they want a small business guy to fork over 65% of the last marginal income he makes. Where's the percent talk when they are porking people? Why only to jab at a guy who paid more tax dollars than 99% of individuals in the USA?

I cannot recall the last time I saw a debate moderator take it upon herself to come to the rescue of one candidate. It was ridiculous.
And after she shuts off Romney twice and Obama says "show him the transcript " she waves it in the air !!!
A sure wtf moment......
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Obama was quick to shut down Romney when it came about Obama's investments.....he acts like he is not a millionaire

And after she shuts off Romney twice and Obama says "show him the transcript " she waves it in the air !!!
A sure wtf moment......
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I saw that. I can't help but wonder why, as a moderator, she had that transcript handy. I can only think of 1 reason, and that is that she wanted to use it to help her preferred candidate.

I also love when Obama says he "created 5 million jobs", which conveniently ignores the 5 million jobs he lost during his first 18 months. Unemployment was 7.8% in January 2009, and it is 7.8% today. In total (and that's the only fair way to measure it), he has had zero net job gains. Zip. Zilch. Nada. Bupkus.

I mean, if I lose $5 million at the casino on Monday, and win $5 million at the casino on Tuesday, would Obama claim that I'm $5 million richer? Because that's what he is saing about his "job creation".

It's such a blatant lie, and no one calls him in it.

Obama was quick to shut down Romney when it came about Obama's investments.....he acts like he is not a millionaire

He's a millionaire several times over. But much like the Hollywood crowd, it's OK to be in the top 1% if you are liberal. Or an actor. But if you struck it rich on Wall Street, or as a small business owner, well then you must have left a path of devastation in your wake during your selfish rise to the top.

I also love when Obama says he "created 5 million jobs", which conveniently ignores the 5 million jobs he lost during his first 18 months. Unemployment was 7.8% in January 2009, and it is 7.8% today. In total (and that's the only fair way to measure it), he has had zero net job gains. Zip. Zilch. Nada. Bupkus.

It's a critical metric when you take over at the very tip of a massive purging of jobs. Without the job creation the unemployment rate would be in the teens...

Nobody can turn the economy around overnight and considering the depth of the recession even in a few years...can't be done in a global economy.

Today, unemployment is backing down, personal savings is up, the housing market is starting to recover and corporate profits are looking pretty good. I've read that the improving housing market could drive better than expected performance overall in 2013.

Romney is promising his policy will create 12 million new jobs, except they're already projecting 12 million new jobs under the current trajectory set by Obama's policies.

I hate to break it to you, but it's working.

-spence

i've been looking for someone thats presidential


and i'm still looking

One thing I forgot. I really hate this percent business. Obama keeps saying Romney only paid 14% while lower income people paid more in taxes. Well this percent bull is a classic sales tool. Fact is , Romney paid more dollars (forget percent) that Obama's total income. You don't pay taxes with percent certificates. You have to write a check in dollars.

I am sorry to disagree. If I get a dollar in interest on my lousy money market account that is paying next to nothing and pay federal tax of 30 cents, I am not happy if the CEO of WC Bradley is paying 15 cents on each dollar of dividends he gets from the 5,000,000 shares he got when he exercised his stock options that he paid for with the sales proceeds of a portion of the option shares. So percents matter to me.

If I have a house in Westerly that is taxed at 11 cents per thousand of assessed value, I will be very unhappy if they decide that the CEO with a mansion in Watch Hill is taxed at 3 cents per thousand- even if that guy pays a lot more in real estate taxes on his $8,000,000 cottage than me.

I am also not happy that last year Exxon paid 2% of its 73 billion in profits to the USA. 2% is 1.46 billion which is a lot- but 2% is not a good percentage. Exxon paid more than 10 times that in taxes to foreign countries. How is that possible?

The whole tax system absolutely sucks. We need a flat tax on everyone.

I agree with you guys on lots of items but as you can see, I am not a fan of fortune 500 companies. I think that they sit on hordes of billions in cash, realize that hiring humans will not help them meet their earnings targets, but laying off 1,000's of workers, merging, outsourcing to Pah-Ke-Stan and installing robots will help meet earnings targets, The CEO's get stock options and tax breaks you and I don't see. If the stock price falls below the option exercise price, they reissue the options at a lower price. The stock price is their God and they treat hard working people like crap.

But like women, I suppose you can't live with them but you can't live without them.

I would absolutely agree with a flat tax. No BS how much did you earn x a percentage period eliminate all the back door hoopla.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I agree with you guys on lots of items but as you can see, I am not a fan of fortune 500 companies. I think that they sit on hordes of billions in cash, realize that hiring humans will not help them meet their earnings targets, but laying off 1,000's of workers, merging, outsourcing to Pah-Ke-Stan and installing robots will help meet earnings targets, The CEO's get stock options and tax breaks you and I don't see. If the stock price falls below the option exercise price, they reissue the options at a lower price. The stock price is their God and they treat hard working people like crap.
That's why the elite get to play by a different set of rules.

Not all corporations are evil and some corporate officers I believe are good stewards of their employees, but ultimately, shareholder value is the reason they exist.

You make some good points above. I'd simplify it by saying that the true value of a dollar is a lot less for the elite than the average working joe.

-spence

It's a critical metric when you take over at the very tip of a massive purging of jobs. Without the job creation the unemployment rate would be in the teens...

Nobody can turn the economy around overnight and considering the depth of the recession even in a few years...can't be done in a global economy.

Today, unemployment is backing down, personal savings is up, the housing market is starting to recover and corporate profits are looking pretty good. I've read that the improving housing market could drive better than expected performance overall in 2013.

Romney is promising his policy will create 12 million new jobs, except they're already projecting 12 million new jobs under the current trajectory set by Obama's policies.

I hate to break it to you, but it's working.

-spence

"Nobody can turn the economy around overnight "

True. But not everyone is incompetent enough to add $5 trillion to the debt in 4 years, and all we have to show for it is a net gain of zero jobs and lower wages.

"I hate to break it to you, but it's working."

Zero job growth, lower wages, higher health costs, higher gas prices, anemic GDP growth...and $5 trillion deeper in the hole.

If that's 'working' to you, you are entitled to that opinion. But we can do better.

True. But not everyone is incompetent enough to add $5 trillion to the debt in 4 years, and all we have to show for it is a net gain of zero jobs and lower wages.
It has nothing to do with incompetence and everything to do with larger trends.

Obama inherited a trillion + defecit and given the reduced tax revenues, war expenditures and pre-planned spending there's little a McCain president could have done to avoid adding similar debt. Sure, there's the gamble that stimulus spending was unecessary but I'm willing to wager it helped keep us slipping into a worse situation.


Zero job growth, lower wages, higher health costs, higher gas prices, anemic GDP growth...and $5 trillion deeper in the hole.

If that's 'working' to you, you are entitled to that opinion. But we can do better.

So you agree that nobody could turn things around overnight but the fact that things are getting better still isn't good enough, it's not fast enough for you. We could always sprinkle some magic dust on the US economy...that would fix the EU and China as well...right?

The problem right now isn't Obama, it's a political system that can't agree on even the most basic steps forward. Sure, there is plenty of blame to go around but either party would be well served to compramise with whomever is elected.

We know how the GOP responded to Obama's win.

-spence

you need some new talking points :uhuh:

Election 2012 Likely Voters Trial Heat: Obama vs. Romney (http://www.gallup.com/poll/157817/election-2012-likely-voters-trial-heat-obama-romney.aspx)


hey, looks like some of the 47% are smartening up :)

apparently no candidate at 50% in a Gallup poll in mid October had ever lost...things ARE getting better Spence!

you need some new talking points :uhuh:

Election 2012 Likely Voters Trial Heat: Obama vs. Romney (http://www.gallup.com/poll/157817/election-2012-likely-voters-trial-heat-obama-romney.aspx)


hey, looks like some of the 47% are smartening up :)

apparently no candidate at 50% in a Gallup poll in mid October had ever lost...things ARE getting better Spence!




I don't know,
Read on FB a little while ago, Bigfish Larry is going to vote for the 1st time in his life.
He's voting for Barack Hussein Obama :yak5:

Yup! I am Ronnie!! Its called a choice.......I make em'......I stand behind them.....and I live with them! I can also respect that you have a choice, I would hope I get the same respect and I certainly would not belittle you for it.

It has nothing to do with incompetence and everything to do with larger trends.

Obama inherited a trillion + defecit and given the reduced tax revenues, war expenditures and pre-planned spending there's little a McCain president could have done to avoid adding similar debt. Sure, there's the gamble that stimulus spending was unecessary but I'm willing to wager it helped keep us slipping into a worse situation.

It has everything to do with a central government acting like a giant corporation with top-down directives on how the underlings will conduct the business. It has everthing to do with the "directors" of this giant corporation irresponsibly gambling with the earnings of the underlings and assuming unpayable debts that are transferred to some of the underlings who must sacrifice more and more of their earnings not only to pay down the unpayable debt, but to allow the "directors" to irresponsibly gamble more and accrue more debt. It has everything to do with the "directors" pitting enough of the underlings, who are allowed to pay less or nothing toward the gambling and debt accruing, against the underlings who must pay more, thus keeping enough "happy" with the gambling and debt as they are brainwashed into believing that they benefit from the gambling and unpayable debt and will have to pay less or nothing to sustain the unsustainable.

And as for those who believe that all will be, somehow, better if the "directors" would just act "responsibly," they willingly, or ignorantly, miss the point that the irresponsibility does not lie in the gambling or debt accruing, which the "directors" believe is necessary and proper and totally responsible to achieve the goals of government benevolence according to the dictates of the "directors," but the irresponsibility is in doing that which the Constitution never intended for them to do. The irresponsibility can only be corrected by the dismantling of this illegal giant government corporation, and by returning the power and responsibility of creating an "economy" to the people, in whom the Constitution originally vested such responsibility.


So you agree that nobody could turn things around overnight but the fact that things are getting better still isn't good enough, it's not fast enough for you. We could always sprinkle some magic dust on the US economy...that would fix the EU and China as well...right?

Sprinkling fairy dust, as you so often do, over the actions of our central administrative and unelected bureaucracy, in whom you have a magically unwarrented trust, will merely continue the "irresponsible" spending.

The problem right now isn't Obama, it's a political system that can't agree on even the most basic steps forward. Sure, there is plenty of blame to go around but either party would be well served to compramise with whomever is elected.

The problem is a political system that is run by a constitutionally unintended fourth branch of the federal government--the nearly 400 regulatory agencies that are responsible for most of the new, annual, regulations that fill the 80,000 new pages of the Federal Register every year. No one person, not the President, not the congressmen, not the judges, not any of the bureaucrats, reads all 80,000 pages per year. None know the totality of what's in those pages. And we are bound, as underlings of this giant corporation, to obey those regulations and run our lives and businesses accordingly. And the new regulations keep coming, and more agencies are created. And the problem is a political system that has been transformed from a limited central government to an all-powerful one that can create these agencies, and can tax at will, and spend at will, and the only barrier left to defend us against that directorate, is the uncompromising bickering among the "directors." Heaven help us if they all finally agree on how to run our lives.

We know how the GOP responded to Obama's win.

-spence

Just as political parties have always responded.

Ronnie ,

No problem ......... But don,t think age has anything to do with it .

I,ll argue anything EXCEPT polotics [SP] & religion both are no win battles .even if millions of people have been killed over the centuries over both ><><.

I believe each individual has their own right to their opinions & religious beliefs. .

So much so >I was married 36 years to a a wesome woman ........... we always voted .......one election nite we were talking & somehow it came out who each of us had voted for ..for some office ......... yep we each voted for the opposite person .

THE only Bitch I have is .......... you have allllllllll the right in the world to bitch about whatever & whoever you want in this country .................... BUT in you do BITCH & you don,t vote >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>IMO your worse than any of them & should shut the F uck up :smash::smash:

My father, to this day, won't tell anybody who he is voting for....not even my mother.

Smart Man...

I am sorry to disagree. If I get a dollar in interest on my lousy money market account that is paying next to nothing and pay federal tax of 30 cents, I am not happy if the CEO of WC Bradley is paying 15 cents on each dollar of dividends he gets from the 5,000,000 shares he got when he exercised his stock options that he paid for with the sales proceeds of a portion of the option shares. So percents matter to me.

.

The CEO has to pay income tax on the stock options when exercised as INCOME. He then pays 15% on the capital gains - price change from when he he exercsied until when he sells.

It has nothing to do with incompetence and everything to do with larger trends.

Obama inherited a trillion + defecit and given the reduced tax revenues, war expenditures and pre-planned spending there's little a McCain president could have done to avoid adding similar debt. Sure, there's the gamble that stimulus spending was unecessary but I'm willing to wager it helped keep us slipping into a worse situation.




So you agree that nobody could turn things around overnight but the fact that things are getting better still isn't good enough, it's not fast enough for you. We could always sprinkle some magic dust on the US economy...that would fix the EU and China as well...right?

The problem right now isn't Obama, it's a political system that can't agree on even the most basic steps forward. Sure, there is plenty of blame to go around but either party would be well served to compramise with whomever is elected.

We know how the GOP responded to Obama's win.

-spence

"It has nothing to do with incompetence "

That's your opinion. In my opinion, 4 years is a lot of time, and $5 trillion is a lot to flush down the toilet, if all you have to show is zero jobs created and lower wages. A huge majority of business owners said the passage of Obamacare would hurt them, but Obama did it anyway. That's a big part of the 'larger trend' yuo describe, and that effect lies right at his feet.

Spence, there are states that are growing and adding jobs. They are overwhelmingly red states. Pure coincidence, I supose.

"Obama inherited a trillion + defecit "

(1) Inherited from whom? Obama and Biden were members of the US Senate, and they were in the party that controlled Congress from 2006-2010. In our country, the legislature controls the legislative agenda and the purse strings. So I'm not sure I give Obama a complete 'pass' on the mess he claims to have 'inherited'. He didn't walk in off the street. He was there. I'm not saying it's all his fault. But I'm saying he bears some responsibility for what happened.

(2) He promised to cut that deficit in half.

"there's little a McCain president could have done to avoid adding similar debt"

Wrong. McCain would not have passed Obamacare, and he wouldn't have implemented a stimulus that did nothing except delay public sector layoffs for one year.

"you agree that nobody could turn things around overnight "

Agree 100%. But I think you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who could have mis-managed the crisis worse than Obama has.

"the fact that things are getting better "

It's not a fact that things are better. $5 trillion added to our debt. That means that every living American is now $16,667 deeper in debt than when he took office. That works out to $67,000 for a family of 4, and the interest is now accumulating. What does that family of 4 have to show for that $67,000 IOU Obama gave to the Chinese on their behalf? Zero jobs created, and wages that are $4300 lower than they were 4 years ago. Higher healthcare costs. Astronomically higher fuel prices. How you can claim that it's a 'fact' that things are better, I simply cannot fathom.

We're not bleeding jobs like we were, that is a fact. But at what cost? And what kinds of jobs are being created - part time jobs with no healthcare. Whoop-dee-doo.

"We could always sprinkle some magic dust on the US economy"

You think that's a fair assessment of what McCain would have done, or what Romney is proposing/

That's you in a nutshell, right there, that post. You bend over backwards to heap praise on Obama, and yuo dismiss those who disagree with him as proposing to 'sprinkle magic dust'. That's very dishinest, and it's what we have all come to expect from you. I;m happy to honestly debate the merits of what Obama has actually said and done. You cannot bring yourself to do that with my side, because you know you can't reject these ideas on their merits, so all you can do is dishonestly dismiss them.

I cannot fathom that you work in finance, I can only pray that your DNA isn't on anything that will ever impact my family.

you two would never make it very far as foxhole buddies...

.....I did say "foxhole"......:)

you two would never make it very far as foxhole buddies...

.....I did say "foxhole"......:)

Gallup poll just released has Romney up 6. He is surging, really "peaking" at the right time. And the fact that the last debate, the last impression people will have, will be on foreign policy, could not work more to Romney's advantage. He has all weekend to prepare a narrative to use the Libya debacle to back Obama into a corner from which there is no escape. I cannot imagine that Obama's camp is looking forward to this debate.

The only tough question Obama got in teh debate (and it was a very tough question) wa steh gyu who asked "who rejected the diplomat's requet for more security, and why". Obama's answer? He spoke about how heroic the diplomats are...never even came close to answering teh question that was asked. And God knows Canbdy Crowley wasn't going to ask Obama to answerthe question that was asked. I guess sheet cake isn't brain food.

"It has nothing to do with incompetence "

That's your opinion. In my opinion, 4 years is a lot of time, and $5 trillion is a lot to flush down the toilet, if all you have to show is zero jobs created and lower wages. A huge majority of business owners said the passage of Obamacare would hurt them, but Obama did it anyway. That's a big part of the 'larger trend' yuo describe, and that effect lies right at his feet.

It may be argued that Obama is extremely competent in accomplishsing HIS goals, not yours. When you argue back and forth with Spence on what are "better" economic methods and solutions, you are playing in his sandbox (and, apparently, yours) in which the problem is merely competence within a system of government that allows bureaucrats to do what they do, rather than the original sand box that would not allow such shenanigans. When arguing about competence within the parameters of the status quo (the central government's right and responsibility to control and create the "economy"), you are accepting that status quo. And it is that status quo, that system, which allows the competence or incompetence, to be the argument of who will be "better" rather than whether the federal government even has that right and responsibility

Spence, there are states that are growing and adding jobs. They are overwhelmingly red states. Pure coincidence, I supose.

There will always be sectors that will do better or worse. That's the beauty of federalism--the States being the laboratories of social, political, and economic experiments. But only insofar as they are allowed to do so. The more centralized that government becomes, the less will be the diversity of those experiments, and the more static society, the "economy", and the relationship between the citizen and the government becomes. The overall "economy" if left to the control of a central government will be diverse and evolutionary in the most limited way--only at the hands of a unitary directorate, and only change course within those limited parameters when parties can convince the electorate that their director is more competent than the other party.

"Obama inherited a trillion + defecit "

(1) Inherited from whom? Obama and Biden were members of the US Senate, and they were in the party that controlled Congress from 2006-2010. In our country, the legislature controls the legislative agenda and the purse strings. So I'm not sure I give Obama a complete 'pass' on the mess he claims to have 'inherited'. He didn't walk in off the street. He was there. I'm not saying it's all his fault. But I'm saying he bears some responsibility for what happened.

(2) He promised to cut that deficit in half.

Yes, you're absolutely right (there are absolutes, Spence). Obama bears some responsibility for the inheritance he helped to create--as do all the other members of Congress, and other Presidents and judges. And, as well, We The People bear some of that responsiblity, not only for electing them, but allowing them to transform the Constitution into a system of government that makes us underlings instead of masters.

"there's little a McCain president could have done to avoid adding similar debt"

Wrong. McCain would not have passed Obamacare, and he wouldn't have implemented a stimulus that did nothing except delay public sector layoffs for one year.

McCain would have helped to maintain the present administrative system of government, perhaps with a smaller growth in deficits and national debt. But the system would have been maintained, perhaps advanced to another level, and would be there for future mischief by bigger spenders and controllers.

"you agree that nobody could turn things around overnight "

Agree 100%. But I think you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who could have mis-managed the crisis worse than Obama has.

Again, depending on what Obama's goals are for fundamentally transforming this country and its system of government, he may be considered to have managed very well.

"the fact that things are getting better "

It's not a fact that things are better. $5 trillion added to our debt. That means that every living American is now $16,667 deeper in debt than when he took office. That works out to $67,000 for a family of 4, and the interest is now accumulating. What does that family of 4 have to show for that $67,000 IOU Obama gave to the Chinese on their behalf? Zero jobs created, and wages that are $4300 lower than they were 4 years ago. Higher healthcare costs. Astronomically higher fuel prices. How you can claim that it's a 'fact' that things are better, I simply cannot fathom.

See, that's the progressive sandbox in which you are playing. Arguing about how much rather than should they even be able.

We're not bleeding jobs like we were, that is a fact. But at what cost? And what kinds of jobs are being created - part time jobs with no healthcare. Whoop-dee-doo.

When the blood has drained so much, there is not as much left to be drained. It would have been mathematically impossible to maintain the higher number of jobs lost, but the rate at which they are presently lost in comparison to how much "blood" is left, may be as high or higher. Again, is it the Federal Government's responsibility to create jobs?

"We could always sprinkle some magic dust on the US economy"

You think that's a fair assessment of what McCain would have done, or what Romney is proposing/

That's you in a nutshell, right there, that post. You bend over backwards to heap praise on Obama, and yuo dismiss those who disagree with him as proposing to 'sprinkle magic dust'. That's very dishinest, and it's what we have all come to expect from you. I;m happy to honestly debate the merits of what Obama has actually said and done. You cannot bring yourself to do that with my side, because you know you can't reject these ideas on their merits, so all you can do is dishonestly dismiss them.

I cannot fathom that you work in finance, I can only pray that your DNA isn't on anything that will ever impact my family.

Finance, the "economy," jobs, health care, etc. are very important issues. The question (and answer) is whether the Federal government should be responsible for those things.

Yup! I am Ronnie!! Its called a choice.......I make em'......I stand behind them.....and I live with them! I can also respect that you have a choice, I would hope I get the same respect and I certainly would not belittle you for it.

first Honey Boo Boo...then Big Fish Larry....oh...noooooo!!!:rotf2:

congrats Larry, I am glad you are voting.

Gallup poll just released has Romney up 6.


now "7" (insert Joe Castiglione screech:)) and leading in the Electoral College....WOW...Honey Boo Boo switched to Romney explaining the unlikely surge...


whatever happened to Mitt blowing it and all the trends and data pointing to a Barry Cakewalk?


McCain was gaining some ground at this point in 08'

now "7" (insert Joe Castiglione screech:)) and leading in the Electoral College....WOW...Honey Boo Boo switched to Romney explaining the unlikely surge...


whatever happened to Mitt blowing it and all the trends and data pointing to a Barry Cakewalk?


McCain was gaining some ground at this point in 08'

Yes, it i snow a 7-point lead, and significantly, that poll starts to reflect the impact of the second debate. Perhaps Obama's improved performance did not stop the bleeding.

And the fact that the last debate, the one that will stick in people's minds, is foreign policy, can only help us. Romney will spend the weekend preparing to disembowel Obama over how ineptly he handled the ebmassy attack. That timing just could not work out better for Romney.

McCain lost the election when Lehman Brothers went belly-up. Once that was blamed on Republicans (no one has ever explained why Republicans did more than Democrats to cause the subprime mortgage crisis), McCain had no chance.

I can not believe Romney is doing as well as he is. Obama has cheeleaders moderating debates, and he is still very vulnerable. I never thought we'd have this good a chance with the media so in love with Obama. This "binder" nonsense just might be the stupidest, and most dishonest, thing I have ever heard.

Yeah....binders full of womens names!!! That struck me as weak!!!

Yeah....binders full of womens names!!! That struck me as weak!!!




If all Obama & the liberals can come up with 3 weeks before the election is Bigbird (who by the way makes $314k a year, not exactly non profit for a public tv station funded by tax payers) and Binders instead of their accomplishments & plan for another 4 years, don't you think thats pretty pathetic ???

So Larry,
Why so much hate of Romney as you stated ?
You resent wealth through accomplishment and hard work ?

Yeah....binders full of womens names!!! That struck me as weak!!!

yup, probably, most likely, nearly, maybe officially the...... OK..definitely the worst statement, comment, quip, gaff... I've ever heard or read that any candidate has ever made in a debate....good grief:rotf2::fishin:

Yeah....binders full of womens names!!! That struck me as weak!!!

Wasn't his Lieutenant Governor a woman (Jane Swift)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes, it i snow a 7-point lead, and significantly, that poll starts to reflect the impact of the second debate. Perhaps Obama's improved performance did not stop the bleeding.
There's one Gallup poll showing just outside of the margin, but when you look across polls Romney only has a slight lead in the popular vote.

Electoral college Obama still has the clear edge.

In other words...it's a dead heat.

-spence

This "binder" nonsense just might be the stupidest, and most dishonest, thing I have ever heard.

I agree, why did Romney make it up? The woman who ran the company that put the binder together said his story isn't true at all. The binder was assembled for both candidates before he became gubner. At the end of Romney's tenure the % of women in his cabinet was under 30% and much lower than his successor or predecessor.

Pretty sad when you have to dodge a valid question about equal pay with a fabrication.

-spence

Pretty sad when you have to dodge a valid question about equal pay with a fabrication.
-spence

Call a spade a spade Spence.

Let's be serious here and agree that it is just as sad that Obama dodged valid questions in that debate as well.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Call a spade a spade Spence.

Let's be serious here and agree that it is just as sad that Obama dodged valid questions in that debate as well.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Dodging questions is part of debating, I was just surprised he had to make something up to do it.

-spence

There's one Gallup poll showing just outside of the margin, but when you look across polls Romney only has a slight lead in the popular vote.

Electoral college Obama still has the clear edge.

In other words...it's a dead heat.

-spence



I agree, why did Romney make it up? The woman who ran the company that put the binder together said his story isn't true at all. The binder was assembled for both candidates before he became gubner. At the end of Romney's tenure the % of women in his cabinet was under 30% and much lower than his successor or predecessor.

Pretty sad when you have to dodge a valid question about equal pay with a fabrication.

-spence

Spence,if Romney was less than honest about what happened, let's get th rtruth out. That's important. But that's not what I'm hearing. What I'm hearing from liberals is that teh fact that Romney had a binder, is offensive to women.

It's not a dead heat. One only acts this desperate (claiming that notebooks are sexist) when (1) one knows they are in trouble, and (2) when one knows that they cannot talk about the issues.

People are realizing that in the poker game of ideas, Romney's full house beats Obama's pair of 6's.

The polls show a close race. Those polls are over-sampling Democrats, and are based on demographic turnouts from 2008, which no one is claiming will happen again.

Obama is in serious trouble.

Clinton had a binder full of women...

Dodging questions is part of debating-spence

Indeed. But Obama's candidacy was supposed to be based on "change". So shouldn't he be raising the bar?

Dodging questions is part of debating, I was just surprised he had to make something up to do it.

-spence

So, you say it's sad that Romney dodged a question in the debate but when asked if it is sad that Obama dodged questions in the same debate, your answer is "dodging questions is part of debating."

I get it now.........
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device