You make the call.
The things President Obama promised that meant a lot to some people didn't happen the way he promised they would and there is no great increase in transparency. His idea of compromise is "do it my way and we'll say that we worked together" at best. The conservative side of the Republican party went farther right and dug in. They decided to match him--he won't compromise; neither will they.
Governor Romney doesn't have an empty suit or an empty heart. He has helped people along the way and he has been successful. He doesn't verbalize helping people...but he does help. He also is a hard-nosed business person. He gets things done.
I am not one off those that thinks either person is evil...we just have a choice to make and my choice is to support Governor Romney.
Quote: s2dbakerI'm going with the guy that got bin Laden. Also, the US economy histoically does much better with a Democrat at the helm.
I guess you do not include the years of 1976-1980 and 2008-2012 vs 1981 to 1990 in your figures? Or do you hope people don't remember?
Clinton and Bush43 were about equal in terms of the economy, other than that no contest.
You're right about it being no contest. Democrats win by any measure.Quote: AZDuffmanI guess you do not include the years of 1976-1980 and 2008-2012 vs 1981 to 1990 in your figures? Or do you hope people don't remember?
Clinton and Bush43 were about equal in terms of the economy, other than that no contest.
Quote: s2dbakerYou're right about it being no contest. Democrats win by any measure.
DailyKos as a source? Seriouly?
What do you got?Quote: AZDuffmanQuote: s2dbakerYou're right about it being no contest. Democrats win by any measure.
DailyKos as a source? Seriouly?
Quote: s2dbakerI'm going with the guy that got bin Laden. Also, the US economy histoically does much better with a Democrat at the helm.
"Getting Bin Laden" is great, but it isn't something to hang your hat on as President because you just did what anyone in that office would have done. I would exclude Ron Paul from that (and someone made the convoluted argument that John McCain might have been too distracted to do it, but I dismiss that one...). The plan was to find and kill Bin Laden. President Obama didn't put that plan in motion; the previous President did. The intelligence and military people looked until they found him and then killed him.
It would have only been a big Presidential decision had he said "Don't do it"...
Now, if you feel that the exconomy really is better with a Democrat at the helm, then that would be a good reason to vote that way.
Quote: s2dbakerWhat do you got?Quote: AZDuffmanQuote: s2dbakerYou're right about it being no contest. Democrats win by any measure.
DailyKos as a source? Seriouly?
I think his point was that this:
ABOUT DAILY KOS Founded on May 26, 2002, Daily Kos is the premier online political community with 2 million unique visitors per month and 300,000 registered users. It is at once a news organization, community, and activist hub. Among luminaries posting diaries on the site are President Jimmy Carter, Senator Barack Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, and dozens of other senators, congressmen, and governors. Even more exciting than that, however, are the hundreds of thousands of regular Americans that have used Daily Kos to shape a political world once the exclusive domain of the rich, connected, and powerful.
doesn't exactly sound like an unbiased balanced source for much of anything. For what it is worth, if anyone on the right started quoted "Rush L" as a source I would say the same thing.
Quote: MrV
You make the call.
Tough one....
Quote: s2dbakerJust to clean this up a bit, I quoted a source that had links to statistics. The source is not accepted. So I'll ask again, what have you got?
Well, I have unemployment never over 7.2% under Bush, that under his last days as a lame-duck POTUS. And I have unemployment never under 8% under Obama, except for his first days of what his supporters say "you can't blame him for."
I won't even go into comparing Carter and Reagan. Like comparing a Yugo to a Lexus.
January 19, 2009 there was no chance unemployment was over 7.2%
January 20, 2009 there was no chance unemployment was under 8%
So during the transfer of power of presidency, at least .8% of the country lost their job that day? Let's round to 200 million Americans in the workforce. That means that about 1.6 MILLION people lost their job on Obama's first day as president and it was his fault.
Quote: FinsRuleOk, so under those statistics on
January 19, 2009 there was no chance unemployment was over 7.2%Quote: AZDuffmanAnd I have unemployment never under 8% under Obama, except for his first days of what his supporters say "you can't blame him for."
January 20, 2009 there was no chance unemployment was under 8%
So during the transfer of power of presidency, at least .8% of the country lost their job that day? Let's round to 200 million Americans in the workforce. That means that about 1.6 MILLION people lost their job on Obama's first day as president and it was his fault.
Did you read my entire post?
Quote: FinsRuleOk, what do you define as his first days? Do you think changes can occur that quickly?
In Jan 2009 the unemployment rate was 7.8%
In February 2009 it was 8.1%
It has not fallen below 8.1% since, meeting that number last April, now back up to 8.3%.
So for his first 11 days it was <8%. Lets call "his first days" 11 days.
I'll just say that he was left with a mess that wasn't finished getting bigger. There is still a mess, and the debate is whether we are on the right track or not. If we're on the right track, then 4 more years makes sense. If not, then we need a new President.
You feel one way, I feel the other. Whoever wins as President I will be rooting for to make things better, do you feel the same way?
I don't see any link there. I provided one that has actual statistics and facts in it. But you didn't like those facts because it came via DailyKos. So here's a link to the Wall Street Journal. Maybe you'll like that link better. But I'll ask again, what have you got?Quote: AZDuffmanWell, I have unemployment never over 7.2% under Bush, that under his last days as a lame-duck POTUS. And I have unemployment never under 8% under Obama, except for his first days of what his supporters say "you can't blame him for."
I won't even go into comparing Carter and Reagan. Like comparing a Yugo to a Lexus.
Quote: s2dbakerI don't see any link there.
No link, summary of data from a government website. Two simple numbers, didn't see the need.
So the information that you've povided comes from Azduffman as far as I can tell. I can't take your numbers seriously. Sorry. Links or it didn't happen.Quote: AZDuffmanNo link, summary of data from a government website. Two simple numbers, didn't see the need.
Quote: s2dbakerSo the information that you've povided comes from Azduffman as far as I can tell. I can't take your numbers seriously. Sorry. Links or it didn't happen.
Here is one source of many.
Looks pretty good for ObamaQuote: AZDuffman
After the stimulus got the economy settled down, it's been steady improvement ever since. Thanks for the link Az.
Quote: s2dbakerLooks pretty good for ObamaQuote: AZDuffman
After the stimulus got the economy settled down, it's been steady improvement ever since. Thanks for the link Az.
Looks good for Obama? Is your computer upsidedown? Big spike up then slow drift sideways. Under Reagan we were booming by this point without $860 Billion in pork called "stimulus."
Note that under Bush we drifted down from 6% to 4%, a 50% reduction. Funny you do not credit how great the economy was then.
is the most detached out of touch president we've
probably ever had, why would anybody want 4 more
years?
He can't manage anything, so he delegates all his
responsibility to underlings, while he plays hoops
on the WH court, bowls on the WH lanes, and plays
golf whenever he can. When he has WH briefings,
he always appears 'distant and distracted' from
whats being said. He just doing what he does best,
voting or being 'present'.
Quote: EvenBobWith all the WH insider info coming out that Obama
is the most detached out of touch president we've
probably ever had, why would anybody want 4 more
years?
He can't manage anything, so he delegates all his
responsibility to underlings, while he plays hoops
on the WH court, bowls on the WH lanes, and plays
golf whenever he can. When he has WH briefings,
he always appears 'distant and distracted' from
whats being said. He just doing what he does best,
voting or being 'present'.
Obama pondering his next golf game as he gives the order to execute bin Laden
Leading from Behind: The Reluctant President and the Advisors Who Decide for Him will be published on Tuesday
--Claims Obama cancelled three operations to kill bin Laden
--The killing of bin Laden is at the centre of Obama’s re-election campaign
--The 9/11 mastermind was eventually killed by US Navy SEALs in May 2011"
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2191021/EXCLUSIVE-Obama-cancelled-missions-kill-bin-Laden-THREE-TIMES-getting-cold-feet--Hillary-Clinton-stepped-claims-explosive-new-book.html#ixzz25icBLa4t
A little different take on the whole Bin Laden thing...
Do you think for one minute his Presidency would stand a chance in this election if everyone found out he didn't give the order when he had a chance to do so?
Simply put...killing Bin Laden is something he HAD to do.
It is the stuff he didn't have to do that should help us decided who to elect this time. Those things he pushed of that he got done, those things that didn'get done, and whether we believe he will compromise in the future.
Killing Bin Laden was only a choice if he didn't like the idea of remaining President.
Enough said.
Bin Laden's dead.
Obamacare took 700 billion from Medicare.
Bin Laden's dead.
Obamacare costs way more than they said it would.
Bin Laden's dead.
We haven't had a budget in years; even when the Democrats controlled both sides of Congress.
Bin Laden's dead.
Yes, Bin Laden's dead. I am thankful for that. He did what had to be done.
That isn't a reason to vote for him (or anyone else)!!!
meaningless. What it always comes down to
when an incumbent is involved, is this. When
the independents and undecideds go into the
voting booth, they'll be asking themselves
very personal questions, like how am I doing
financially. Do I want another 4 years like the
last 4 years. Do I want a change.
Its what sunk Carter because of the economy,
and sunk Bush Sr because of the tax increases.
People always vote incumbents in or out because
of their wallets, for the most personal of reasons.
Knowing that, does anybody REALLY think any
voter in his right mind wants another 4 years
like the ones we just had? I mean, c'mon.. Its
even the reason Ford didn't get elected in 76,
forget Nixon. We were in a bad recession. People
always vote with their wallets.
Quote: buzzpaffFormer President George W. Bush congratulated President Obama and the members of the military after learning that the U.S. has successfully killed Usama bin Laden.
Enough said.
He deserved congratulations.
He also did what had to be done.
He asked for the job; killing Bin Laden when presented the opportunity is what the job required.
Quote: RonC
He asked for the job; killing Bin Laden when presented the opportunity is what the job required.
You don't get it. Only Obama could have killed
Bin Laden. Bush couldn't because he, um, well,
he just couldn't, thats all.
Quote: MrVEmpty suit or empty heart.
You make the call.
Giant douche or turd sandwich? #garyjohnson2012
George Carlin
Quote: EvenBob"Where do people think these politicians come from? They don't fall out of the sky. They don't pass through a membrane from another reality. They come from american parents and american families, american homes, american schools, american churches, american businesses, american universities, and they are elected by american citizens. This is the best we can do folks, this is what we have to offer. It's what our system produces: garbage in, garbage out. If you have selfish ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish ignorant leaders."
George Carlin
HOLD ON HERE!!!!! This is a post from EVENBOB that goes across the entire screen!!!!! What has occurred!!!! How did this happen????
Quote: SOOPOOHow did this happen????
Cut and paste.
economy was doing OK. And if people are feeling
good about that, they'll keep the incumbant. Remember
the Dem's slogan to defeat Bush Sr in '92? "Its the
economy, stupid." James Carville came up with that
one. Too bad for him it works both ways..
Quote: EvenBobWith all the WH insider info coming out that Obama
is the most detached out of touch president we've
probably ever had, why would anybody want 4 more
years?
He can't manage anything, so he delegates all his
responsibility to underlings, while he plays hoops
on the WH court, bowls on the WH lanes, and plays
golf whenever he can. When he has WH briefings,
he always appears 'distant and distracted' from
whats being said. He just doing what he does best,
voting or being 'present'.
Bob Woodward, the king of investigative reporters,
who's usually pretty nice to Democrats, has whats
described as a 'devastating' book on Obama coming
out next week.
He's described as arrogant, aloof, full of himself,
unprepared. Woodward says Obama is ham-handed
in forming alliances, something Clinton was a master
of. Obama is lacking in people-skills, and doesn't seem
to even like people very much. Yet he views himself
as very effective at swaying people to his side. He
seems to like all the trappings of being president, but
doesn't enjoy at all the actual work of being president.
Apparently Obama's arrogance is described many times
in the book as having a negative effect on those visiting
the White House, from both sides of Congress.
Gosh, the more I hear, the more I'm thinking, how is
this guy not getting my vote. Good grief.
Quote: EvenBobas a 'devastating' book on Obama coming
out next week..
Maybe Woodward wrote two different books.
Quote:The book goes on sale next Tuesday, but The New York Times was able to buy a copy on Thursday from a retailer.
With the presidential election weeks away, the book will do little to reshape Mr. Obama’s image as a powerful man steering the government forward, but it is also unlikely to engender much support for Republican leaders in Congress who seem unable to control their members.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/07/us/politics/woodward-book-details-battles-over-deficit.html
Quote: rxwineMaybe Woodward wrote two different books.
LOL, did you read the review? Its saying essentially the
same thing, only with a spin on it. I'm seeing nothing
positive about Obama at all, except he blames congress
whenever he can. The biggest criticism of Obama seems
to be nobody was in charge and there were no real plans.
Even the Dem's were thrown by the administrations lack
of planning.
Quote: EvenBobLOL, did you read the review? Its saying essentially the
same thing, only with a spin on it. I'm seeing nothing
positive about Obama at all, except he blames congress
whenever he can.
As Abraham Lincoln use to say, "You can lead a horse to water, but sometimes the goddamn idiots on the other side want a civil war."
from every other speech he's ever given. The crowd loved it,
but they had drank the KoolAid and Obama reading the phone
book would have been just as enjoyable to them. Did you their
glassy eyes and dilated pupils? Frightening.
Quote: buzzpaff" Watched Obama's speech." I believe this is an imposter and not EvenBob.
I had it on, OK? Did anybody really 'watch' it?