Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

You Know... It's Risky To Support Obama...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • You Know... It's Risky To Support Obama...

    Face it... most people are worse off than they were 4 years ago.

    Supporters of Obama seem to have had it worse still.

    Overall household income is down, Black household income is down even more.

    Black unemployment is higher...

    Black poverty is higher...

    Young people suffer too... their income is down, and even with college degrees their unemployment is twice the general population.

    Then we get to the unions...

    The nation's unions lost 400,000 members in 2012 as the percentage of U.S. workers represented by a labor union fell to 11.3 percent, its lowest level since the 1930s - declining by 0.5 percent over the last year.

    Michigan accounted for about 10 percent of the nation's loss of unionized workers as the Wolverine State fell to the seventh most-unionized state, from fifth in 2011.

    The Bureau of Labor Statistics said the biggest hit was in public sector unions, where many states and cities have cut back on their unionized workforce.

    Among public sector workers, 35.9 percent are in a union - down from 37.0 percent in 2011, as the public sector shed nearly 250,000 union workers.

    The public sector union rate is more than five times higher than that of private-sector workers. In the private sector, 6.6 percent are unionized, down from 6.9 percent in 2011.
    How bad is that?

    On Wednesday, the Labor Department publishes 2012 data showing that during President Obama's first term the unionization rate -- the percentage of American workers belonging to unions -- declined faster than during two terms of President George W. Bush. Who would have guessed?

    The total unionization rate declined from 11.8 percent of wage and salary workers in 2011 to 11.3 percent in 2012. Private-sector unionization fell from 6.9 percent to 6.6 percent, and the government unionization rate dropped from 37 percent to 35.9 percent. The total Obama-era decline is 1.1 percentage points, compared with 1.1 percentage points during the eight Bush years.

    Although Obama has championed union causes, his tax and regulatory policies have systematically discouraged business investment and job creation in America for all workers -- union and nonunion.

    U.S. corporate tax rates remain the highest in the industrialized world. Inefficient regulations add to production costs and make employees into liabilities.

    Obama vetoed the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico, which would have provided thousands of unionized construction jobs. Instead, Canada is planning to ship the oil it produces in its western provinces to China. Too bad for American members of the Laborers' International Union of North America. More jobs for Canadians.

    Obama's Environmental Protection Agency regulations have resulted in the closure of more than 100 coal-fired power plants over the past two years, with more scheduled. That's too bad for the United Mine Workers of America and for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.
    Tens of millions of dollars spent by the unions... tens of thousands of dues paying jobs lost.

    Those of his supporters here continue to claim that Obama's first term was a great success.

    The question would seem to be: how much more of this "success" can Obama's supporters take?


    Union membership falls to 70-year low | The Detroit News | detroitnews.com

    Furchtgott-Roth: Why the unions are shrinking | WashingtonExaminer.com

  • #2
    Re: You Know... It's Risky To Support Obama...

    That is why i will forever compare it to a CULT.... they still love this dude.. I have asked all that i can ( who voted for him) about their pay loss, and about the "selma stonewall" bullshit... all agree it is fucked up ... all say he should of said something about the pay increase and about the economy in his speech

    But all said they would vote for him again... Cool = competent to these obamabots

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #3
      Re: You Know... It's Risky To Support Obama...

      Originally posted by Rakkasan View Post
      That is why i will forever compare it to a CULT.... they still love this dude.. I have asked all that i can ( who voted for him) about their pay loss, and about the "selma stonewall" bullshit... all agree it is fucked up ... all say he should of said something about the pay increase and about the economy in his speech

      But all said they would vote for him again... Cool = competent to these obamabots
      More to pity, these mindless, low information voters; Sheeple; Obamabots. </SPAN></SPAN>
      They feel fully justified and forthright in their support of this guy, and think you are crazy for thinking different than them. </SPAN></SPAN>
      You know. How tolerant liberals area, right?</SPAN>

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #4
        Re: You Know... It's Risky To Support Obama...

        As I have been saying, it's because they feel and don't think. It's all an emotional venture for them.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #5
          Re: You Know... It's Risky To Support Obama...

          Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
          As I have been saying, it's because they feel and don't think. It's all an emotional venture for them.
          Yup. As you have been saying.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #6
            Re: You Know... It's Risky To Support Obama...

            What the information in the OP really tells us is we missed the boat on stimulating the economy through proper government spending designed for the private sector to keep on running without it. We did not go with that much infrastructure, that ended up lost to the "shovel ready" debate. Investments in jobs and technology did not generate all that much demand, but it did net China some nice new technology to keep running with at our expense. Instead we ended up with a pet project filled and tax break included vote for me spending package that was way too small, way too late, and way too economically ineffective.

            Sure we avoided the floor, but we now have a government deficit spending dependent economy going forward with one hell of a vicious cycle. Either we cut spending and risk finding the economic floor we have been avoiding, or we continue to spend not really doing much economically but keeping us afloat. Oh yeah, and keep a few politicians in office by adding to debt at very fast rate. Not very good options I agree, but leaning to finding that economic cycle trough we have been avoiding from a mostly failed and self serving government "stimulus" plan the private sector has not responded well enough to.

            Thanks Bush 43, Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Boehner, McConnell, and many others... epic levels of failure.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #7
              Re: You Know... It's Risky To Support Obama...

              If the rest of the world was doing fantastically well then you could maybe blame the President for the US economy being less than amazing but I'm sorry to break it to you but it's kind of shit everywhere so it's a lot harder to grow exports.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #8
                Re: You Know... It's Risky To Support Obama...

                Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
                If the rest of the world was doing fantastically well then you could maybe blame the President for the US economy being less than amazing but I'm sorry to break it to you but it's kind of shit everywhere so it's a lot harder to grow exports.
                No, I can still get away with the comment as it goes to the motivations behind the spending we have put forth to date. Little of is has anything to do with the economic cycle, more to do with our very matured problem now of votes in exchange for more from the treasury, less contribution to, or a combination of both. If we are truly a nation that leads then we should be able to stabilize our economy to a point where the private sector then takes over with it's own spending even in the face of other economies. Which are not all bad. Has not quite worked out that way but we have a very sizable debt to show for our failed efforts.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #9
                  Re: You Know... It's Risky To Support Obama...

                  Originally posted by tsquare View Post
                  Face it... most people are worse off than they were 4 years ago.

                  Supporters of Obama seem to have had it worse still.

                  Overall household income is down, Black household income is down even more.

                  Black unemployment is higher...

                  Black poverty is higher...

                  Young people suffer too... their income is down, and even with college degrees their unemployment is twice the general population.

                  Then we get to the unions...



                  How bad is that?



                  Tens of millions of dollars spent by the unions... tens of thousands of dues paying jobs lost.

                  Those of his supporters here continue to claim that Obama's first term was a great success.

                  The question would seem to be: how much more of this "success" can Obama's supporters take?


                  Union membership falls to 70-year low | The Detroit News | detroitnews.com

                  Furchtgott-Roth: Why the unions are shrinking | WashingtonExaminer.com
                  And now you are going to try to make the case that everyone would have been better off with McCain and Palin......

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #10
                    Re: You Know... It's Risky To Support Obama...

                    Originally posted by goober View Post
                    And now you are going to try to make the case that everyone would have been better off with McCain and Palin......
                    I would not go that far... it would just be a different set of vote for me pet projects, useless to the economic cycle spending, etc. under McCain & Palin or Romney & Ryan. Under Romney & Ryan it is possible debt would increase rate of addition.

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #11
                      Re: You Know... It's Risky To Support Obama...

                      Originally posted by Sluggo View Post
                      I would not go that far... it would just be a different set of vote for me pet projects, useless to the economic cycle spending, etc. under McCain & Palin or Romney & Ryan. Under Romney & Ryan it is possible debt would increase rate of addition.
                      We just had an election and Ohio and Florida and Virginia and Michigan put Obama over the top.
                      Why?
                      Because the people in those states are better off than they were 4 years ago.
                      When TSquare thinks about Bush, he thinks about 4.2% unemployment, well unemployment was 4.2% under Bush, in January 2001.
                      There was a budget surplus, in 2001.
                      T forgets just how bad things were in 2008.
                      But most people remember, and that's why most people voted for Obama.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #12
                        Re: You Know... It's Risky To Support Obama...

                        Originally posted by goober View Post
                        We just had an election and Ohio and Florida and Virginia and Michigan put Obama over the top.
                        Why?
                        Because the people in those states are better off than they were 4 years ago.
                        When TSquare thinks about Bush, he thinks about 4.2% unemployment, well unemployment was 4.2% under Bush, in January 2001.
                        There was a budget surplus, in 2001.
                        T forgets just how bad things were in 2008.
                        But most people remember, and that's why most people voted for Obama.
                        That is not the entire reason, it is just one of many. As an example, Romney & Ryan seemed to go out of their way to ensure a significant portion of our electorate voted for Obama no matter how they are doing vs. 4 years ago. Another example, enough of the electorate did not go for the idea of being a social conservative to get a pretend fiscal conservative as well. Even another, while Romney did well during the first debate he did not fare so well for the next two. There are others.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #13
                          Re: You Know... It's Risky To Support Obama...

                          Originally posted by Sluggo View Post
                          That is not the entire reason, it is just one of many. As an example, Romney & Ryan seemed to go out of their way to ensure a significant portion of our electorate voted for Obama no matter how they are doing vs. 4 years ago. Another example, enough of the electorate did not go for the idea of being a social conservative to get a pretend fiscal conservative as well. Even another, while Romney did well during the first debate he did not fare so well for the next two. There are others.
                          The thing is, most people don't change their minds, there are very few people who were going to vote for A, but after the debate decided to vote for B.
                          And when they go, there aren't anymore left, there isn't a trend, And I don't think that if you pulled out Romney and plugged in Bachman or Thune or Christy or Cantor or Rubio it would have changed the outcome.
                          And that's what the Christys and the Thunes and the Jindals and the Rubios figured, so they stayed clear.
                          The incumbent has an advantage, and the professional politicians knew that Obama didn't screw up, he was right where he had to be to win.
                          Things were better than they were 4 years before, growth was modest, but there was growth, Bin laden was dead, GM was alive, the only people who figured Romney would win were the brainwashed minions, and the willingly deluded.
                          The people who thought all the polls oversampled Democrats, when really the polls were telling them that there were a lot more Democrats after 4 years of Obama.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #14
                            Re: You Know... It's Risky To Support Obama...

                            Originally posted by goober View Post
                            The thing is, most people don't change their minds, there are very few people who were going to vote for A, but after the debate decided to vote for B.
                            And when they go, there aren't anymore left, there isn't a trend, And I don't think that if you pulled out Romney and plugged in Bachman or Thune or Christy or Cantor or Rubio it would have changed the outcome.
                            And that's what the Christys and the Thunes and the Jindals and the Rubios figured, so they stayed clear.
                            The incumbent has an advantage, and the professional politicians knew that Obama didn't screw up, he was right where he had to be to win.
                            Things were better than they were 4 years before, growth was modest, but there was growth, Bin laden was dead, GM was alive, the only people who figured Romney would win were the brainwashed minions, and the willingly deluded.
                            The people who thought all the polls oversampled Democrats, when really the polls were telling them that there were a lot more Democrats after 4 years of Obama.
                            While you say few changed their minds post the debates, the poll numbers did change a little (even FoxNews polls showed some movement.) It may not have been much but it appears independents might have made those moves. You are right about the lot of Republicans this time around that tore themselves apart trying to get the nomination, having Christie in the mix may have made matters worse. One of many reasons I kept asking, "is this the best Republicans have?"

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #15
                              Re: You Know... It's Risky To Support Obama...

                              Originally posted by goober View Post
                              We just had an election and Ohio and Florida and Virginia and Michigan put Obama over the top.
                              Why?
                              Because the people in those states are better off than they were 4 years ago.
                              When TSquare thinks about Bush, he thinks about 4.2% unemployment, well unemployment was 4.2% under Bush, in January 2001.
                              There was a budget surplus, in 2001.
                              T forgets just how bad things were in 2008.
                              But most people remember, and that's why most people voted for Obama.
                              Not too hard to remember how bad things were in 2008, they are the same today as they were then.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?

                              Working...
                              X