Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 16, 2018, 11:39:42 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Be sure to enable your "Ultimate Profile" for even more goodies on your profile page!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Election Archive
| |-+  Election Archive
| | |-+  All Archived Boards
| | | |-+  2012 Elections
| | | | |-+  The Official CNN/Tea Party Express Debate Discussion Thread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 [19] Print
Author Topic: The Official CNN/Tea Party Express Debate Discussion Thread  (Read 20514 times)
shua
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18,599
Nepal


View Profile WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #450 on: September 13, 2011, 02:29:21 pm »

Quote
Cain and Santorum were friendly animals in an old Disney movie. It is inconceivable to imagine them in the White House. The wicked idiots in the audience were tireless in their cheers — one of the field markings of their idiocy.
Richard Brookheiser (Sr Editor, National Review)

Logged

"Darkness makes a great canvas" - unidentified man

Reluctant Republican
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,878


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #451 on: September 13, 2011, 02:46:45 pm »

Saw this on a Ron Paul site I frequent, so keep that in mind, but I thought it was interesting.

Total candidate talking time (in seconds): 4041

Percent of time by candidate:

Perry: 21.3%
Romney: 15.7%
Bachmann: 12.7%
Huntsman: 11.3%
Gingrich: 10.8%
Santorum: 10.4%
Paul: 9.6%
Cain: 8.2%

link: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?315288-Percent-Debate-Time-By-Candidate

Paul should have had more time, Huntsman less. Also, I will say that Santorum knows how to utilize his time effectively to get his message out.
Logged

"In addition to my other numerous acquaintances, I have one more intimate confidant. . . . My depression is the most faithful mistress I have known- no wonder, then, that I return the love.”

― Søren Kierkegaard
memphis
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16,010


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #452 on: September 13, 2011, 03:02:16 pm »

*is amused at the idea that you can measure poverty in that sort of way*

Well, something is being measured.  Call it what you will.

We like statistics, and HHS has come up with the definition of poverty as a "family of four living at or below an income of $22314 per year."  Other incomes for other family sizes, of course.  And, technically, the income thresholds do vary with age of family members in their full algorithm.  The US Department of agriculture provides food costs data.  There are something like 48 different thresholds in use.  But obviously it's a statistical yardstick, and not a complete description of poverty in the abstract sense.

Whatever you make of it, it's an objective, time-varying parameter, and it's now at 46.2 million people.  That's huge.  Highest level in the 52 years that the statistics have been collected.

The aggregate GDP may be increasing, and that may have economists saying that the recession was brief, and finished about 2 years ago, but maybe other indicators besides GDP growth should be given more weight in the minds of policy makers.  This poverty index is just one of those indicators. 
It's the highest raw number of people in 52. It's nowhere near the pre-Great Society percent. It is the highest precent since the early 90s recession. And the GOP is 100% convinced that cutting capital gains taxes or the large inheritance tax and all other taxes that primarly hit richers is the solution for people in poverty Roll Eyes
Logged

I cannot do anything good under my own power. 
I don't want my women talking to people
Vosem
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,882
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: -6.26

P P

View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #453 on: September 13, 2011, 03:11:10 pm »

The rabidly pro Israeli members of the Tea Party are the most annoying people. I know, I am from Little Israel (South Florida).....If you dont support bombing and killing everyone they hate, your a "dirty Liberul Rino Commie Muslim Nazi"

Israel is the only ally we had in the Middle East for many decades -- now, after much bloodshed, I can say the current government of Iraq is also fairly pro-American. Why should we turn our backs after sixty-three years of friendship? Especially if one of al Qaeda's goals in attacking us was for us to turn our backs on them?

Luckily, I'm pretty sure none of the candidates up there, or Barack Obama, agree with you.

Turkey is our real Middle Eastern ally.


That's why we recognize Northern Cyprus.

Israel has the right to exist and all, but it needs to get its head out of its rear.

How is Israel's head in its rear? With regard to its policies on Palestine, the founding declaration of the PLO states that Israel does not have the right to exist. Hamas also affirms this. Fatah believes in (this is a quote the Constitution of Fatah):

12. Complete liberation of Palestine, and eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence.

Does this amount to a forced removal (or an 'eradication') of settlers, many of whom have lived in today's West Bank for several generations, since before the Israeli declaration of independence?

Fatah also maintains a military wing, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades. The AAMB is recognized by the United States as a terrorist organization, while Fatah is not (something I find contradictory; the two are very closely linked).

Additionally, with many of its neighbors hostile (consider the anti-Israeli agitation in Egypt that recently occurred), Israel must, for its own survival, maintain a large military.

But this is the wrong thread for this sort of thing; that would be International General Discussion.

Logged

I will NOT be accepting any result other than a victory for America's next President, Governor Gary Earl Johnson Angry
angus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 17,436
View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #454 on: September 13, 2011, 03:23:16 pm »

It's the highest raw number of people in 52. It's nowhere near the pre-Great Society percent. It is the highest precent since the early 90s recession. And the GOP is 100% convinced that cutting capital gains taxes or the large inheritance tax and all other taxes that primarly hit richers is the solution for people in poverty Roll Eyes

True, it's the highest raw number, but as a percent it was matched in around 1992.

As for the Great Depression, you cannot make any objective claims, since the agency wasn't collecting this particular statistic.  But, yes, with an unemployment rate of 25ish percent, it's probably safe to say that there was "more poverty" in the 30s than today.  Still, it's not quantifiable.

As for the trickle-down theory, obviously there's room for argument there.  I don't want to get into it, as my views are too left for Republicans and too right for Democrats, and I'd just be like Rick Perry, a faction of one, having to defend arguments from both sides.
Logged
Korwinist
ModernBourbon Democrat
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,268


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #455 on: September 13, 2011, 04:05:48 pm »

Saw this on a Ron Paul site I frequent, so keep that in mind, but I thought it was interesting.

Total candidate talking time (in seconds): 4041

Percent of time by candidate:

Perry: 21.3%
Romney: 15.7%
Bachmann: 12.7%
Huntsman: 11.3%
Gingrich: 10.8%
Santorum: 10.4%
Paul: 9.6%
Cain: 8.2%

link: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?315288-Percent-Debate-Time-By-Candidate

Paul should have had more time, Huntsman less. Also, I will say that Santorum knows how to utilize his time effectively to get his message out.

Yes, I saw that too. Even more annoying is that Paul was never given a chance of rebuttal until the end, that the question regarding the Federal Reserve (which is to him what frothing at gays is to Santorum) had him as the only candidate NOT given an answer, and several of his questions being entirely loaded (the "YOU WOULD LET THIS INNOCENT MAN DIE" question comes to mind). Fortunately, he performed great up until the 9/11 question (whereupon he managed to stumble upon the only way he could make Santorum look correct), and the main focus of this debate was Perry getting crushed from attacks from literally every direction (Though I doubt the media pundits would admit his overwhelming defeat even if he started engaging in name calling)


Quote
How is Israel's head in its rear? With regard to its policies on Palestine, the founding declaration of the PLO states that Israel does not have the right to exist. Hamas also affirms this. Fatah believes in (this is a quote the Constitution of Fatah):

12. Complete liberation of Palestine, and eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence.

Does this amount to a forced removal (or an 'eradication') of settlers, many of whom have lived in today's West Bank for several generations, since before the Israeli declaration of independence?

Fatah also maintains a military wing, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades. The AAMB is recognized by the United States as a terrorist organization, while Fatah is not (something I find contradictory; the two are very closely linked).

Additionally, with many of its neighbors hostile (consider the anti-Israeli agitation in Egypt that recently occurred), Israel must, for its own survival, maintain a large military.

But this is the wrong thread for this sort of thing; that would be International General Discussion.

Israel punishes innocents as much as it punishes terrorists, if not more. This, in turn, radicalizes those they don't kill into becoming terrorists. For example, starving out what amounts to a giant ghetto with a blockade to defeat a single group of terrorists only makes them angrier, as does carpet bombing large areas to catch a couple of low quality rocket launchers. Yes, Israel fights terrorists. But Israel is a nation, it should hold to higher standards than those of terrorists.
Logged

Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 17,495
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #456 on: September 14, 2011, 06:19:27 am »

FactCheck.org's take on the debate, if anyone cares about such things.
Logged

King
intermoderate
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29,535
United States


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #457 on: September 14, 2011, 12:59:11 pm »

FactCheck.org's take on the debate, if anyone cares about such things.

It's very easy to spot facts in this debate.  Whatever was booed is the truth.
Logged

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 [19] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines