Romney: "Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?" Answer: "Yes."
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 05:36:39 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  Romney: "Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?" Answer: "Yes."
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Romney: "Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?" Answer: "Yes."  (Read 2166 times)
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: September 02, 2012, 05:59:48 PM »


Libya is over.  Zero coalition lives lost.  Cost about as much as a day in Iraq.  You complainin'?  You must really never vote Republican.  You should see their wars.
Logged
7,052,770
Harry
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 35,222
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: September 02, 2012, 06:07:34 PM »

To even compare it Iraq and Afghanistan is dishonest and asinine...

You're right, to try to downplay Libya by comparing it to Iraq and Afghanistan, or any other conflict that wasn't solely unilateral, is dishonest.

I don't understand your point.  Neither Iraq, Afghanistan, nor Libya was solely unilateral.  We had broad international support (at least among NATO and "Western" countries) for Afghanistan and Libya, and much less, but still some, in Iraq.

The relevant point is that 0 Americans died for Libyan freedom (or "freedom"), while thousands of Americans died for Iraqi and Afghan "freedom."
Logged
Donerail
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,345
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: September 02, 2012, 06:18:42 PM »

To even compare it Iraq and Afghanistan is dishonest and asinine...

You're right, to try to downplay Libya by comparing it to Iraq and Afghanistan, or any other conflict that wasn't solely unilateral, is dishonest.

I don't understand your point.  Neither Iraq, Afghanistan, nor Libya was solely unilateral.  We had broad international support (at least among NATO and "Western" countries) for Afghanistan and Libya, and much less, but still some, in Iraq.

The relevant point is that 0 Americans died for Libyan freedom (or "freedom"), while thousands of Americans died for Iraqi and Afghan "freedom."

Not that kind of unilateral, domestically unilateral without any respect for the War Powers Resolution. The relevant point is that the President declared a unilateral war w/out Congress
Logged
Donerail
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,345
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: September 02, 2012, 06:20:20 PM »


Libya is over.  Zero coalition lives lost.  Cost about as much as a day in Iraq.  You complainin'?  You must really never vote Republican.  You should see their wars.

I vote Republican on occasion (ex: Paul), but never for warmongers.
Logged
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: September 02, 2012, 07:10:55 PM »

To even compare it Iraq and Afghanistan is dishonest and asinine...

You're right, to try to downplay Libya by comparing it to Iraq and Afghanistan, or any other conflict that wasn't solely unilateral, is dishonest.

I don't understand your point.  Neither Iraq, Afghanistan, nor Libya was solely unilateral.  We had broad international support (at least among NATO and "Western" countries) for Afghanistan and Libya, and much less, but still some, in Iraq.

The relevant point is that 0 Americans died for Libyan freedom (or "freedom"), while thousands of Americans died for Iraqi and Afghan "freedom."

Not that kind of unilateral, domestically unilateral without any respect for the War Powers Resolution. The relevant point is that the President declared a unilateral war w/out Congress

I see if it's a war that a few hundred rich white men approve of while BILLIONS of people around the world protest against it is okay.  But if BILLIONS of people around the world agree with the war but you don't seek the approval of a few hundred rich white men then it is a travesty?!
Logged
Donerail
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,345
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: September 02, 2012, 07:31:28 PM »

To even compare it Iraq and Afghanistan is dishonest and asinine...

You're right, to try to downplay Libya by comparing it to Iraq and Afghanistan, or any other conflict that wasn't solely unilateral, is dishonest.

I don't understand your point.  Neither Iraq, Afghanistan, nor Libya was solely unilateral.  We had broad international support (at least among NATO and "Western" countries) for Afghanistan and Libya, and much less, but still some, in Iraq.

The relevant point is that 0 Americans died for Libyan freedom (or "freedom"), while thousands of Americans died for Iraqi and Afghan "freedom."

Not that kind of unilateral, domestically unilateral without any respect for the War Powers Resolution. The relevant point is that the President declared a unilateral war w/out Congress

I see if it's a war that a few hundred rich white men approve of while BILLIONS of people around the world protest against it is okay.  But if BILLIONS of people around the world agree with the war but you don't seek the approval of a few hundred rich white men then it is a travesty?!

Please provide your source for "billions of people around the world" agreeing with the bombing of Libya.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: September 02, 2012, 11:14:52 PM »


I hate that meme.  What shovel ready jobs?  What government bureaucracy is going to have plenty of constriction plans and environmental permits in hand for projects that they had no funding to achieve?  And if they did why weren't they being lambasted back before 2009 for wasting money on excessive planning and permitting when they could have used some of those funds to have less plans lying around and more construction already done?

The idea that infrastructure spending is something that these days can be quickly turned off and on is ludicrous.  Now perhaps if we had realized back in early 2009 that we'd still be in a bad spot we could have had a long term program that provided for stimulus spending over a four year period, but probably not because of the politics involved.  What politician of any party wants to say things are going to be that bad that long?
Logged
Free Palestine
FallenMorgan
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,022
United States
Political Matrix
E: -10.00, S: -10.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: September 02, 2012, 11:42:12 PM »

To even compare it Iraq and Afghanistan is dishonest and asinine...

You're right, to try to downplay Libya by comparing it to Iraq and Afghanistan, or any other conflict that wasn't solely unilateral, is dishonest.

I don't understand your point.  Neither Iraq, Afghanistan, nor Libya was solely unilateral.  We had broad international support (at least among NATO and "Western" countries) for Afghanistan and Libya, and much less, but still some, in Iraq.

The relevant point is that 0 Americans died for Libyan freedom (or "freedom"), while thousands of Americans died for Iraqi and Afghan "freedom."

Not that kind of unilateral, domestically unilateral without any respect for the War Powers Resolution. The relevant point is that the President declared a unilateral war w/out Congress

I see if it's a war that a few hundred rich white men approve of while BILLIONS of people around the world protest against it is okay.  But if BILLIONS of people around the world agree with the war but you don't seek the approval of a few hundred rich white men then it is a travesty?!

Please provide your source for "billions of people around the world" agreeing with the bombing of Libya.

I don't know about billions, but the Libyan revolutionaries wanted it, and overall it was widely viewed as a humanitarian necessity, considering how Gaddafy Duck's troops were closing in on Benghazi, and there was a pretty reasonable chance that the city would be in flames if it fell to the forces that flew the world's most original flag.
Logged
後援会
koenkai
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,265


Political Matrix
E: 0.71, S: -2.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: September 03, 2012, 12:43:32 AM »

I hate that meme.  What shovel ready jobs?  What government bureaucracy is going to have plenty of constriction plans and environmental permits in hand for projects that they had no funding to achieve?

Actually, from my work experience, we actually had a lot of prospective projects lined that basically went "we're only going to do them if we get more money." Like a lot of stuff.

But then again, we didn't get sh**t from the stimulus. Well, besides a new office, which was actually quite unnecessary because the old office was quite fine.
Logged
5280
MagneticFree
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,404
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.97, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: September 03, 2012, 01:31:48 AM »

I don't see the point in another stimulus.  It was nice to have extra money, but I don't like the idea of it being from the government.  How else did it help me? Pay more bills, buy more useless garbage I already have?  Same thing, different tune.
Logged
They put it to a vote and they just kept lying
20RP12
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,236
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -7.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: September 03, 2012, 09:55:24 AM »

1. Jobs

More jobs are being added now than when Obama first took office. It's not sky high, but it's not a loss of jobs

Yeah! We're not doing good but at least we haven't totally descended into an Armageddon-like scenario! Vote Democrat!

2. Obamacare.

It is a fact that Obamacare will allow 30 million people to have health insurance, and I'm one of them.

No, it's a fact that Obamacare will force 30 million (actually, many, many more) people to buy health insurance. Never in the history of this country has the Federal Government forced citizens to purchase anything. Ever. Nothing. Democrats talk so much about how they favour individual autonomy and freedom, yet they support as little fiscal freedom as possible, along with this monstrosity of a healthcare bill (if you would even call it that, it's more of a tyrannical takeover of private industry, one that is comparable to the takeover of the auto industry that is still being paid off.) Frankly, it's hypocritical. Don't call yourself a supporter of freedom and then turn around and support disasters like Obamacare.
 
I think people are greatly underestimating the number of young people who will vote for Obama on that reason alone.

Yeah, I forgot young people support as little freedom as possible. Fight the power! Kill Whitey!


And Libya and potentially Syria have been started.

And we're still in Afghanistan.

(he forgot Iran as well)


This is the most irritating point that left wingers make. More than Obamacare or the Buffet Rule or anything, this makes me so furious. Obama did not kill Osama bin Laden. Obama did not take his life with his bare hands. He ordered for him to be killed, yes. But ever since 9/11, the Bush administration was constantly gathering information about his whereabouts, so the Obama administration had only a small amount of work to do in order to get bin Laden. How come nobody credits W with an assist? You know, for the 6-7 years of information he'd gathered before Obama even took office? At least give Bush his due credit. But you won't, because in your world (actually, in just about every left-winger's world) Bush did nothing right. Nothing. Not a thing. He only made this country worse and worse and basically put it on the brink of financial collapse (which he didn't do that by himself, but that's another debate) and so on and so forth. You liberals won't give Bush ANY credit. For anything. Bush could have gone to New Orleans hours before the levees broke, causing Katrina, and tried to seal the levees with bare hands and you wouldn't give him any credit. In fact, as soon as the levees broke, you'd be on your "IT'S BUSH'S FAULT" crusade. So the bin Laden point is moot. The job was nearly completed, and Obama was the one to finish it. Bush should be getting about as much credit for bin Laden's death as Obama in terms of Presidents, but SEAL team 6 deserves all of the credit, of course.

/rant


Also, this. Why does this thread belong on the 2012 board? Threads like this are the reason why people say the 2012 board is absolute crap.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: September 03, 2012, 02:00:24 PM »

I hate that meme.  What shovel ready jobs?  What government bureaucracy is going to have plenty of constriction plans and environmental permits in hand for projects that they had no funding to achieve?

Actually, from my work experience, we actually had a lot of prospective projects lined that basically went "we're only going to do them if we get more money." Like a lot of stuff.

But then again, we didn't get sh**t from the stimulus. Well, besides a new office, which was actually quite unnecessary because the old office was quite fine.

And these projects were ones you could have put into immediate effect if you had the money?  No need for additional planning, permits, or qualified personnel to oversee them?
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: September 03, 2012, 02:16:37 PM »

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Obviously you have never heard of the Militia Act of 1792.

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Granted this requirement for citizens to buy firearms was within the scope of the Federal government's power "to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia", but wouldn't ensuring that the Militia is healthy and able-bodied be within that scope as well?
Logged
Warren 4 Secretary of Everything
Clinton1996
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,203
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: September 03, 2012, 02:37:55 PM »


This is the most irritating point that left wingers make. More than Obamacare or the Buffet Rule or anything, this makes me so furious. Obama did not kill Osama bin Laden. Obama did not take his life with his bare hands. He ordered for him to be killed, yes. But ever since 9/11, the Bush administration was constantly gathering information about his whereabouts, so the Obama administration had only a small amount of work to do in order to get bin Laden. How come nobody credits W with an assist? You know, for the 6-7 years of information he'd gathered before Obama even took office? At least give Bush his due credit. But you won't, because in your world (actually, in just about every left-winger's world) Bush did nothing right. Nothing. Not a thing. He only made this country worse and worse and basically put it on the brink of financial collapse (which he didn't do that by himself, but that's another debate) and so on and so forth. You liberals won't give Bush ANY credit. For anything. Bush could have gone to New Orleans hours before the levees broke, causing Katrina, and tried to seal the levees with bare hands and you wouldn't give him any credit. In fact, as soon as the levees broke, you'd be on your "IT'S BUSH'S FAULT" crusade. So the bin Laden point is moot. The job was nearly completed, and Obama was the one to finish it. Bush should be getting about as much credit for bin Laden's death as Obama in terms of Presidents, but SEAL team 6 deserves all of the credit, of course.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4PGmnz5Ow-o
"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

"I am truly not that concerned about him."
- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts,
3/13/02


 “If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.”
- Senator Barack Obama, responding to a question about Bin Laden being in Pakistan, 2007

That's Why.
Logged
後援会
koenkai
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,265


Political Matrix
E: 0.71, S: -2.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: September 03, 2012, 02:43:27 PM »

And these projects were ones you could have put into immediate effect if you had the money?  No need for additional planning, permits, or qualified personnel to oversee them?

I mean, not all of them of course, but I think a good chunk of them, yeah. When a project is denied due to lack of funding, it's usually gotten to the point where one has planned it carefully enough to actually have cost projections.
Logged
They put it to a vote and they just kept lying
20RP12
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,236
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -7.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: September 03, 2012, 04:37:13 PM »


This is the most irritating point that left wingers make. More than Obamacare or the Buffet Rule or anything, this makes me so furious. Obama did not kill Osama bin Laden. Obama did not take his life with his bare hands. He ordered for him to be killed, yes. But ever since 9/11, the Bush administration was constantly gathering information about his whereabouts, so the Obama administration had only a small amount of work to do in order to get bin Laden. How come nobody credits W with an assist? You know, for the 6-7 years of information he'd gathered before Obama even took office? At least give Bush his due credit. But you won't, because in your world (actually, in just about every left-winger's world) Bush did nothing right. Nothing. Not a thing. He only made this country worse and worse and basically put it on the brink of financial collapse (which he didn't do that by himself, but that's another debate) and so on and so forth. You liberals won't give Bush ANY credit. For anything. Bush could have gone to New Orleans hours before the levees broke, causing Katrina, and tried to seal the levees with bare hands and you wouldn't give him any credit. In fact, as soon as the levees broke, you'd be on your "IT'S BUSH'S FAULT" crusade. So the bin Laden point is moot. The job was nearly completed, and Obama was the one to finish it. Bush should be getting about as much credit for bin Laden's death as Obama in terms of Presidents, but SEAL team 6 deserves all of the credit, of course.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4PGmnz5Ow-o
"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

"I am truly not that concerned about him."
- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts,
3/13/02


 “If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.”
- Senator Barack Obama, responding to a question about Bin Laden being in Pakistan, 2007

That's Why.

>2002
>2007
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: September 13, 2012, 10:40:36 PM »


Yeah, really. He's been told that pretty much every day since 2008.

I will not be intimidated by those who would subvert freedom of speech nor by those who would trample on the very foundations of democracy itself.
Logged
Mister Twister
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 511


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: September 13, 2012, 11:11:51 PM »


Yeah, really. He's been told that pretty much every day since 2008.

I will not be intimidated by those who would subvert freedom of speech nor by those who would trample on the very foundations of democracy itself.


Dude, this is a message board. Stop taking it so seriously.
Logged
Zioneer
PioneerProgress
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,451
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: September 14, 2012, 12:16:59 AM »


Yeah, really. He's been told that pretty much every day since 2008.

I will not be intimidated by those who would subvert freedom of speech nor by those who would trample on the very foundations of democracy itself.


You sound like a 1950s newsreel.
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: September 14, 2012, 10:02:25 PM »

Surely someone would have picked up on my melodramatic tone.
Logged
retromike22
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,433
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: September 18, 2012, 01:41:52 PM »

The number of people who think they're better off has increased, it's almost even with people who say they are worse off.

"Thirty-eight percent of registered voters now say the nation is better off, which is up from 31 percent in the August NBC/WSJ poll conducted before the conventions.
Still, a plurality of voters -- 41 percent -- believe the country is worse off, while 21 percent think it's in the same place."

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/18/13941205-nbcwsj-poll-optimism-in-obama-presidency-increases?lite
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.076 seconds with 13 queries.