Your "Gut feelings" EV map.

[War on Want]

I haven't seen this much red on the maps since......the 2004 elections with John Kerry!

Better get used to it...or rather blue when it comes to other media outlets.

Yes, I'm used to the hackish left wing media propping up their inexperienced marxist candidate.

Marxist? LOL

Yep, his stances on the issues are directly contrary to the constitution and freedom. Do you realize the tax hikes he will put on the American people plus his folks want to re-introduce the "fairness" doctrine. I thought liberals were for free speech?

Tax hikes on those making over $1 million dollars isn't going to make me lose any sleep at night.

That attitude is exactly the problem. Who are you to take away 60% of a wealthy persons income. What right does the obnoxious federal govt have to do that?

To make society better and to have a compassionate government that actually does things for the people. I don't care if the wealthy or a few Liberitarians have a problem with it, it is part of social contract and it leads to better distribution of wealth which I am sure in your heart you want.

[War on Want]

We've been in Germany for 60+ years. WW2 was such a failure.

No. Try again.

[DownWithTheLeft]

To make society better and to have a compassionate government that actually does things for the people. I don't care if the wealthy or a few Liberitarians have a problem with it, it is part of social contract and it leads to better distribution of wealth which I am sure in your heart you want.

That statement screams "I am 12 years old and do not know anything about how the world or government works".  That is the single most idealistic and non-sensical statement utter on the forum in awhile

[War on Want]

To make society better and to have a compassionate government that actually does things for the people. I don't care if the wealthy or a few Liberitarians have a problem with it, it is part of social contract and it leads to better distribution of wealth which I am sure in your heart you want.

That statement screams "I am 12 years old and do not know anything about how the world or government works".  That is the single most idealistic and non-sensical statement utter on the forum in awhile

Thank you. I could use a real argument but you guys obiously know nothing about Kenyesianism or real economic theory because you guys are Liberitarians. See on Torie or someobody that actually knows things in an argument I might actually use stuff like this so I have to use bullsh**t like philosophy which by the way you guys believe in too.(OMG government is always bad!!! ASSHOLES!!! I want my ing money!!!)

[War on Want]

We've been in Germany for 60+ years. WW2 was such a failure.

No. Try again.

Haha, what?  Is that a denial that we are in Germany or what?  Delusional much?

No that isn't lol. I know he was using that as a reason for why there is nothing wrong with the Iraq War but that argument does not work in the slightest bit. In Germany we had no insurgency besides a few extremely hardcore Nazis and we actually had big enough of a military to sit on the damn country using our traditional Anti-Insurgency doctrine.

[DownWithTheLeft]

To make society better and to have a compassionate government that actually does things for the people. I don't care if the wealthy or a few Liberitarians have a problem with it, it is part of social contract and it leads to better distribution of wealth which I am sure in your heart you want.

That statement screams "I am 12 years old and do not know anything about how the world or government works".  That is the single most idealistic and non-sensical statement utter on the forum in awhile

Thank you. I could use a real argument but you guys obiously know nothing about Kenyesianism or real economic theory because you guys are Liberitarians. See on Torie or someobody that actually knows things in an argument I might actually use stuff like this so I have to use bullsh**t like philosophy which by the way you guys believe in too.(OMG government is always bad!!! ASSHOLES!!! I want my ing money!!!)

A real argument?  That's exactly what the argument is, the government wastes money, individual people (who are not stupid) do not.  If people control their money, they know where it goes.  They can use it to better society, the government only uses it to fund pork barrel programs and wasteful programs for the most part.  Aside from the military, the government sucks

[War on Want]

To make society better and to have a compassionate government that actually does things for the people. I don't care if the wealthy or a few Liberitarians have a problem with it, it is part of social contract and it leads to better distribution of wealth which I am sure in your heart you want.

The only thing the government can do for the people is provide equal opportunity by allowing all Americans to chase their dreams but not at the expense of others.  I'm assuming you believe in tolerance and acceptance of all lifestyles?  Why are you so hateful and intolerant towards the wealthy?  Who are you to say they can't live the way they do?  There are plenty of happy poor people and unhappy rich people.  How about the government try to fix that instead of fixing wealth, the artificial measure of worth liberals supposedly fight so hard to erase.

I am not hateful or intolerant. I am against the system where wealth sits in one class for long periods of time. Also you have never been poor have you? They have much higher rates of depression, much shorter lifespans, etc and this would spike if the government didn't do anything to try and provide at least some services. The idea behind Socialism/Liberalism is not a hatred of the wealthy but a hatred of the forces that causes class systems which causes almost no economic oppurtunity for the lower middle class and none for the poor.

[War on Want]

To make society better and to have a compassionate government that actually does things for the people. I don't care if the wealthy or a few Liberitarians have a problem with it, it is part of social contract and it leads to better distribution of wealth which I am sure in your heart you want.

That statement screams "I am 12 years old and do not know anything about how the world or government works".  That is the single most idealistic and non-sensical statement utter on the forum in awhile

Thank you. I could use a real argument but you guys obiously know nothing about Kenyesianism or real economic theory because you guys are Liberitarians. See on Torie or someobody that actually knows things in an argument I might actually use stuff like this so I have to use bullsh**t like philosophy which by the way you guys believe in too.(OMG government is always bad!!! ASSHOLES!!! I want my ing money!!!)

A real argument?  That's exactly what the argument is, the government wastes money, individual people (who are not stupid) do not.  If people control their money, they know where it goes.  They can use it to better society, the government only uses it to fund pork barrel programs and wasteful programs for the most part.  Aside from the military, the government sucks

More arguments that make more sense. There has always been corruption and waste in corporations or in huge businesses. Also that is extremely false the government only spends a small amount of money on pork barrel programs and some can be very benefical to regions, when they are the right kind. Sure it is not as efficent as a business but money can be directed better and be used wisely. The idea is that a business' cause to is to benefit itself and create profits for its shareholders, the government's economic cause is to help the economy so from a philosophical standpoint it sounds better, but that is not why I am a Liberal.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Again, you prove that you do not understand anything about how the world works.  At least you acknowledge the government wastes money and people know how to spend it better.

[minionofmidas]

My gut feeling is that Obama will win by a Clinton-comparable margin, doing better in some regions, worse in others.

[War on Want]

Again, you prove that you do not understand anything about how the world works.  At least you acknowledge the government wastes money and people know how to spend it better.

Ummmmm no you understand nothing. Do you know who Maynard Keynes is or how economic conditions existed before say 1910 or even better 1930 or so?

[Ban my account ffs!]

Again, you prove that you do not understand anything about how the world works.  At least you acknowledge the government wastes money and people know how to spend it better.

Stop being such a ing thickheaded idiot.  You've done nothing in this thread but prove that your head is so far up your ass that you are actually looking at your vocal chords from the inside.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Again, you prove that you do not understand anything about how the world works.  At least you acknowledge the government wastes money and people know how to spend it better.

Ummmmm no you understand nothing. Do you know who Maynard Keynes is or how economic conditions existed before say 1910 or even better 1930 or so?

I know about Keynes, I wrote an essay on him and how moronic his ideas were actually.  And its John Keynes, I believe Maynard was his middle name.  Taking what another poster says it using it to make yourself look semi-intelligent is really dumb too.  And if you think that the depression was caused simply unfettered capitalism, you really should pass the 8th grade.  I'm sure someday you'll get there, DON'T GIVE UP!!

[DownWithTheLeft]

Again, you prove that you do not understand anything about how the world works.  At least you acknowledge the government wastes money and people know how to spend it better.

Stop being such a ing thickheaded idiot.  You've done nothing in this thread but prove that your head is so far up your ass that you are actually looking at your vocal chords from the inside.

I never knew you subscribed to the "you don't agree with me your wrong school" EMD belongs to.  Facts and opinions are completely different things.

[War on Want]

To make society better and to have a compassionate government that actually does things for the people. I don't care if the wealthy or a few Liberitarians have a problem with it, it is part of social contract and it leads to better distribution of wealth which I am sure in your heart you want.

The only thing the government can do for the people is provide equal opportunity by allowing all Americans to chase their dreams but not at the expense of others.  I'm assuming you believe in tolerance and acceptance of all lifestyles?  Why are you so hateful and intolerant towards the wealthy?  Who are you to say they can't live the way they do?  There are plenty of happy poor people and unhappy rich people.  How about the government try to fix that instead of fixing wealth, the artificial measure of worth liberals supposedly fight so hard to erase.

I am not hateful or intolerant. I am against the system where wealth sits in one class for long periods of time. Also you have never been poor have you? They have much higher rates of depression, much shorter lifespans, etc and this would spike if the government didn't do anything to try and provide at least some services. The idea behind Socialism/Liberalism is not a hatred of the wealthy but a hatred of the forces that causes class systems which causes almost no economic oppurtunity for the lower middle class and none for the poor.

If you were tolerant of a wealthy lifestyle you would allow them to live their lives the way they see fit instead of punishing them for succeeding.  All disproportionate taxes do is send a message of low value in a certain class and greed of the government.  Progressive taxes say, "you are doing better than those other people, give me your money."  Instead, if the government really wanted to make a difference they should simply be encouraging philanthropy.  Private charities and self-motivated redistribution of wealth is leaps and bounds more efficient than government will ever be.  This is all simply put and basic, but honestly, it's nothing more than that.

Wow. I never thought you were this nieveh Fezzy. Taxes are not a punishment by any means, they are a necessary evil and the rich can take the burden much better and even if we tax them heavily remember they will still disproportinally more money than 90% of the country. Not to mention many of the rich are only rich because of inheritance and having been raise in a upper middle class family. I will post a better reply later because I have to leave right now.

[War on Want]

Again, you prove that you do not understand anything about how the world works.  At least you acknowledge the government wastes money and people know how to spend it better.

Ummmmm no you understand nothing. Do you know who Maynard Keynes is or how economic conditions existed before say 1910 or even better 1930 or so?

I know about Keynes, I wrote an essay on him and how moronic his ideas were actually.  And its John Keynes, I believe Maynard was his middle name.  Taking what another poster says it using it to make yourself look semi-intelligent is really dumb too.  And if you think that the depression was caused simply unfettered capitalism, you really should pass the 8th grade.  I'm sure someday you'll get there, DON'T GIVE UP!!

More name calling. Thanks.

Also I don't give a flying  if that was his middle name or not I only care about his economic ideas. Please explain to me what was so idiotic about it. The idea is that the government could help to balance out the economy, shorten recessions, and guide the invisible hand of the market better so there was less damage. Also I have read many books on the Great Depression and I perfectly understand where it comes from.

[DownWithTheLeft]

First of all, his theories were developed in 1936, a time when the world was very different.  Two, he was British not American, completely different economies.  Finally, the idea that the government cannot rectify anything is incredibly naive.

[© tweed]

I haven't seen this much red on the maps since......the 2004 elections with John Kerry!

not quite, no.  check the predictions databases from 2004 and compare them to this year.  Bush was also always favored on Intrade and in sportsbooks in 2004 (up until election night, anyway).

[DownWithTheLeft]

I haven't seen this much red on the maps since......the 2004 elections with John Kerry!

not quite, no.  check the predictions databases from 2004 and compare them to this year.  Bush was also always favored on Intrade and in sportsbooks in 2004 (up until election night, anyway).

That might have had a lot to do with power of incumbency though

[© tweed]

I haven't seen this much red on the maps since......the 2004 elections with John Kerry!

not quite, no.  check the predictions databases from 2004 and compare them to this year.  Bush was also always favored on Intrade and in sportsbooks in 2004 (up until election night, anyway).

That might have had a lot to do with power of incumbency though

so?  States claimed that people were as optimistic about Kerry's chances as they are Obama's when all of the evidence that exists points to the contrary.

[DownWithTheLeft]

I haven't seen this much red on the maps since......the 2004 elections with John Kerry!

not quite, no.  check the predictions databases from 2004 and compare them to this year.  Bush was also always favored on Intrade and in sportsbooks in 2004 (up until election night, anyway).

That might have had a lot to do with power of incumbency though

so?  States claimed that people were as optimistic about Kerry's chances as they are Obama's when all of the evidence that exists points to the contrary.

The average American and the mainstream media seemed to be just as estatic about Kerry's chances, the oddmakers just didn't think so.  There seems to be quite a difference

[© tweed]

I haven't seen this much red on the maps since......the 2004 elections with John Kerry!

not quite, no.  check the predictions databases from 2004 and compare them to this year.  Bush was also always favored on Intrade and in sportsbooks in 2004 (up until election night, anyway).

That might have had a lot to do with power of incumbency though

so?  States claimed that people were as optimistic about Kerry's chances as they are Obama's when all of the evidence that exists points to the contrary.

The average American and the mainstream media seemed to be just as estatic about Kerry's chances, the oddmakers just didn't think so.  There seems to be quite a difference

there is absolutely no way to substantiate the claim you just made

[© tweed]

and oddsmakers don't "think" about anything.  what they do is adjust their odds to garner maximum revenue.  which means the market dictates odds, not oddsmakers.

[DownWithTheLeft]

I haven't seen this much red on the maps since......the 2004 elections with John Kerry!

not quite, no.  check the predictions databases from 2004 and compare them to this year.  Bush was also always favored on Intrade and in sportsbooks in 2004 (up until election night, anyway).

That might have had a lot to do with power of incumbency though

so?  States claimed that people were as optimistic about Kerry's chances as they are Obama's when all of the evidence that exists points to the contrary.

The average American and the mainstream media seemed to be just as estatic about Kerry's chances, the oddmakers just didn't think so.  There seems to be quite a difference

there is absolutely no way to substantiate the claim you just made

Just as there is no way to substantiate who the general populous feels about Obama's chance.  We just have hunches to go on.  Oddsmakers don't reflect the general population, they reflect polls, trends, and statistics

[Hatman 🍁]