Obama just handed Mitt Romney the White House:

reply to post by Beach Bum


If you think Obama whines, I think Romney would be far worse. His reaction when others at the debates have been speaking is really off putting.

He'll have that same reaction to the public when they disagree with him, doesn't make him appear very president worthy...that's also why I have a hard time thinking he has any reasonable chance of winning.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77

It seems CBS fails to realize that It was Obama who has made the sweeping changes that this country wasn't ready for. Romney wants to return it back to the Clinton days.

Yet you seem to miss the entire point of this quote. Obama has spent us into oblivion. Mitt Romney wants to stop that and maybe return it back to Clinton days of economic competence!

Originally posted by Allenb83
If Romney really wants to return this country back to the 'Clinton days', then he seriously needs to get a clue and work on monetary policy and the federal reserve system, and reign in on wasteful big government spending instead of wanting to cut proposed increases. Something Ron Paul has been talking about for many years.

We can easily return to the clinton days at least. There is something of a tech boom 2.0 waiting for the right economic conditions. Plenty of startup companies have come up and matured: Facebook, Linkedin etc... The internet is not done with Billionaire stories. To suggest that Mitt Romney knows nothing about economics or policy is ignorant. Talking and doing are two different things. That's the problem with communism. When you talk about it, it's a fine theory, but it doesn't work. Same with your libertarian world view.

Anyway, MItt Romney wants to get the nation back on track, and I don't really think he is gonna care, if the next guy (or girl) is gonna take all the credit for it. You don't see Bush coming back and attacking Obama for all the things Obama blames on him....


Most republicans don't succumb to stupid personal attacks and class warfare like that.

Originally posted by olaru12
Anyone that would vote for a man that would tie a dog to the top of a car for a 12 hr ride has some real fundamental moral issues and this issue will "dog" him thru out his campaign. Sorry for the corny metaphor.

edit on 10-6-2012 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)

This story hurt Romney pretty bad in my eyes too. Most people treat there pets like they're part of the familly, strapping your dog to the roof of your car for 12 hours is not how most people treat there animals. It may seem like a minor issue to some people, but in my opinion it shows what a heartless dude he is. Mitt Romney get's a big from me.

Hilarious little graphs on the first page. Make that in ms paint all by yourself?

Originally posted by jjf3rd77They would like him to make his campaign an affirmative case for conservative policies.

Well, there's your problem. No one really believes Romney is a 'conservative'. I think much of the Right still have that bitter taste in their mouth after giving GWBush the benefit of the doubt TWICE.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77

Originally posted by jjf3rd77

It seems CBS fails to realize that It was Obama who has made the sweeping changes that this country wasn't ready for. Romney wants to return it back to the Clinton days.

Yet you seem to miss the entire point of this quote. Obama has spent us into oblivion. Mitt Romney wants to stop that and maybe return it back to Clinton days of economic competence!

Originally posted by Allenb83
If Romney really wants to return this country back to the 'Clinton days', then he seriously needs to get a clue and work on monetary policy and the federal reserve system, and reign in on wasteful big government spending instead of wanting to cut proposed increases. Something Ron Paul has been talking about for many years.

We can easily return to the clinton days at least. There is something of a tech boom 2.0 waiting for the right economic conditions. Plenty of startup companies have come up and matured: Facebook, Linkedin etc... The internet is not done with Billionaire stories. To suggest that Mitt Romney knows nothing about economics or policy is ignorant. Talking and doing are two different things. That's the problem with communism. When you talk about it, it's a fine theory, but it doesn't work. Same with your libertarian world view.

Anyway, MItt Romney wants to get the nation back on track, and I don't really think he is gonna care, if the next guy (or girl) is gonna take all the credit for it. You don't see Bush coming back and attacking Obama for all the things Obama blames on him....


Most republicans don't succumb to stupid personal attacks and class warfare like that.

edit on 11-6-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)

Its really amazing that people can really believe what Romney is saying. Ron Paul called him out in one of the debates on his promises with fiscal spending, saying something to the effect that all of this talk is just talk, and nothing will really be done about it, as Romney was just referring to cutting proposed increases over 30 years. I wish I could find the link for it because it was brilliant. You really want to do something about our governments runaway spending? Then say your going to cut a Trillion dollars year one. When someone continuously makes generalized statements on the campaign trail like "I want to bring this country back to prosperity again" and "I want to make this country great again" and "corporations are people my friend", without really spelling out a specific economic plan to change policy that got us into this mess, then exactly what else am I supposed to think except that Romney is blowing hot air out of his ears?
Liberitarians believe in the constitution. Sure, the constitution is an interesting document on paper, but I guess it just hasn't worked for America... It was a fine theory though...
And bush is lucky that he wasn't impeached. He messed up so many things for this country and probably doesn't sleep well at night. I don't feel sorry for him one bit. Sorry, but the only person I see that can really make an effort to change this country, and actually has a plan to do it, is Ron Paul. And contrary to what you have been fed, he is still in the running for the republican nomination.

I'm a very progressive person who has recently finally gotten tired of the two party system and have basically fled it. I now see it for what it is: control, divide and conquer. Both parties are controlled by the same people: TPTB, corporations, the rich, the Illuminati.

Every election cycle we get this stuff. Propaganda from both sides about how one side is clearly, obviously going to win.

My belief is that whoever wins is already picked in advance, no voting is going to change that. Please wake up to the hoax which is the two party system and "democracy" in America.

reply to post by jjf3rd77


TECHNICALLY .. private job growth has been about equal under Obama as under Bush. That's not actually good considering there needs to be about 2-3x as much growth, but the private sector IS growing. It's government jobs at the local and state level that are being wiped out right now.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
For Mitt Romney, the president's remarks no doubt seemed like a gift, but they also presented him with a choice over how to approach this election. In the wake of the Scott Walker victory in Wisconsin, conservatives from Charles Krauthammer to Bill Kristol to Walker himself have called on Romney to make the campaign about more than Obama's economic record. They would like him to make his campaign an affirmative case for conservative policies. Obama's Great Private Sector Is Fine Declaration of June 2012 is likely to hurt their argument and encourage Romney to continue along his cautious path.

www.cbsnews.com...

This was a pretty bipartisan news article about how Obama just lost election. The only problem I had was with this statement:

If Mitt Romney decides to stay on the cautious path--giving speeches about free enterprise and keeping the focus on President Obama--it may win him the election. Then he'll just have to figure out what to do with a country that has not been prepared for the kind of sweeping changes he plans to make.

It seems CBS fails to realize that It was Obama who has made the sweeping changes that this country wasn't ready for. Romney wants to return it back to the Clinton days.

You're all so easily played..

so easily fooled. The elite must view this as child's play. You guys literally NEVER figure it out.

I haven't got time now to read the whole thread, but for those of you not yet aware, there is another choice than either of these two losers; Gary Johnson is the Libertarian candidate, he will be on all 50 state ballots and he's the real deal that only comes along every so many decades in this country. Seriously, how can anyone vote for someone who promised so much and then just kept bombing half the world, and alternatively for some punk who gay bashes to the tune of assault and battery, and is so incredibly creepy he thought pulling people over in a fake cop outfit was a fun, fun, fun idea? This in an era when people were being executed for using this tactic to be serial murderers? Mr. Chuckles just chuckles it off when asked about it. That's the best this pervert can do for damage control.

Check out the man GQ called, "Is This the Sanest Man Running for President?:
www.gq.com...

There's something else no one from his campaign will ever tell you about Romney. He suffered a head injury so severe in a car accident in France while he was there dodging the draft that he was in a coma for 2-3 days. It took him nearly a year to recover. Maybe that explains his convenient memory loss when asked about his behavior as a highly privileged member of rich, politically connected and Mormon society...

poor dog

Originally posted by shaluach

My belief is that whoever wins is already picked in advance, no voting is going to change that. Please wake up to the hoax which is the two party system and "democracy" in America.

This is my take as well. I vote in the local elections, beyond that it's all too corrupted to worry about.

Romney has as close to a zero percent chance of being elected as one could get. LOL at Romney returning to the Clinton days, the OP is in for a rough ride, I'll be here to point out his idiocy though.

Originally posted by zero1020
Hilarious little graphs on the first page. Make that in ms paint all by yourself?

You must have a problem reading sources.

Originally posted by shaluach
I'm a very progressive person who has recently finally gotten tired of the two party system and have basically fled it. I now see it for what it is: control, divide and conquer. Both parties are controlled by the same people: TPTB, corporations, the rich, the Illuminati.

Every election cycle we get this stuff. Propaganda from both sides about how one side is clearly, obviously going to win.

My belief is that whoever wins is already picked in advance, no voting is going to change that. Please wake up to the hoax which is the two party system and "democracy" in America.

Totally agree. All the two party system does is increase the chances of splitting the vote, greatly increasing the chances things won't get done, or done as slowly as possible.

When someone signs over a check for 10 million dollars to Romney, after already giving 20 million to Gingrich who used it to deface Romney. You have to wonder why so much funding is necessary if they are up to the job and have a plan.

I would love to see even a rough draft plan on how anyone running for President will start to fix things.

At least Ron Paul could cut a trillion off the deficit in a year.

Who likes these banksters so damn much anyways? I'm sure people love giving all they hard earned money away while getting shafted at every opportunity.

Anybody that think Romney is better than Obama is being played...HARD.

The two are but different sides of the same coin.


Mitt Romney's only consistency is that he is inconsistent.



GET your head out of the dirt.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by MrWendal

 

Yes the same Bill Clinton who approved Republican Economic Policies. Try to get your facts straight before replying to something you don't understand

I think I have forgotten more facts than you have learned Junior. Maybe you were not alive yet to know, but we had 12 years of Republican policy and were just coming out of a recession when Clinton took Office. The only part of his policies that one could call "Republican" or "Conservative" was his support for free trade.

reply to post by jjf3rd77


Romney won't do anything.
Nothing.
He won't change anything Obama has enacted and he will blame it on the Dems in Congress, he would take us to another war and obviously he wants to keep us in the wars we are in. He will make sure internet freedom is stripped away and he obviously isn't opposed to things like the NDAA this year.

He also flip flops on every issue ever handed to him so anyone that believes a word he says is a complete fool.

Originally posted by MrWendal

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by MrWendal

 

Yes the same Bill Clinton who approved Republican Economic Policies. Try to get your facts straight before replying to something you don't understand

I think I have forgotten more facts than you have learned Junior. Maybe you were not alive yet to know, but we had 12 years of Republican policy and were just coming out of a recession when Clinton took Office. The only part of his policies that one could call "Republican" or "Conservative" was his support for free trade.

Well, and his long-term bombing campaign in Iraq. And his stripping of welfare programs with his "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act", which was a big hit among Republicans. Oh, and his reversal of the Glass-Steagall Act, which allowed companies to become 'too big to fail'. Oh, and he increased the War on Drugs and oversaw an almost doubling of the US prison population.

Oh, and his 'Defense of Marriage Act'.

And then there was his Foreign Policy, which saw military intervention in several countries like Somalia, Rwanda, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, and Haiti, arguing "that the U.S. has the right to use military force to ensure uninhibited access to key markets, energy supplies, and strategic resources."

reply to post by stanguilles7


And everything you are describing has nothing to do with Republican or Democrat. It is why people like me sit here and say there is no difference between the 2 Parties. What is being followed in an Agenda, an ideology that has nothing to do with Political Parties.

This is why today we see a Democratic President who has expanded on so called "Republican" policies. It has been happening for decades and continues to this very day.