Romney: Most Important Numbers In Election Are 23, 47 and 16

Excerpts From: EXCLUSIVE - Romney on Debates: Obama Will 'Say Things That Aren't True' By George Stephanopoulos | ABC OTUS News
news.yahoo.com...


" Romney said the most important numbers in this election are 23, 47 and 16.

"23 million Americans out of work or underemployed. 47 million people on food stamps. $16 trillion in debt. And now the Federal Reserve, it says, " Look, this economy is not going well," he said. "

23 Million Americans Out of Work or Underemployed
47 Million People on Food Stamps
$16 Trillion in Debt

As an American, these numbers are unacceptable. How do you feel?

How I feel will get me banned and have the FEDS at my door,.All I can say, is that I'm tired and can't wait till the new civil war is fought, I'm tired of everything this society has to offer!

Those numbers mean one thing, that the US like Europe is on the verge of collapse.

And what will Romney do about it?

Nothing.

Both of these establishment minions work for the same elite.

In-case no one has noticed, nothing changes from one administration to the next, Republican or Democrat.

Exactly, Romney can shout out this rhetoric all he likes but wtf is he gonna do about it?

reply to post by RELDDIR

23 Million Americans Out of Work or Underemployed 47 Million People on Food Stamps $16 Trillion in Debt

Did he mention that these are numbers that his party helped to create?

reply to post by jam321


Excuse me, but did Obama even ATTEMPT to compromise?

Originally posted by RELDDIR
reply to post by jam321

 

Excuse me, but did Obama even ATTEMPT to compromise?

He did, but the Tea Party members of congress were refusing to compromise. It' was either their way or no way. They wanted to see the country burn to somehow reach their version of the way things should be.

Obama's legacy will be the worst in history. Every President in modern times made more effort to compromise than Obama. Reagan, Clinton, and even Bush 43 are better examples.

Originally posted by Kaploink

Originally posted by RELDDIR
reply to post by jam321

 

Excuse me, but did Obama even ATTEMPT to compromise?

He did, but the Tea Party members of congress were refusing to compromise. It' was either their way or no way. They wanted to see the country burn to somehow reach their version of the way things should be.

Anyone with a little critical thinking skill knows that this does not fall solely on the back of Obama. To say so either shows a severe lack of economic knowledge, or a desire to perpetuate bull for political purposes.

Is Obama part of the problem? Hell yes!

But let's not forget to look at his Democrat and Republican cohorts that are just as much to blame.

The most important number is 300 million. That's how many Americans there are and it's going to take a lot more than rhetoric and propaganda from Romney to pull us all out of this mess we are in.

reply to post by RELDDIR


Without having anything to compare them to, the numbers are USELESS! We have to know the history of those numbers before they mean anything. This economy was on the brink of disaster during the end of the Bush years and it was because of the policies of Bush and the GOP. Romney would go back to many of those failed policies and once again, target the middle class to support this country.

Here are the numbers that really matter (with their history as regards the 2008 election and the stimulus package that Obama enacted). Source

It's not a 9-9-9 approach to Government for Dummies, as Romney seems to prefer, but they tell the story.

Graphs are for people inept in analytical mathematics. And to most people, graphs are nothing but smoke and mirrors. The less insightful comments take up the most space.

How can you deny these numbers? Looking through history, there is no other President worst than Obama.

23 Million Americans Out of Work or Underemployed
47 Million People on Food Stamps
$16 Trillion in Debt
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

reply to post by RELDDIR


Graphs are for the mathematically inept? Seriously? Who are you trying to kid? Just because you disagree with BH's assertion, does not mean you have to insult our intelligence with such utter silliness.

Like I said before, there are many more people to blame right along with Obama. But you conveniently passed over that comment didn't you?

Probably because you would realize that there are many within your political clique that had a hand in the destruction of America. You cannot just blame Obama.

So you can continue down this road if you wish, but don't be shocked when you are no longer taken seriously by us....the fact-seeking, graph-using, mathematically-inept people of ATS.

reply to post by sheepslayer247

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
Graphs are for the mathematically inept? Seriously? Who are you trying to kid? Just because you disagree with BH's assertion, does not mean you have to insult our intelligence with such utter silliness.

Doesn't bother me. My education and career say otherwise.

Romney's numbers are catchy, though. I wonder what they would be if the GOP policies that got us into this mess would have continued... Much, much worse, I'm certain.

Here's a number for you: 2,000,000,000.00

That's how much billionaire Sheldon Adelson will save in taxes if Romney is elected. $2 Billion.

A new report shows the billionaire casino mogul and top Republican donor Sheldon Adelson stands to reap a massive tax windfall should Mitt Romney win the presidential election.

Source

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


It bothers me a little. How stupid does this person think we are?

If we were that stupid, it'd be more likely that we'd agree with him.

Ugg.....my brain hurts today.

Originally posted by Kaploink

Originally posted by RELDDIR
reply to post by jam321

 

Excuse me, but did Obama even ATTEMPT to compromise?

He did, but the Tea Party members of congress were refusing to compromise. It' was either their way or no way. They wanted to see the country burn to somehow reach their version of the way things should be.

What was his compromise?

reply to post by RELDDIR


Absolutely unacceptable. Somehow Obama has managed to make this election about NOTHING though. Here's our story:

"George W. Bush's unfunded wars and tax cuts for the wealthy caused the greatest economic collapse since the Great Depression. Obama has us moving forward and is rebuilding the economy on solid ground. For some the pace might be too slow, but this is real progress. If you elect Romney, you are electing a tax dodger who is only running for President to lower his own tax burden. Vote for Obama to continue this progress."

If this fairy tale overrides the amazing amount of information we all have at our finger tips, and gives us 4 more years of this crap - I'm joining the Ron Paul people.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


What is this? Obama's (and nearly every other politician's) polygraph results?

Yeah, that makes more sense than trying to make the current POTUS look good.
We saw where the stimulus money went, and where it was wasted.
I didn't get a dime of it, and I'm still looking for work. I wonder how the banksters and auto makers and clean energy guys are doing, right now. Are they wondering how the heck they're going to pay their bills, next month?

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


These graphs encapsulate everything wrong the mindset required to vote for Obama. Of course if you start every graph at the point the recession begins, the 'recovery' is going to look awesome. Congratulations, you've proven that recessions end and that things typically are better after a recession than during the recession. The question is are we back to healthy level of growth or are we on our way to a healthy level of growth? NO.

Losing 700,000 jobs a month was never the norm under Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, or well, just about EVERYBODY. It was an event, not the way 'life used to be before Obama.' And how is life under Obama? We're treading water. Notice how after the May 2010 to July 2011 advancement we see in every graph how improvement has slowed or flatlined? That's what you should be concerned about, and that's why Obama has got to go.

Originally posted by snusfanatic
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

These graphs encapsulate everything wrong the mindset required to vote for Obama. Of course if you start every graph at the point the recession begins, the 'recovery' is going to look awesome. Congratulations, you've proven that recessions end and that things typically are better after a recession than during the recession. The question is are we back to healthy level of growth or are we on our way to a healthy level of growth? NO.

Losing 700,000 jobs a month was never the norm under Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, or well, just about EVERYBODY. It was an event, not the way 'life used to be before Obama.' And how is life under Obama? We're treading water. Notice how after the May 2010 to July 2011 advancement we see in every graph how improvement has slowed or flatlined? That's what you should be concerned about, and that's why Obama has got to go.

Graphs can say whatever you want them to say. How about the 384k people who gave up on looking for a job last month?

reply to post by OccamsRazor04


Exactly. The problem with the Obama mindset is that history begins at the recession. Just forget that the 4-5% unemployment that has been the norm for decades is going to be impossible with Obama growth levels (at least with the same size work force). Just forget that there have been past recessions, some worse, and that we recovered faster from those than now. Just forget that other Presidents have had divided or hostile congresses and found ways to compromise and get things done. Just remember the recession, that was the old normal, and this big treadmill we're running on is the 'best anyone could have done.' Yea, that's a real uplifting message