Third and Final Presidential Debate Thread.

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by sheepslayer247

Food stamps are a small drop in the bucket compared to other spending and it shows the lack of compassion of a certain group of people when they exploit the hardship of others for a political agenda.

The increase of People on Foodstamps show Obama's Policies to get this country back to work, ISN'T working !!!
The poor cant find jobs! The Middle class is losing Jobs!


That IS the FACT !

In case you haven't noticed, the increase is on Obama's watch, due to failed policies. More people in need. How can ANYONE not see this for what it truly is?????

Foodstamp enrollment was increasing under Bush and continued under Obama. The failure is in corporatist-friendly presidents that uphold run-amok capitalism before anything else.

Why can't you see that Romney will continue on as Obama has? Hell, he wont even repeal Obamacare!

Obama did nothing in this debate to stop Romney's momentum. The American electorate will not double down on failure by re-electing an incompetent for another 4 years. It is over. Obama is way behind Romney in cash on hand. He has all but abandoned efforts in Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, etc.. His "firewall" is getting smaller and smaller. Obama is a Jimmy Carter/1980 redux - terrible economy at home and no credibility abroad.

reply to post by sheepslayer247


Since Obama is one of the most anti-Capitalist anti- free market Presidents in the history of the US< then explain how the use of foodstamps went up under an anti Capitalist President. Your theory is backwards. And you tell us we don't understand socialism. You could try and study the Cloward-Piven strategy Please call Dinesh DSouza, maybe he can explain it all to you.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

I saw that, too.
I watched the debate, and read this post.
So far, I've only discovered that people see what they want to see, they leap at any discrepancy of the other guy to bolster up their own ego and say "I was right! My guy's winning."
I didn't see that.
I'm going to watch the debate again, to see all this body language and gasping and poking and mad dancing of which you all are speaking. Either I watched the wrong debate, or you all have been watching "American Bandstand" with your descriptions of insane body motions.

In my opinion, neither succeeded at this debate. They started off on the topic of foreign policy, but then everyone, including the ushers, just meandered off into parts unknown. Now I have to go off and fact check both of these bastards.

Originally posted by Sparky63

Originally posted by FreebirdGirl

Originally posted by alternateuniverse
reply to post by sheepslayer247

 

For someone NOT VOTING FOR OBAMA, you sure are fired up. Calm down.

Romney will be president, Obama must go. The Economy Will Improve and Americans Will Be Happy Again.

Oh really explain how Romney will create jobs? How will the economy be improved?Whose economy ? The average American or just the fat cats? Will we magically start manufacturing a product that the whole world will want? Will these jobs afford Americans the resources to take care of themselves? Stop drinking the Kool-Aid.No one can fix our problem in ten years let alone four. I am not an Obama fan but I will bet you everything you own that with Romney or Obama things will not get better. However, I would love to be wrong. So Please explain to me how Romney will accomplish all that you claim.

Romney is counting on ending Obamacare and hoping that small business will feel more confident to hire new people. My boss is one who is voting for Romney and said that he cannot and will not hire any new employees due to the added costs of Obamacare. We ran the numbers and due the number of employees we have Obama care is costing our company a small fortune. Small businesses are not confident about the future and they are holding off from expanding and hiring. At least that's the way it looks from my perspective. Just my opinion of course. I am not voting for either Romney or Obama. I just call it as I see it.

How many businesses went bankrupt or stopped hiring/expanding due to Romney's healthcare plan as govenor?Romney's plan was to help the uninsured and not too much different from Obama's except:

So which plan is better when it comes to financing? Again, fair question.

But there's a big difference -- Massachusetts got the federal government to pick up the lion's share of the cost. MA health reform would have been impossible without the Administration of President George W. Bush playing Sugar Daddy.

I would propose -- the appropriate comparison is how ObamaCare was financed in comparison with the major health achievement of Obama's predecessor, George W. Bush.

In 2003, with Bush's strong support, a Republican-controlled House and Senate approved the Medicare Modernization Act (MMA) that created the Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit, a big advance sought by senior citizen groups for many years. How was that law financed? 25% was financed by Medicare enrollee premiums and 75% was financed by lathering the costs onto the federal deficit. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that between 2010 and 2019, the MMA would increase the federal debt by about one trillion dollars.

In 2010, with Obama's strong support, a Democratic-controlled House and Senate approved the Affordable Care Act (ACA). White House and Congressional leaders decided that the law needed to be entirely self-financed so that it would not increase the federal debt at all. The CBO estimated in 2010 that the ACA would reduce the federal debt by about $140 billion 2010-2019.

Mitt Romney and the Republican Party support the Part D drug program and indicate no desire to eliminate it. They also indicate no desire, retrospectively, to develop a plan to pay for it beyond allowing the Chinese (and other purchasers of U.S. debt) to finance it. Barack Obama and the Democrats support the ACA and made the most difficult decision to pay for it. You can easily disagree with how they chose to pay for it -- and still respect their integrity in taking the political hits to pay for it.

Advantage -- Obama and ObamaCare.

www.boston.com...


. So your boss is not hiring based on Obama care? How many people did he hire during the so called recession and before Obamacare was passed? From your statement I am gathering you guys don't have insurance? So what do employees do when they get sick or injured? Obviously your boss wasn't doing too well before Obama was elected if he did well than he did not care enough about his employees to be concerned about their health. Either that or he's just selfish and needs more money for his pleasure while you guys are left with crumbs. I worked for a small business myself the difference was my boss was a great man who treated his employees the way he wanted to be treated. He provide health insurance when most small businesses would not. Spoke to him the other day and his business is doing great. He has that thing about him where he makes it happen no matter what. Since he always provided insurance for his employees he doesn't see his future as bleak.Maybe that's the real issue bad business plans.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by sheepslayer247

 

You, again, show that you don't even know what socialism means but use it to propagate propaganda for a political purpose.

This is quite simply a most ridiculous argument. I cannot believe you and others keep using it over and over again on this forum. It really shows the desperation.

I have no horse in this race, so there is no desperation needed. But that doesn't negate the fact that you used the word socialism in the wrong context, as you have before.

Show me where Obama has been socialist! Please.....I'll wait.

Are foodstamps the proof? Ok, then Bush was a socialist!

The word socialism is used as a buzzword to detract from the matter at hand, as was so obvious in that post.

Originally posted by sheepslayer247

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by sheepslayer247

Food stamps are a small drop in the bucket compared to other spending and it shows the lack of compassion of a certain group of people when they exploit the hardship of others for a political agenda.

The increase of People on Foodstamps show Obama's Policies to get this country back to work, ISN'T working !!!
The poor cant find jobs! The Middle class is losing Jobs!


That IS the FACT !

In case you haven't noticed, the increase is on Obama's watch, due to failed policies. More people in need. How can ANYONE not see this for what it truly is?????

Foodstamp enrollment was increasing under Bush and continued under Obama. The failure is in corporatist-friendly presidents that uphold run-amok capitalism before anything else.

Why can't you see that Romney will continue on as Obama has? Hell, he wont even repeal Obamacare!

Number 1.
WHY are you blaming Bush?



Is accountability something you cant understand? In 4 years hes made Food Stamps, into a necessity for the Poor, and Middle Class !!!!

Number 2.

Voting For Obama is going to "change" what he hasn't done in 4 Years?

Really?

Obama has done nothing, but create the biggest Polarization, between Americans ! Even more then Bush did !!!

Can he be held accountable for that, or are you going to blame Bush for that Also?




Again, you don't have to vote for Romney, but you SHOULDN'T Vote for Obama!

reply to post by TheCounselor


Mad dancing? hahaha I fell asleep while Obama was droning. My husband slept almost through the entire debate. Kind of reminds me of a psyche professor I had in school whose voice would put me to sleep almost instantaneously.

reply to post by sonnny1


I wont vote for Obama!

No matter how many times I say it, people don't comprehend!

I am trying to get everyone to see how the arguments against Obama are so bad that a Jr. High kid would laugh at it...and my kid does!

You say oust Obama because of certain reasons...I say Romney will do the same. AND HE WILL!

By the way, do you realize that you completely missed the point of my post?

reply to post by snusfanatic


Binders, old people use binders.

I have really enjoyed this thread tonight. I believe I have read every single post. This was especially appreciated tonight because my Dish TV receiver went out, and I had to listen to the debate on radio, so some of the color commentary here (usually filled in by the talking heads on TV) was nicely supplied by you folks. Well done! There are a lot of brilliant people on ATS, for sure.

Here is the thing -- you may think this is extremely shallow -- but I plan to vote as follows:

There will be one more job report coming out November 2nd. Purely and simply, if this job report shows a continued decline in the unemployment rate, I will be voting for Obama. If the unemployment rate stays the same or goes up, I will be voting for Romney. That is the way things will break for me.

I know you may think this is crazy, but in the absence of any other material facts -- with nothing to operate with except self-serving opinions, almost all of it speculation -- this job report will be the major determining factor for me. There is a certain undeniable epistemology to making a decision this way.

www.nytimes.com...

I think there are millions of people who agree with me on this. It will be hard to vote for Obama if this next jobs report does not show even a little improvement. Likewise, it it looks good, a lot of people will be willing to stay the course, no doubt. And I think it will be difficult to impossible to manipulate this report in any substantial way. I hope.

Have a nice evening, and thanks for all the deep thoughts.

Regards.

reply to post by sheepslayer247


Foodstamps isn't part of the socialist apparatus? Perhaps it is you who doesn't understand what Fabian socialism is. Permit me to explain that Fabian socialism is the implementation of socialism in incrememts. To insist that socialism must happen overnight is to believe that Revolutionary movements sparking immediate change is the only way. Socialists have long figured out that violent revolutions don't win the game and that peopel will accept their programs when they do not see the trojan horse in their files.

Why must you continue this argument, even after people from former communist countries have shown you wrong?

I just saw DSouza's movie 2016 last night. It is lsike a documentary. I will post some statements by him which are similar to what he explains in his movie. Whatever you do with that information is your business. Maybe some others here will listen.

“In his inaugural speech, Obama said he wanted to remake America,” D’Souza said. “That’s his phrase, the remaking of America. But look, in order to remake America, you have to unmake the America that’s there now. And Obama has set about doing that with a vengeance. So, if you look at what’s happened in the last four years, we’ve seen two things happen: one is the downsizing of the American economy.”

“Now here’s the key point, even middle class Americans, even poor Americans are rich by world standards,” he said. “If someone makes $20,000 a year, that puts them in the very upper echelons of income globally. So what Obama’s about is not just redistributing income within America; he’s ultimately about global reparations. So traditional democrats want to recirculate you may say money within the country. Obama wants to realign America in the world.”
Discussing defense, D’Souza said Obama is being naïve in reducing America’s nuclear warheads because other countries are not following suit.

“When Obama came to office, America had 5,000 nuclear warheads,” D’Souza said. “Now, thanks to the START Treaty (STrategic Arms Reduction Treaty) we’re going down to 1,500 warheads. Obama has asked the Pentagon to study cutting down even further to three hundred warheads and he’s given speeches saying that he wants to have a world in which no country has nuclear weapons.”


Read more on Newsmax.com: D'Souza: Obama Has Put America's Superpower Status in Jeopardy
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

“Now here’s the key point,” he continued. “This may sound like a dreamy idea, no nuclear weapons but the truth of the matter is the rest of the world is ignoring Obama. China, India, Pakistan, North Korea, Iran is trying to get nuclear bombs. So the countries that don’t have it are trying to get it and the countries that have nuclear bombs are modernizing their arsenals. Meanwhile, Obama is slashing the nuclear arsenal of the only country that he controls, which is the United States of America.

Now Romney did make this point about Obama's giving our power away to Russia. And that is an important point in Obama's foreign policy strategy. While he is encouraging chaos and war in the middle east and North Africa, he is giving Russia advantages in nuclear warheads. So perhaps the Iran issue would be moot anyway. But Russia and Iran and more closely allied than we are.
www.newsmax.com...

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

Then you missed the candidates' spastic body motions! According to this board, they were jitterbugging allover the joint, moaning, groaning, burping, and farting. There was not one eyelash flicker that escaped the opposing views laser gaze. The nitpicking of the other guy in these posts are hilarious. Who knew you can win or lose the presidency due to a hair out of place?

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
reply to post by sonnny1

 

I wont vote for Obama!

No matter how many times I say it, people don't comprehend!

I am trying to get everyone to see how the arguments against Obama are so bad that a Jr. High kid would laugh at it...and my kid does!

You say oust Obama because of certain reasons...I say Romney will do the same. AND HE WILL!

Im sorry.

But you are very "liberal", on your views when it comes to Obama, regardless on who you wont vote for.


Im voting for Gary Johnson. Ive made that clear.


But there is nothing that Obama has done, minus Osama, that deserves him getting a second Term


PERIOD.


Hes a failure.

Originally posted by TheCounselor
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Then you missed the debater's spastic body motions! According to this board, they were jitterbugging allover the joint, moaning, groaning, burping, and farting. There was not one eyelash flicker that escaped the opposing views laser gaze. The nitpicking of the other guy in these posts are hilarious. Who knew you can win or lose the presidency due to a hair out of place?

I really don't know what you are talking about and I suspect that neither do you.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by sheepslayer247

 

Foodstamps isn't part of the socialist apparatus? Perhaps it is you who doesn't understand what Fabian socialism is. Permit me to explain that Fabian socialism is the implementation of socialism in incrememts. To insist that socialism must happen overnight is to believe that Revolutionary movements sparking immediate change is the only way. Socialists have long figured out that violent revolutions don't win the game and that peopel will accept their programs when they do not see the trojan horse in their files.

Why must you continue this argument, even after people from former communist countries have shown you wrong?

edit on 23-10-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

Fabian socialism? Really?

Did you know that Tony Blair, our former friend in the fight against terrorism, is an advocate of Fabian Socialism?

Bush and the Right support a socialist?

Fabian socialism supporters are nothing more than people that support worker union rights.

Get real....you have to do better then that!

reply to post by sonnny1


I will vote for Johnson as well....or maybe a write-in for RP.

We can agree on that.

ETA: Did you know that the Republican libertarian ideology can be considered liberal?

I have no problem being called a liberal.

The president trying to school Mitt on our military like he was a fifth grader only served to make him look 1 inch tall and petty. It diminished Obama in the role as POTUS to the smallest it has ever looked in the behavior as a president. Trying to insult Mitt's intelligence in this way was just so detrimental to him, this isn't the show "Are you smarter than a fifth grader".

Obama WON the debate on all front .. PERIOD

double post