It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If Romney wins, it will be 2008 all over again in 4 years or less.

page: 6
13
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Obama made the mistake of trying to work with the republicans in congress, and agreed to extend the tax cuts for the super rich.


I will agree that Obama would have no chance at working with a GOP controlled Congress. I will disagree that he really tried, and I likely would not have tried were I him either. What his challenge was, was how to manipulate situations so that he could achieve the effect of working with them, despite having no chance to do that. Clinton was able to do it, and he was a good president. Obama....he isn't even Bush. Let alone Clinton.

The problem isn't tax cuts for the rich. The problem is not tying those tax cuts to penalties for the cash they keep out of circulation. It should be a sliding scale if the goal is to have the trickle down effect. Otherwise you get what we have: stagnation as the wealthy squirrel away until the environment is more friendly.

Consequently, Obama policies don't help create a more friendly environment. So we get tax cuts that are stuffed into the proverbial mattress. Not recirculated to create jobs. Obama's plan was thwarted at tax cuts, and he should have reformulated instead of moving forward. He didn't.




At least Obama is saying that it is time to allow those tax cuts to expire, to ask the rich to pay more.


Words mean nothing. Actions count some. Results are all the matters. That is how the real world works.




Romney publicly states he wants more tax cuts for the rich.


Right. He is pandering to his base. He also accuses Obama of all sorts of dirty pool. Fund raising and vote grabbing. That is what these liars do.




Obama did tie bailout loans to be made on the condition that exec bonuses not be paid. This is against what the repubs wanted.


And how did that work out? seems to me that the bonuses were paid, right on schedule.

Like I said: results are all that matters. The rest is simply theatrics.




posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 07:27 PM
link   
Get real..

It will be 2008 all over again in a few years ANYWAY. Obama already made that a certainty by keeping Bernanke on and allowing QE3 to happen. We are allowing the fed to spend 85 billion dollars (money they create and pump into the economy) every month until 2016.

So you see.. it doesn't matter if it's Obama or Romney they are the same guy. Seriously they are the same, if you don't think so it's because you haven't paid close enough attention. They both support the same healthcare, they both support the fed/bernanke, they both support gun control, etc etc.

Nothing will change. It will be 2008 again with Romney.. sure, but it will be with Obama too.

Vote Gary Johnson.. he is the only person in the race that could save this country. They won't let him win, but at least you will have a voice, even if it's just one more person checking a box beside his name. That is more of a voice than you are allowed when voting for the others.



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 



Well, heres the thing: I don't want a president that will fight for the American people. I want a president who can fight for the American people and win.

It means nothing to hear what Obama's position will be. Nor does it do anything to me to hear the excuse of "obstructionist congress". If Obama were the president his followers say he is, he would be able to lead well enough to clear hurdles that are in his way. He would be slick enough to work around his opponents, not through them.

He has failed in that regard. So, as the saying goes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. And if good intentions is all Obama's got, we are in a handbasket travelling down that road.



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


And Romney is no better. I mean, he can't even tell the truth about his intentions. So you have the option of a guy that is allegedly fighting for the American people and failing miserably or a guy that never had the intention of fighting for the American people?

Again, they are both a waste of a vote as one is already chosen and neither of them are worth a damn. Voting Gary Johnson is the only vote that isn't a waste.



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Grambler
 


The Fact remains that Obama has gone after the bankers and continues to go after the bankers.

The only thing you have proven is that Obama hasn't gotten the results his political enemies claim he should have gotten, and then you try to pretend that this isn't politically expedient.

You also ignore the fact that Romney is one of those crooked bankers.

By the way, I voted for McCain.

You are the one programmed by right winged propaganda.



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 07:54 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Sure it is.

The Fed runs things. And whoever runs the Fed, i mean really truly owns the keys, is who run the US. The guy in the Oval Office is a formality. Gary Johnson would be no different.



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Grambler
 


The Fact remains that Obama has gone after the bankers and continues to go after the bankers.

The only thing you have proven is that Obama hasn't gotten the results his political enemies claim he should have gotten, and then you try to pretend that this isn't politically expedient.

You also ignore the fact that Romney is one of those crooked bankers.

By the way, I voted for McCain.

You are the one programmed by right winged propaganda.


What do you mean "go after the bankers"?

You mean keep giving them loans? Like "going after their votes"?

Do you have any evidence that he has done any more than Bush did RE: "the bankers"?



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Ordinarily I'd agree with that sentiment. However the Republican Party believes compromise is a dirty word, and have been willing to sabotage the entire country for one purpose, to make the president fail. They have went far and above just general disagreement. They went to outright we will not do a thing mode. Those that looked like they might give in and work with the President were primaried and replaced in favor of ultraconservatives.

The biggest thing they cry about is ObamaCare 95% of which they were all for when it was them dreaming it up. The reason it is like that is because Obama wanted them to be a part of it and was willing to alienate his base to get a bipartisan bill that consists of virtually nothing that his base actually wanted. If anything he went further right to get bipartisanship than Democrats are really comfortable with. One of the biggest factors in Democrat voter turnout is gonna be Romney scares the living hell out of sane people. And the hope that once term two is achieved the Republican Party will finally stop obstructing. And honestly if they are smart they will or come the midterms they will find themselves out of a job.



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Personally, I thought Obama would fail miserably, but at this point in time, I think he has done a pretty good job.

Obama might have moved into the white house almost 4 years ago, but the transfer of power is still not complete.

Obama had no choice as to who would lead the fed res.

Heck, I don't think GW had that much say, which is why I blame the GW admin, not GW.

By the way, the bankers quickly paid back their TARP loans So they could get their fat bonuses, so Obama saved tax payers hundreds of billions of dollars.

With Obama, at least we got a chance, and a 2nd term Obama will have a lot more experience, and a great deal better grip on the power to make changes.

Romney's salivating at the prospect of selling the rest of the country to the highest bidder as soon as he gets into power. I expect the Mormon church to be running the country fast as you can say Chit.



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by KeliOnyx
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Ordinarily I'd agree with that sentiment. However the Republican Party believes compromise is a dirty word, and have been willing to sabotage the entire country for one purpose, to make the president fail. They have went far and above just general disagreement. They went to outright we will not do a thing mode. Those that looked like they might give in and work with the President were primaried and replaced in favor of ultraconservatives.

The biggest thing they cry about is ObamaCare 95% of which they were all for when it was them dreaming it up. The reason it is like that is because Obama wanted them to be a part of it and was willing to alienate his base to get a bipartisan bill that consists of virtually nothing that his base actually wanted. If anything he went further right to get bipartisanship than Democrats are really comfortable with. One of the biggest factors in Democrat voter turnout is gonna be Romney scares the living hell out of sane people. And the hope that once term two is achieved the Republican Party will finally stop obstructing. And honestly if they are smart they will or come the midterms they will find themselves out of a job.


Poet....this is the kind of answer I was hoping for.

Keli....while I don't agree with the entirety of what you say, i can certainly agree with the majority of it.

I bristle at Obamacare because of my conservative libertarian values. I bristle even more by the way it was passed through, mostly because we had to pass it to see what was in it.

I feel like we have had total clowns in all offices for so long it might be hard to know a real leader if we had him fall out of the sky with a halo and wings.

But Romney....I am not very keen on him either. No more or less than McCain. Since he has Ryan, I figure that makes him slightly better than McCain/Palin.



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Those links have already been provided.

If you recognize how much power the ICBs have, why do you expect different?

Sure, it would be nice if we had another Clinton in the house, but Obama was elected just to keep that from happening.

Right now our choice is between half a chance and total destruction. That is the difference I see.
edit on 1-11-2012 by poet1b because: Typo



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by KeliOnyx
 


The republican party has gone full moose bonkers insane.

The goal of the republican party these days is to end any form of democracy in the US, and replace our government with corporate control.



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by KeliOnyx
 


The republican party has gone full moose bonkers insane.

The goal of the republican party these days is to end any form of democracy in the US, and replace our government with corporate control.



That is the goal of the money behind our government. It has nothing to do with the GOP. Seriously. If you prefer the DNC, then you just prefer your poison of a different flavor. Either one is still poison.



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by beezzer
 


In the last 4 years we have seen a major turn around in our nations economy. We have gone from very very bad to things are starting to look positive.

Obama has done a great job.


I bet if we handed a trillion dollars to just about ANYONE they would have had better results than Obama...can't say that is a great job....



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 12:39 AM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


You may be right.

Hard to say.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 12:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


My point remains, that Obama doesn't control that money.

It is all out of control.

No one is in control.

I see things falling apart faster or slower.

Under Romney, it will be worse, IMO.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Summerian
 


Thanks for providing this information.

The US did it with high taxes on the rich and corporations, significant spending on infrastructure and strong public schools, and it worked, and we saw a repeat of this under Clinton.

But for some reason a large percentage of the US population rejects what works, and chooses instead to follow an ideogy that has been proven not to work, over and over again.


And thank you for your info.
I agree 100%.
'US population rejects what works' and the republicans own 90% of the disinfo. responsible for that (thru FOX, Rush and ilk).
The left needs to get the media in order - get the word out. The current corrupt capitalist system has to go.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 

Again, they are both a waste of a vote as one is already chosen and neither of them are worth a damn. Voting Gary Johnson is the only vote that isn't a waste.


Voting for a dark horse third candidate (no matter if they are the better candidate) is deploying a proven successful tactic for dividing the conservative vote in close elections. Example: Ross Perot. (not that Perot was a better candidate but the point was the he successfully divided the conservative vote). I think that's the point in this election: if you can't win on merit, or even B.S.,.....divide and conquer.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Summerian
 


We need a market system with capitalism (private property ownership), not a capitalist system where the capitalists control the markets, which is what we currently have.

Big government is a problem, but big International corporations are an even bigger problem.



posted on Nov, 4 2012 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Summerian
 


We need a market system with capitalism (private property ownership), not a capitalist system where the capitalists control the markets, which is what we currently have.

Big government is a problem, but big International corporations are an even bigger problem.


And if the US government go before the conglomerates are dealt with, international corporations will go from big problem to real threat! Rmoney being a corporation man himself won't get it till it's too late.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join