Obama made secret deal to support Hillary in 2016?

reply to post by hamburgerler


I'll ask you the same thing I have others that want to play for real in this area of data. Do you have source numbers? I've spent far too much time in Government reports and in the pages of the budgets themselves to play games debating people who use reporters and their opinions in MSM as their exclusive source of data.

If you'd like to debate this using source material from where MSM gets theirs (Original reports and original data)...before opinionated and spinning it, I'll spend the night on this or however long it runs. If you'd like to link MSM sources...then I'm wasting my time to even get started with it. My side of this debate DOES take a good period of serious time to hold up, properly support and accurately document. I'm to the point where I won't get much deeper into it than this...for people with MSM as their "expert data" or others that figure clever little 2-3 line zingers are a fit reply to something that may take 30-60 minutes to put together as a reply from my side.

Lemmie know if you want to debate though..I really would enjoy it on the same level.

(We can start with the raw reports out of the Federal Reserve Bank at St Louis, since they seem to generate the most comprehensive reporting for the overall Fed Bank Network, in my experience on this)

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Lets, clear away all the BS and get some logic going... If major journalist outlets are too commie for you, why don't you explain why PROFESSIONAL investors and money makers would risk their money in an environment that is as bad as you make it sound?

Hillary won't win in 16, but if previous attempts by the GOP in pres. elections are any indication;

The Republicans will lose and lose big. Their past platform was essentially a "hate Obama" campaign and it blew up in their faces. Without someone to hang their hate on; they are SOL.

The GOP needs a charismatic candidate, a viable platform, media support and a way to win back the women and minorities and that's going to be a steep uphill battle. How do you win back voters that you really don't care about; as evidenced by their past performances.

I think the GOP has shot themselves in the foot so many times [Palin and Mitt ] that the electorate won't take them seriously, no matter what they do. They are toast.

Bring on the next round of third parties. New ideas, new approaches etc. Still the dembs machine will devastate
any new comers. Politics is mean business because that's exactly what it is....a business. It's not the 1960s anymore but the GOP steering committees are still working from that obsolete model. Stupid ole geezers!!


I suppose a "Hate Hillary" campaign might get a little traction but it just won't be enough. Look for the Democrats to repeat the "Hope" mantra in 16 and blame the failed Obama presidency on the Obstructionist Republicans. It's worked in the past and will work again.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I'm not sure why this would be a secret, it's fairly obvious that Obama would endorse Hillary if she was to run. As for people insisting that an Obama endorsement will be poison, well that's opinion, opinion from people that don't like Obama for many reasons anyway. I think Hillary will want Obama's endorsement for the reason that he has a large segment of supporters in the Democratic party that she needs, so, yep. Hillary is a strong contender, there's nobody in the Republican party that has already been speculated to which I can imagine will be able to take her on.

Mind you though, somewhere out there I'm sure there is a dark horse candidate that has not popped on our radar yet for the Republican party so don't give up hope yet Republican ATSers. Usually the American public give more sympathy toward the opposing party after two terms of the other party. Usually.

Clinton is the easy front runner and of course Obama will back her. It is part of what you do for the good of your party. No real other DNC primary threats, the GOP is a wreck and she can say we fixed the wars and economy. The GOP is going to have do something soon because they have some real bad eggs making the entire party look bad.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by hamburgerler

 

I'll ask you the same thing I have others that want to play for real in this area of data. Do you have source numbers? I've spent far too much time in Government reports and in the pages of the budgets themselves to play games debating people who use reporters and their opinions in MSM as their exclusive source of data.

Oh, I see, reporters are not viable useless they indicate something that is damaging or unsavory for Obama!
I have seen you take those kinds of sources VERY serious...

If you'd like to debate this using source material from where MSM gets theirs (Original reports and original data)...before opinionated and spinning it, I'll spend the night on this or however long it runs. If you'd like to link MSM sources...then I'm wasting my time to even get started with it. My side of this debate DOES take a good period of serious time to hold up, properly support and accurately document. I'm to the point where I won't get much deeper into it than this...for people with MSM as their "expert data" or others that figure clever little 2-3 line zingers are a fit reply to something that may take 30-60 minutes to put together as a reply from my side.

Sure thing, here is Moody's report, an independent company that is not attached to the administration or the government.

28 May 2013
US banking system outlook changed to stable as economy improves
The change in outlook on the US banking system to stable from negative reflects continued improvement in the operating environment and reduced downside risks to the banks from a faltering economy. Sustained GDP growth and improving employment conditions will help banks protect their now-stronger balance sheets. In addition, after another year of reducing credit-related costs and restoring capital, US banks are now even better positioned to face any future economic downturn

www.moodys.com...

Even though I know it's all theater, I still like to comment on it.

That said, Clinton would be wise to distance herself from Obama, because I'm fairly sure that the next few years of his presidency will be hellish and more of his administrations crimes will come to light.

Originally posted by hamburgerler

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by hamburgerler

 

I'll ask you the same thing I have others that want to play for real in this area of data. Do you have source numbers? I've spent far too much time in Government reports and in the pages of the budgets themselves to play games debating people who use reporters and their opinions in MSM as their exclusive source of data.

Oh, I see, reporters are not viable useless they indicate something that is damaging or unsavory for Obama!

I have seen you take those kinds of sources VERY serious...

If you'd like to debate this using source material from where MSM gets theirs (Original reports and original data)...before opinionated and spinning it, I'll spend the night on this or however long it runs. If you'd like to link MSM sources...then I'm wasting my time to even get started with it. My side of this debate DOES take a good period of serious time to hold up, properly support and accurately document. I'm to the point where I won't get much deeper into it than this...for people with MSM as their "expert data" or others that figure clever little 2-3 line zingers are a fit reply to something that may take 30-60 minutes to put together as a reply from my side.

Sure thing, here is Moody's report, an independent company that is not attached to the administration or the government.

28 May 2013
US banking system outlook changed to stable as economy improves
The change in outlook on the US banking system to stable from negative reflects continued improvement in the operating environment and reduced downside risks to the banks from a faltering economy. Sustained GDP growth and improving employment conditions will help banks protect their now-stronger balance sheets. In addition, after another year of reducing credit-related costs and restoring capital, US banks are now even better positioned to face any future economic downturn

www.moodys.com...

Moody's is a crooked as the come good sir. Please google "moodys fraud" or "moodys scam" and you'll fine a few MSM links that go into detail about them

Originally posted by Southern Guardian


Mind you though, somewhere out there I'm sure there is a dark horse candidate that has not popped on our radar yet for the Republican party so don't give up hope yet Republican ATSers. Usually the American public give more sympathy toward the opposing party after two terms of the other party. Usually.

There are plenty of Republican people that could improve the GOPs image and actually be a fine candidate and good president but for some bizarre reason the GOP has attraction for losers as candidates, and I doubt if that's going to change. The sympathy tactic only works when you have someone that can win.

The ATS Republicans would be better served by bailing on the GOP and throwing in with us Libertarians but I doubt if that would happen because the Libertarians are a unhomginized mix of hippies and intellectuals. Republicans hate both groups!!!

reply to post by hamburgerler


Solely basing all indications of a "healthy" economy on stock-market numbers doesn't present a whole picture of the overall economy.

Take these few statistics into conderation while you post articles pointing towards a bull-ish market:
-- Median wages are still 8-percent lower than 2000.

-- Unemployment, for all intensive purposes, is still steady at a dragging 7.5% (also depends on how you come up with that number)

-- Companies are buying back their stocks to bolster their books (have you ever stopped to wonder why the market is shooting up like a Roman candle?)

-- Capital investments are going into technology upgrades and real property, not manpower.

-- The Fed dumping money and artificially keeping interest rates at near zero are detrimental to how the the real economy looks.

-- Over 10% of the nation's total population is unemployed. Of that, that number equates to the above 7.5%; that isn't good.

-- Rather than focusing on making surgical cuts on useless programs, the administration has taken the "sequestration" to effect its brute force upon the People: allowing cuts to ATC personnel (along with technicians, safety inspectors, etc) in the FAA -- rather than looking for real cuts, cutting "Head Start" -- you are telling me there is nothing in the Department of Education's budget that could be cut before that? I have a bridge for you to buy; on and on.

-- Stark realities on upcoming regulations regarding health-care insurance that are leaving many companies unsure of how they will operate next year stagnates business.

You still think the economy is doing good because the stock-market is flying high?!

Originally posted by supremecommander

Originally posted by hamburgerler

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by hamburgerler

 

I'll ask you the same thing I have others that want to play for real in this area of data. Do you have source numbers? I've spent far too much time in Government reports and in the pages of the budgets themselves to play games debating people who use reporters and their opinions in MSM as their exclusive source of data.

Oh, I see, reporters are not viable useless they indicate something that is damaging or unsavory for Obama!

I have seen you take those kinds of sources VERY serious...

If you'd like to debate this using source material from where MSM gets theirs (Original reports and original data)...before opinionated and spinning it, I'll spend the night on this or however long it runs. If you'd like to link MSM sources...then I'm wasting my time to even get started with it. My side of this debate DOES take a good period of serious time to hold up, properly support and accurately document. I'm to the point where I won't get much deeper into it than this...for people with MSM as their "expert data" or others that figure clever little 2-3 line zingers are a fit reply to something that may take 30-60 minutes to put together as a reply from my side.

Sure thing, here is Moody's report, an independent company that is not attached to the administration or the government.

28 May 2013
US banking system outlook changed to stable as economy improves
The change in outlook on the US banking system to stable from negative reflects continued improvement in the operating environment and reduced downside risks to the banks from a faltering economy. Sustained GDP growth and improving employment conditions will help banks protect their now-stronger balance sheets. In addition, after another year of reducing credit-related costs and restoring capital, US banks are now even better positioned to face any future economic downturn

www.moodys.com...

Moody's is a crooked as the come good sir. Please google "moodys fraud" or "moodys scam" and you'll fine a few MSM links that go into detail about them

Oh please...

Just because you hate Obama, doesn't mean that reality is with you

Originally posted by MrSpad
she can say we fixed the wars and economy.

Well, the way things are going she won't be able to say that.

Maybe she can say that they saved the Solar/Green industry? Oops! can't say that either.

What will she say? Stay tuned to 2015/16 and find out. Same Pol channel...Same Pol time.

Originally posted by hamburgerler
Oh please...

Just because you hate Obama, doesn't mean that reality is with you

I think the thing is that you don't get is that we do not HATE Obama. We just dislike him and his messed up policies...intensely.

Hate has nothing to do with it as I don't know the man personally. I just don't like what he is doing. He's a narcissitic amatuer as far as I am concerned.

Phew! I feel better.

Originally posted by TDawgRex

Originally posted by hamburgerler
Oh please...

Just because you hate Obama, doesn't mean that reality is with you

I think the thing is that you don't get is that we do not HATE Obama. We just dislike him and his messed up policies...intensely.

Perhaps you don't, but from the names that Obama has been called on these forums; I can only classify that as hate speech! "Monkey" for example... I heard that on the ATS Live webcast by a MOD.

Originally posted by ownbestenemy
reply to post by hamburgerler

 

Solely basing all indications of a "healthy" economy on stock-market numbers doesn't present a whole picture of the overall economy.

Take these few statistics into conderation while you post articles pointing towards a bull-ish market:
-- Median wages are still 8-percent lower than 2000.

-- Unemployment, for all intensive purposes, is still steady at a dragging 7.5% (also depends on how you come up with that number)

-- Companies are buying back their stocks to bolster their books (have you ever stopped to wonder why the market is shooting up like a Roman candle?)

-- Capital investments are going into technology upgrades and real property, not manpower.

-- The Fed dumping money and artificially keeping interest rates at near zero are detrimental to how the the real economy looks.

-- Over 10% of the nation's total population is unemployed. Of that, that number equates to the above 7.5%; that isn't good.

-- Rather than focusing on making surgical cuts on useless programs, the administration has taken the "sequestration" to effect its brute force upon the People: allowing cuts to ATC personnel (along with technicians, safety inspectors, etc) in the FAA -- rather than looking for real cuts, cutting "Head Start" -- you are telling me there is nothing in the Department of Education's budget that could be cut before that? I have a bridge for you to buy; on and on.

-- Stark realities on upcoming regulations regarding health-care insurance that are leaving many companies unsure of how they will operate next year stagnates business.

You still think the economy is doing good because the stock-market is flying high?!

I base my perspective on many things, but I think we both know it is futile to post ANY information because it is contrary to the anti Obama narrative.

new car sales -

finance.yahoo.com... 110000788.html;_ylt=AwrNUbHMwKtR_QgA7MbQtDMD

For May 2013, new light vehicle sales in the U.S. (including fleet) is expected to be 1,435,495 units, up 8.5 percent from May 2012 and up 12.1 percent from April 2013 (on an unadjusted basis).
The May 2013 forecast translates into a Seasonally Adjusted Annualized Rate ("SAAR") of 15.2 million new car sales, up from 14.9 April 2013 and up from 13.9 million in May 2012.
Retail sales are up almost six percent compared to May 2012 and up twelve percent from April 2013.
Fleet and rental sales are expected to make up 20.2 percent of total industry sales in May 2013.
The industry average incentive spending per unit will be approximately $2,482 in May 2013, which represents a decrease of 3 percent from May 2012 and is down 1.7 percent from April 2013.
Used car sales* are estimated to be 3,345,674. The ratio of new to used is estimated to be 1:3 for May 2013.

housing data

A separate report from the Commerce Department showed new single family home sales rose 2.3 percent last month to a 454,000-unit pace. The median sales price for a new home jumped 14.9 percent from a year ago to a record $271,600.

"We have seen some momentum in the housing market. The improving sales are a very broad and powerful positive effect for the U.S. economy," said Robert Dye, chief economist at Comerica in Dallas.

www.reuters.com...

employment data

American employers took on more workers than forecast in April and the jobless rate unexpectedly fell to a four-year low of 7.5 percent, reflecting confidence in the outlook for the world’s biggest economy.

www.reuters.com...


Consumer confidence

The Thomson-Reuters/University of Michigan consumer sentiment index reached 84.5, its highest since July 2007. The report, out Friday, exceeded expectations as consumer sentiment was predicted to reach 83.7.

www.usatoday.com...

Independent Financial analysis

The change in outlook on the US banking system to stable from negative reflects continued improvement in the operating environment and reduced downside risks to the banks from a faltering economy. Sustained GDP growth and improving employment conditions will help banks protect their now-stronger balance sheets. In addition, after another year of reducing credit-related costs and restoring capital, US banks are now even better positioned to face any future economic downturn

www.moodys.com...

reply to post by hamburgerler

Sure thing, here is Moody's report, an independent company that is not attached to the administration or the government.

Yes, Let's see just how bipartisan your Moody's Corporation is,,, Shall We!
influenceexplorer.com...
data.influenceexplorer.com...==
Strange I see a lot of donation to Obama Victory Fund.
I have to ask, what shift are you working there at the support obuma at all cost basement and who's taking over for you when your shift ends?
www.opensecrets.org...

reply to post by hamburgerler


There are areas in certain markets that are thriving, that isn't in contention; but the health of the over all economy is a far broader view and cherry-picking stories to make that news good in my opinion.

Arguably, some states are booming (to the detriment of some); Texas, North and South Dakota, Wyoming, and Nebraska. Other states have been in a steady decline; California, Nevada, Florida, and Michigan.

So while the overall economy is showing signs of improvement, there are some areas where it is lagging and falling behind. Start-up rates are in the tank ("big business" is enjoying that), jobless claims are hardly a solid figure to pin the health of economy on (considering how the manipulation of numbers is well documented), truck sales are promising (could mean an increase in construction), we still have a massive amount of wasteful government spending (and still growing despite the sequestration).

Originally posted by ownbestenemy
reply to post by hamburgerler

 

There are areas in certain markets that are thriving, that isn't in contention; but the health of the over all economy is a far broader view and cherry-picking stories to make that news good in my opinion.

I am trying to present a broader view. Should I post more components? And at what point will my evidence be broad enough?

I sincerely think there it is not possible to be broad enough.

I didn't even know this...

But the national debt is finally starting to reverse and shrink.

Since February, the CBO has cut $200 billion off its deficit projection for 2013 and $618 billion off its cumulative estimate for the next decade. Thanks to higher tax revenues and deep spending cuts, the deficit has been shrinking by about $42 billion a month for the past six months. The CBO projects that the deficit will fall to $342 billion by 2015, or only 2 percent of GDP.

www.businessweek.com...

reply to post by hamburgerler


Look at it this way, would you say that Greece's economy is improving because say, Economic Times reports there are signs that it is? Or would you rather want to know from the "boots on the ground" about the true health of the economy.

That is parallel to what we are seeing here in this thread. We all can point to pros/cons of some pundit that parses the information flowing for the Government (the very government that wants the economy to look good mind you) and say "Look!"

But what is the real situation? As I posted before, start-ups have been in a two-year decline. For a "free-market" such as ours, small business is the back bone (unless there is a nefarious reason to make the larger market holders the back bone), and a decline that we have seen in those seeking to set up shop is troubling.

Strip malls are extremely vacant as people pack it up or declare bankruptcy, mom and pop shops are getting shouldered out by the big-dogs (with the help of lobbied political rules/enforcement/regulations/etc), real-income is severely down (Americans aren't even close to recouping the wealth lost), no incentive to save (0.01% APR? Okay!), discretionary spending of households is down, unemployment is still in the clouds....on and on....is that a broad enough view for you?

Because a few well off sectors (that didn't take devastating hits by the way) are thriving back, doesn't mean the overall economy is doing well. Talk to Mr. and Mrs. Mainstreet and ask them just how well the economy is doing and stop relying upon pundits, who, in effort to retain or gain readership, will spin or selectively present a story in their benefit (I believe that is what the wrabbit was getting at earlier by the way).

Post Script:

How the Gallup includes "gasoline" as discretionary is beyond me. That is why many of us don't believe polls. Of course, now looking at the data, they included more "cellphone only" response, which skews the data to a more younger crowd that isn't the same as an overall cross-section of a demographic. Ham...this is what we are talking about; critically think about what is being pushed onto you to believe.