***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[Betonblck]

This election is strictly economic policy & a referendum on da last 4 years.

Ninjahood, what was your expectation for the economy at this point? Also add what would make the economy grow as fast as you expected it to?

Unemployment #s?

Deficit #s?

GDP growth?

 

[RustyShackleford]

The lies have worked so far in his campaign so he's going to continue saying lies. Blame the people that continue to support the lies.

Bu the thing is, no one can call him out on the lie in person right now. He is giving no more interviews until the Election

 

[True Blues]

The lies have worked so far in his campaign so he's going to continue saying lies. Blame the people that continue to support the lies.

Bu the thing is, no one can call him out on the lie in person right now. He is giving no more interviews until the Election

Politicians have always lied to win votes during campaigns, but frankly, I can't recall a case of plain pandering this blatant in a Presidential election in the last 30 years.

If you believe the national polls, it also seems to be working. Perplexing.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Politicians have always lied to win votes during campaigns, but frankly, I can't recall a case of plain pandering this blatant in a Presidential election in the last 30 years.
If you believe the national polls, it also seems to be working. Perplexing.

People are voting against Obama more than they are voting for Romney. They are not educated about what a Romney presidency could potentially mean, and to be honestly they don't really care. They just want Obama out of office.

 

[Betonblck]

People are voting against Obama more than they are voting for Romney. They are not educated about what a Romney presidency could potentially mean, and to be honestly they don't really care. They just want Obama out of office.

This is the same country that re-elected Bush because they thought he was doing a good job. Many people are stupid.

 

[david bowman]

Yeah this correspondent on one of the morning shows today was just straight up saying it doesn't matter if Romney has terrible policies or flip flops or has no core system, anything is better than obama

 

[futuremd]

If you voted for Bush in 2000, thats excusable.

If you voted for Bush in 2004? What THE HELL were you thinking? 

I ALWAYS hated how they shafted my boy Howard Dean though. 

 

[PatRiley]

If you voted for Bush in 2000, thats excusable.

If you voted for Bush in 2004? What THE HELL were you thinking? 

I ALWAYS hated how they shafted my boy Howard Dean though. 

 

[True Blues]

Politicians have always lied to win votes during campaigns, but frankly, I can't recall a case of plain pandering this blatant in a Presidential election in the last 30 years.
If you believe the national polls, it also seems to be working. Perplexing.

People are voting against Obama more than they are voting for Romney. They are not educated about what a Romney presidency could potentially mean, and to be honestly they don't really care. They just want Obama out of office.

Co-sign.

Romney appears a centrist in national settings (i.e. debates), but my fear is that his presidency will be anything but. A piece from today's Boston Globe cogently summed my fears:

Unlike Ryan, Romney has no legislative record forcing him to take a position. And he likes to hedge his bets. A fleeting moment in the second presidential debate was revealing. Asked about the assault weapons ban he signed while governor (but which he opposes in federal legislation) Romney said the Massachusetts bill had been negotiated with “pro-gun and anti-gun people,” and included provisions both sides were happy with. “So it was a mutually agreed-upon piece of legislation,” he said.

With that bill, as with his health care plan, Romney preferred to make decisions with many advisers at the table. That’s admirable. But what happens when there is no consensus, and core guiding principles — not just politics — are needed? Faced with complex choices, it’s easy to imagine that a wavering Romney would outsource his decision to strongest argument in the room.

In a Romney administration, it is Ryan who would push an uncompromising agenda, Ryan who would rally social conservatives and deliver for the economic elite. That’s why voters should care who is Romney’s vice president. Because if Romney has been willing to suppress his true nature for so long, what does it matter who he “really” is?

Romney has vacillated between the center and the far right during the campaign, but what happens when he actually has to make a decision in office?

His leadership style suggests that his presidency might look something like Bush 43: Delegating tasks, but relying on a set of hawkish advisers to make crucial policy decisions-- particularly on foreign policy, where both Romney and Bush lacked experience.

It should also be pointed out that Romney's foreign policy team is comprised of 17/24 neocons from the Bush administration.

 

[futuremd]

Politicians have always lied to win votes during campaigns, but frankly, I can't recall a case of plain pandering this blatant in a Presidential election in the last 30 years.
If you believe the national polls, it also seems to be working. Perplexing.

People are voting against Obama more than they are voting for Romney. They are not educated about what a Romney presidency could potentially mean, and to be honestly they don't really care. They just want Obama out of office.

Co-sign.

Romney appears a centrist in national settings (i.e. debates), but my fear is that his presidency will be anything but. A piece from today's Boston Globe cogently summed my fears:

Unlike Ryan, Romney has no legislative record forcing him to take a position. And he likes to hedge his bets. A fleeting moment in the second presidential debate was revealing. Asked about the assault weapons ban he signed while governor (but which he opposes in federal legislation) Romney said the Massachusetts bill had been negotiated with “pro-gun and anti-gun people,” and included provisions both sides were happy with. “So it was a mutually agreed-upon piece of legislation,” he said.

With that bill, as with his health care plan, Romney preferred to make decisions with many advisers at the table. That’s admirable. But what happens when there is no consensus, and core guiding principles — not just politics — are needed? Faced with complex choices, it’s easy to imagine that a wavering Romney would outsource his decision to strongest argument in the room.

In a Romney administration, it is Ryan who would push an uncompromising agenda, Ryan who would rally social conservatives and deliver for the economic elite. That’s why voters should care who is Romney’s vice president. Because if Romney has been willing to suppress his true nature for so long, what does it matter who he “really” is?

Romney has vacillated between the center and the far right during the campaign, but what happens when he actually has to make a decision in office?

His leadership style suggests that his presidency might look something like Bush 43: Delegating tasks, but relying on a set of hawkish advisers to make crucial policy decisions-- particularly on foreign policy, where both Romney and Bush lacked experience.

It should also be pointed out that Romney's foreign policy team is comprised of 17/24 neocons from the Bush administration.

 

[futuremd]

LOL

 

[ninjahood]

This election is strictly economic policy & a referendum on da last 4 years.

Ninjahood, what was your expectation for the economy at this point? Also add what would make the economy grow as fast as you expected it to?

Unemployment #s?

Deficit #s?

GDP growth?

WAY better progress all around. i mean lets face it folks, this da slowest recovery (if you can all it that) EVER.

some cat i aint seen in a while ask me if i was working i said yea why wassup, son was like "yooo..you maaad lucky b, aint NO work out here right now"

and we're talking about NYC, a place that for da most part was shielded from da worse of da housing bubble.

as far as defict spending, now that we're winding down those 2 wars overseas i EXPECT that to make a impact in da way we borrow from china to continue to fund this, but

yea, obama said it was "unpatriotic" of bush but this happened..

da only reason our dollar is worth a damn at this point is because its pegged to petroleum. this is a road thats unsustainable. most of us aint feeling how weak

our dollar is because all da crap we buy is made cheap and inexpensive by overseas manufacturing, there's a REASON why foamposite production which has historically

been made in taiwan along with all da iron tuff nikes of da past is now made in china..its cheaper, in every way shape and form.

GDP looks miserable...da trade imbalances we got with other nations puts us at a disadvantage. obama could've done so much more...

 

[ninjahood]

LOL

what a scumbag

 

[futuremd]

 

[Betonblck]

Ninjahood, can you be more specific than Way Better?

The weak dollar makes exports more attractive and imports less attractive, helping reduce the trade imbalances. Can you be more specific on this one as well. You arent saying exa
ctly what you expect the president to do.

 

[oh you mad]

What's going to happen if Romney wins the popular vote by a significant percentage but Obama wins the election?

 

[laker4lifeman]

What's going to happen if Romney wins the popular vote by a significant percentage but Obama wins the election?

The race war

 

[ninjahood]

Ninjahood, can you be more specific than Way Better?

The weak dollar makes exports more attractive and imports less attractive, helping reduce the trade imbalances. Can you be more specific on this one as well. You arent saying exa
ctly what you expect the president to do.

any more specific and id be a economist on salary wit CNN.

but a weak dollar sucks for folks that have to spend more to get less out of products.

i wouldn't mind da spending if we took in as much as we dish out but thats not been da case

that was all of last year and part of 2012....now imagine a individual spending in more then what he took him what would happen to him?

 

[Betonblck]

So you want the President to cut spending while creating jobs. How you supposed to do that? Magic?

 

[ninjahood]

So you want the President to cut spending while creating jobs. How you supposed to do that? Magic?

loosening up some regulation would help.

 

[i lax bro]

What's going to happen if Romney wins the popular vote by a significant percentage but Obama wins the election?

Probably going to court, recounting votes and stuff... Same thing as 2000, except this time the GOP will feel the pain democrats felt that year Would be pretty interesting to see if the electoral ended in a tie, President Romney VP Biden lulz.

 

[deuce king]

So you want the President to cut spending while creating jobs. How you supposed to do that? Magic?

loosening up some regulation would help.

We tried that during the last Bush administration champ.  How'd that work out??

 

[Coupé It]

Probably going to court, recounting votes and stuff... Same thing as 2000, except this time the GOP will feel the pain democrats felt that year Would be pretty interesting to see if the electoral ended in a tie, President Romney VP Biden lulz.

it's impossible for the electoral vote to be tied.

 

[ninjahood]

So you want the President to cut spending while creating jobs. How you supposed to do that? Magic?

loosening up some regulation would help.

We tried that during the last Bush administration champ.  How'd that work out??

loosening up regulation =/= predatory lending

im sure you're bright enough to know da difference

 

[hansi]

If only we germans could elect the US president.

89% for Obama 2% for Romney.