By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Romney doesn't care about 47% of americans

sperrico87 said:

He's pointing out the obvious bias in the media.  The same media that refuses to go to YouTube.com and see visual and audio proof that Obama is indeed a practicing secret Muslim who refuses to admit it because he's worried it would destroy his party and his image.  Which it would. Even so....

...what?



Around the Network
sperrico87 said:
KungKras said:
badgenome said:

It's hilarious how this is the big story of the day, just like Romney's comments last week overshadowed everything else (including murder). You carry that fucking Obama water, media!

Because if a guy running for president says stupid shit, it aint more important than regular everyday news?


He's pointing out the obvious bias in the media.  The same media that refuses to go to YouTube.com and see visual and audio proof that Obama is indeed a practicing secret Muslim who refuses to admit it because he's worried it would destroy his party and his image.  Which it would. Even so....

Yes, there is word circling about that Reverend Wright secretly celebrates Ramadan, and at his church, they serve Halal food.  It is one of those underground secret Muslim churches.



badgenome said:
richardhutnik said:
Paul Ryan says to not feed the fish:
http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/09/27/14124144-paul-ryan-declares-dont-feed-fish?lite

"Teach a man to fish. Don't simply feed [him] fish."

Seems pretty obvious.

Care to show in Ryan's budget what the government funding for training is, as opposed to now?  



Just noting there has been a further shift towards the blue in the polls. Now approaching a 4 % nation wide lead for Obama. A lead that historically has been hard to overtake for any presidential candidate this late in the game. This is especially notable in the battleground states including big ones like Florida, and Ohio.



chocoloco said:
Just noting there has been a further shift towards the blue in the polls. Now approaching a 4 % nation wide lead for Obama. A lead that historically has been hard to overtake for any presidential candidate this late in the game. This is especially notable in the battleground states including big ones like Florida, and Ohio.

Romney has failed to win support of the margin he is talking about in the 47% video.  Due to the lack of winning support, and hoping he wins out of disgust at Obama, ends up not being a winning formula.  It fits into John Kerry 2004.



Around the Network
richardhutnik said:

Care to show in Ryan's budget what the government funding for training is, as opposed to now?  

Care to show where sticking things in the federal budget is the only way to care about them? Once more:

"Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain."

- Frederic Bastiat



richardhutnik said:
chocoloco said:
Just noting there has been a further shift towards the blue in the polls. Now approaching a 4 % nation wide lead for Obama. A lead that historically has been hard to overtake for any presidential candidate this late in the game. This is especially notable in the battleground states including big ones like Florida, and Ohio.

Romney has failed to win support of the margin he is talking about in the 47% video.  Due to the lack of winning support, and hoping he wins out of disgust at Obama, ends up not being a winning formula.  It fits into John Kerry 2004.

I truly think that Obama has a lot less disgust towards him than Bush did at the time. That years election included a lot more foreign topics of debate concerning the war in Iraq. This year it is far more domestic as the Economy is the biggest issue. So yes, this year a much more struggling 47% compared to that election does seem like it would more likely dispute Romneys lack of sympathy and lack of even being able to have empathy. Romney just cannot show swingers that he can be better than Obama using mostly mutually used smear methods. I think the trend towards an incumbent president winning will hold true in 2012 as it did in 2004.



chocoloco said:
Just noting there has been a further shift towards the blue in the polls. Now approaching a 4 % nation wide lead for Obama. A lead that historically has been hard to overtake for any presidential candidate this late in the game. This is especially notable in the battleground states including big ones like Florida, and Ohio.


As of this moment, Romney will lose the election...albeit not by much.  The debates are really the only thing Romney could do to turn the election in his favor.  He'll really have to do something miraculous at the debates to come out of them a stronger candidate.  The trouble is, as with most Republicans, is the mainstream of the party doesn't seem to stand for anything.  Too afraid to be truly conservative or libertarian, thereby confusing Independents who might be looking for change, and even worse, turning off the conservatives and libertarians.

The only other thing that might change the race is if there is an October surprise that hurts Obama.  No idea what it could be, but someone will try to make one up even if there isn't one.



 

badgenome said:
richardhutnik said:

Care to show in Ryan's budget what the government funding for training is, as opposed to now?  

Care to show where sticking things in the federal budget is the only way to care about them? Once more:

"Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain."

- Frederic Bastiat

Here is a reality about the government: It grows and does more, whenever the body politic demands a problem get addressed and it fails to act of its own collective will, to address issues.  So, let's look at this more in general.  Care to show the Paul Ryan solution to ending training people to fish?  Sorry, but, proposing nothing and presuming that the issue of getting people trained will take care of itself is not a solution, it is neglect.

What is YOUR solution to getting people taught to fish?  Care to name what they should train in, and how they will pay for it?  If you can't do that, you neither care to give a man to fish, or teach him how to fish.  You would rather he die of neglect via starvation.  Hey, we need to cull down the incompetent losers after all.  Drive them to kill themselves and then lower taxes.



richardhutnik said:

Here is a reality about the government: It grows and does more, whenever the body politic demands a problem get addressed and it fails to act of its own collective will, to address issues.  So, let's look at this more in general.  Care to show the Paul Ryan solution to ending training people to fish?  Sorry, but, proposing nothing and presuming that the issue of getting people trained will take care of itself is not a solution, it is neglect.

What is YOUR solution to getting people taught to fish?  Care to name what they should train in, and how they will pay for it?  If you can't do that, you neither care to give a man to fish, or teach him how to fish.  You would rather he die of neglect via starvation.  Hey, we need to cull down the incompetent losers after all.  Drive them to kill themselves and then lower taxes.

Oops. You caught me. Yep, I want everyone to starve to death. That's what always happens under economically liberal systems, after all. Good thing we're going more and more towards a centrally planned economy. No one ever starves under those. (Well, except for everyone. But never mind them. They just didn't believe in fairies hard enough.)