US Elections 2012 Obama v Romney Official Thread
Discussion
Jimbeaux said:
I am merely an interested observer to the whole circus, but you could do a better job of defending the GOP cause. I'm here with arms open, happy to be won over by a reasoned argument. I just have'nt heard one yet. And I would really like to
t crazy; no-one with even minimal critical judgement could buy that blatant scam...
Did anyone watch Chris Christie's speech last night? That guy is a good performer. Interesting though that, in a speech of 2600 words that was the keynote speech at Romney's conference, he didn't mention Romney until 1800 words in! The speech was all about Christie and was basically a pretty selfish positioning speech for 2016 when it will be him or Paul Ryan to challenge Obama's successor.
unrepentant said:
Jimbeaux said:
unrepentant said:
Obama is absolutely running on his record, as he should because it's a good one.
I quoted facts, Obama has a good record. If you disagree quote facts and links, not your usual vacuous snidey innuendo and insinuation. Try and debate like an adult for a change.
unrepentant said:
Jimbeaux said:
unrepentant said:
Obama is absolutely running on his record, as he should because it's a good one.
I quoted facts, Obama has a good record. If you disagree quote facts and links, not your usual vacuous snidey innuendo and insinuation. Try and debate like an adult for a change.
Jimbeaux said:
Point being that you saying that Obama has a great record is not a fact; full stop.
Oh come on. Thats pathetic. He offered some factual statements. Your response is no rebuttal. Just saying "Oh no it is'nt" without any facts is kindergarten stuff. You can do better than that.
Lets make it easy. Give me 5 reasons , supported with a proper narrative, as to why you believe Romney is going to do better. Where you draw comparison with Obama, show evidence to support that your stance on Obama is based on facts, not fallacy.
Here you go:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
toppstuff said:
Jimbeaux said:
Point being that you saying that Obama has a great record is not a fact; full stop.
Oh come on. Thats pathetic. He offered some factual statements. Your response is no rebuttal. Just saying "Oh no it is'nt" without any facts is kindergarten stuff. You can do better than that.
Lets make it easy. Give me 5 reasons , supported with a proper narrative, as to why you believe Romney is going to do better. Where you draw comparison with Obama, show evidence to support that your stance on Obama is based on facts, not fallacy.
Here you go:
1. We have massive amounts of domestic energy sources that are not being exploited. Permits are being clogged in red tape and the Keystone pipeline (the most studied one yet) has yet to be approved. This is thought by some to be an appeasement of the Greenie base vote that belongs to Obama. Energy production increase alone would create millions of jobs.
2. Stop having the DOJ oppose right to work states from hosting large businesses that wish to move there as they did in their latest example with Boeing. Businesses will feel better about expansion if they are not worried about a politically motivated DOJ popping up at every turn. This is not helped by Obama being that Union bosses are one of his biggest donors.
3. The U.S. now has the highest corporate tax rate in the world (we took that sad tiltle when Japan recently lowered theirs). How does that help stimulate business except for driving more expansion offshore, as GE has been compelled to do?
4. The SCOTUS proclaimed Omamacare's mandate portion as a tax. It is an expense on small businesses (those with 51 or more employees). This will cause businesses not to expand to past that level to defer costs. Small businesses are the U.S.'s top employers.
5. Food stamp use has gone up 40% under Obama in just 3.5 years. This should not happen if Unrepentent is correct in the job creation and general record of Obama. The fact is that Obama wants to build up the benefits culture because once someone gets benefits, they want to keep them. Votes for benefits. Romney wants to means test benefits and invest in training so that those on benefits have an opportunity to work. Be it PC or not, there are many who prefer to sit home, get a check, squirt out more kids, get a bigger check. Welfare is a hand up, not a hand out meant to become a generational way of life.
Edited by Jimbeaux on Wednesday 29th August 16:25
Jimbeaux said:
Thanks. Good stuff.Let me digest it.
Maybe you are reaching a bit on the food stamp thing? After all, is'nt food stamp usage going to increase in a period of global recession anyway when
unemployment increases?
I would not be surprised if benefits dependency did not also increase during recessions under GOP presidencies as well.
I'm not sure if a buy the correlation between increases in welfare dependency during a recession with a political strategy to develop a benefit culture. It is an issue of real debate here, because it is one area where the previous government of more than a decade got it wrong. I'm not sure if I buy the idea that Obama is as left thinking as that.
toppstuff said:
Jimbeaux said:
Thanks. Good stuff.Let me digest it.
Maybe you are reaching a bit on the food stamp thing? After all, is'nt food stamp usage going to increase in a period of global recession anyway when unemployment increases? I'm not sure if a buy the correlation between increases in welfare dependency during a recession with a political strategy to develop a benefit culture. It is an issue of real debate here, because it is one area where the previous government of more than a decade got it wrong. I'm not sure if I buy the idea that Obama is as left thinking as that.
1. We are a net exporter of petroleum products, oil supply currently exceeds demand. The original Keystone pipeline would have decimated areas of natural beauty, Obama made them think again and it is being re routed and will be approved.
2. I disagree with opposition to right to work.
3. Current corporate tax rates have been in place since 1986, they are not an Obama invention. Bush didn't change them, nor did his Dad. The time to change them is not in the immediate aftermath of the worst financial crisis in recent history when general tax receipts are falling. The whole tax code is too complicated and needs reforming.
4. Small company's with less than 50 employees are exempt from having to provide healthcare for employees, although many of the more progressive employers do. Any employer that has more than 50 employees who refuses to help with their healthcare is not an employer most of us would want to work for.
5. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by it's very nature is a program that is designed to deal with need and as such you can expect demand to rise steeply following a time of economic meltdown and the subsequent large scale loss of jobs. For anyone to suggest that their fellow American's are happy to live on food stamps is ludicrous and insulting.
2. I disagree with opposition to right to work.
3. Current corporate tax rates have been in place since 1986, they are not an Obama invention. Bush didn't change them, nor did his Dad. The time to change them is not in the immediate aftermath of the worst financial crisis in recent history when general tax receipts are falling. The whole tax code is too complicated and needs reforming.
4. Small company's with less than 50 employees are exempt from having to provide healthcare for employees, although many of the more progressive employers do. Any employer that has more than 50 employees who refuses to help with their healthcare is not an employer most of us would want to work for.
5. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by it's very nature is a program that is designed to deal with need and as such you can expect demand to rise steeply following a time of economic meltdown and the subsequent large scale loss of jobs. For anyone to suggest that their fellow American's are happy to live on food stamps is ludicrous and insulting.
unrepentant said:
1. We are a net exporter of petroleum products, oil supply currently exceeds demand. The original Keystone pipeline would have decimated areas of natural beauty, Obama made them think again and it is being re routed and will be approved.
2. I disagree with opposition to right to work.
3. Current corporate tax rates have been in place since 1986, they are not an Obama invention. Bush didn't change them, nor did his Dad. The time to change them is not in the immediate aftermath of the worst financial crisis in recent history when general tax receipts are falling. The whole tax code is too complicated and needs reforming.
4. Small company's with less than 50 employees are exempt from having to provide healthcare for employees, although many of the more progressive employers do. Any employer that has more than 50 employees who refuses to help with their healthcare is not an employer most of us would want to work for.
5. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by it's very nature is a program that is designed to deal with need and as such you can expect demand to rise steeply following a time of economic meltdown and the subsequent large scale loss of jobs. For anyone to suggest that their fellow American's are happy to live on food stamps is ludicrous and insulting.
1) We are a net exporter of refined fuels but still a heavy importer of raw crude; we do not need to be so. The Keystone pipeline was studied and found safe. After the new concerns, alternative paths were offered up through other states but Obama still has not approved. You say he will approve. I am waiting.2. I disagree with opposition to right to work.
3. Current corporate tax rates have been in place since 1986, they are not an Obama invention. Bush didn't change them, nor did his Dad. The time to change them is not in the immediate aftermath of the worst financial crisis in recent history when general tax receipts are falling. The whole tax code is too complicated and needs reforming.
4. Small company's with less than 50 employees are exempt from having to provide healthcare for employees, although many of the more progressive employers do. Any employer that has more than 50 employees who refuses to help with their healthcare is not an employer most of us would want to work for.
5. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by it's very nature is a program that is designed to deal with need and as such you can expect demand to rise steeply following a time of economic meltdown and the subsequent large scale loss of jobs. For anyone to suggest that their fellow American's are happy to live on food stamps is ludicrous and insulting.
2) Why do you disagree with right to work? States with right to work have far better job growth and the employees are not on slave wage either.
3)Agree the tax code needs reforming. However, cutting corporate tax would give incentive for corporations to bring more operations back on shore, thus increasing expansion and hiring of employees; these employees then have money to spend as consumers and the tax take rises. That is a Democratic flaw in reasoning, they fail to realize that cutting taxes can actually cause a rise in overall tax revenue; raising taxes stifles economic activity and lowers overall tax revenues.
4) Except maybe the ones that are working there, obviously! Many do provide healthcare but will not expand due to the upcoming Obamacare costs. A business that cannot expand will have less employees out here in the economy spending money.
5) I answered that in my intial post; I suggest you reread. As to what is insulting; I find it insulting that there are many who are happy to take others' tax money as a way of life. I am all for helping those that need it; sorry to disappoint, there are plenty who have gamed the system for a generation.
Edited by Jimbeaux on Wednesday 29th August 17:21
unrepentant said:
Jimbeaux said:
unrepentant said:
2. I disagree with opposition to right to work.
2) Why do you disagree with right to work? States with right to work have far better job growth and the employees are not on slave wage either.This sums a lot up for me.
Surely there has never been a time before when so many people have planned to vote against their own economic interests. Under the Romney plan everyone pays more except the very wealthy (like Romney himself) who will get a massive tax break. Even those making over $200k a year, which is only a tiny percentage would pay more under Romney. The average family will be $2k a year worse off under the Romney tax plan. Of course if you make $millions a year you will be massively better off. No wonder Sheldon Alderson has given the GOP $40 million this year and the Koch brothers much more!
Surely there has never been a time before when so many people have planned to vote against their own economic interests. Under the Romney plan everyone pays more except the very wealthy (like Romney himself) who will get a massive tax break. Even those making over $200k a year, which is only a tiny percentage would pay more under Romney. The average family will be $2k a year worse off under the Romney tax plan. Of course if you make $millions a year you will be massively better off. No wonder Sheldon Alderson has given the GOP $40 million this year and the Koch brothers much more!
unrepentant said:
This sums a lot up for me.
Surely there has never been a time before when so many people have planned to vote against their own economic interests. Under the Romney plan everyone pays more except the very wealthy (like Romney himself) who will get a massive tax break. Even those making over $200k a year, which is only a tiny percentage would pay more under Romney. The average family will be $2k a year worse off under the Romney tax plan. Of course if you make $millions a year you will be massively better off. No wonder Sheldon Alderson has given the GOP $40 million this year and the Koch brothers much more!
There are those that disagree with that assessment. There are as many people voting against Obama. You have not made your case as far as I am concerned. Look, you have said your piece and I have said mine. We are not going to agree on this, therefore, why don't we stop subjecting everyone to our bickering and let the people decide in 67 days or so.Surely there has never been a time before when so many people have planned to vote against their own economic interests. Under the Romney plan everyone pays more except the very wealthy (like Romney himself) who will get a massive tax break. Even those making over $200k a year, which is only a tiny percentage would pay more under Romney. The average family will be $2k a year worse off under the Romney tax plan. Of course if you make $millions a year you will be massively better off. No wonder Sheldon Alderson has given the GOP $40 million this year and the Koch brothers much more!
Police had to throw two delegates out of the RNC after they threw nuts at an African American CNN camerawoman and said "this is how we feed animals".
Beggars belief. This is 2012, the GOP is living in 1876.
http://www.boston.com/politicalintelligence/2012/0...
Beggars belief. This is 2012, the GOP is living in 1876.
http://www.boston.com/politicalintelligence/2012/0...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff