Skip to main content

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/the...w/49156820/#49156820

 

Sixty-one percent in a new ABC News/Washington Post poll hold an unfavorable view of how Romney’s handling his presidential campaign, up by 12 percentage points since mid-July. Far fewer, 35 percent, rate Romney’s performance positively, essentially unchanged.

 

Barack Obama’s ratings for handling his campaign are substantially better, 54-43 percent, favorable-unfavorable. And while ratings of Romney’s campaign have grown more negative, favorable ratings of Obama’s campaign efforts have gained 8 points since July.

 

These ratings follow controversy last week about Romney’s remark at a Florida fundraiser that 47 percent of Americans don’t pay income taxes, see themselves as “victims” and lack personal responsibility. As damaging as Romney’s remark may have been, it appears not to be solely responsible for Romney’s weak grade on handling his campaign, since ratings of his campaign performance overall are 7 points more negative than are responses to that comment.

 

In a sign of particular trouble for Romney, negative views of his campaign have grown by 18 points since midsummer among independents, who often are swing voters. In July, 46 percent of independents rated Romney’s handling of his campaign negatively; it’s 64 percent today. Romney’s positive score among independents, at 32 percent, far trails Obama’s, 50 percent.

 

Even among Republicans, more than one in four rates Romney’s efforts negatively – 27 percent.

 

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/po...-efforts-negatively/

 

 

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

That would leave 39% who find him favorable, which is about where Obama's approval ratings have hovered for the past three years.  Despite the fact that some may not like Romney, especially Union leaders and their ilk, when placed in a true sampling of voters, not some regional poll where they know the answer before they ask it, his numbers are not far from the Great One.

What is astounding to me is that people who should show some sign of intelligence will discount a man who has shown he can, when they are left with a choice of a man who can't, and has demonstrated that ability for the past for 3.5 years.

 

yoda,

I have heard some crazy things from the mouths of the Libs, but that has to be the craziest.  At least he has shown a propensity to actually further business and foster it growth.  The current POTUS has stymied small business andcontinues to promote a policy that will not only hurt small business but in most cases totally kill it. Ask yourself why a POTUS would promote a healthcare plane that not only excuses himself and the Congress from participating, but allows SOME businesses and Union to not have to cow to the same rules and regs given to the general populace?

 

 The people who are going to vote for obama will vote for him no matter what, because he is going to give them stuff!! He's going to punish those rich cats, just the republican rich cats doncha know, for being rich, no matter how they got their money. See, all the rich democrats deserve their money, that's why they don't say "nuttin bout" them being filthy rich. It's just those rich republicans that are the problem. Why my goodness, vote obama and you too could end up being a "czar" of something. Want a job but you don't want to work? How about a government job? There's always room for more that sit around and do nothing-that is if you even want to show up. If you don't want to show up-that's OK too. You still get the check and all the "bennies." 

Ah, yes, the "polls".

And from ABC (Advance Barracks Cronyism) and Washington Post?

It has to be true!  Or, just another example of the Ministry of Propaganda turning out wishful thinking?

 

Take this poll for example: 

Wednesday, September 26, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows both President Obama and Mitt Romney attracting support from 46% of voters nationwide. Three percent (3%) prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%) are undecided. See daily tracking history.

When “leaners” are included, it’s Romney 48% and Obama 46%. Leaners are those who are initially uncommitted to the two leading candidates but lean towards one of them when asked a follow-up question. Beginning October 1, Rasmussen Reports will be basing its daily updates solely upon the results including leaners.

Forty-eight percent (48%) of all voters think Obama better understands middle class issues.  Forty-two percent (42%) say Romney. But among voters who identify themselves as middle class, Romney has a slight edge.

http://www.rasmussenreports.co...ential_tracking_poll

 

In 2008, the electorate that elected Barack Obama was 39% Democrat, 32% GOP and 29% Independent. This is what we call a D+7 electorate. Obama defeated McCain by 7 points, the same margin. In 2004, the electorate was 37% Democrat, 37% Republican, and 26% Independent, in other words D/R +0. Bush defeated John Kerry by 3 points nationally. 

Yet, virtually every big media poll is based on a model in which Democrats equal or increase their share of the electorate over 2008. Beyond simple common sense, there are many reasons this won't happen. The Dem vote in '08 was the largest in decades. It came after fatigue of eight years of GOP control, two unpopular wars, a charming Democrat candidate who was the Chauncy Gardner of politics, a vessel who could hold everyone's personal dreams and hopes for a politician. It was a perfect storm for Democrats. 

None of the factors driving Democrat turnout in '08 exist today. Recent polls from AP, Politico and the daily tracking polls from Rasmussen and Gallup, all of which assume relatively lower Democrat turnout in November, show the race essentially tied. Only those polls showing an electorate with equal or greater numbers of Democrats show Obama with any sizable lead. 

Yet, it's these polls that are driving the political narrative. Every day the media launches a number of stories about Romney's "struggling" campaign. They cite anonymous GOP sources who wring their hands that the campaign is losing ground. The only real evidence of this, however, are the polls which heavily over-sample Democrat voters. Without these skewed polls, the media's narrative would be untenable. 

Quite simply, and apart from past years, the media have decided to weaponize the polls. The heavy D polls aren't just meant to reassure them that everything is okay in ObamaLand, but to actually hit the Romney campaign. The constant drumbeat echoed by unrealistic polls is designed to dampen fundraising, tap down on GOP enthusiasm and create a false narrative that Obama is pulling away with the race. 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-G...negative-campaign-ad

 

And in parting, lets refer to these polls:

 

Back in Harry Truman’s time, things were so much simpler.

Maybe four or five polling companies were operating in those days, and they famously shut down weeks before the ’48 election because pollsters were so certain that Tom Dewey would swamp ol’ Harry in the presidential race.

And we all know how that turned out.

 

Originally Posted by teyates:

yoda,

I have heard some crazy things from the mouths of the Libs, but that has to be the craziest.  At least he has shown a propensity to actually further business and foster it growth.  The current POTUS has stymied small business andcontinues to promote a policy that will not only hurt small business but in most cases totally kill it. Ask yourself why a POTUS would promote a healthcare plane that not only excuses himself and the Congress from participating, but allows SOME businesses and Union to not have to cow to the same rules and regs given to the general populace?

 

____________________

 

 

Has anyone else noticed the jobs listings that scroll up the side of the page now on the forums? Jobs are out there. Good jobs. I don't personally know anyone that doesn't have a job that actually wants one. Small businesses are growing at a very good rate, better and faster than they did after the recession in 2001. This is a good article on the subject:
http://www.businessweek.com/ar...ronger-than-we-think

 

And teyates, you are wrong about Congress and the healthcare bill:

SEC. 1312 [42 U.S.C. 18032]. CONSUMER CHOICE.

(D) MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IN THE EXCHANGE.—
(i) REQUIREMENT.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, after the effective date of this sub- title, the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to Members of Congress and congressional staff with respect to their service as a Member of Congress or congressional staff shall be health plans that are—

(I) created under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act); or

(II) offered through an Exchange established under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act).

(ii) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:

(I) MEMBER OF CONGRESS.—The term ‘‘Member of Congress’’ means any member of the House of Representatives or the Senate.

(II) CONGRESSIONAL STAFF.—The term ‘‘congressional staff’’ means all full-time and part-time employees employed by the official office of a Member of Congress, whether in Washington, DC or outside of Washington, DC.

Originally Posted by Roland Pfalz:

Ah, yes, the "polls".

And from ABC (Advance Barracks Cronyism) and Washington Post?

It has to be true!  Or, just another example of the Ministry of Propaganda turning out wishful thinking?

 

Take this poll for example: 

Wednesday, September 26, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows both President Obama and Mitt Romney attracting support from 46% of voters nationwide. Three percent (3%) prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%) are undecided. See daily tracking history.

When “leaners” are included, it’s Romney 48% and Obama 46%. Leaners are those who are initially uncommitted to the two leading candidates but lean towards one of them when asked a follow-up question. Beginning October 1, Rasmussen Reports will be basing its daily updates solely upon the results including leaners.

Forty-eight percent (48%) of all voters think Obama better understands middle class issues.  Forty-two percent (42%) say Romney. But among voters who identify themselves as middle class, Romney has a slight edge.

http://www.rasmussenreports.co...ential_tracking_poll

 

In 2008, the electorate that elected Barack Obama was 39% Democrat, 32% GOP and 29% Independent. This is what we call a D+7 electorate. Obama defeated McCain by 7 points, the same margin. In 2004, the electorate was 37% Democrat, 37% Republican, and 26% Independent, in other words D/R +0. Bush defeated John Kerry by 3 points nationally. 

Yet, virtually every big media poll is based on a model in which Democrats equal or increase their share of the electorate over 2008. Beyond simple common sense, there are many reasons this won't happen. The Dem vote in '08 was the largest in decades. It came after fatigue of eight years of GOP control, two unpopular wars, a charming Democrat candidate who was the Chauncy Gardner of politics, a vessel who could hold everyone's personal dreams and hopes for a politician. It was a perfect storm for Democrats. 

None of the factors driving Democrat turnout in '08 exist today. Recent polls from AP, Politico and the daily tracking polls from Rasmussen and Gallup, all of which assume relatively lower Democrat turnout in November, show the race essentially tied. Only those polls showing an electorate with equal or greater numbers of Democrats show Obama with any sizable lead. 

Yet, it's these polls that are driving the political narrative. Every day the media launches a number of stories about Romney's "struggling" campaign. They cite anonymous GOP sources who wring their hands that the campaign is losing ground. The only real evidence of this, however, are the polls which heavily over-sample Democrat voters. Without these skewed polls, the media's narrative would be untenable. 

Quite simply, and apart from past years, the media have decided to weaponize the polls. The heavy D polls aren't just meant to reassure them that everything is okay in ObamaLand, but to actually hit the Romney campaign. The constant drumbeat echoed by unrealistic polls is designed to dampen fundraising, tap down on GOP enthusiasm and create a false narrative that Obama is pulling away with the race. 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-G...negative-campaign-ad

 

And in parting, lets refer to these polls:

 

Back in Harry Truman’s time, things were so much simpler.

Maybe four or five polling companies were operating in those days, and they famously shut down weeks before the ’48 election because pollsters were so certain that Tom Dewey would swamp ol’ Harry in the presidential race.

And we all know how that turned out.

 

___________________________________

 

Rasmussen is a right leaning poll and everyone knows that. So the fair way to determine is to see an average of all the major pollls. That is what I like about realclearpolitics.com Here is there list of all the major polls. Left, Right and Center.

 

RCP Average9/12 - 9/26----48.944.9Obama +4.0
Rasmussen Tracking9/24 - 9/261500 LV3.04646Tie
Gallup Tracking9/20 - 9/263050 RV2.05044Obama +6
Bloomberg9/21 - 9/24789 LV3.54943Obama +6
Politico/GWU/Battleground9/16 - 9/201000 LV3.15047Obama +3
National Journal9/15 - 9/191055 LV3.05043Obama +7
Associated Press/GfK9/13 - 9/17807 LV4.34746Obama +1
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl9/12 - 9/16736 LV3.65045Obama +5

Do a little search for companies exempt from Obamacare and you will find upwards of 700+ companies that have been exempted from having to participate in the plan.  The majority of those companies are either affiliated with Unions or were big donors to the Obama race.  Let's just go ahead and plunge right into the Greek fiasco and mandate a single payor system.  Personally, I think a majority fo the people who would be out complaining and wailing would be the ones who are going to be sadly dissapointed when they find out that in reality there is no such thing as a free ride.  You are not going to get a good uality healthcare system, with plenty of providers, at what the government is currently paying, nor for what this plan wants to implement.

Obamacare is a timebomb which people who are in the healthcare industry have been trying to tell you.  The system is going to collapse and if "grandma" thinks that it is hard to get in to see a doctor now, wait until they decide they are no longer going to take the government insurance.

As far as the tracking goes, I don't think we will know anything until after Nov. 6, in reality anything could happen between now and then.  The country is way too divided at this point.

 

Originally Posted by teyates:

Do a little search for companies exempt from Obamacare and you will find upwards of 700+ companies that have been exempted from having to participate in the plan.  The majority of those companies are either affiliated with Unions or were big donors to the Obama race.  Let's just go ahead and plunge right into the Greek fiasco and mandate a single payor system.  Personally, I think a majority fo the people who would be out complaining and wailing would be the ones who are going to be sadly dissapointed when they find out that in reality there is no such thing as a free ride.  You are not going to get a good uality healthcare system, with plenty of providers, at what the government is currently paying, nor for what this plan wants to implement.

Obamacare is a timebomb which people who are in the healthcare industry have been trying to tell you.  The system is going to collapse and if "grandma" thinks that it is hard to get in to see a doctor now, wait until they decide they are no longer going to take the government insurance.

As far as the tracking goes, I don't think we will know anything until after Nov. 6, in reality anything could happen between now and then.  The country is way too divided at this point.

 __________________________________

 

What about the growth of small businesses? You claimed that the current administration is stymieing their growth and will eventually kill them. Yet all the facts say otherwise.

 

I have done research into the claim that unions are getting some kind of special treatment. It is the same falsehood that you were also spreading about Congress being expempt. There are exemptions to parts of the bill for certain companies that apply for waivers. However, they are temporary and they consist of union and non-union companies. Here is a good place to read the facts.

 

http://www.politifact.com/trut...re-says-crossroads-/

I don't need Poltifact to tell me that small businesses are suffering under this POTUS, I have seen it personally.  You are delusional to think otherwise and are as uninformed as your leader who is saying we are in a recovery.  They are manipulating the facts, and after he is re-elected, if he is re-elected, you can look for the real facts to be dispeatched. When the new tax rates hit ALL OF US in 2013 you will be singing a different song, at least you will if you pay taxes.  For those 47% or so that in reality pay nothing, I guess they have little to worry about.

And as far as the union research you have done, my research looks a bit different.  Try reading something other than those leftist new organizations and the Huffington Post.

 

Here is a partial list from July, does not take a genius to see some of the commonality here:

24 Hour Fitness
Allied Building Inspectors IUOE Local 211 Welfare Fund
Alpha Omega Home Health, LLC
Andersen Corporation
Bowman Sheet Metal Heating & Air-conditioning
Bricklayers Insurance & Welfare Fund
Bridge, Structural, Ornamental & Reinforcing Ironworkers Local Union No. 60*
Carey Johnson Oil Co, Inc
Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Albany*
Cement Masons' Local No. 502 Welfare Fund
City of Bloomington VEBA Health Savings Plan*
City of Burnsville*
City of Olathe*
Clausen Miller PC
Crystal Run Village, Inc*
Delta Apparel
Discovery Benefits*
Dr. Trailer Repair, Inc.
Employer-Teamsters Local Nos. 175 & 505 Health and Welfare Fund
Entrust
Fabri-Quilt
GC Harvesting, Inc.
Glen Curtis, Inc. #2143
Heritage Christian Services
IBEW Local 3 NYC Electrical Division Health & Welfare Fund
Indiana Area UFCW Union Locals and Retail Food Employers' Health and Welfare Plan
Ingham County
Innovative Driver Services Company
Integrity Data*
Inter-County Hospitalization Plan, Inc.
Jakov P. Dulcich & Sons
Jefferson Rehabilitation Center
JLG Harvesting, Inc.
Johnson Machine Works
Kent County
Laborers' District Council of Virginia Health and Welfare Trust Fund
Laborers National Health and Welfare Fund
Local 1245 Health Fund
Local 237 Teamsters Suffolk Regional Off-Track Betting Corp. Health and Welfare Trust Fund
Local 295 Welfare Fund
Local 381 Group Insurance Fund
Local 805 Welfare Fund
Marble Industry Trust Fund
McGregor Schools ISD #4*
MJ Soffe
MO-Kan Teamsters and Welfare Fund
Mounds View Public Schools*
MVP
North State Bank
North States Industries Inc*
Pathways Inc.
Pavers and Road Builders District Council Welfare Fund
Phoenix Children's Academy
Roofers Local 8 Insurance & Trust Fund
San Bernardino IHSS Public Authority
SCC Healthcare Group, LLP
Schenectady ARC*
Schoharie County ARC*
Sieben Polk Law Firm
Sitel, Inc.
Southern Graphic Communication Health Fund
Springbrook Standalone HRA*
St. Lawrence NYSARC*
Sunview Vineyards of California, Inc.
Tandem Eastern Inc. / Consolidated Transport Systems, Inc.
Taylor Farms
Teamsters Union Local # 35
The Day Care Council/Council of Supervisors and Administrators Welfare Fund
The Public Authority of San Luis Obispo County
The University Financing Foundation, Inc.
The Village of Newark Non-Union Employee Plan*
Theatrical Stage Employees Local One
Tuff Shed, Inc.
U.A. Local 13 & Employers Group Insurance Plan*
UFCW & Participating Food Industry Employers Tri-State Health & Welfare Fund
UFCW Local 1500 Welfare Fund
UFCW Local One Health Care Fund
Ulster Greene ARC*
Westminster-Canterbury of Lynchburg
Wine and Liquor Salesmen of NJ
A-1 Transport
AIDS Council of Northeastern New York
Avon Central School District
Azeros Health Plans, Inc.*
Benton County*
Bessey Tools, Inc.
Canandaigua City Schools*
City of Eagan*
City of Shakopee Post-Employment Health Care Savings Account Plan *
Community Work and Independence Inc.
Continuing Developmental Services
Crystal Cabinet Works, Inc.
CU*Answers, Inc.
Euromarket Designs, Inc., d/b/a Crate and Barrel
First National Bank of Dietrerich
Franziska Racker Centers*
Fridley Public Schools Health Savings Plan*
FSA/SUNYAB-Campus Dining and Shops
Genesee County ARC*
Genesee County Economic Development Corp Health Reimbursement Account*
Grand Island Central School District*
Hammondsport Central School District
Imperial Wholesale, Inc.
Learning Disabilities Association of Western New York
Minnesota State Retirement System Post-Employment Health Care Savings Plan - City of Roseville*
Naples Central School District
Naples Central School District Support Staff
Newark Central School District
Niagara-Wheatfield CSD Self Funded
Panama Central School District
People 1st Health Strategies, Inc.
Pipe Fitters' Welfare Fund, Local 597*
Ron Clark Construction Health reimbursement Arrangement*
Sherman Central School District
Silver Creek Central School District*
Sodus Central School District
Telco Construction
Town of Albion
Town of Chenango
Town of Lockport
Twin City Die Casting*
Western Area Volunteer Emergency Services *
Westfield Academy*
Williamson Central School District
American Radio Association Plan
Carpenters Health and Security Trust of Western Washington
Communicare Health Benefits Trust
District Council 1707 Local 389 Home Care Employees Health & Welfare Fund
Health and Welfare Plan of the Laundry, Dry Cleaning Workers & Allied Industry Health Fund, Workers United
Northern Illinois and Iowa Laborers Health and Welfare Fund
Prell Services
United Food and Commercial Workers Retail Employees and Employers Health and Welfare Plan
A-1 Realty*
AABR*
ABCO Diecasters*
Alfred P. Sloan*
Alizio & Galfunt*
All American Heating and AC*
Allied Pilots Association
Amherst Central School District*
AristaCare at Meadow Springs*
Arthur Sanderson& Sons*
Associated General Contractors of ND Employees*
Autistic Service, Inc.*
Bartech Group
Basf Fuel Cell, Inc.*
Battery Park City Authority*
Battery Park City Conservancy*
Benefit Analysis Inc.*
Blaze SSI*
Blue Beacon
Board of Trustees for the Operating Engineers Local 101 Health and Welfare Fund
Business Wire*
Cargo Ventures*
Carnegie Corporation of NY*
Carpenters Local No. 491 Health & Welfare Plan
Central Laborers' Welfare Fund
Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Health and Welfare Fund
City of Cottage Grove*
City of Inver Grove Heights*
City Of Roseville MN*
Clinton Management*
Cloquet Area Fire Department*
Cohen Partners*
Community Bank of Bergen County*
Community Mainstreaming*
Contract Cleaners Service Employees Benefit Trust
Cornerstone Search Group*
D & D Ag Supply and Construction, Inc.*
Dial Senior Management, Inc
Douglaston Development*
Dr. Margaret Andrin, MD FACOG LLC*
Dynasil Corporation*
Echo Molding*
Eighth District Electrical Benefit Fund
Electrical Workers Health and Welfare Fund

Originally Posted by teyates:

I don't need Poltifact to tell me that small businesses are suffering under this POTUS, I have seen it personally.  You are delusional to think otherwise and are as uninformed as your leader who is saying we are in a recovery.  They are manipulating the facts, and after he is re-elected, if he is re-elected, you can look for the real facts to be dispeatched. When the new tax rates hit ALL OF US in 2013 you will be singing a different song, at least you will if you pay taxes.  For those 47% or so that in reality pay nothing, I guess they have little to worry about.

And as far as the union research you have done, my research looks a bit different.  Try reading something other than those leftist new organizations and the Huffington Post.

 

____________________________

 

I didn't use Politifact for my information on small businesses. I posted this link http://www.businessweek.com/ar...ronger-than-we-think

 

Is that a leftest news org to you? If so who do you think is fair and balanced?

 

You are jumping all over the place teyates. You have gone from falsely saying that small businesses are being stymed, when in fact they are growing at a very good rate. Next you claim that unions are being exempt from the new healthcare bill and don't seem to care that the real facts show that they are not getting any kind of special treatment and do not hold the majority in numbers of companies that are getting these waivers. I would like to point out also that they are temporary waivers. Then you jump on the false band wagon of 47% pay no taxes. And you tell me to do my research? LOL

 

Get a grip teyates the sky is not falling and no matter what Fox news tells you no one is coming for your guns or money.....

As I said, I am not the one jumping around. Do yourself a favor and look around, and stop listening to the junk being fed to you by the liberal media. I plainly showed you numerous Union affilations which we being exempted by the current administration.

Believe what you wish, and for the record I do not listen to Fox News, nor MSNBC, nor Rush, nor any of the other talking heads. I do not need Chris Matthews nor Olbermann to tell me how to vote.  I am quite capable of discerning the records of the candidates and seeing how the current one is affecting businesses all acroos the area.  I also am quite capable of seeing a man who promised "change" who has done nothing exept blame someone else for his inadequacies. His supporters blame another party for "holding him back" and all I can say is thank God someone has had enough sense not to let the kid run loose in the cady store. He has doubled our debt and he is thru yet.

Not a rant, simple truth. For the record, I don't dislike him becuase he is a Democrat, nor the fact that he is half black. I dislke him because his socialist ideals and plans to increase the government directly endanger not only my own, but my children and future grandchildren's, ability to make a life for themselves.  If wanted to bring my kids up in a third world country I would have moved to one years ago.

Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by yoda:

The poor will work harder if we "GIVE" them less.  That would mean they would have to get off the front porch and get a job.

_____________________________

 

just because you sit around waiting on your check, doesn't mean the rest of the world does... you rt. wingnuts sound like a broken record. add up all the "welfare fraud" in the entire US... it doesn't add up to ONE of the rt. wingnuts "corporate welfare" breaks! shesh... what a pack of short sighted, shallow minded, scared someone may have something they don't,  wingnuts!

Originally Posted by Chuck Farley:

Maybe if yoda weren't a pot smoking 40 year old living with his mother he'd have a clue.

_______________________________

 

how many times to i have to tell you... i live with YOUR mother... and she's tired of cooking your pizza rolls.. you're about to have to find your own place!

Originally Posted by yoda:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by yoda:

The poor will work harder if we "GIVE" them less.  That would mean they would have to get off the front porch and get a job.

_____________________________

 

just because you sit around waiting on your check, doesn't mean the rest of the world does... you rt. wingnuts sound like a broken record. add up all the "welfare fraud" in the entire US... it doesn't add up to ONE of the rt. wingnuts "corporate welfare" breaks! shesh... what a pack of short sighted, shallow minded, scared someone may have something they don't,  wingnuts!


Welfare cost the taxpayer $1,000,000,000,000/year.  A conservative estimate for welfare fraud is 20%.   That's $200 billion/year.  The teet is out of milk lil' yoda and the neighbor is only gonna let you borrow so much before they get wise.  Whatcha gonna do?  Your lifestyle is not sustainable, the free checks are going away no matter who's in office.

 

http://www.heritage.org/resear...e-or-aid-to-the-poor

Originally Posted by teyates:

yoda,

I have heard some crazy things from the mouths of the Libs, but that has to be the craziest.  At least he has shown a propensity to actually further business and foster it growth.  The current POTUS has stymied small business andcontinues to promote a policy that will not only hurt small business but in most cases totally kill it. Ask yourself why a POTUS would promote a healthcare plane that not only excuses himself and the Congress from participating, but allows SOME businesses and Union to not have to cow to the same rules and regs given to the general populace?

 

--------------------------------- 

"... allows SOME businesses and Union to not have to cow to the same rules and regs given to the general populace ..."

 

They received a waiver because the benefits provided by them, as mine are, are already superior to the coverage provided by ACA. My prescription drug coverage is superior to Medicare Part D.

http://www.uaw.org/content/hea...panded-and-protected

Originally Posted by The Propagandist:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by yoda:

The poor will work harder if we "GIVE" them less.  That would mean they would have to get off the front porch and get a job.

 

 

And the rich? 

"Doing God's work" by letting the taxpayers socialize their greedy screwup losses with bailouts. 

_____________________________________________________________________

 

propie - it was liberal policy that put the banks in that position.  Before every tom, dik and harry with a fico score south of 200 could get a loan, we didn't have this problem.

Originally Posted by yoda:

lets give the banks a HUGE bailout... make sure they don't have any problems paying multi-million dollar bonuses to the "big wigs". but, no way in hell we're gonna make sure a poor family has food! we gotta put god back in the school, but we better not show compassion for the poor!


 

 

I'm not for multi million dollar bonuses to execs who fail their company any more than I am for giving someone who is too lazy to work free taxpayer money.  The fact of the matter is, the banks failed due to liberal lending policies.  Who got what after they failed is not the root cause of the problem.

 

The amount of welfare burdening our tax system is not sustainable.  Having lots of people addicted to welfare may get Obama re-elected in November, but eventually the hammer is going to drop. 

 

All my working friends out there who don't rely on lifetime gov. handouts, I suggest you start working on getting debt free quickly.   Stocking up on ammo may not be a bad thing either.  When the government can't give it to them, they'll be looking to take it from those who earned it.

Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:

All my working friends out there who don't rely on lifetime gov. handouts, I suggest you start working on getting debt free quickly.   Stocking up on ammo may not be a bad thing either.  When the government can't give it to them, they'll be looking to take it from those who earned it.

WOW! you're even nuttier than i thought! the term "squirrel poo" comes to mind!

Originally Posted by Jankinonya:
Originally Posted by Roland Pfalz:

Ah, yes, the "polls".

And from ABC (Advance Barracks Cronyism) and Washington Post?

It has to be true!  Or, just another example of the Ministry of Propaganda turning out wishful thinking?

 

Take this poll for example: 

Wednesday, September 26, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows both President Obama and Mitt Romney attracting support from 46% of voters nationwide. Three percent (3%) prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%) are undecided. See daily tracking history.

When “leaners” are included, it’s Romney 48% and Obama 46%. Leaners are those who are initially uncommitted to the two leading candidates but lean towards one of them when asked a follow-up question. Beginning October 1, Rasmussen Reports will be basing its daily updates solely upon the results including leaners.

Forty-eight percent (48%) of all voters think Obama better understands middle class issues.  Forty-two percent (42%) say Romney. But among voters who identify themselves as middle class, Romney has a slight edge.

http://www.rasmussenreports.co...ential_tracking_poll

 

In 2008, the electorate that elected Barack Obama was 39% Democrat, 32% GOP and 29% Independent. This is what we call a D+7 electorate. Obama defeated McCain by 7 points, the same margin. In 2004, the electorate was 37% Democrat, 37% Republican, and 26% Independent, in other words D/R +0. Bush defeated John Kerry by 3 points nationally. 

Yet, virtually every big media poll is based on a model in which Democrats equal or increase their share of the electorate over 2008. Beyond simple common sense, there are many reasons this won't happen. The Dem vote in '08 was the largest in decades. It came after fatigue of eight years of GOP control, two unpopular wars, a charming Democrat candidate who was the Chauncy Gardner of politics, a vessel who could hold everyone's personal dreams and hopes for a politician. It was a perfect storm for Democrats. 

None of the factors driving Democrat turnout in '08 exist today. Recent polls from AP, Politico and the daily tracking polls from Rasmussen and Gallup, all of which assume relatively lower Democrat turnout in November, show the race essentially tied. Only those polls showing an electorate with equal or greater numbers of Democrats show Obama with any sizable lead. 

Yet, it's these polls that are driving the political narrative. Every day the media launches a number of stories about Romney's "struggling" campaign. They cite anonymous GOP sources who wring their hands that the campaign is losing ground. The only real evidence of this, however, are the polls which heavily over-sample Democrat voters. Without these skewed polls, the media's narrative would be untenable. 

Quite simply, and apart from past years, the media have decided to weaponize the polls. The heavy D polls aren't just meant to reassure them that everything is okay in ObamaLand, but to actually hit the Romney campaign. The constant drumbeat echoed by unrealistic polls is designed to dampen fundraising, tap down on GOP enthusiasm and create a false narrative that Obama is pulling away with the race. 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-G...negative-campaign-ad

 

And in parting, lets refer to these polls:

 

Back in Harry Truman’s time, things were so much simpler.

Maybe four or five polling companies were operating in those days, and they famously shut down weeks before the ’48 election because pollsters were so certain that Tom Dewey would swamp ol’ Harry in the presidential race.

And we all know how that turned out.

 

___________________________________

 

Rasmussen is a right leaning poll and everyone knows that. So the fair way to determine is to see an average of all the major pollls. That is what I like about realclearpolitics.com Here is there list of all the major polls. Left, Right and Center.

 

RCP Average9/12 - 9/26----48.944.9Obama +4.0
Rasmussen Tracking9/24 - 9/261500 LV3.04646Tie
Gallup Tracking9/20 - 9/263050 RV2.05044Obama +6
Bloomberg9/21 - 9/24789 LV3.54943Obama +6
Politico/GWU/Battleground9/16 - 9/201000 LV3.15047Obama +3
National Journal9/15 - 9/191055 LV3.05043Obama +7
Associated Press/GfK9/13 - 9/17807 LV4.34746Obama +1
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl9/12 - 9/16736 LV3.65045Obama +5

 

 

Rasmussen right leaning???

Yeah, that's certainly a hall of fame list you got there...

 

Here's your "Crash and Burn" award.

Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by The Propagandist:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by yoda:

The poor will work harder if we "GIVE" them less.  That would mean they would have to get off the front porch and get a job.

 

 

And the rich? 

"Doing God's work" by letting the taxpayers socialize their greedy screwup losses with bailouts. 

_____________________________________________________________________

 

propie - it was liberal policy that put the banks in that position.  Before every tom, dik and harry with a fico score south of 200 could get a loan, we didn't have this problem.

 

 

That was capitalism run amok after being let off the leash of banking regulations, spurred on by the White House. That's another thing we can blame George Bush for.

 

 

We can put light where there’s darkness, and hope where there’s despondency in this country. And part of it is working together as a nation to encourage folks to own their own home.” — President Bush, Oct. 15, 2002

 

There are plenty of culprits, like lenders who peddled easy credit, consumers who took on mortgages they could not afford and Wall Street chieftains who loaded up on mortgage-backed securities without regard to the risk.

 

But the story of how we got here is partly one of Mr. Bush’s own making, according to a review of his tenure that included interviews with dozens of current and former administration officials.

 

From his earliest days in office, Mr. Bush paired his belief that Americans do best when they own their own home with his conviction that markets do best when let alone.

 

He pushed hard to expand homeownership, especially among minorities, an initiative that dovetailed with his ambition to expand the Republican tent — and with the business interests of some of his biggest donors. But his housing policies and hands-off approach to regulation encouraged lax lending standards.

 

“The Bush administration took a lot of pride that homeownership had reached historic highs,” Mr. Snow said in an interview. “But what we forgot in the process was that it has to be done in the context of people being able to afford their house. We now realize there was a high cost.”


Lawrence B. Lindsey, Mr. Bush’s first chief economics adviser, said there was little impetus to raise alarms about the proliferation of easy credit that was helping Mr. Bush meet housing goals.

 

“No one wanted to stop that bubble,” Mr. Lindsey said. “It would have conflicted with the president’s own policies.”

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/21admin.html?_r=5&pagewanted=all&

 


Last edited by The Propagandist
Originally Posted by teyates:

Propie sez "That's another thing we can blame George Bush for."

 

How much longer you gonna beat that dead horse?  Sooner or later you and the rest of the Obamites are going to have to admit that a lot of the blame lies at the feet of your leader and his administration.

_____________________________

 

That makes no sense. Are you saying that Obama is to blame for the economic collapse of 2007-08? Even into 2009 when we where still working under Bush's policies? How can he be responsible when he was not even the President when it started? We might not be growing as fast as some people think we should, but we have continuously moved forward, not backward since the collapse.

 

It makes me laugh to read how we can't blame Bush for what he did, but we can hold Obama accountable for everything that went wrong in American economics even before he took office. LOL

Originally Posted by teyates:

Propie sez "That's another thing we can blame George Bush for."

 

How much longer you gonna beat that dead horse?  Sooner or later you and the rest of the Obamites are going to have to admit that a lot of the blame lies at the feet of your leader and his administration.

 

 

How much longer am I going to beat that horse that's still running around loose?

 

As long as it takes to clean all his sh*t up, down to the last turd, however long it takes.

Originally Posted by yoda:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:

All my working friends out there who don't rely on lifetime gov. handouts, I suggest you start working on getting debt free quickly.   Stocking up on ammo may not be a bad thing either.  When the government can't give it to them, they'll be looking to take it from those who earned it.

WOW! you're even nuttier than i thought! the term "squirrel poo" comes to mind!

 

__________________________________________________________________________

 

I just found footage of your mom,  nut didn't fall far from the tree:

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politic...ion-federal-program/

 

Where Are the 47% of Americans Who Pay No Income Taxes?

 

 

 

 

Mitt Romney says citizens who don't pay income tax will never vote for him. But eight of the top 10 states with the highest number of nonpayers are red states.


It's important to remember that just because people aren't paying income tax doesn't mean they're not paying taxes -- they pay federal payroll taxes and state and local sales taxes, for example. Once those taxes are factored in, the tax regime is basically flat. And the reason that most income tax nonpayers don't pay is they simply don't make enough income to qualify to pay. As one might expect, the map of states with the highest poverty levels resembles this map fairly closely.


But if calling for a less progressive taxation system was enough to alienate poor voters in the Deep South, the Republican Party would have already lost its stronghold there.


http://www.theatlantic.com/pol...pay-no-taxes/262499/

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×