Quit Picking On Romney

T

TeddyBallgame

Time Out
Mar 30, 2012
522
0
16
JLM said:
What's most important is how much he gets "picked on" on the first Tuesday in November. I predict you won't hear too much about him after that! :lol:
Click to expand...

- JLM ... Spoken like a true knee jerk lefty lackey.

In actual fact, Obama enjoys at best a 3 point lead in the polls which is within the statistical margin of error. If one were to rely on the most accurate of all the polls in both 2004 and 2008, the Rasmussen 3 day tracking poll of 1500 likely voters, Romney is ahead by 2 points and has led most of the time since Ryan was chosen as his running mate. And if you also factor in the tendency of most polls to over represent Democrats and under represent Republicans in their sampling, a case can be made that Romney is actually ahead even now and headed for a very big win.

- The upcoming four debates, especially the three presidential debates starting the first week in October, are likely this time to be significant factors in the ultimate vote. Ryan will wipe the floor with that idiot Biden. And I expect Romney to handily win all three presidential debates, particularly the first and the third ones, because he knows his stuff and he has had lots of debates in the past year whereas Obama is best when someone gives him a script to read on a teleprompter or when shucking and jiving on pop culture crap but easily exposed as glib, shallow and untruthful when in extemporaneous debate on complex issues.

- Obama has already blown the bulk of his ad budget in the summer months demonizing Romney with some of the most disgusting and dishonest ads ever presented whereas Romney just now is starting to spend his ad budget which is even bigger than Barry's Hollyweird haul of liberal money. If the Romney adsters simply tell the truth about Obama and his background and his nefarious associates and his unprecedentedly piss poor record as the reverse Midas Touch president (everything he touches turns to crap) then his ads should do more for him than Barry's lying ads about Romney did to advance BO's foul agenda .

- In other words, JLM, only a simpleton would predict the demise of Mitt Romney this early in the game.

- Will Mitt maul Barry and send him packing to Hawaii?

- I don't know because its too early to say. But I do know that Obama has the advantages of incumbency, a worshipful liberal media, a likable **** eating grin and a bunch of public sector union weasels on the take and in the tank for him while Romney has advantages like a real track record of relevant experience and accomplishment, an earned reputation as an authentic person of great compassion and charity and community service, and precisely the kind of turn around skills and experience needed for America at this crossraods in its history.

- So lets at least put the coronation of your hero BO on hold for a few weeks, OK?
 
Last edited:
JLM

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
TeddyBallgame said:
- JLM ... Spoken like a true knee jerk lefty lackey.

- In other words, JLM, only a simpleton would predict the demise of Mitt Romney this early in the game.

- Will Mitt maul Barry and send him packing to Hawaii?

- I don't know because its too early to say. But I do know that Obama has the advantages of incumbency, a worshipful liberal media, a likable **** eating grin and a bunch of public sector union weasels on the take and in the tank for him while Romney has advantages like a real track record of relevant experience and accomplishment, an earned reputation as an authentic person of great compassion and charity and community service, and precisely the kind of turn around skills and experience needed for America at this crossraods in its history.

- So lets at least put the coronation of your hero BO on hold for a few weeks, OK?
Click to expand...

Actually you are dead wrong on a couple of points, first I'm not a "lefty" (or a righty or anything in between) Politically I'm just for whatever works- the person is more important than the stripe. Of course I could be wrong about the demise of Romney as I don't know what's on the mind of those voting for or against him, but I'm guessing in six weeks he'll be gone.
 
T

TeddyBallgame

Time Out
Mar 30, 2012
522
0
16
JLM said:
Actually you are dead wrong on a couple of points, first I'm not a "lefty" (or a righty or anything in between) Politically I'm just for whatever works- the person is more important than the stripe. Of course I could be wrong about the demise of Romney as I don't know what's on the mind of those voting for or against him, but I'm guessing in six weeks he'll be gone.
Click to expand...

- JLM ... Since you claim that you are for "whatever works" politically and Obama has blown trillions of borrowed dollars and yet failed to make a serious dent in the US unemployment problem (instead of keeping unemployment below 8% with the wasteful stimulus as promised, he has never even been able to get it below 8% even once in 43 months in power and the real unemployment rate in the US is about 14% and the rate would be about 11% if official unemployment were calculated the same in the US as it is in Canada) and fewer people are working as a % of the population than at any time in over thirty years, then you must be supporting Romney.

- Just kidding. From your remarks on this thread and elsewhere it is obvious you are supporting Obama. Maybe that makes you a trougher in the public sector rather than a genuine lefty by philosophy, I don't know. But to claim you are for whatever works and then to support a spectacular failure like Obama over a stellar success story like Romney means either that you are a lefty, a trougher or utterly uninformed or perhaps a combination of the three. Which is it?
 
JLM

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
TeddyBallgame said:
- JLM ... Since you claim that you are for "whatever works" politically and Obama has blown trillions of borrowed dollars and yet failed to make a serious dent in the US unemployment problem (instead of keeping unemployment below 8% with the wasteful stimulus as promised, he has never even been able to get it below 8% even once in 43 months in power and the real unemployment rate in the US is about 14% and the rate would be about 11% if official unemployment were calculated the same in the US as it is in Canada) and fewer people are working as a % of the population than at any time in over thirty years, then you must be supporting Romney.

- Just kidding. From your remarks on this thread and elsewhere it is obvious you are supporting Obama. Maybe that makes you a trougher in the public sector rather than a genuine lefty by philosophy, I don't know. But to claim you are for whatever works and then to support a spectacular failure like Obama over a stellar success story like Romney means either that you are a lefty, a trougher or utterly uninformed or perhaps a combination of the three. Which is it?
Click to expand...

Well, I'm a Canadian and only take a casual interest in American Politics so of course I could be wrong, but we'll see in November. BUT I DON'T THINK SO! :lol:
 
T

TeddyBallgame

Time Out
Mar 30, 2012
522
0
16
Tonington said:
GOP activists to Romney: Why aren't you winning? - The Globe and Mail

They would do well to try to court voters outside their base. Teddy T-ball and his ilk who view the world through a bi-polar filter are political liabilities.
Click to expand...

- Tonington ... Do tell us what this glib comment about ``viewing the world `through a bi-polar filter`is supposed to mean to your left wing and trougher pals since it means nothing to me.

- Perhaps you didn`t read the Globe column you posted. If you had read it, you would see that the folks interviewed for the column have the same take as me in that they cannot understand why anyone would vote for Obama with his dreadful record of failing at everything he has attempted. Therefore, they believe that Mitt Romney should be beating Obama hands down based upon the foul stench of BO`s record as president. Since you posted the article, do you agree with them on this, as I do.

- But I disagree with the folks interviewed and perhaps agree with you that the answer or at least part of the answer for Romney is to broaden not narrow his appeal, to take more centrist not more right wing stances so as to solicit support from the independents and from those who are disillusioned with the past four years under management trainee Obama. Was this what you were trying to say.
 
Tonington

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
TeddyBallgame said:
- Tonington ... Do tell us what this glib comment about ``viewing the world `through a bi-polar filter`is supposed to mean to your left wing and trougher pals since it means nothing to me.
Click to expand...

Was that too difficult to understand? Your reply is more evidence of the same. Bi-polar. Right and wrong. Left and Right. Us and them. Anytime someone says something you don't like, you lump them in with, well "them", the "lefties", the "wrong" people.

Even people who are Conservatives. It gets to be hilarious when you chastise Obama on the one hand, and congratulate Stephen Harper on the other for doing exactly the same thing. The cognitive dissonance is easy for you to deal with when you can simply change the parts of your bi-polar filter.

- Perhaps you didn`t read the Globe column you posted. If you had read it, you would see that the folks interviewed for the column have the same take as me in that they cannot understand why anyone would vote for Obama with his dreadful record of failing at everything he has attempted. Therefore, they believe that Mitt Romney should be beating Obama hands down based upon the foul stench of BO`s record as president. Since you posted the article, do you agree with them on this, as I do.
Click to expand...
No, I read it. You seem to be having difficulties though with your cognitive dissonance again. Romney could easilly beat Obama, if he didn't pander to his base incessantly. He gives up the middle with his more crazy conservative platform. So he goes from being a moderate Republican who won as a Governor in a very liberal state, to a more conservative Presidential candidate who can't attract the moderates. It's a basic math problem, and he's failing. Your understanding seems to be as well.
 
B00Mer

B00Mer

Keep Calm and Carry On
Sep 6, 2008
44,800
7,297
113
Rent Free in Your Head
www.getafteritmedia.com
Well as long as the 48% of Americans Worthless Freeloaders don't vote for him and he gets the other 52% he will win... lol

I would say however, he nailed it on the head.. most of the Obama voters are welfare bums looking for a free handout.
 
Bar Sinister

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
More good news for Romney. He's behind in the Latino vote, the Black vote, and the women's vote. All he had going for him was the male vote. Now it appears he has lost that as well. The latest polls show Obama with a three point lead in the male vote.
Romney losing lead among men - The Hill - covering Congress, Politics, Political Campaigns and Capitol Hill | TheHill.com

To put this in an even stronger perspective, in the 2008 election McCain actually had a four point lead on Obama in September, before falling behind badly. And McCain won the male vote. Gallup Daily: Obama Up 4 Points Over McCain

Since the male vote was pretty much all Romney had going for him it is beginning to look pretty grim for the GOP.
 
T

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
0
36
Yes the majority of the 47% who don't pay Federal Income Tax, but do pay state taxes etc., are retirees or people in 'right to work for less states' that pay so poorly they are under the threshold to pay Federl Income Tax.



The fastest way to make the tax-averse incensed is to tell them that nearly half of U.S. households end up owing no federal income tax when all is said and done.

But like most statistics, it is often misunderstood -- and, in the case of those trying to stir political outrage, misrepresented.


45% of households owe no federal income tax for 2010 - Apr. 17, 2011












 
Tonington

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
Bar Sinister said:
Since the male vote was pretty much all Romney had going for him it is beginning to look pretty grim for the GOP.
Click to expand...

Unless Romney can win 190% of the right wingnut vote. That appears to be his plan too...more math problems for the GOP. :lol:
 
T

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
0
36
Maybe Romney via his video is just waiting to lower the tax threshold so that those low income earners will have to pay federal Income Tax........



Mitt Romney will probably get 95 electoral votes from ‘moocher’ states. Obama will probably get 5.



Mitt Romney will probably get 95 electoral votes from ‘moocher’ states. Obama will probably get 5.




But among families making more than $100,000, there were also half a million tax units -- enough to replace the population of Tucson, Arizona -- that also paid no income tax. Even more surprising, 7,000 millionaires also paid no individual income tax.

Let's focus on these 7,000 tax payers. I think they help to show why, even if the Buffett Rule is a sensible principle, it wouldn't be a commonsense law.


Buffett Rule Rorschach: 7,000 Millionaires Paid No Income Taxes in 2011 - Business - The Atlantic
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom