2012 Presidential race

[redskin_rich]

Originally Posted by RedskinsDave

Throwing trillions of dollars at something isn't fixing it. We hit bottom. If you find that stable, okay. Unemployment is worse. Home foreclosures bottomed out and sales are tepid despite rates being insanely low. Bankruptcies are up. Economic indicators aren't good.

If you take a job and want to blame the guy before you, I'd recommend spending your first two years fixing the problems instead of creating a giant entitlement program (which, unlike tax cuts, are almost impossible to undo).

A lot of what you're pointing out was residual and there are no fixes for that.

What about Romney's platform do you believe will trigger a major upturn? This is a different world than 20 years ago, there are more millionaires that got their wealth because of luck and timing and greed and they damn sure have no interest in giving back.

Do you think putting further stress on the declining middle class will help things?
Is it true that Ryan looks to education as the first place to make cuts. LOL, we'll be a 3rd world nation before long if that is their answer.

[RedskinsDave]

Originally Posted by redskin_rich

A lot of what you're pointing out was residual and there are no fixes for that.

What about Romney's platform do you believe will trigger a major upturn? This is a different world than 20 years ago, there are more millionaires that got their wealth because of luck and timing and greed and they damn sure have no interest in giving back.

Do you think putting further stress on the declining middle class will help things?
Is it true that Ryan looks to education as the first place to make cuts. LOL, we'll be a 3rd world nation before long if that is their answer.

Well you've already made your mind up so I don't know why you asked. Enjoy four more years of Obama.

[redskin_rich]

Originally Posted by RedskinsDave

Well you've already made your mind up so I don't know why you asked. Enjoy four more years of Obama.

You could have discerned that from my previous post, where I stated I was ready to sit this one out but the ideology of Romney/Ryan combined with the way outdated and mythological belief in the trickle down theory has me scared that I could actually see the spirit that created our great nation collapse in my lifetime.

And Dave, I'm not going to battle wits with you on politics. I know and respect that you are far more educated and passionate on this subject. Which leads me to ask you why you would just blow me off as a "partisan" when I have voted the Republican ticket more times than the Democrat. I would guess that you can't claim the same.
So, again, tell me what you think Romney can accomplish with his plan.

[akhhorus]

Originally Posted by shally

you know what, maybe you should have listened to your great uncle

I don't remember my great uncle ever saying "just remember: anything that is in contradiction to what Israel wants, no matter how minor, is antisemitism" lol. In fact, he was pretty sour on Israel not giving back Palestine after 67. Oh well.

Originally Posted by shally

instead of acting like a know-it-all putz.. shame on you, you know better

If pointing out when people make glaring factual errors(like "Carter led until late in 1980, then Reagan pulled ahead") or demanding people defend their points with fuller explanations(like asking you to explain how the Allies could have ended the Holocaust after the war began) makes me a "know-it-all", so be it. I don't think it does, but I prefer a more real dialogue as compared to "talking point for one side vs talking point for the other, then keep screaming said talking points at each other." Which is pointless imo.

[RedskinsDave]

Originally Posted by redskin_rich

You could have discerned that from my previous post, where I stated I was ready to sit this one out but the ideology of Romney/Ryan combined with the way outdated and mythological belief in the trickle down theory has me scared that I could actually see the spirit that created our great nation collapse in my lifetime.

You don't think that is hyperbole? If throwing trillions of dollars at the idiots on Wall Street and the unions in Detroit didn't kill this country, nothing will. Making the government more efficient by cutting wasteful programs coupled with tax increases certainly won't.

And Dave, I'm not going to battle wits with you on politics. I know and respect that you are far more educated and passionate on this subject. Which leads me to ask you why you would just blow me off as a "partisan" when I have voted the Republican ticket more times than the Democrat. I would guess that you can't claim the same.
So, again, tell me what you think Romney can accomplish with his plan.

I only said it wasn't worth debating if you're parroting the Obama campaign on Romney. I am not a huge fan of Romney's plan. I am certain it will do less damage than the fully rolled out health care plan. I want to get rid of the guy who wants every American to be reliant on the government. For chrissake they are running a campaign to get MORE people on food stamps. We already have record numbers of unemployed, welfare and food stamp reliant citizens. I prefer an approach that creates jobs and makes people self sufficient versus the democrats plan to increase the rolls as much as possible.

[Ibleedburgundy]

The American people were isolationists - understandably so after WWI. Anti-semitism and nativism was far more prominent back then (nativism is now *ahem* prominent towards latinos). Americans didn't want millions of jews coming over here even though we had the ability to easily support them. They absolutely didn't know the extent of the holocaust though, and they certainly weren't able to predict it.

FDR did everything possible to get us into the war. That was one of his greatest achievements. Americans absolutely did not want to be involved. Beating back the overwhelming isolationist sentiment - even just for the purposes of instituting lend-lease and sanctions on Japan - was a massive sea change, a noteworthy accomplishment.

IMO, it's not the policy/Government that deserves the blame, it's the American people as a whole. This is a representative democracy, and our representatives at the time were reflecting the wishes of the people, while pushing them towards the war they knew was inevitable.

[RedskinsDave]

The Erskine Bowles video circulating is pretty funny.

[akhhorus]

Originally Posted by Ibleedburgundy

The American people were isolationists - understandably so after WWI. Anti-semitism and nativism was far more prominent back then (nativism is now *ahem* prominent towards latinos). Americans didn't want millions of jews coming over here even though we had the ability to easily support them. They absolutely didn't know the extent of the holocaust though, and they certainly weren't able to predict it.

FDR did everything possible to get us into the war. That was one of his greatest achievements. Americans absolutely did not want to be involved. Beating back the overwhelming isolationist sentiment - even just for the purposes of instituting lend-lease and sanctions on Japan - was a massive sea change, a noteworthy accomplishment.

IMO, it's not the policy/Government that deserves the blame, it's the American people as a whole. This is a representative democracy, and our representatives at the time were reflecting the wishes of the people, while pushing them towards the war they knew was inevitable.

If you want a good book on this, I recommend "In the Garden of Beasts" about William Dodd's time as Ambassador to Nazi Germany. There was antisemitism inside the State department to some extent, which prevented some jewish immigration from Nazi germany, but it wasn't official policy and they had no clue what was going to happen(everyone took Hitler at his word way too often but part of that might have been the splits inside the Nazi regime on what to do with the Jews).

[Keino]

Maybe get your senators to stop filibustering the Jobs Act and obstructing anything the guy tries to do address the economy. We agree it should have been the first thing he tackled but you can't complain about increasing the debt when you voted for Bush 2x especially when your rationale for voting for him the second time was "I am not happy with things, but I want to give him a chance to clean up his mess".

Rich is absolutely correct. Given the state of things in 2008, when he was elected, what did you expect would change in 4 years? The only economic indicator that I have seen that is worse is unemployment, which is about the same as it was when he took office. (8.2% when he took office in Jan 2009, 8.3% according to the last report).

We know that Mittens tax plan would increase taxes on the middle class (Obama cut payroll taxes BTW, not sure why the W2 wage earners who support the tea party don't seem to remember this) while cutting them for the Rich. Sorry, but I don't like that a rich guy is trying to increase my burden, and this is not parroting Obama's campaign either, this is based on independent analysis of Mitt's plan.

If I weren't in a Battleground state, I would be voting for Gary Johnson. As it is, I have to defend against Rich guys digging into my already shallow pockets, while ushing a social agenda that is 100% in complete opposition to what I believe in.

[RedskinsDave]

You prefer a liberal dig in your pockets to give it to people who don't give anything in return?

[AustinSkin]

Originally Posted by Keino

Maybe get your senators to stop filibustering the Jobs Act and obstructing anything the guy tries to do address the economy. We agree it should have been the first thing he tackled but you can't complain about increasing the debt when you voted for Bush 2x especially when your rationale for voting for him the second time was "I am not happy with things, but I want to give him a chance to clean up his mess".

Rich is absolutely correct. Given the state of things in 2008, when he was elected, what did you expect would change in 4 years? The only economic indicator that I have seen that is worse is unemployment, which is about the same as it was when he took office. (8.2% when he took office in Jan 2009, 8.3% according to the last report).

We know that Mittens tax plan would increase taxes on the middle class (Obama cut payroll taxes BTW, not sure why the W2 wage earners who support the tea party don't seem to remember this) while cutting them for the Rich. Sorry, but I don't like that a rich guy is trying to increase my burden, and this is not parroting Obama's campaign either, this is based on independent analysis of Mitt's plan.

If I weren't in a Battleground state, I would be voting for Gary Johnson. As it is, I have to defend against Rich guys digging into my already shallow pockets, while ushing a social agenda that is 100% in complete opposition to what I believe in.

1000% agreed. The Republican agenda has been to stonewall and block any Democratic-proposed agenda that has an even remote chance of being successful in terms of stimulating job growth and strengthening the economy. The strategy is pretty obvious to me. Weaken the President by making every effort possible to keep him from looking good, and hope that the financially exhausted middle class will throw up their hands in surrender and vote for change if it means a move in the direction of job creation, stability and an eventual return to prosperity.

The Republicans plan to bring the country back to prosperity by providing further tax breaks to the wealthy, and cutting services like Medicare to an already suffering public. They are also setting the stage to wage yet another war against Iran. McCain insisted that it could take generations before we are ready to get out of Afghanistan. So, the question I have to ask is: how does this serve the American public?

If Romney comes into office on the wings of job creation and prosperity for all, he will do so knowing that nothing is going to change. The Republicans will argue that the reason they can't grow the economy is because Obama destroyed it. They will probably ask for an 8-year rebuild. To make us feel better, they will wage an intense, "shock and awe" campaign against Iran.

Someone is going to make a lot of money from this. And it won't be the American people.

[Ibleedburgundy]

Originally Posted by Keino

...the economy. We agree it should have been the first thing he tackled...

What do you "should have?" Wasn't that the purpose of the stimulus bill - to stabalize the economy? Isn't that the first major thing Obama did?

[Keino]

Originally Posted by RedskinsDave

You prefer a liberal dig in your pockets to give it to people who don't give anything in return?

My income taxes (as have yours if you are a W2 wage earner) have been cut by this administration and liberal social politics, such as supporting a woman's right to choose, allowing gay couples to be married, not drug testing welfare recipients are more in line with my views.

Payroll taxes have gone down. I have received a refund from my Health Insurer based on the mandate in the health care law that requires 85% of my policy premiums be used on actual services. My home was saved from foreclosure based upon the Obama refinance program. None of these things would have occurred with your team running things which tells me I am better off with Obama than I am with Mittens.

[RedskinsDave]

My taxes have gone up because we are invested well and, like everything else they do, we are penalized for making money. My insurance premiums went up so we switched to a different plan that doesn't cover anything out of network to avoid paying more.

Your home was saved by the second program because the first one failed to require the banks to help anyone. That most certainly would have occurred under McCain.

[Keino]

Nope, my home was saved by the original HAMP program. Also known as the Obama Modification.

As to your contention about your taxes going up, I don't believe the capital gains rate has gone up, but am happy to say I am wrong if you can show that they have.

I am W2 wage earner. My income taxes have gone down, not up, which was my original comment. Liberals aren't in my pockets as deeply as GOP (can't rightly call them conservatives anymore) folks want to be and I intend to make sure my vote reflects that.

Not going to touch the social stuff, eh? I don't blame you.